Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024-03-14 Council Agenda Packet
Corcoran City Council Agenda March 14, 2024 - 7:00 pm REVISED MARCH 12, 2024 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 a. Hennepin County Commissioner Anderson Presentation* 7. Consent Agenda a. February 22, 2024 DRAFT Regular Council Minutes* b. March 23, 2023 DRAFT Regular Council Minutes* c. Financial Claims March 14, 2024* d. PNP Results* e. 7200 Willow Drive Construction Agreement* f. Kvam CUP (City file 24-009)* g. City Center Drive and 79th Place – Mass Grading and Stormwater Improvements – Pay Request 5* h. Updated: Water Treatment Plant – Pay Request 10* i. Water Treatment Plant – Change Order 2* j. City Hall - Utility Service Connections (ARPA Eligible)* k. Added: February 29, 2024 DRAFT Special Meeting Council Minutes* l. Added: Amendment to 2024 Fee Schedule* 8. Planning Business – Public Comment Opportunity a. Public Hearing: Interim Ordinance Discussion* 9. Unfinished Business 10. New Business a. Stanchion Bar Music and Event Request for July 12 and 13, 2024* 11. Closed Session a. Real Estate Property 1. Stieg Road Improvements 2. City Center 12. Staff Reports a. Added: Cropland Bid Update* b. Added: Timeline for Staff/Project Status* 13. Council Reports a. SF 3303/HF 3168* b. Updated: SF 3080/HF 2235* c. SF 3964/HF 4009* d. Added: SF 3964/SF 3980/HF 4009* e. Added: SF 1370 14. 2024 City Council Schedule* 15. 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: 821 6350 4979 Video Link and Instructions: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82163504979 visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 821 6350 4979 *Please note in-person comments will be taken at the scheduled meeting where noted. Comments received via email to City Clerk Friedrich at mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov or via public comment cards will also be accepted. All email and public comment cards must be received by the Wednesday prior to scheduled Council meeting. For more information on options to provide public comment visit: www.corcoranmn.gov * Corcoran City Council Agenda March 14, 2024 - 7:00 pm 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 a.Hennepin County Commissioner Anderson Presentation* 7.Consent Agenda a. February 22, 2024 DRAFT Regular Council Minutes* b.March 23, 2023 DRAFT Regular Council Minutes* c.Financial Claims March 14, 2024* d.PNP Results* e.7200 Willow Drive Construction Agreement* f.Kvam CUP (City file 24-009)* g.City Center Drive and 79th Place – Mass Grading and Stormwater Improvements – Pay Request 5* h.Water Treatment Plant – Pay Request 10* i.Water Treatment Plant – Change Order 2* j.City Hall - Utility Service Connections (ARPA Eligible)* 8.Planning Business – Public Comment Opportunity a.Public Hearing: Interim Ordinance Discussion* 9.Unfinished Business 10.New Business a.Stanchion Bar Music and Event Request for July 12 and 13, 2024* 11.Closed Session a.Real Estate Property a.Stieg Road Improvements b.City Center 12.Staff Reports 13.Council Reports a.SF 3303/HF 3168 b.SF3080/HF 2235 c.HF4009/SF 3964 14. 2024 City Council Schedule* 15.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 E nter Meeting ID: 821 6350 4979 Video Link and Instructions: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82163504979 visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 821 6350 4979 *Please note in-person comments will be taken at the scheduled meeting where noted. Comments received via email to City Clerk Friedrich at mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov or vi a public comment cards will also be accepted. All email and public comment cards must be received by the Wednesday prior to scheduled Council meeting. For more information on options to provide public comment visit: www.corcoranmn.gov STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 4. Summary The advisory commission representatives for the March 14, 2024, Council meeting are as follows: •Planning Commission: Corrine Brummond •Parks and Trails Commission: Tom Anderson Financial/Budget N/A Council Action N/A Attachments N/A Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Prepared By Topic Action Required Informational This message was sent from outside of the organization. Please do not click links or open attachments unless yourecognize the source of this email and know the content is safe. From:Glenn Wontorcik To:Michelle Friedrich Subject:Interim Use Permit for Khacholing Center (City File No. 23-029) Date:Saturday, March 9, 2024 1:04:08 PM I strongly oppose the IUP application. The proposed development of this property would essentially convert it to a commercial property, impacting surrounding residential properties. This type of development should only be allowed in an area that is zone as commercial. Glenn Wontorcik 19625 Patrick Pl Corcoran, MN 55340 Added Agenda Item: 5a1. Commissioner Kevin Anderson •Serving District 7 since 2021 •Chair - Public Works Committee, •Vice Chair- Housing and Redevelopment Authority •Vice Chair - Human Services & Law Safety Justice •Chair - AMC Business and Partner Development •Vice Chair – NACO Public Health Subcommittee •Appointed to NACO County Technology Advisory Council Hennepin County Budget Hennepin County Public Works Law, Safety and Justice Health Human Services Disparity Reduction Resident Services Operations Total: $2,647,343,892 Corcoran at a Glance Hennepin County Human Services •Nearly 800 Corcoran residents (11%) receive Human Services from Hennepin County •780 individuals receive financial assistance through cash, food or healthcare supports Hennepin County Public Safety •Embedded Social Work •47 referrals to embedded social workers in 2023 by the Corcoran Police Department •Sentencing to Service •STS crews provide services like snow and litter removal, landscaping maintenance, painting, janitorial services or public park and trail maintenance Hennepin County Public Works Projects •2023 •County Road 50 Chip Sealing •County Road 19 Chip Sealing •Traffic Signal Updates at Hackamore Road •Future •Pavement Rehabilitation Project on Woodland Trail (CSAH 10) •Complete and Green Streets Policy Hennepin County Supporting Youth in Corcoran Hennepin County •Youth Activities Grants •$850,379 since 2009 •Educational Support Systems •Hennepin’s School Based Mental Health •Voluntary academic support for students & families / caregivers •Academic support, mentorship, tutoring, and GED preparation Questions? 1 CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Minutes February 22, 2024 – 7:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on February 22, 2024, 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 Tobin, City Clerk Friedrich, Planner Davis McKeown, Public Works Director Mattson, Direct of Public Safety Gottschalk, and Administrative Services Director Hughes 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 Tobin noted moving agenda item 6a Zeke Recognition to 5a; the addition of the Draft Work Session Minutes February 8, 2024 for 7a; and Draft Regular Council Minutes February 8, 2024, for 7b; noted revised agenda item 7f Appoint Planning Commissioners, to include the additional applications received; the addition of Draft Regular Council Minutes March 9, 2023; a revision to 7l, regarding date of service on Resolution 2024-12; tabling item 7m Conference Room Video/Audio Cameras to the March 14 Council meeting; the addition of information on 7o Lead Service Line Inventory Engagement Request (Minnesota Department of Health); the addition of item 7q Public Works Facility Fund Closeout; and tabling item 8b, 610 Extension, to a future Council meeting. MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Nichols to approve the agenda as modified. Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols. (Motion carried 5:0) 4.Commission Representatives Mayor McKee noted Planning Commissioner Lanterman and Parks and Trails Commissioner Strehler were present. 5.Presentations/Recognitions a. Zeke Recognition (K9 Unit) Council recognized Police Canine Zeke for his years of service from June 2018 through December 2023, and referenced 193 deployments, and an official retirement date of December 18, 2023. Council acknowledged the outstanding work and service to the City of Corcoran and surrounding communities. 6.Open Forum (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person during Open Forum for items not included on the agenda. Mayor McKee noted the removal of item 8b 610 Extension by the applicant. City Administrator Tobin explained the instructions to participate in the public comment opportunity. Angie Bottema, 10500 Trailhaven Road, opined on agenda item 8a Hope CPA, RZ, PP, PUD, and noted support of the project. Ms. Bottema noted she has observed Hope Community Church is a good neighbor and is a venue for many community events and opined on the thought and consideration of the community by Hope Church regarding the project being reviewed by Council this evening. 7.Consent Agenda a.February 8, 2024 DRAFT Work Session Minutes b.February 8, 2024 DRAFT Regular Council Minutes c.Financial Claims February 22, 2024 d.Water Tower – Pay Request 10 Added Agenda Item: 7a. 2 e. Life Cycle Replacement of Council Chamber Chairs f. Appoint Planning Commissioners g. Construction Hours Update h. Lister Garage CUP (City file 23-028) i. Temporary Liquor Licenses-Corcoran Lions j. March 9, 2023 DRAFT Regular Council Minutes k. Staff Report on K-9 Program l. Resolution 2024-12 Zeke K-9 Unite Recognition of Service m. Conference Room Video/Audio Cameras n. Water Treatment Plant – Change Order 1 o. Lead Service Line Inventory – Engagement Request (Minnesota Department of Health) p. Current City Organization Chart q. Public Works Facility Fund Closeout Council requested items 7e, 7f, 7g, and 7k be pulled for further discussion. MOTION: made by Bottema, to approve items 7a-d, 7h-j, 7l-o, as presented. City Administrator Tobin noted addition of the Public Works Facility Fund Closeout in Consent Agenda Items. City Clerk Friedrich noted the Public Works Facility Fund Closeout is item 7q. City Administrator Tobin noted item 7m was tabled and transferred to the Council Agenda on March 14, 2024, but remains on the agenda as the February 22 Council Agenda was previously published to include item 7m. (Motion fails for lack of second). Mayor McKee withdrew his original move to Motion. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Nichols, to approve items 7a-d, 7h-j, 7l, and 7n-q, as presented. Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols. (Motion carried 5:0) Regarding item 7e, Council noted the depleted 7-year depreciation schedule on the Council Chamber chairs and discussed the $4,000 request by staff to replace the Council and staff chairs for the Council Chambers. Council discussed replacing the staff Council Chambers chairs if necessary. Council discussed the usage of the Council Chambers and chairs by staff as a conference room and noted staff usage of the Council Chamber chairs. Council discussed the chair age and noted chairs over 20 years old can still be useful. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded Bottema to deny purchase of chairs for Council Chambers as presented. Council noted staff may bring back an amendment to the request for Council to review again and include an estimate on Council Chamber chairs for staff only. Voting Aye: Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols Nay: McKee (Motion carried 4:1) Council noted review of Herman Miller chairs. Regarding 7f, Council noted the two vacancies on Planning Commission and made a recommendation to appoint two applicants to the vacant seats. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Bottema, to appoint Cecelia Kozicky and Peter Hargraves to the vacant Planning Commission seats for a term ending February 28, 2027. Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols. (Motion carried 5:0) Regarding 7g, Council discussed including construction hour signs as part of the building agreement with developers. City Administrator Tobin noted signs were deployed only when needed, with very few complaints regarding construction hours in 2023. Planner McKeown noted with the decrease in complaints over 2023, signs were not necessary, as no complaints have been received in the last year. Planner Davis McKeown noted a significant reduction in complaints from 2022 to 2023. Planner Davis McKeown added staff was developing a sign policy during the transition of leadership last year, however, the policy would still need to be completed. Council and staff discussed the threshold for deploying the construction hour signs. Council and staff discussed sign cost of approximate $90 per sign in 2022. Planner Davis McKeown noted discussions with the city attorney regarding infringement of Free Speech rights by requiring developers to include city-initiated hours within their construction rule signs. Planner Davis McKeown noted it would be 3 beneficial to have a policy regarding complaints received within developments and documentation of violations. Planner Davis McKeown noted recent successes with concerns regarding construction hours, and developers and on-site managers engaging to resolve some resident concerns directly without management by the City. Council noted maximizing where digital signs are located with the example of St. Therese construction area with a City digital sign. City Administrator Tobin noted refining the policy in the first phase, and three complaints for city engagement with developer to deploy a sign, and secondary phase on requiring builders to include within developer signage. Planner McKeown requested a timeline for implementing a draft policy for sign deployment. Council noted incentivizing builders to include in development signs. City Administrator Tobin noted staff would bring back to a future Council meeting. Planner McKeown noted code may not allow for placement of signs within current development agreements. Council and staff discussed placing signs into communities where development agreements are already in place. Council provided staff with direction. Regarding 7k, Council reviewed canine program and if the canine program results reflect a decrease in crime in the city. Council reviewed the canine program statistics and noted of the 193 deployments, 78 included charges, and 87 were deployments in the City of Corcoran. Council noted Plymouth, Rogers, and Maple Grove have canine units. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the canine unit in Corcoran is a regional asset dispatched throughout the surrounding communities. Council and staff discussed future training needs for the canine unit, a future work session regarding type of dog desired, training, timelines, and the canine unit program costs. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted including the City of Corcoran in fall training classes and opening the canine unit handler to interested officers. Council noted clarification of language of the canine unit being property of the City of Corcoran, with guidelines for years of service, health of canine, remaining service with handler, and expectations of being a dedicated canine handler. Council noted creating a pro-rating based on years of service for purchasing the canine at the end of service life. Council provided staff with direction. 8. Planning Business (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person during the Public Comment Opportunity for items in Planning Business. City Administrator Tobin explained the instructions to participate in the public comment opportunity. George Gmach, 22600 Oakdale Drive, commented on historical summary of homes in Corcoran, and noted in 1980 the comprehensive plan was implemented with a goal to preserve the ag community and farmland. Mr. Gmach noted the goal has changed over the years with development increasing in Wright County. Mr. Gmach noted traffic has increased on the west side of Corcoran with adjacent building occurring in Wright and Sherburne Counties. Mr. Gmach noted Hope Church presented to the Council and Planning Commission 20 years ago and at that time the project was not feasible. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Vehrenkamp to extend Mr. Gmach’s public comment speaking time. Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols. (Motion carried 5:0) Mr. Gmach noted the timing for the Hope project is now feasible with both sewer and water now available in the area. Mr. Gmach commented on traffic and trips per day number and noted upgrades to local County Roads such as County Road 116 and County Road 30 that are required with the Hope project. Mr. Gmach was in support of the Hope project. Jason Bartels, 19795 Hunters Ridge, commented on impacts to residents on the east side of County Road 116 from the proposed development. Mr. Bartels noted he spoke at the Planning Commission regarding daily traffic volume and the trips per day within the development with competing access at Hunter's Ridge and County Road 116 and opined on safety concerns of westbound traffic at the intersection. Mr. Bartels commented on Planning Commission's comments regarding the percentage of non-elderly and non-senior housing. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Nichols to extend Mr. Bartels public comment speaking time regarding item 8a. Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols. (Motion carried 5:0) Mr. Bartels opined on the housing type proposed within the development and noted the Planning Commission discussion regarding applicant requests for building height and setback variance flexibility. Mr. 4 Bartens reiterated the traffic concerns, the proposed building heights, and setback reductions requested to be at the forefront of Council decisions. Sean Tharp, 20420 Duffney Circle, Corcoran, opined on land variances and exceptions to the code regarding hardships, and noted PUD status exceptions by Hope Church. Mr. Tharp requested Council limit the project development progress with fewer homes and coincide the development progress as road updates are completed. Mr. Tharp requested the PUD be rejected by Council, and to limit the number of homes, unless there is extending circumstance. a. Hope CPA, RZ, PP, PUD (City file 23-028) Planner Davis McKeown reviewed the 40-acre mixed use development project at the northwest corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 that would surround the existing Hope Community Church site. Planner Davis McKeown noted the applicants include Hope Community Church, Corcoran Investments LLC, and Brian and Jackie Lother, with representation by Josh McKinny. Planner Davis McKeown reviewed the long-term vision by the applicant to create a campus where residents could live, work, and worship. Planner Davis McKeown noted the existing church was built in 2001 with a concept plan that was shared at that time very similar to the mixed-use project currently submitted. Planner Davis McKeown noted a daycare was approved via a conditional use permit in 2005, with a site plan amendment in 2012, for a second conditional use permit for the existing cemetery. Planner Davis McKeown noted a concept plan was reviewed by Council in January 2023, and noted the amount of commercial space and housing units has decreased since Council reviewed the plan in January 2023. Planner Davis McKeown noted an environmental assessment worksheet was conducted and finalized by the City in July of 2023 and included the traffic and feasibility study for infrastructure. Planner Davis McKeown noted the feasibility report and EAW process include improvements on County Road 116 and County Road 30, with right turn lanes, widening Oswald Farm Road and westbound on Hunter's Ridge, and east and westbound turn lanes on County Road 30 as project requirements. Planner Davis McKeown reviewed staff and Three Rivers Park District have worked through a separate feasibility study regarding the underpass and trail application for the Diamond Lake Regional Trail. Planner Davis McKeown noted the Parks and Trails Commission reviewed the proposed park dedication in January 2024, and recommended relocating the trail to run along the north side of Oswald Farm Road. Planner Davis McKeown noted the Diamond Lake Regional Trail and underpass would cross County Road 116, with a combination of public and private paths throughout the proposed development. Planner Davis McKeown noted Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval to Council of the four-phase development, that includes 641 housing units and approximately 880,000 square feet of commercial space, at the February 1 Planning Commission meeting. Planner McKeown noted site plan parameters, with both residential and commercial space, and includes 30,000 square-foot medical facilities. Planner Davis McKeown noted parking, multi-family housing, the senior housing component with a continuum of care to include independent care units with nursing care, 28 memory-care units, 20-detached villas, 6 attached age-restricted units, and 51 row townhomes ranging in 6 to 8 units. Council reviewed density as is and as proposed. Planner Davis McKeown reviewed the components of the application process includes approval of a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning to the PUD and reviewed the density summary analysis, and approval of the preliminary PUD plan. Planner Davis McKeown noted the water treatment facility, on the east side of County Road 116, and the water tower adjacent to the church on the corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30, are both currently under construction. Council and staff discussed the preliminary PUD plan, front and side setbacks, parking setbacks and requirements, commercial parking and landscaping islands, screening, and landscape buffering. Planner Davis McKeown reviewed the conditions of approval for the Preliminary Plat. Council noted discussions at Parks and Trails Commission meetings included issues with the Diamond Lake Regional Trail on the south side of Oswald Farm Road and the trail crossing three of four different driveway accesses that will either have residential or commercial traffic, with the trail crossing through areas of stopped cards that may or may not be blocking intersections. Council noted Parks and Trails Commission recommendation was to move the trail to the north side of Oswald Farm Road with flashing beacons or narrowing of road with curb extensions versus four separate stops on the south side of Oswald Farm Road. Council and staff discussed pedestrian safety within underpasses. Brian Lother, applicant, and Josh McKinney presented the project overview to Council. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, approving Resolution 2024-14 Comprehensive Plan Amendment for “Hope Ministries” at the Northwest Corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 (PID 11-119-23-14-0004) (City File 23-028). 5 Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, adopting Ordinance 2024-513 Amending Title X (Zoning Ordinance) of the City Code to Classify Certain Land Located at the Northwest Corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 (PID 11-119-23-14-0003, 11-119-23-14-0004, 11-119-23-14-0005, 11-119-23-11- 0012) (City File 23-028). Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, adopting Ordinance 2024-514 Summary of Ordinance 2024-513 Amending Title X (Zoning Ordinance) of the City Code to Classify Certain Land Located at the Northwest Corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 (PID 11-119-23-14-0003, 11-119-23-14-0004, 11-119-23-14-0005, 11-119-23-11-0012) (City File 23-028). Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, approving Resolution 2024-15 Findings of Fact for the Properties Located at the Northwest Corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 (PID 11-119-23-14- 0003, 11-119-23-14-0004, 11-119-23-14-0005, 11-119-23-11-0012) (City File 23-028). Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, approving Resolution 2024-16 Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plan for “Hope Ministries” as Amended, and Located at the Northwest Corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 (PID 11-119-23-14-0003, 11-119-23-14-0004, 11-119-23-14-0005, 11-119-23-11- 0012) (City File 23-028). Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, approving Resolution 2024-17 Preliminary Plat for “Hope Ministries” as Amended, and Located at the Northwest Corner of County Road 116 and County Road 30 (PID 11-119-23-14-0003, 11-119-23-14-0004, 11-119-23-14-0005, 11-119-23-11-0012) (City File 23-028). Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols (Motion carried 5:0) b. 610 Extension Item was tabled to a future Council meeting. 9. Unfinished Business 10. New Business (Public Comment Opportunity) 11. Staff Reports a. Staff Report Planning Update; Council received report. 12. 2024 City Council Schedule Council received schedule. Council requested a future discussion for Council to review legal aspects of ordinance changes to code regarding light industrial. City Administrator Tobin noted issues were addressed as a goal from the strategic planning session and identified as a goal to be met or addressed in the second quarter. City Administrator Tobin noted Council provided staff direction to escalate the priority for Planning Commission review. Planner Davis McKeown noted discussion with the Planning Commission will include uses across the district for a clearer understanding of what is allowed and what is not and provide feedback to Council. Planner Davis McKeown noted Council’s request to provide immediate feedback on the rural commercial districts and development rights discussion and provide information to Council at the end of March. Planner Davis McKeown noted the recent direction by Council tonight to review construction sign hours, initiating a policy, and an implementation timeline. Council and staff discussed city branding, apparel, and city logo. 13. Adjournment MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Bottema to adjourn. Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, Bottema, Vehrenkamp, and Nichols. (Motion carried 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 10:38 pm on February 22, 2024. 6 Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7a. Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Prepared By Michelle Friedrich Topic Draft Regular Council Minutes – February 22, 2024 Action Required Informational Summary The draft Council Regular Minutes for February 22, 2024, will be emailed on Tuesday, March 12, with hard copy provided to Council the evening of the March 14 meeting. Attachments (Hard copies will be provided March 12, 2024) 1. 2024-02-22 Draft Regular Council Minutes 1 CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Meeting Minutes March 23, 2023 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on March 23, 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, Planner Davis McKowen, Parks and Recreation Supervisor Christensen Buck, and Public Works Director Mattson 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 requested item 7f City Center Drive and 79th Place Street Improvements Engineering Design Services Proposal be tabled, and a revised resolution for item 9b Reinstating Cropland Rental Contract, and a revised item in 8a Concept Sketch Plan for Amira Village regarding a technical error. MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Schultz to approve the agenda as amended. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) 4.Commission Representatives Mayor McKee noted Planning Commissioner Horn was present, and Parks and Trails Commissioner Christenson was present virtually. 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 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 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 Council requested items 7h and 7g be pulled for further discussion. MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Nichols to approve items 7a-e, and 7h, as presented. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) Regarding 7g Schedule Work Session for Rental Ordinance on April 13, Council requested a total count of councilmembers able to attend the April 13 work session to ensure 3 members would be present for a quorum. Mayor McKee noted he would be absent from the meeting, but Acting Mayor Bottema would be present. Added Agenda Item: 7b. 2 MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve item 7g as presented and Mayor McKee called a Council Work Session on April 13. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) Regarding 7h, Council noted for public record, Council made the mistake regarding the utility charge fees, and noted staff would issue credits to affected accounts to correct the mistake within the next month. MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Schultz to approve item 7h as presented. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) 8. Planning Business (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity for Planning 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 residents participated in the public comment opportunity. a. Concept Sketch Plan – Amira Village Planner Davis presented the Amira Village Concept Sketch Plan and the applicants involved with sketch plan. Planner Davis noted the applicant is requesting feedback from Council on the Chastek property located northeast of County Road 10 and Maple Hill Road and is roughly 38 acres. Planner Davis noted the sketch plan includes single-family homes and noted the narrative explains this would be for home rentals through United Properties. Planner Davis reviewed the sketch plan includes 102 50-foot-wide lots to the south and 39 44-foot-wide lots to the north. Planner Davis noted the applicant is proposing an intentional rental community with amenities such as a clubhouse fitness center, social room, outdoor pool, pickleball, and bocce ball courts, and a pet exercise area. Planner Davis reviewed the sketch plan showing an off-road trail along the northern property boundary, which is also included in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Planner Davis noted the estimated net density of 3.9 units per acre and aligns with the goals for a single-family residential guided area. Planner Davis noted potential PUD flexibility that would be necessary and noted the applicant is not requesting any flexibilities from architectural standards at this point but noted it might be difficult for compliance with the garage standard. Planner Davis noted a component for the sketch plan is discussion on how the development would fit within the rental dwelling ordinance draft currently in progress. Beth Hustad, Trek Real Estate, applicant for the sketch plan noted the mixed-use zoning which allows for a variety of uses including multi-family, high-density, and commercial units are considerations reviewed when developing the sketch plans. Dave Young, United Properties, applicant for the sketch plan reviewed the history of United Properties. Mr. Young noted the maintenance free lifestyle, with an amenity-rich community including a clubhouse with full- time staff. Mr. Young noted the full-time staff would be dedicated to the community, and include a property manager, director, and other staff as needed. Mr. Young noted the homes would be like the other adjacent development in Maple Grove, but would incorporate luxury style finishes, quartz countertops, stainless steel appliances, luxury vinyl plank, window treatments, and very high-end finishes. Mr. Young noted the homes would incorporate smart technologies, like smart thermostats, water sensors, smart locks, to allow the resident to experience a care-free and maintenance-free lifestyle. Nikki Longy, Lincoln Property Companies, commented on the expertise and experience of Lincoln Property Companies in managing multi and single-family rental properties. Council discussed aspects of the environmental cleanup on the site and public benefit of private property in relation to a PUD rules and applicable benefits. Council and staff reviewed different scenarios with rentals turning to individually owned homes, HOAs, and future rental ordinance implications. Tom Walz, Robert Thomas Homes, builder for the homes within the sketch plan, reviewed the history of Robert Thomas Homes, and noted the median sale price for homes in 2022, was $750,000. Mr. Walz reviewed other projects Robert Thomas Homes was involved with and like the current sketch plan proposed. Council consensus was owner-occupied, single-family homes rather than for rent single-family homes, with bigger lot sizes with a 50-foot minimum size, with a 3.9 pre-development density and more contiguous, open space or park area. Council reviewed access points and noted the 3 northwest cul de sac would have to incorporate a full access not just an emergency access as proposed. Council discussed the future rental ordinance. Council requested moving item 9e to 8b, moving 9a-d to 8c-f, and moving PUD Zoning Ordinance to 8g. b. PUD Zoning Ordinance Discussion; Moved to 8g. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Bottema, to modify the agenda and move item 9e Photography Donation Update to 8b, move items 9a-d to items 8c-f, and then resume with old item 8b PUD Zoning Ordinance Discussion to new item 8g. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) b. Photography Donation Update (Previously item 9e.) Council and staff discussed sports photography and the donation received from sale of photos to the City. Council indicated the donation from the vendor should not be donated to the City, but to the families who are purchasing the photos. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by McKee, to decline the donation check from the 2022 season from the photography company, and proceed with free shipping to the families ordering photos for the 2023 season. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp Nay: Abstain: Nichols (Motion carries 4:0:1) c. 2023A Bonds Discussion MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Vehrenkamp, to direct staff to finalize the sale of 2023A Bonds in the amount of $27,130,000. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) d. Cropland Rental Discussion MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, to approve Resolution 2023-22 Reinstating the 2022 and 2023 Cropland Rental Agreement with Mr. Leuer. Council clarified the City of Corcoran will pay for the Hennepin County Property Tax on the two parcels. Council noted for the 2024 cropland bids, a charitable organization is interested in a bid submission and noted the charitable organization teaches farming for charitable purposes. Council noted review of the status of how the farmed commodity is treated after the land is harvested and if the charitable parties are selling the produce for profit. Council and staff discussed future property value amounts of the parcels. City Administrator Beise noted the value of the property is not what is assessed, but the potential income from the farmed property that is taxed as a personal property tax. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) e. Commissioner Appointments MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Schultz, to appoint Lindsay Jacobs to the Planning Commission vacant seat for a term ending February 28, 2026. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) f. RFPs – Additional Information on Financials for City versus Developer Costs Council noted consideration to the RFP process and the difficulty in completing multiple RFPs in a year, rotation schedule of RFPs. Council and staff discussed bringing information back to Council at the April 27 Council meeting. Council noted more thorough itemization of information. g. PUD Zoning Ordinance Discussion Mayor McKee noted amended agenda, and invited residents to communicate in-person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity for Planning Business, item 8g. 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. Planner Davis noted the continuation of our planned unit development zoning ordinance amendment discussion and recapped the updates since the last Council meeting that pertained to the amendment. 4 Planner Davis noted the table that correlates the proposed minimum lot width with the required amount of open space, and noted the neighborhood meeting language has now been changed, so that the meeting occurs after concept plan, but prior to submittal of the preliminary application. The PUD point system has been adjusted with a new category for lot size variety to encourage larger lot sizes and includes five points awarded for every 10 percent of blocks that exceed a lot width of 65 feet, or a lot area of 7500 square feet for the 50-point maximum. Additionally, verbiage to the rural structures category was added that specifies when the structure becomes structurally or financially unfeasible to maintain for HOAs and homebuyers, the structure could be replaced with a small monument such as a plaque or bench to satisfy the intent of the approval. Planner Davis noted remaining discussion points, include questions specifically focused on the proposed points categories by the Planning Commission. Planner Davis noted additional feedback such as concerns of the PUD process, increasing housing costs, meeting maintenance of open space and preservation areas potential, and that the point system could favor an HOA. Planner Davis noted the multiple categories and the simultaneous rigidness and subjectivity of the point system and potential legal challenges of denying a PUD application. Planner Davis reviewed what the standards would do to cancel discretion when approving or denying a PUD. Planner Davis noted Maple Grove staff confirmed that their city council has yet to deny a PUD that meets their points threshold. Maple Grove point thresholds do not specifically indicate in the code that it's for staff analysis. Planner Davis noted comments by the city attorney and his initial thoughts included a potential for an applicant to point to the staff analysis of points to argue application denial. Planner Davis noted to defend such a denial, the Council would need to provide clear findings of fact as to why the staff analysis is wrong, or what other findings of fact they reviewed to justify the denial, which are not captured by the point system. Planner Davis clarified Council will need to decide if the goal is to create standards for the review and approval of denial of a PUD, or, if the goal is to retain Council discretion, Planner Davis noted moving away from a defined threshold. Planner Davis reviewed use of the categories discussed and creation of an unweighted list of desired public benefits and development traits that would still be used to guide negotiations of PUDs, but without the defined threshold, to retain Council discretion. Planner Davis noted the next steps include Council direction on changes that should be incorporated to the draft, scheduling a public hearing for the May Planning Commission meeting. Planner Davis concluded if there are significant changes, a discussion on the timeline expectations would be necessary. Council discussed municipal code, PUDs, and zoning district standards code. Council and staff discussed all aspects of the draft point system and potential scoring of existing sketch plans. Planner Davis noted the point system would not come into effect until the preliminary plat. Council discussed a super majority vote of the seated majority at Council meetings. Council noted with the point allocation, difficulty in optimizing and generating a favorable system is to review the heaviest weighted items and make sure they're not so heavily weighted. Council discussed looking at categories with a point value above 30, reduce the category down to 30 points for example, per category four units within a quarter mile of a focal point would go from a max of 50 to a maximum of 30. Council discussed adding more definition to the categories, and what would be viable as a focal point to address concerns about items not desirable within neighborhoods. Council noted using the buffer yard definitions for classifying landscaping. Council noted obtaining community, commissions, and developer comments regarding the draft point system. Council discussed refining, adding, and removing categories, and determining the weight the points carry in each category. Council and staff discussed moving forward with the categories, as a policy document, but with no a zero points threshold. Council noted ranking the categories in order of importance. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz, to include the revised category language with no points in the initial adoption. Council and staff reviewing pulling the points out, referenced the PUD points system is a separate policy document that is incorporated by code, and instead of it being a point system document, it can be referred to as the Corcoran PUD public benefit list and is hereby made part of the section. Planner Davis noted a policy document can be edited and a public hearing is not necessary to adjust policy. Voting aye: Bottema Nay: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp Nay votes included further Council discussion on excluding points. (Motion fails 1:4) MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Nichols, to forward the draft to the Planning Commission as suggested by staff, and remove the points from text, keeping it as a policy document and preserving the option for Council to implement revisions, subject to approval by the city attorney, and bring back to Council for further discussion on April 27. 5 Council commented if Council agrees on a point system, having it as a policy allows for greater flexibility and adjustments. Voting aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp Nay: Bottema Councilor Bottema opposed moving forward with including points in the draft version. (Motion carries 4:1) 9. Unfinished Business (Public Comment Opportunity) a. 2023A Bonds Discussion; Moved to 8c. b. Cropland Rental Discussion; Moved to 8d. c. Commissioner Appointments; Moved to 8e. d. RFPs – Additional Information on Financials for City vs. Developer Costs; Moved to 8f. e. Photography Donation Update; Moved to 8b. 10. New Business 11. Staff Reports a. Planning Project Update; Council received update. b. Downtown Utility Services Connection Letter; Council received copy of letter. c. 2022 Minutes Update; Council received update. Council did not have questions regarding staff reports. 12. Closed Session – Hackamore Road Project and Purchase of Property Mayor McKee stated: “The City Council is going into closed sessions 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 counter- offers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property. The city council is going into closed session to consider an offer for real estate; the following properties are the subject of the closed meeting:” • PID 3611923330009 • PID 3611923330010 Mayor McKee recessed the Council meeting at 10:55 pm. Mayor McKee reconvened the Council meeting at 11:20 pm. Mayor McKee stated: “In closed session, the City Council discussed an offer for real estate; staff was provided direction.” 13. 2023 City Council Schedule 14. Adjournment MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz to adjourn. Voting aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 11:22 pm on March 23, 2023. Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7b. Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Prepared By Michelle Friedrich Topic Draft Regular Council Minutes – March 23, 2023 Action Required Informational Summary The draft Council Regular Minutes for March 23, 2023, will be emailed on Tuesday, March 12, with hard copy provided to Council the evening of the March 14 meeting. Attachments (Hard copies will be provided March 14, 2024) 1. 2023-03-23 Draft Regular Council Minutes Agenda Item 7c. Council Meeting Date:3/14/2024 Prepared By:Jodie Peterson Amount Project name $0.00 -$ $1,211,499.88 $1,211,499.88 159,950.21$ 1,371,450.09$ Date Paid to Amount Description 2/16/2024 MN DEPT OF REVEN 446.47$ MN SALES TAX RETURN 2/16/2024 ADP PAYROLL FEES 510.52$ Payoll Processing Fee 2/21/2024 ADP PAYROLL FEES 403.10$ Payoll Processing Fee 2/22/2024 Optum Bank 8,683.78$ Employee HSA 2/22/2024 ADP Tax 119,554.70$ Net Payroll and Taxes 2/23/2024 MN PERA 25,793.60$ Employee Pension 2/26/2024 EMPOWER 5,485.68$ Employee Deferred Comp/Healthcare Savings 3/1/2024 ADP PAYROLL FEES 353.96$ Payoll Processing Fee 3/1/2024 HealthPartners 38,086.36$ Employee Health Insurance Premium 3/7/2024 RevTrak 206.00$ Credit Card Processing Fee 3/7/2024 ADP Tax 121,303.89$ Net Payroll and Taxes Total 159,950.21$ 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 1/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35096 3509689.99 03/14/24549367CARBURETOR KITA-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC02/16/24100-45200-50210 89.99 Total For Check 35096 Check 35097 3509715.95 03/14/2412441470STEALTH MOUNTSACME TOOLS02/22/24100-45200-50210 15.95 Total For Check 35097 Check 35098 35098111.14 03/14/243858308CITY HALL PEST CONTROLADAMS PEST CONTROL, INC.02/20/24100-41900-50401 111.14 Total For Check 35098 Check 35099 3509938.92 03/14/241NFJ-MPVR-PHFJLAMINATING POUCHESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/02/24100-41410-50210 3509946.98 03/14/241Y9N-N9QD-RYVLSUPPLIES FOR ELECTIONAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES02/13/24100-41410-50210 3509969.07 03/14/241NFJ-MPVR-PHFJLAMINATING POUCHESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/02/24100-41900-50200 3509968.72 03/14/241HHL-3H3D-H4JKPOLICE OFFICER US AMERICAN FLAG UNAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/01/24100-42100-50417 3509944.84 03/14/24196X-MFRH-PH71LIGHTER OUTLET REPLACEMENTAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/13/23100-43100-50210 3509988.27 03/14/241FNG-P36C-9NWCCAR CHARGER ADAPTERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/15/23100-43100-50220 35099247.34 03/14/241V63-14T9-7VMMLAWN MOWER BLADEAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/22/23100-45200-50221 604.14 Total For Check 35099 Check 35100 35100248.01 03/14/242562367CITY HALL PROPANEBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/13/24100-41900-50210 3510030.07 03/14/242573815UNLEADED FUELBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/16/24100-41900-50212 351001,368.25 03/14/242573815UNLEADED FUELBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/16/24100-42100-50212 35100856.90 03/14/242576277ULS DYED FUELBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/20/24100-43100-50212 35100105.25 03/14/242573815UNLEADED FUELBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/16/24100-43100-50212 35100671.59 03/14/242562366PUBLIC WORKS PROPANEBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/13/24100-43100-50380 3,280.07 Total For Check 35100 Check 35101 3510199.15 03/14/2403062024UTILITY BILLING REFUNDBELLWETHER ASSOCIATION03/01/24601-00000-22200 99.15 Total For Check 35101 Check 35102 3510280.00 03/14/2429076SQUAD 576 WINDSHIELD REPAIRBOB AND CARLS AUTO BODY INC02/16/24100-42100-50403 80.00 Total For Check 35102 Check 35103 351032,553.72 03/14/2413303TRUCK SAFETY FOODBROASTER CATERING02/29/24207-42100-50210 2,553.72 Total For Check 35103 Check 35104 35104232.00 03/14/245160LEGAL SERVICES - FEBRUARY 2024CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER02/29/24100-00000-22205 3510410,581.38 03/14/245160LEGAL SERVICES - FEBRUARY 2024CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER02/29/24100-41600-50300 351043,094.10 03/14/245160LEGAL SERVICES - FEBRUARY 2024CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER02/29/24100-42100-50304 35104145.00 03/14/245160LEGAL SERVICES - FEBRUARY 2024CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER02/29/24419-43100-50304 14,052.48 Total For Check 35104 Check 35105 35105538.88 03/14/24204185SUPPLEMENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS JANUACIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURA02/29/24100-00000-15500 35105538.88 03/14/24204192SUPPLEMENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS MARCH CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURA02/29/24100-00000-15500 35105538.88 03/14/24204190SUPPLEMENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS FEB 2CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURA02/29/24100-00000-15500 1,616.64 Total For Check 35105 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 2/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35106 35106146.37 03/14/244184140483CITY HALL FLOOR MATSCINTAS - 47002/21/24100-41900-50400 3510630.09 03/14/244184859704UNIFORM/DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MATCINTAS - 47002/28/24100-43100-50400 3510683.70 03/14/244184859697SHOP TOWELSCINTAS - 47002/28/24100-43100-50400 3510683.70 03/14/244183419657SHOP TOWELSCINTAS - 47002/14/24100-43100-50400 3510630.09 03/14/244183419641UNIFORM/DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MATSCINTAS - 47002/14/24100-43100-50400 351066.60 03/14/244184140447DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MAT/UNIFORMCINTAS - 47002/21/24100-43100-50400 3510630.55 03/14/244184140469CRT CABINET/DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MACINTAS - 47002/21/24100-43100-50400 35106212.99 03/14/244184859775UNIFORMCINTAS - 47002/28/24100-43100-50417 3510635.27 03/14/244184859704UNIFORM/DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MATCINTAS - 47002/28/24100-43100-50417 3510635.27 03/14/244183419641UNIFORM/DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MATSCINTAS - 47002/14/24100-43100-50417 3510635.27 03/14/244184140447DISPOSABLE BATHROOM MAT/UNIFORMCINTAS - 47002/21/24100-43100-50417 35106212.99 03/14/244184140518UNIFORMCINTAS - 47002/21/24100-43100-50417 35106212.99 03/14/244183419747UNIFORMSCINTAS - 47002/14/24100-43100-50417 1,155.88 Total For Check 35106 Check 35107 35107900.00 03/14/2423-058TRAINING CENTER RENTALCITY OF ANNANDALE11/20/23100-42100-50207 900.00 Total For Check 35107 Check 35108 3510897.50 03/14/24BP23-0052-5BP23-0052 STAFF PLANNER REVEIW FEBCITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 351081,235.00 03/14/24BP23-0045-4BP23-0045 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEBCITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 35108698.75 03/14/24BP23-0053-3BP23-0053 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEBCITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 3510897.50 03/14/24BP24-0001-2BP24-0001 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEBCITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 35108130.00 03/14/24BP22-0029.16BP22-0029 STAFF PLANNER TIME FEB 2CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 35108227.50 03/14/24BP24-0005BP24-0005 STAFF PLANNER TIME FEB CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 3510897.50 03/14/24BP23-0038-5BP23-0038 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEB CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 3510865.00 03/14/24BP23-0014BP23-0014 STAFF PLANNER TIME FEB 2CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 3510881.25 03/14/24BP24-0008BP24-0008 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEB CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 3510848.75 03/14/24BP24-0013BP24-0013 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEB CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 35108146.25 03/14/24BP23-0048-4BP23-0048 STAFF PLANNER REVIEW FEB CITY OF CORCORAN03/05/24100-00000-22205 3510827.53 03/14/2402-29-20246620 CO RD 116 WATER BILLCITY OF CORCORAN02/29/24100-45200-50382 3510827.53 03/14/2402292023UB BILL 20200 CO RD 50CITY OF CORCORAN02/29/24100-45200-50382 2,980.06 Total For Check 35108 Check 35109 35109295.05 03/14/24194023332INTERNET FEBRUARY 2024COMCAST - 93089903502/01/24100-43100-50380 295.05 Total For Check 35109 Check 35110 351101,861.30 03/14/24368341AGREEMENT OFFICE 365 - FEBRUARY 20COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/15/24100-41920-50300 35110885.00 03/14/24368735SIRIS 4 - P4000 BACKUP BILLING - MCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/15/24100-41920-50300 351103,816.00 03/14/24369177AGREEMENT MANAGED SERVICES MARCH 2COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/15/24100-41920-50300 6,562.30 Total For Check 35110 Check 35111 3511186.00 03/14/24100X08020609PD OFFICE WATERCULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER02/29/24100-42100-50210 86.00 Total For Check 35111 Check 35112 3511263.32 03/14/24985731MARCH 5 PRIMARY ELECTION ECM PUBLISHERS INC02/15/24100-41130-50350 35112387.84 03/14/24986696HUD RELEASE OF FUNDS REQUEST NOTICECM PUBLISHERS INC02/22/24100-41900-50350 451.16 Total For Check 35112 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 3/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35113 35113600.50 03/14/240523818-1WATER METERSFERGUSON WATERWORKS #251802/15/24601-49400-50210 351131,992.84 03/14/240524796-1WATER METERSFERGUSON WATERWORKS #251802/21/24601-49400-50210 2,593.34 Total For Check 35113 Check 35114 3511454.68 03/14/244020316FEBRUARY 2024 SUPPORT SERVICESGOPHER STATE ONE CALL02/29/24601-49400-50380 3511454.67 03/14/244020316FEBRUARY 2024 SUPPORT SERVICESGOPHER STATE ONE CALL02/29/24602-49450-50380 109.35 Total For Check 35114 Check 35115 35115960.00 03/14/24030624DEPENDENT CARE REIMBURSEMENTMATT GOTTSCHALK03/06/24100-00000-21710 960.00 Total For Check 35115 Check 35116 3511610.28 03/14/249027890079BARBED HOSE FITTING GRAINGER02/21/24100-43100-50220 10.28 Total For Check 35116 Check 35117 351171,500.00 03/14/2403012024RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION REIMBURSBRANDON HEINZ03/01/24100-43100-50307 1,500.00 Total For Check 35117 Check 35118 351187,447.58 03/14/24023-058-2CORCORAN PARK PLANNING AND DESIGNHKGI02/13/24100-41900-50300 7,447.58 Total For Check 35118 Check 35119 351192,669.73 03/14/2402162024WELLNESS REIMBURSEMENTLAWSON, JOSH02/21/24100-42100-50307 2,669.73 Total For Check 35119 Check 35120 35120125.00 03/14/24401412DAY ON THE HILLLEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES03/04/24100-41320-50207 35120125.00 03/14/24401412DAY ON THE HILLLEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES03/04/24100-42100-50207 250.00 Total For Check 35120 Check 35121 35121136,272.00 03/14/24021420242024 PROPERTY/CASUALTY INSURANCELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR02/14/24100-41900-50360 136,272.00 Total For Check 35121 Check 35122 351221,500.00 03/14/24022124RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION REIMBURSLINDA CANTON02/21/24100-41400-50307 1,500.00 Total For Check 35122 Check 35123 351231,770.10 03/14/2429809CITY HALL OUTLET INSTALLATIONLOBERG ELECTRIC INC02/16/24100-41900-50401 1,770.10 Total For Check 35123 Check 35124 35124130.00 03/14/242638MANDATORY CHECK INMARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW, LLC03/04/24100-41900-50300 130.00 Total For Check 35124 Check 35125 35125373.46 03/14/242461WATERTANK MENARDS BUFFALO02/22/24100-43100-50210 373.46 Total For Check 35125 Check 35126 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 4/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35126 3512619.71 03/14/2429026CLAMP FOR SPRINKLER ROOMMENARDS MAPLE GROVE02/22/24100-43100-50223 19.71 Total For Check 35126 Check 35127 3512789.02 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-00000-20205 3512729.17 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-41320-50130 3512787.51 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-41400-50130 3512789.02 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-41500-50130 35127125.45 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-41910-50130 35127280.07 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-42100-50130 3512759.85 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-42102-50130 3512759.85 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-42400-50130 35127156.13 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-43100-50130 3512714.59 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-45100-50130 3512714.58 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 DENTAL INSURANCEMETLIFE03/01/24100-45200-50130 1,005.24 Total For Check 35127 Check 35128 3512844,725.14 03/14/244021FINALIZED PERMITS JANUARY 2024METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVIC02/02/24100-42400-50300 44,725.14 Total For Check 35128 Check 35129 3512923,413.36 03/14/240001169391WASTE WATER SERVICES APRIL 2024METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRO03/01/24602-49450-50312 23,413.36 Total For Check 35129 Check 35130 351302,754.00 03/14/241Q 2024WATER CONNECTION 01/01/24-03/31/24MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH02/16/24601-49400-50300 2,754.00 Total For Check 35130 Check 35131 35131290.00 03/14/240030466ANIMAL CONTROL CHARGESCITY OF MONTICELLO02/09/24100-42100-50300 290.00 Total For Check 35131 Check 35132 35132151.78 03/14/24521833BATTERYNAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran02/13/24100-42100-50220 3513212.95 03/14/24523030FUEL LINE HOSENAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran02/21/24100-45200-50210 351323.69 03/14/24523733SLIDE TERMINALNAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran02/26/24100-45200-50210 168.42 Total For Check 35132 Check 35133 35133384.62 03/14/2403.04.2024DEPENDENT CARE REIMBURSEMENTNATALIE DAVIS MCKEOWN03/04/24100-00000-21710 384.62 Total For Check 35133 Check 35134 351342,700.00 03/14/24552306REBARNORTH SECOND STREET STEEL02/27/24411-43100-50520 2,700.00 Total For Check 35134 Check 35135 3513511,430.01 03/14/242024 - 22024 2ND BENCHMARKNW TRAILS ASSOCIATION01/01/24100-45200-50530 11,430.01 Total For Check 35135 Check 35136 3513650,333.66 03/14/24PAY 5MASS GRADING & STORMWATER CITY CENPARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES02/27/24408-00000-20610 50,333.66 Total For Check 35136 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 5/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35137 35137142.02 03/14/24Q1198902FOLDER INSERTER LEASE 03/15/24-06/QUADIENT LEASING USA INC02/12/24100-41900-50413 35137141.98 03/14/24Q1198902FOLDER INSERTER LEASE 03/15/24-06/QUADIENT LEASING USA INC02/12/24601-49400-50413 35137141.97 03/14/24Q1198902FOLDER INSERTER LEASE 03/15/24-06/QUADIENT LEASING USA INC02/12/24602-49450-50413 425.97 Total For Check 35137 Check 35138 35138139,596.61 03/14/2403082024SURETY CASH RELEASERACHEL DEVELOPMENT INC03/08/24100-00000-22205-011 139,596.61 Total For Check 35138 Check 35139 351394,516.70 03/14/2402012024LEGAL FEESRATWIK, ROSZAK & MALONEY, P.02/01/24100-41600-50300 4,516.70 Total For Check 35139 Check 35140 35140919.23 03/14/240894-006593164CITY RECYCLING JANUARY 2024REPUBLIC SERVICES02/29/24100-43201-50300 919.23 Total For Check 35140 Check 35141 35141744,500.00 03/14/24227704426 PAY 1NE WATER SUPPLY - WATER TREATMENT RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP03/04/24601-00000-16500 35141(37,225.00)03/14/24227704426 PAY 1NE WATER SUPPLY - WATER TREATMENT RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP03/04/24601-00000-20610 707,275.00 Total For Check 35141 Check 35142 35142244.00 03/14/2420242024 MEMBERSHIP DUES - BARNHARTSHRM03/01/24100-41500-50433 244.00 Total For Check 35142 Check 35143 351431,155.75 03/14/24410307CONSTRUCTION SIGNS - ROAD WORK AHESIGN SOLUTIONS USA02/13/24100-43100-50226 1,155.75 Total For Check 35143 Check 35144 3514413.46 03/14/2402-13-24COST SHARING RMS - CONSULTING SERVSOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PD02/13/24416-42100-50210 13.46 Total For Check 35144 Check 35145 35145138.94 03/14/2402132024RMS COST SHARING - 2023 CONSULTING SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE 02/13/24416-42100-50210 138.94 Total For Check 35145 Check 35146 35146192.35 03/14/2402.21.24COST SHARING RMS - LEGAL FEESSOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE 02/21/24416-42100-50210 192.35 Total For Check 35146 Check 35147 3514738.46 03/14/2402.13.2024COST SHARING RMS - CONSULTING SERVSOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA POLICE 02/13/24416-42100-50210 38.46 Total For Check 35147 Check 35148 351481,981.75 03/14/2403-2024MARCH 2024 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUMSSTANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY02/15/24100-00000-21709 1,981.75 Total For Check 35148 Check 35149 35149876.00 03/14/24I1682052PRACTICE AMMUNITIONSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/14/24100-42100-50207 3514976.95 03/14/24I1682574OPTICS ADAPTERSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/15/24100-42100-50417 35149399.99 03/14/24I1685175FIREARM OPTICSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/28/24100-42100-50417 1,352.94 Total For Check 35149 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 6/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35150 35150542.88 03/14/249205592978DEFIBRILLATION ELECTRODESSTRYKER SALES, LLC02/13/24100-42100-50210 542.88 Total For Check 35150 Check 35151 351513,193.66 03/14/24P99488PACKERSWANSTON EQUIP CORP.02/19/24100-43100-50220 3,193.66 Total For Check 35151 Check 35152 351522.82 03/14/2402.21.2024CELL SERVICES 01/21/24-2-20-24T-MOBILE02/21/24100-43100-50321 2.82 Total For Check 35152 Check 35153 35153400.68 03/14/2403-2024UNION DUES/TLDF MARCH 2024TEAMSTER LOCAL 32003/01/24100-00000-21707 400.68 Total For Check 35153 Check 35154 351541,226.19 03/14/2415683-00RIVET/SPLIT LOCK WASHERS/BATTERY TTERMINAL SUPPLY CO02/15/24100-45200-50210 1,226.19 Total For Check 35154 Check 35155 35155364.69 03/14/2401-2024PD UNIFORM DRY CLEANING JANUARY 20TIDE CLEANERS02/01/24100-42100-50417 364.69 Total For Check 35155 Check 35156 3515666.77 03/14/2410553596ANCHOR TWIN HOSETOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY02/21/24100-43100-50210 66.77 Total For Check 35156 Check 35157 35157720.00 03/14/2424022900CITY HALL & PD CLEANINGULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC02/29/24100-41900-50401 720.00 Total For Check 35157 Check 35158 351581,040.00 03/14/2402222024TREE GIVEAWAY - WRIGHT SWCDCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/21/24100-00000-15500 3515872.70 03/14/2403953-32494780COMMUNICATION SUBSCRIPTIONCANVAS SOLUTIONS INC10/29/23100-41130-50325 3515813.05 03/14/240088CITY ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW LUNCH CREDIT CARD PURCHASES11/02/23100-41320-50210 3515852.50 03/14/24084674CITY ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW LUNCH CREDIT CARD PURCHASES11/02/23100-41320-50210 35158161.16 03/14/24117394031ELECTION MEALSCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/05/24100-41410-50210 3515883.65 03/14/24805055ELECTION MEALSCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/05/24100-41410-50210 35158175.66 03/14/24805049ELECTION MEALSCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/05/24100-41410-50210 3515890.34 03/14/24387963398ELECTION MEALSCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/05/24100-41410-50210 3515883.86 03/14/24053334ELECTION SUPPLIESCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/03/24100-41410-50210 3515817.68 03/14/24102000658094365ELECTION JUDGES SUPPLIESCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/02/24100-41410-50210 3515864.43 03/14/241067027253ELECTION JUDGES LUNCHCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/04/24100-41410-50210 35158237.02 03/14/242684676ELELCTION TABULATOR ROLLSINTAB LLC02/20/24100-41410-50210 35158600.00 03/14/24790870GFOA TRAINING RENEWAL - PETERSONGOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS 03/02/24100-41500-50207 3515870.00 03/14/2416914MNGFOA ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP - BARNHARMNGFOA02/16/24100-41500-50433 3515832.58 03/14/24092605EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION EVENT SUPPLIECREDIT CARD PURCHASES12/19/23100-41900-50210 3515837.75 03/14/24121923EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION EVENT SUPPLIECREDIT CARD PURCHASES12/19/23100-41900-50210 35158135.00 03/14/24024357ENTRANCE PERMIT FOR CITY PARK DRIVCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/16/24100-41900-50430 35158920.00 03/14/2481798022024 NATIONAL PLANNING CONFERENCE CREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/21/24100-41910-50207 3515837.06 03/14/24MZA1M170APPLE - DEVICE STORAGE PLAN 8/26/2CREDIT CARD PURCHASES09/26/23100-41920-50210 3515835.88 03/14/24MZA204H2APPLE - DEVICE STORAGE PLAN 9/26/2CREDIT CARD PURCHASES10/26/23100-41920-50210 3515835.88 03/14/24MZA22B78APPLE - DEVICE STORAGE PLAN 10/26/CREDIT CARD PURCHASES11/26/23100-41920-50210 3515841.73 03/14/24MZA24LDNAPPLE - DEVICE STORAGE PLAN 11/26/CREDIT CARD PURCHASES12/26/23100-41920-50210 3515850.83 03/14/24MZA29NG5APPLE - DEVICE MANAGEMENTCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/26/24100-41920-50210 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 7/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 35158 35158163.07 03/14/24242024QR CODE GENERATOR SUBSCRIPTIONCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/04/24100-42100-50200 35158200.00 03/14/2429648BCA TRAINING - LAWSONBCA TRAINING10/23/23100-42100-50207 35158547.40 03/14/240588750-INRANGE FEESCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/13/24100-42100-50207 35158496.20 03/14/24159703IACP CONFERENCE TRAVEL - GOTTSCHALCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/13/24100-42100-50207 3515849.42 03/14/240098HY-VEE - SUPPLIES FOR POLICE EVENTCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/08/24100-42100-50210 351582.00 03/14/24979443MPLS CHARGECREDIT CARD PURCHASES10/17/23100-42100-50210 3515829.51 03/14/24013880CASEY'S - FUELCREDIT CARD PURCHASES12/06/23100-42100-50212 35158206.28 03/14/2402192024LEGAL DEFENSE FUND - EKENBERGCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/19/24100-42100-50300 3515875.00 03/14/243609221-202402-PD INVESTIGATIONS FEBRUARY 2024TRANSUNION RISK & ALTERNATIV03/01/24100-42100-50300 3515835.00 03/14/2425012024MAPET - MEMBERSHIP RENEWALCREDIT CARD PURCHASES01/25/24100-42100-50433 3515885.00 03/14/24IMS3963611CERTIFIED BUILDING OFFICIAL EDUCATMN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY02/16/24100-42400-50207 3515891.85 03/14/24035345TRAINING MEALCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/12/24100-43100-50207 35158103.71 03/14/24025811TRAINING MEALCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/08/24100-43125-50210 35158139.00 03/14/2418015FIREARM SAFETY AWARDSALTA03/01/24204-42100-50210 35158288.00 03/14/2401312024EVENTCREATE SUBSCRIPTIONCREDIT CARD PURCHASES01/31/24207-42100-50210 3515875.97 03/14/241096567448COFFEE FOR TRUCK SAFETY CLASS CREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/25/24207-42100-50210 35158252.00 03/14/24090416TRUCK SAFETY WATERCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/27/24207-42100-50210 35158429.26 03/14/242.26.24TRUCK SAFETY FOODCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/26/24207-42100-50210 351584,189.69 03/14/24R260844HYDRAULIC PUMPCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/27/24416-43100-50580 11,547.12 Total For Check 35158 Check 35159 3515920.10 03/14/24522814920COPIER LEASEUS BANKCORP EQUIPMENT FINANC02/16/24100-41920-50210 20.10 Total For Check 35159 Check 35160 35160300.00 03/14/2450025503933SALT GUARDWHITE CAP02/15/24100-43121-50224 300.00 Total For Check 35160 Check 35161 35161339.78 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205 35161278.87 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205-007 35161825.09 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205-056 351611,176.57 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205-065 35161628.53 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205-087 35161218.19 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205-098 3516196.60 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-00000-22205-132 351612,853.46 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-41900-50381 3516160.95 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-42151-50381 35161206.80 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-43100-50381 35161200.94 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24100-45200-50381 3516174.97 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24601-49400-50380 35161373.51 03/14/2435031108726UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/09/24602-49450-50380 7,334.26 Total For Check 35161 Check 35162 35162185.82 03/14/24866452057PW BUILDING ELECTRICITYXCEL ENERGY02/26/24100-43100-50381 185.82 Total For Check 35162 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 8/8Page: 03/08/2024 10:02 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 02/23/2024 - 03/14/2024 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number 413,033.74 Fund 100 GENERAL FUND 139.00 Fund 204 FIREARMS SAFETY 3,598.95 Fund 207 TRUCK SAFETY 50,333.66 Fund 408 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT 2,700.00 Fund 411 PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY 4,572.90 Fund 416 CAPITAL-EQUIPMENT CERTS 145.00 Fund 419 HACKAMORE UPGRADE (LENNAR) 712,993.12 Fund 601 WATER 23,983.51 Fund 602 SEWER Fund Totals: 1,211,499.88 Total For All Funds: STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7d. Council Meeting: March 14, 2024 Prepared By: Michelle Friedrich Topic: 2024 PNP Election Results Action Required: Informational Only Summary The State Canvassing Board will meet to certify the official results report for Minnesota for the March 5, 2024 Presidential Nomination Primary, at 2:00pm, on March 12, 2024. This State Canvassing Board will consist of: •Steve Simon, Secretary of State •G. Barry Anderson, Associate Justice, Minnesota Supreme Court •Margaret H. Chutich, Associate Justice, Minnesota Supreme Court •Laura Nelson, Judge, Second Judicial District Court •Reynaldo Aligada, Judge, Second Judicial District Court Financial/Budget NA Options NA Recommendation NA Council Action NA Attachments 1.Unofficial results P1, P2, and P3 for March 5, 2024 Presidential Nomination Primary 2024. 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…1/6 Precincts Reporting of Selected Precincts: 100% 3 of 3 Last Updated: 03/08/24 10:17 AM Voters Registered at 7AM: 5,134 Español Hmoob Soomaali Tiếng Việt Pусский 中文 ພາສາລາວ Afaan Oromo ែខ រ አማርኛ Unof cial Results Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Results Home Previous Page Results for Selected Precincts in Hennepin County CORCORAN P-01 U.S. Presidential Nominee 4100 precincts in contest. 1 of 1 precincts reported. Republican Candidate Totals Percent Donald J. Trump 166 79.05% Vivek Ramaswamy 1 0.48% Ron DeSantis 2 0.95% Nikki Haley 40 19.05% Chris Christie 0 0.00% Write-In 1 0.48% Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Jason Palmer 0 0.00% Joseph R Biden Jr 39 72.22% OFFICE OF THE MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE STEVE SIMON 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…2/6 Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Eban Cambridge 0 0.00% Uncommitted 4 7.41% Marianne Williamson 0 0.00% Dean Phillips 11 20.37% Frankie Lozada 0 0.00% Gabriel Cornejo 0 0.00% Cenk Uygur 0 0.00% Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Vermin Supreme 0 0.00% Krystal Gabel 0 0.00% Dennis Schuller 1 100.00% Edward Forchion 0 0.00% Rudy Reyes 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…3/6 CORCORAN P-02 U.S. Presidential Nominee 4100 precincts in contest. 1 of 1 precincts reported. Republican Candidate Totals Percent Donald J. Trump 120 56.07% Vivek Ramaswamy 0 0.00% Ron DeSantis 1 0.47% Nikki Haley 92 42.99% Chris Christie 1 0.47% Write-In 0 0.00% Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Jason Palmer 0 0.00% Joseph R Biden Jr 80 72.73% Eban Cambridge 0 0.00% Uncommitted 7 6.36% Marianne Williamson 1 0.91% Dean Phillips 20 18.18% Frankie Lozada 0 0.00% Gabriel Cornejo 1 0.91% Cenk Uygur 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…4/6 Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato 0 0.00% Write-In 1 0.91% Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Vermin Supreme 0 0.00% Krystal Gabel 0 0.00% Dennis Schuller 0 0.00% Edward Forchion 0 0.00% Rudy Reyes 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% CORCORAN P-03 U.S. Presidential Nominee 4100 precincts in contest. 1 of 1 precincts reported. Republican Candidate Totals Percent Donald J. Trump 94 63.51% Vivek Ramaswamy 1 0.68% Ron DeSantis 0 0.00% Nikki Haley 53 35.81% Chris Christie 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…5/6 Republican Candidate Totals Percent Write-In 0 0.00% Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Jason Palmer 0 0.00% Joseph R Biden Jr 36 55.38% Eban Cambridge 0 0.00% Uncommitted 11 16.92% Marianne Williamson 0 0.00% Dean Phillips 15 23.08% Frankie Lozada 0 0.00% Gabriel Cornejo 0 0.00% Cenk Uygur 0 0.00% Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato 0 0.00% Write-In 3 4.62% Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Vermin Supreme 0 0.00% Krystal Gabel 0 0.00% Dennis Schuller 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…6/6 Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Edward Forchion 0 0.00% Rudy Reyes 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% © 2024 Of ce of the Minnesota Secretary of State - Terms & Conditions The Of ce of the Secretary of State is an equal opportunity employer Subscribe for email updates! Vulnerability Disclosure 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…1/6 Precincts Reporting of Selected Precincts: 100% 3 of 3 Last Updated: 03/08/24 10:17 AM Voters Registered at 7AM: 5,134 Español Hmoob Soomaali Tiếng Việt Pусский 中文 ພາສາລາວ Afaan Oromo ែខ រ አማርኛ Unof cial Results Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Results Home Previous Page Results for Selected Precincts in Hennepin County CORCORAN P-01 U.S. Presidential Nominee 4100 precincts in contest. 1 of 1 precincts reported. Republican Candidate Totals Percent Donald J. Trump 166 79.05% Vivek Ramaswamy 1 0.48% Ron DeSantis 2 0.95% Nikki Haley 40 19.05% Chris Christie 0 0.00% Write-In 1 0.48% Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Jason Palmer 0 0.00% Joseph R Biden Jr 39 72.22% OFFICE OF THE MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE STEVE SIMON 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…2/6 Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Eban Cambridge 0 0.00% Uncommitted 4 7.41% Marianne Williamson 0 0.00% Dean Phillips 11 20.37% Frankie Lozada 0 0.00% Gabriel Cornejo 0 0.00% Cenk Uygur 0 0.00% Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Vermin Supreme 0 0.00% Krystal Gabel 0 0.00% Dennis Schuller 1 100.00% Edward Forchion 0 0.00% Rudy Reyes 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…3/6 CORCORAN P-02 U.S. Presidential Nominee 4100 precincts in contest. 1 of 1 precincts reported. Republican Candidate Totals Percent Donald J. Trump 120 56.07% Vivek Ramaswamy 0 0.00% Ron DeSantis 1 0.47% Nikki Haley 92 42.99% Chris Christie 1 0.47% Write-In 0 0.00% Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Jason Palmer 0 0.00% Joseph R Biden Jr 80 72.73% Eban Cambridge 0 0.00% Uncommitted 7 6.36% Marianne Williamson 1 0.91% Dean Phillips 20 18.18% Frankie Lozada 0 0.00% Gabriel Cornejo 1 0.91% Cenk Uygur 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…4/6 Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato 0 0.00% Write-In 1 0.91% Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Vermin Supreme 0 0.00% Krystal Gabel 0 0.00% Dennis Schuller 0 0.00% Edward Forchion 0 0.00% Rudy Reyes 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% CORCORAN P-03 U.S. Presidential Nominee 4100 precincts in contest. 1 of 1 precincts reported. Republican Candidate Totals Percent Donald J. Trump 94 63.51% Vivek Ramaswamy 1 0.68% Ron DeSantis 0 0.00% Nikki Haley 53 35.81% Chris Christie 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…5/6 Republican Candidate Totals Percent Write-In 0 0.00% Democratic-Farmer-Labor Candidate Totals Percent Jason Palmer 0 0.00% Joseph R Biden Jr 36 55.38% Eban Cambridge 0 0.00% Uncommitted 11 16.92% Marianne Williamson 0 0.00% Dean Phillips 15 23.08% Frankie Lozada 0 0.00% Gabriel Cornejo 0 0.00% Cenk Uygur 0 0.00% Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato 0 0.00% Write-In 3 4.62% Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Vermin Supreme 0 0.00% Krystal Gabel 0 0.00% Dennis Schuller 0 0.00% 3/8/24, 1:52 PM Index - Election Results https://electionresults.sos.mn.gov/results/Index?ErsElectionId=162&CountyId=27&DistrictId=&Scenario=PrecinctsPnp&selectprecincts=2021585&sele…6/6 Legal Marijuana Now Candidate Totals Percent Edward Forchion 0 0.00% Rudy Reyes 0 0.00% Write-In 0 0.00% © 2024 Of ce of the Minnesota Secretary of State - Terms & Conditions The Of ce of the Secretary of State is an equal opportunity employer Subscribe for email updates! Vulnerability Disclosure STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7e. Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Prepared By Mike Pritchard Topic Construction Agreement – 7200 Willow Dr. Action Required Approval of Agreement Summary Eric and Alysha Kvam own the property at 7200 Willow Drive, Corcoran, MN. The existing home is habitable and currently occupied by the Kvams, however, they would like to construct a new home and demolish the existing home. The property owners have requested the City to draft an agreement allowing them to reside in their existing home while building their new home. The City will require an escrow in the amount of $10,000 prior to execution of the agreement. The City Attorney has drafted the Construction Agreement (see attached) for your review and approval. The home is to be constructed and have a Certificate of Occupancy issued in 2024; the existing home will then be burned and utilized for training by West Suburban Fire and will be razed and removed no later than June 30, 2025. Financial/Budget There will be a $10,000 escrow in place. Staff do not foresee any financial impacts to the City. Recommendation Staff recommend approving the Construction Agreement as presented. Council Action 1. Approve the Construction Agreement as presented. 2. Decline approval of the Construction Agreement as presented. 3. Amend the Construction Agreement as presented and approve the amended agreement. Attachments 1.Construction Agreement 2.Survey 7g1. CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT This Construction Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into between the City of Corcoran (“Cit y”) and Eric Kvam and Alysha Kvam, husband and wife, 7200 Willow Drive, Corcora n, Minnesota (“Kvams”). The City and Kvams are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the “parties” or each a “party”. This Agreement shall be effective upon full execution by all parties hereto. RECITALS WHEREAS, Kvams have applied to the City for permission to build a new home structure on the following described property: Property address: 7200 Willow Drive PID #: 28-119-23-41-0002 Legal Description: The North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section Twenty-eight (28), Township One Hundred Nineteen (119) North, Range Twenty-three (23) West of the 5th Principal Meridian, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, subject to rights acquired for public road over the Westerly 33 feet thereof and together with and subject to an easement for roadway over the Easterly 33 feet thereof. (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, an existing single family home exists on the Property; and WHEREAS, the Corcoran City Code does not permit multiple single family homes to be constructed to permanently occupy the same parcel of land within the City, however, the parties desire to enter into this Agreement to facilitate the reasonable replacement of an existing home with a new home; and WHEREAS, Kvams have requested that the City permit them to live in the existing home on the Property during the construction of their new home on the Property and have further requested that the City grant them adequate time to remove the existing home structure; and 7g1. WHEREAS, Kvams have deposited $10,000 in escrow to cover City expenses incurred in preparing this Agreement and administering this process and Agreement; further, the escrow funds may be used by the City in the event the City is required to enforce this Agreement. NOW , THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: (1) Subject to all applicable permitting, federal, state, and local requirements, the City hereby grants pe rmission to Kvams to construct a new single family dwelling unit on the Property while at the same time remaining and residing in the existing home on the Property. (2) Kvams agree to complete construction and obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the new homestead in the calendar year 2024, and further agree to raze and remove the currently existing home on the Property no later than June 30, 2025. (3) Kvams hereby agree that, in the event of non -compliance with the terms of this Agreement, the City may enter upon the Property and complete any work necessary to make the conditions on the Property compliance with City Code and all federal, state and local regulations. This right of entry shall be exercised exclusively in the City’s discretion and nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to impose a duty to enter and correct on the City. (4) Kvams agree that, should the City be forced to seek enforcement of this Agreement, that Kvams will reimburse the City for all costs, expenses and liabilities the City incurs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, associated with said enforcement. (5) The $10,000 escrow provided by Kvams will be used to reimburse the City for the costs associated with preparing this Agreement and for all costs associated with administering, overseeing, and enforcing this Agreement; any unused amounts remaining at the completion of the new home construction project will be returned to Kvams. In the event the City’s costs exceed $10,000, the City shall invoice Kvams for that overage and Kvams shall pay the invoice within thirty (30) days. Should Kvams fail to timely pay an escrow overage invoice, the City shall be empowered to assess, without further notice, the balance owed to the Property and Kvams hereby waive, on behalf of themselves and their heirs, successors and assigns, any right to appeal or challenge said assessment. (6) Kvams hereby represent and warranty that they are the owners of the Property and maintain the unencumbered right to comply with all terms of this Agreement. (7) The parties agree that this Agreement shall run with the Property and shall bind each party’s heirs, successors, and assigns. Signatures on following pages 7g1. OWNERS: Dated: ___________________ __________________________ Eric Kvam Dated: ___________________ __________________________ Alysha Kvam STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ___________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of _________________, 2024, by Eric Kvam and Alysha Kvam, husband and wife, as their own free act and deed. 7g1. CITY OF CORCORAN: Date______________ ____________________________ Tom McKee, its Mayor Date______________ _________________________ Michelle Friedrich, its City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of ____________, 2024, by Tom McKee, the Mayor and Michelle Friedrich, the City Clerk of the City of Corcoran, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of said municipal corporation. _______________________________ Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55430 Willow Drive DWELLINGPROPOSEDS1Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345Phone (952) 474-796417917 Highway 7Web: www.advsur.comAdvanceSurveying & Engineering, Co.CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESSSHEET NO.SHEET 1 OF 1DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE60300SHEET SIZE22 X 34SCALE - 1" = 30'LEGENDLEGAL DESCRIPTION:The North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section Twenty-eight(28), Township One Hundred Nineteen (119) North, Range Twenty-three (23) West of the 5thPrincipal Meridian, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, subject to rightsacquired for public road over the Westerly 33 feet thereof and together with and subject to aneasement for roadway over the Easterly 33 feet thereof.SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS:1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. Thescope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter.Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel,if necessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements,that you wish to be included on the survey have been shown.2. Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey.3. Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of theproperty.4. This survey has been completed without the benefit of a current title commitment. There maybe existing easements or other encumbrances that would be revealed by a current titlecommitment. Therefore, this survey does not purport to show any easements orencumbrances other than the ones shown hereon.5. Note that all building dimensions and building tie dimensions to the property lines, are takenfrom the siding and or stucco of the building.6. Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of the topographyof the site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations forconstruction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on thissurvey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey whendetermining other elevations for use on this site or before beginning construction.7. It should be noted that this survey was done under snow and ice conditions and that allimprovements may or may not have been shown correctly. While we did our best to locate allimprovements under the snow and ice, we can't be sure that all improvements were shown.Please look over the survey to be sure everything you need shown is shown correctly.STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS:"●" Denotes iron survey marker, set, unless otherwise noted.ERIK KVAM7200 WILLOW DRIVEHAMEL, MNDRAFT COPY7g2. Page 1 of 8 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7f. City Council Meeting: March 14, 2024 Prepared By: Natalie Davis McKeown Topic: Kvam CUP Minor Amendment (PID 28-119-23-41-0002) (City File No. 24-009) Action Required: Approval 1.Application Request Eric Kvam, the applicant, requests approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) amendment that previously allowed for a garage with a sidewall height of 14’ in the rear yard to now be allowed in the front yard for his property at 7200 Willow Drive. 2.Background The City approved a CUP in 1991 that allowed the subject structure to be constructed with a sidewall height of 14’. The structure is currently located in the rear yard. The applicant is in the process of replacing the existing single-family home on the site with a newly constructed home further back on the property. This will make the existing accessory structures located in the front yard per the definition of front yard in the Zoning Ordinance. Accessory structures are allowed to be located in the front yard in the Rural Residential zoning district; however, structures with a sidewall height of more than 10’ require a CUP. The CUP previously approved was for a structure located in the rear yard, so a minor CUP amendment is required to specifically allow the structure’s changed location in the front yard. 3.Context Zoning and Land Use The proposed property is 9.7 acres, guided for Rural/Ag Residential, and zoned Rural Residential (RR). The property has an existing single-family home with two detached accessory structures. The property is outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Figure 1 Site Location Page 2 of 8 Surrounding Properties All surrounding properties are guided for Rural/Ag Residential, within the RR district, and outside of the MUSA. The existing land use of the properties to the north, east, and west is agricultural/residential, and the properties to the south are used for residential purposes. Natural Characteristics of the Site The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Natural Resource Inventory Areas map does not indicate the presence of any natural plant communities on this property. According to the Hennepin County Natural Resources Map, there are wetlands present on the property. The City Engineer’s Memo noted that the wetlands on this site were reviewed and were found to be unaffected by this request and the proposed improvements on the project. Figure 2 Hennepin County Natural Resources Map Page 3 of 8 4. Analysis Planning staff coordinated review of the request for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, City Code requirements, and City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are attached to this report, and the approval conditions require compliance with the memo. Accessory Structure CUP Per Section 1030.020, Subd. 5, the maximum sidewall height of an accessory building constructed in the front or side yard is 10’ unless approved through a CUP. The City’s discretion in approving or denying a CUP is limited to whether the proposed request meets the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the CUP. As discussed in the background portion of this report, the subject structure has a sidewall height of 14’ which was previously approved by the City in the rear yard. Per Section 1070.020, Subd. 6, CUP amendments may be proposed at any time. The applicable process for a CUP amendment is dependent on whether there are significant or minor changes. Significant changes include changes to a CUP that involve hours of operation, number of employees, expansion of structures and/or premises, or other operational modifications that result in increased external activities and traffic. Staff do not believe this change falls into the category of significant changes. Therefore, this request falls under a minor change to the CUP. Minor changes do not require a public hearing or Planning Commission review, but the request requires City Council action. Approval of the minor CUP amendment as requested will allow an existing detached garage of 1,456 square feet to remain in what will become the front yard once the property owner constructs a new single-family home on the property that will replace the existing single-family home. Location and Setbacks The location of the structure will not actually change with this request, but the yard classification of the structure’s location will change per the City Code’s definition of a front yard: YARD, FRONT: An area extending the full width of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest principal structure. The structure is located nearest to the north property line with a setback of 47’. The structure more than complies with the required setbacks for accessory structures (50’ from the front property line, 20’ from the side property lines, and 15’ from the rear property line). The structure is placed more than 15’ from the smaller accessory Page 4 of 8 structure located near the subject structure, and it will be placed more than 15’ from the new home to be constructed on the lot. Size Section 1030.020 of the Zoning Ordinance allows an accessory building footprint of 3,906 square feet for a lot of this size (9.7 acres). The other existing detached structure is roughly 588 square feet. The subject structure is roughly 1,456 square feet. Altogether, the property has an accessory structure footprint of 2,044 square feet. This complies with the size standard. Should the applicant need to expand the accessory structure space in the future, an additional 1,862 square feet can be added to the property. Additionally, 1,000 square feet of attached accessory space can be added without it counting towards the footprint limit. Further, one additional detached structure can be added if it does not exceed 200 square feet (another specific exemption from the footprint limit). Figure 3 Clip of Survey/Site Plan Page 5 of 8 Building Height The building will become located in the front yard which has a maximum sidewall height of 10’ without CUP approval to bypass this limit. The minor CUP amendment will specifically allow the subject structure to have a sidewall height of 14’ in the front yard. Architectural Standards The applicant submitted photos of the subject structure that are attached to this report in addition to the previously approved plans. The materials of the structure are not changing from what was initially approved in 1991.The roof and siding are painted galvanized metal. The current Zoning Ordinance requires metal siding and roof materials to be approved through a Certificate of Compliance, but since the original approval pre-dates the current Zoning Ordinance, the Certificate of Compliance approval is implied. The attached resolution affirms approval of the Certificate of Compliance. The photos of the structure submitted by the applicant show a chicken coop on the north end of the structure. The chicken coop is not indicated on the submitted land survey. In speaking with the City’s Construction Services Supervisor, chicken coops are typically not subject to building code requirements as they are more similar to a dog kennel than a building typically occupied by humans and animals, such as a horse stable. However, per the Zoning Ordinance, the chicken coop meets the definition of a structure. Structures of 200 square feet or more require a building permit. A condition of approval is that the square footage of the chicken coop’s footprint be confirmed and be no more than 200 square feet. Otherwise, an after-the-fact permit must be applied for and approved, and this would require bringing the chicken coop up to building code standards. Figure 4 Photo of Existing Structure - North Wall Page 6 of 8 Additionally, the setback of the chicken coop must be confirmed. Animal shelters must be setback at least 25’ from the property line, and at least 75’ from neighboring residences. It appears the chicken coop more than satisfies the setback from neighboring structures and should be able to comply with the 25’ setback from the property line. Grading and Drainage No grading changes are proposed for the subject structure. A grading and drainage plan for the proposed new house will be reviewed with the building permit per the City Engineering Memo. Conditional Use Permit Standards The applicant requests a CUP to exceed the maximum sidewall height of 10’ in the front yard as allowed by Section 1030.020, Subd. 5(D). In order to grant a CUP, the following standards must be met: 1.The proposed use shall be in conformance with all City regulations. The proposed use is in conformance with the City regulations. The existing structure satisfies required setbacks, the accessory structure footprint limit, and architectural requirements. A condition of approval included in the attached resolution is that the structure cannot be used for commercial uses without a separate approval for a home occupation, and the structure cannot be used as an accessory dwelling unit without a separate approval. 2.A certificate of survey shall be required that identifies all existing structures on site, including buildings, septic sites, and wells. In addition, the survey shall include the proposed structure, flood plain, wetlands, and any recorded easements. The applicant submitted a certificate of survey that shows most of the required features. A condition of approval is that the applicant must confirm the footprint and setbacks of the chicken coop that is not shown on the survey. Since the structure is pre-existing and will remain in the same physical location, a new wetland delineation is not required for the minor CUP amendment. 3.Applicable criteria as outlined in Section 1070.020 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Corcoran Zoning Ordinance. Staff finds that the taller building height would comply with the standards as follows: a.Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. Page 7 of 8 The proposed taller building in the front yard has no impact on the Comprehensive Plan. b.The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. The CUP for a sidewall height of 14’ for an accessory structure in the front yard would not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort of the surrounding neighborhood. The building does not exceed the 35’ maximum building height allowed for principal buildings in the RR district. The building exceeds all setback requirements for the RR district. c.The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. Assuming the recommended conditions of approval are adopted, staff find no reason to believe the CUP for the sidewall height of 14’ in the front yard would be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the surrounding properties for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. The existing building is below the maximum building height and exceeds all required setbacks. d.The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The surrounding properties are used for a mix of residential and agricultural uses. The proposed CUP amendment does not preclude improvement or further development of the surrounding properties. e.Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the proposed use. Adequate public facilities are available to accommodate the proposed use. The proposed CUP amendment will not impact the demand for services. f.The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. If the CUP is approved with the conditions of approval as recommended by staff, the use will comply with the district regulations for the RR. Page 8 of 8 g.The conditional use and site conform to performance standards as specified by this Chapter. If the CUP is approved with the conditions of approval as recommended by staff, the use will comply with the performance standards for accessory structures. 4.The building materials standards required by this Section have been met. As noted previously, the building is made of pre-finished metal wall and roof panels. Section 1060.050 Subd. 1(D) of the Zoning Ordinance allows metal siding and/or roofing provided they meet the Minnesota State Building Code standards and are treated with a factory applied color coating system that protects against fading. The materials feature galvanized coating. The materials of this structure were approved in the original CUP approval in 1991, and approval of the Certificate of Compliance currently required by the Zoning Ordinance is implied. The attached resolution affirms approval of the Certificate of Compliance. 5.The proposed building will be compatible with surrounding land uses. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 5.Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Resolution 2024-18 approving the CUP minor amendment for a detached garage with a sidewall height of 14’ in the front yard. Attachments: 1.Resolution 2024-18 Approving the CUP Minor Amendment 2.Site Plan 3.Building Photos 4.Engineering Memo 5.1991 Approvals City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-18 Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MINOR AMENDMENT FOR A DETACHED STRUCTURE FOR ERIC KVAM AT 7200 WILLOW DRIVE (PID 28-119-23-41-0002) (CITY FILE 24-009) WHEREAS, Eric Kvam, the applicant, requests approval of a conditional use permit minor amendment to allow an existing accessory building with a sidewall height of 14’ previously approved in the rear yard to be located in the front yard at property legally described as follows: See Attachment A WHEREAS, a conditional use permit to allow the structure with a sidewall height of 14’ in the rear yard was originally approved in 1991 (File No. 91-5-3), and; WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance requires that conditional use permit amendments that do not constitute a significant change to only be reviewed and approved by the City Council as a minor amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the conditional use permit request at a duly called public meeting, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request, subject to the following findings and conditions: 1.A conditional use permit amendment is approved, in accordance with the application materials received by the City on February 27, 2024. 2.The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the City Engineer’s memo dated January 11, 2024. 3.A conditional use permit is approved to allow a 1,456 sq. ft. accessory building with sidewalls of 14 feet in the front yard, based on the finding that that the following conditional use permit standards are satisfied: a.The proposed use shall be in conformance with all City regulations. b.A certificate of survey showing existing structures, septic sites, wells, proposed structures, floodplain, wetlands, and recorded easements was submitted with the application. c.Applicable criteria as outlined in Section 1070.020 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Corcoran Zoning Ordinance are satisfied: i.The conditional use complies with the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. Agenda Attachment Item: 7f1. City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-18 Page 2 of 4 ii.The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. iii.The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. iv.The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. v.Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the proposed use. vi.The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. vii.The conditional use and site conform to performance standards as specified by the Zoning Ordinance. d.The building materials standards required by the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. e.The proposed building will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 4.A certificate of compliance to allow a metal roof and metal siding on this accessory building is approved as part of the conditional use permit. 5.The structure cannot be used for commercial purposes unless the applicant applies for City approval of a home occupation and such approval is granted. 6.The structure cannot be used as an Accessory Dwelling Unit unless the applicant applies for an approval to allow an Accessory Dwelling Unit and such approval is granted. 7.Prior to release of the land use application escrow, the applicant must complete the following: a.The approving resolution must be recorded at Hennepin County. b.The applicant must provide proof of recording to the City. c.The footprint of the chicken coop structure must be confirmed. i.Should the footprint be at or exceed 200 square feet, an after-the-fact building permit must be applied for, approved, and issued prior to release of the escrow. d.The following setbacks of the chicken coop must be confirmed: City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-18 Page 3 of 4 i.25 feet from all property lines. ii.75 feet from neighboring residences. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 14th day of March 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024-18 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHEMENT A The North ½ of the South ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of Section Twenty-eight (28). Township One Hundred Nineteen (119) North, Range Twenty-three (23) West of the 5th Principal Meridian, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, subject to rights acquired for public road over the Westerly 33 feet thereof and together with and subject to an easement for roadway over the Easterly 33 feet thereof. Willow Drive DWELLINGPROPOSEDS1Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345Phone (952) 474-796417917 Highway 7Web: www.advsur.comAdvanceSurveying & Engineering, Co.CLIENT NAME / JOB ADDRESSSHEET NO.SHEET 1 OF 1DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE60300SHEET SIZE22 X 34SCALE - 1" = 30'LEGENDLEGAL DESCRIPTION:The North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section Twenty-eight(28), Township One Hundred Nineteen (119) North, Range Twenty-three (23) West of the 5thPrincipal Meridian, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, subject to rightsacquired for public road over the Westerly 33 feet thereof and together with and subject to aneasement for roadway over the Easterly 33 feet thereof.SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS:1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. Thescope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter.Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel,if necessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements,that you wish to be included on the survey have been shown.2. Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey.3. Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of theproperty.4. This survey has been completed without the benefit of a current title commitment. There maybe existing easements or other encumbrances that would be revealed by a current titlecommitment. Therefore, this survey does not purport to show any easements orencumbrances other than the ones shown hereon.5. Note that all building dimensions and building tie dimensions to the property lines, are takenfrom the siding and or stucco of the building.6. Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of the topographyof the site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations forconstruction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on thissurvey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey whendetermining other elevations for use on this site or before beginning construction.7. It should be noted that this survey was done under snow and ice conditions and that allimprovements may or may not have been shown correctly. While we did our best to locate allimprovements under the snow and ice, we can't be sure that all improvements were shown.Please look over the survey to be sure everything you need shown is shown correctly.STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS:"●" Denotes iron survey marker, set, unless otherwise noted.ERIK KVAM7200 WILLOW DRIVEHAMEL, MNDRAFT COPYAgenda Attachment Item: 7f2. Agenda Attachment Item: 7f3. Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director From: Kent Torve, PE City Engineer Project: Kvam CUP Date: March 4, 2024 Exhibit: This review is based on the following document: •Site Plan for Erik Kvam at 7200 Willow Drive by Advance Surveying and Engineering (no date provided) Comments: •The improvements do not affect wetlands. •Final grading plan will be reviewed with the building permit. End of Memo Agenda Attachment Item: 7f4. Agenda Attachment Item: 7f5. () Stantec Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, PW Director From: Steve Hegland, PE Project/File: 227704747 Date: February 27, 2024 Subject: Pay Application #5 to Park Construction Company-Mass Grading and Stormwater Pond for City Center Drive and 79 th Place Council Action Requested Staff is recommending Council Approve Pay Application #5 for the Mass Grading and Stormwater Pond for City Center Drive and 79 th Place to Park Construction Company in the amount of $50,333.66 This approval is conditional until it is also approved by the St. Therese Development per the terms of the Cost Share Agreement. Summary The grading portion of this project is substantially completed with restoration and punch list items on the project remaining. Park Construction Company is requesting to reduce retainage on the work completed to date to 1 %. The signed payment request form and pay application is attached for review. Attached is a summary of the work completed to date. Total Contract Value to Date $1,451,685.40 Work Completed to Date $1,258,341.60 1% Retainaoe $12,583.42 Amount Paid to Date $1, 195.424.52 Total Pay APP #5 $50,333.66 Engineer's Recommendation We recommend approving Pay Application #5 to Park Construction Company in the amount of $50,333.66 Design with community in mind Agenda Item: 7g. APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT FORM OWNER: City of Corcoran PROJECT: Mass Grading and Stormwater Pond for City Center Drive and 79 t h Place CONTRACTOR: Park Construction Company PAY ESTIMATE NO. 5 Original Contract Amount $ .... 1,344,086.40 Contract Changes approved to Date (List Change Order Numbers) $ ...... 107,599.00 Revised Contract Price Work Completed to Date (attached) Retainage to Date, 1 % Work Completed to Date Less Retainage to Date Total Amount Previously Certified Payment Request This Estimate $ .... 1,451,685.40 $ .... 1.258,341.60 $ ........ 12,583.42 $ .... 1,245, 758.18 $ .... 1.195.424.52 $ ........ 50,333.66 I declare under penalty of perjury that this account, claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid. Park Construction Co. CONTRACTOR Project No. 227704747 Application for Payment Form 00 62 76-1 CERTIFICATE OF CONTRACTOR I hereby certify that the work and the materials supplied to date, as shown on the request for payment, represents the actual value of accomplishment under the terms of the contract dated August 12, 2022 between the City of Corcoran (OWNER) and Park Construction Company (CONTRACTOR) and all authorized changes thereto. By Title Approval: (CONTRACTOR) (ENGINEER) Project No. 227704747 Park Construction Company Scott Neumann Project Manager ly $'gned soon Neu-MM Scott Neumamn ;;!,,1.,,.,91,.-.Cll,.!co:tllelln'IAM O.Ct 202.&,03.0S08.0&<l3-06W Steven Hegland, P.E. END OF SECTION 3-5-2024 Date _______ Application for Payment Form 00 62 76-2 MASS GRADING AND STORMWATER POND FOR CITY CENTER DRIVE AND 79TH PLACE PAYMENT REQUEST FORM � Stantec NO, I ITEM DESCRIPTION BASE BID SCHEDULE BID SCHEDULE A ' MOEllllZATION AND DEMOBIUZATION 'TRAFFIC CONTROL 'CLEARING 'GRUBBING 'CLEAR TREE 'GRUB TREE ' COMMON EXCA.VATION -ONSITE NON-STRUCTRUAL EV ,, ' COMMON EXCAVATION -ONSITT (STRUCTURAL) {EVl (Pl ' COMMON EXCAVATION • OFl'SITE rEV) IP rn COMMON BORROW -ONSITE /EV) [Pl H STOCKPILE COMMON [CV\ " STOCKPlLE TOPSOIL CV " BOULDER RETAINJNG WALL " WETLAND BUFFER POSTS ANO MONUMENTS "COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE "MEDIUM FILTER AGGREGATE n PREMIXED IRON/FINE FILTER AGGREGATE /MOD\ " GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE IV (NON-WOVEN) " RANDOM R!PRAP, CLASS ill ,0 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 76 " 36" RCP CLASS V STORM SEWER " 8" SOLlD PVC SCH 40 DRAIN TILE PIPE 23 6" SOUD PVC SCH 40 DRAIN TILE PIPE " 6" PERFORATED PVC SCH 40 DRAIN TILE PIPE " 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT "36" RCP FlARED END AND TAASH GUARD "5' DIA OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE "24" HOPE STORM SEWER PIPE "TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE• MAINTAINED 30 SEDlMENT CONTROL LOG -MAINTAINED " SILT FENCE, TYPE MS -MAINTAINED " MN DOT SEED MIX 21-112 AND STRAW MULCH "MNDOT SEED MD( 25-131 "MN DOT SEED MIX 33-261 "MNDOT SEED MIX 34-171 "MNDDT SEED MD( 35-241 "SEEDING AND STRAW MULCH "SEED AND Off 25 BLANKET C01.l lndlrect,;-Supervlslon-Sond-Survev-Mc,blllzatlon COl.2 Inefficiencies Common E:<cavation Crew COl.3 Excavate and Stockplle Buildinq A COl.4 Moisture Condition Stockpiled Materials ' CONTRACTOR: PARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY I UNIT IQUANTiTY I I LUMP SUM ' LUMP SUM ' ACRE '-' ACRE ,., TREE ' TREE $ CU YD 41300 CUYD 46524 CU YD 25774 CU YO 48518 CUYO 4000 ccm 3100 US IT no EACH " CU YD so CUYO ao CU YD "40 SQYD '" CUYD 30 SQYD mo urn '88 urn "urn ' LIN Ff "'"''" ' "''" ' "''" ' um "' LUMP SUM ' um 1760 US IT 5276 ACRE 23.4 POUND 1746 POUND '°' POUND ' POUND " ACRE 23 S"YD 1800 LUMP SUM ' HOUR " CU YD 8380 am 8380 TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE $ 66,000.00 $66,000,00 $ 3,540.00 $3,540.00 $ 2,380.00 $10,234.00 $ 2,380.00 $10,234.00 $ 144.00 $720.00 $ 61.80 $309.00 $ 7.00 $289,100.00 $ 3.95 $183,769.80 $ 11.50 $296,401.00 $ 3.35 $162,535.30 $ 3.15 $12,600.00 $ 3.15 $9,765.00 $ 160.00 $27,200.00 $ 227.00 $5,902.00 $ 66.30 $5,304.00 $ 66.30 $5,304.00 $ 211.00 $92,840.00 $ 3.35 $2,331.60 $ 124.00 $3,720.00 $ 21.50 $2,160,00 $ 2B9.00 $25,432.00 ' 45.80 $2,931.20 $ 45.60 $228.00 ' 35.00 $12,845.00 $ 686.00 $4,116.00 $ 6,850.00 $6,850.00 $ 19,200.00 $19,200.00 $ 67.60 $17,981.60 $ 2,710,00 $2,710.00 $ 3.00 $5,280.00 $ 2.35 $12,398.60 $ 618.00 $14,461.20 $ 7.00 $12,222.00 $ 22.70 $2,338.10 $ 92.80 $278.40 $ 18.60 $669.60 $ 495.00 $11,385.00 $ 1.55 $2,790.00 $ 25,550.00 $25,550.00 $ 1,425.00 $31,350,00 $ 3.95 $33,101.00 $ 2.10 $17,598.00 $1,451,685,40 GENERAL CONTRACTOR Park Construction Company 1481 81st Ave NE Minneapolis, MN SS432 COMPLETED TO DATE LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS CURRENT PAY REQUEST #5 Feb-24 QT< PRICE QT< PRICE QT< PRICE 0.90 $ 59,40□.oo 0.90 $ 59,400.00 0 $ ' $ 3,540.00 ' $ 3,540.00 0 $ 6.82 $ 16,231.60 6,62. $ 16,231.60 0 $ 6.82 $ 16,231.60 6.62 $ 16,231.60 0 $ $ $ 720.00 ' $ 720.00 0 $ '$ 309.00 ' $ 309.00 0 $ 41300 $ 289,100.00 41300 $ 2.89,100.00 0 $ 46524 $ 183,769.80 46524 $ 183,769.80 0 $ 25744 '296,056.00 25744 $ 296,056.00 0 $ 4B51B $ 162,535.30 48518 $ 162,535.30 0 $ 4000 $ 12,600.00 4000 $ 12,600.00 0 $ 3100 $ 9,765.00 3100 $ 9,765.00 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ ' 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ 30 $ 3,720.00 30 $ 3,720.00 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ 88 $ 25,432.00 88 $ 25,432.00 0 $ "' 1,740.40 "$ 1,740.40 0 '' 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ '$ 686.00 ' $ 686.00 0 $ '$ 6,850.00 '$ 6 850.00 0 $ ' $ 19,200.00 ' $ 19,200.00 0 $ '" $ 12,708.80 '" $ 12,708.80 0 $ ' $ 2,710.00 ' $ 2,710.00 0 $ ' 0 $ 0 $ 5389 $ 12,664.15 5389 $ 12,664.15 0 $ 11.5 $ 7,107.00 11.S $ 7,107.00 0 $ ,w $ 2,870.00 "° $ 2,870.00 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 $ 0 $ $ 0 '0 ' '·' $ 643,50 L3 $ 643,50 0 $ 2679 $ 4,152.45 2679 $ 4,152.45 0 ' 0 ' $ 25,550.00 ' $ 25,550.00 0 '" $ 31,350.00 " ' 31,350.00 0 $ 8380 $ 33,101.00 8380 ' 33,101.00 0 $ 8380 $ 17,598.00 8380 $ 17 598.00 0 ' $1,258,341,60 $1,258,341.60 $0.00 COMPLETED TO DATE LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS PAYMENT RE_g_UEST S Subtotal: Subtotal, $1,258,341,601 Subtotal: $ 1,2S8,341.60 I (Reduction to $ So/o Retainage: $ 62,917.08 5% Retainage: $ 62,917.08 1% retainage) Tota[: $ 1,1951424.52 Total: $ 1,1951424.52 Total: $ S0,333.66 50,333,66 Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, PW Director From: Ash Hammerbeck, PE Project/File: 227704426 Date: Steve Hegland, PE March 4, 2024 Subject: Corcoran WTP - Pay Application #10 Council Action Requested Staff is recommending Council approve Pay Application #10 for the Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Project to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $707,275.00. Summary Rice Lake continued work on the project including surveying, building earthwork, structural testing, main level walls, upper level concrete decks, topping slabs, backwash tank, building perimeter and clearwell insulations, underground water main, water main valves and hydrants, sanitary sewer and obtaining the necessary utilities and materials. This pay request is for the work performed through 2/29/2024. The signed payment request form and pay application is attached for review. Total Contract Value to Date $ 16,728,200.00 Work Completed to Date $ 6,431,352.64 5% Retainage $ 321,567.63 Amount Paid to Date $ 5,402,510.01 Total Pay App #10 $ 707,275.00 Engineer’s Recommendation We have reviewed the request and recommend approving Pay Application #10 to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $707,275.00 for the work completed and materials stored to date. Updated Agenda Item: 7h. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT AJA DOCUMENT G702 PAGE ONE OF 10 PAGES TO OWNER: City of Corcoran 8200 County Road I16 Corcoran, MN 55340 PROJECT: WTP APPLICATION NO: 10 Distribution to: c=JOWNER c=]ENGINEER FROM CONTRACTOR: Rice Lake Construction Group VIA ENGINEER: Stantec PERIOD TO: PROJECT NOS: 02/29/24 227704426 c=JcoNTRACTOR c=]RURAL DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR: City of Corcoran WTP CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT Application is made for payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document G703, is attached. CONTRACT DATE:01.26.23 The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application for Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due. ■ Digitally signed by Mark Hinsz DATE (Column G on G703) 5. RETAINAGE: a. 5 % of Completed Work $ (Column D +Eon G703) 321,567.63 By: Mark HInS State of: Subscribed and sworn to before me this Notary Public: My Commission expires: DN: C=US, E=mark_hinsz@ricelake.org, O=Rice Lake ..._Construction Group; CN=Mark Hinsz Date: 2024.02.26 11:00:45-06'00' County of: day of Total in Column I ofG703) 6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE (Line 4 Less Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT (Line 5+6 from prior Certificate) 8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE 9. BALANCE TO FINISH, NOT INCLUDING RETAINAGE (Line 3 less Line 4) $ 321,567.63 $ 6,109,785.01 $ $5,402,510.0 I $ 707,275.00 $ I 0,296,847.36 ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations and the data comprising the application, the Engineer certifies to the Owner that to the best of the Engineer's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. AMOUNT CERTIFIED ................... $ (Attach explanation if amount certified differs from the amount applied. initial all figures on this Application and onthe Continuation Sheet that are changed to conform with the amount certified.) ENGINEER: t U gned by Ash Hammerbeck Ash Hammerbeck E= sh.ha,,;mecbeck@slaotec.com, By: CN=Ash Hammerbeck Date:J2024.03.04 07:29:53-06'00' Date: This Certificate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance ot payment are without prejudice to any tights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. APPROVED BY OWNER ACCEPTED BY AGENCY AIA DOCUMENT G702 • APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT· 1992 EDITION· AIA • ©1992 THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20006-5292 Users may obtain validation of this document by requesting a completed AJA Document D401 - Certilication of Document's Authenticity from the Licensee. 2 CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS Total changes approved in previous months by Owner Total approved this Month TOTALS $0.00 $0.00 NET CHANGES by Change Order $0.00 I. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM $ 16,728,200.00 2. Net change by Change Orders $ 0.00 CONTRACTOR: 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line I± 2) $ 16,728,200.00 4. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO $ 6,431,352.64 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE: 02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 A B C D I E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 1 Insurance $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 100.00% 2 Bonds $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 100.00% 3 Mobilization $350,000.00 $350,000.00 $350,000.00 100.00% 4 Demobilization $50,000.00 $50,000.00 5 Supervision $220,000.00 $120,000.00 $10,000.00 $130,000.00 59.09% $90,000.00 6 Layout/Surveying $15,000.00 $8,500.00 $1,000.00 $9,500.00 63.33% $5,500.00 7 Testing $25,000.00 $14,000.00 $2,000.00 $16,000.00 64.00% $9,000.00 8 Temporary Facilities $20,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $12,000.00 60.00% $8,000.00 9 Winter Conditions $50,000.00 $25,000.00 $15,000.00 $40,000.00 80.00% $10,000.00 10 Safety $10,000.00 $4,000.00 $500.00 $4,500.00 45.00% $5,500.00 11 Weekly Cleanup (Labor) $10,000.00 $4,000.00 $500.00 $4,500.00 45.00% $5,500.00 12 Weekly Cleanup (Material) $10,000.00 $4,000.00 $500.00 $4,500.00 45.00% $5,500.00 13 Final Facility Cleaning (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 14 Disinfection (L & M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 15 Final System Startup $5,000.00 $5,000.00 16 Allowances $50,000.00 $50,000.00 17 Capital Purchase Agency Agreement Compliance $1,000.00 $1,000.00 18 Facility Record Documents $500.00 $500.00 19 Building Earthwork (L & M) $450,000.00 $375,000.00 $25,000.00 $400,000.00 88.89% $50,000.00 20 Watertightness Testing (L&M) $20,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 60.00% $8,000.00 21 Structural Testing & Special Inspections (L&M) $25,000.00 $15,000.00 $4,000.00 $19,000.00 76.00% $6,000.00 22 Concrete: General Conditions (L) $100,000.00 $80,000.00 $5,000.00 $85,000.00 85.00% $15,000.00 23 Concrete: General Conditions (M) $100,000.00 $80,000.00 $5,000.00 $85,000.00 85.00% $15,000.00 24 Footings (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 25 Footings (M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 26 Waterstop (L) $20,000.00 $16,500.00 $2,000.00 $18,500.00 92.50% $1,500.00 27 Waterstop (M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 100.00% 28 Detention Tank Walls (L) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 100.00% 29 Detention Tank Walls (M) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 100.00% 30 Detention Tank Base Slab (L) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 100.00% 31 Detention Tank Base Slab (M) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 100.00% 32 Filter Room Base Slab (L) $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 100.00% 33 Filter Room Base Slab (M) $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 100.00% 34 Filter Room Walls (L) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 100.00% 35 Filter Room Walls (M) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 100.00% 36 Lower Level Base Slab (L) $130,000.00 $ I30,000.00 $130,000.00 100.00% 37 Lower Level Base Slab (M) $130,000.00 $130,000.00 $130,000.00 100.00% CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE: 02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 A B C D I E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 38 Main Level Base Slab (L) $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 100.00% 39 Main Level Base Slab (M) $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 100.00% 40 Main Level Walls (L) $80,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 25.00% $60,000.00 41 Main Level Walls (M) $80,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 50.00% $40,000.00 42 Upper Level Concrete Decks (L) $130,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 15.38% $110,000.00 43 Upper Level Concrete Decks (M) $130,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 30.77% $90,000.00 44 Topping Slabs (L) $40,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 12.50% $35,000.00 45 Topping Slabs (M) $40,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 25.00% $30,000.00 46 Sidewalks (L & M) $10,000.00 $10,000.00 47 Misc. Walls (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 48 Misc. Walls (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 49 Building Reinforcing Steel (L) $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 I00.00% 50 Building Reinforcing Steel (M) $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 100.00% 51 Precast Plank - (L) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 52 Precast Plank - (M) $100,000.00 $100,000.00 53 Rub/Patch Walls (L & M) $40,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,000.00 $7,000.00 17.50% $33,000.00 54 Misc. Concrete (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 55 Water Cure (L & M) $5,000.00 $3,500.00 $500.00 $4,000.00 80.00% $1,000.00 56 Clearwell Bottom Slab (L) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 100.00% 57 Clearwell Bottom Slab (M) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 I00.00% 58 Clearwell Walls (L) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 100.00% 59 Clearwell Walls (M) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 I00.00% 60 Clearwell Deck (L) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 100.00% 61 Clearwell Deck (M) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 100.00% 62 Clearwell Reinforcing Steel (L) $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 100.00% 63 Clearwell Reinforcing Steel (M) $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 100.00% 64 Backwash Tank Bottom Slab (L) $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 100.00% 65 Backwash Tank Bottom Slab (M) $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 I00.00% 66 Backwash Tank Walls (L) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 100.00% 67 Backwash Tank Walls (M) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 I00.00% 68 Backwash Tank Deck (L) $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 100.00% 69 Backwash Tank Deck (M) $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 100.00% 70 Backwash Tank Reinforce Steel (L) $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 100.00% 71 Backwash Tank Reinforce Steel(M) $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 100.00% 72 Concrete Outfall Structure (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 73 Concrete Outfall Structure (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 74 Masonry: General Conditions (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE:02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 I A B C D E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 75 Masonry: General Conditions (M) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 76 Masonry: Exterior (L) $225,000.00 $225,000.00 77 Masonry: Exterior (M) $150,000.00 $150,000.00 78 Cavity Wall Insulation (L) $!0,000.00 $10,000.00 79 Cavity Wall Insulation (M) $10,000.00 $10,000.00 80 Masonry: Interior (L) $65,000.00 $65,000.00 81 Masonry: Interior (M) $65,000.00 $65,000.00 82 Metals: General Conditions (L) $15,000.00 $4,500.00 $1,000.00 $5,500.00 36.67% $9,500.00 83 Metals: General Conditions (M) $175,000.00 $52,500.00 $25,000.00 $77,500.00 44.29% $97,500.00 84 Exterior Handrails/Stairs/Ladders (L & M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 85 Interior Handrails/Stairs/Ladders (L&M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 86 Metal Grating (L) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 87 Misc. Metals (L) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 88 Interior Access Hatches (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 89 Exterior Access Hatches (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 90 Wood Trusses (L) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 91 Wood Trusses (M) $30,000.00 $30,000.00 92 Rough Carpentry (L) $65,000.00 $65,000.00 93 Rough Carpentry (M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 94 Finish Carpentry (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 95 Finish Carpentry (M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 96 Plastic Fabrication (L) $1,500.00 $1,500.00 97 Plastic Fabrication (M) $1,500.00 $1,500.00 98 Fiberglass Grating (L) $8,500.00 $8,500.00 99 Fiberglass Grating (M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 100 Dampproofing (L & M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 IOI Membrane Waterproofing (L&M) $125,000.00 $80,000.00 $15,000.00 $95,000.00 76.00% $30,000.00 102 Fluid Applied Waterproofing (L & M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 103 Clearwell Insulation (L & M) $35,000.00 $32,500.00 $2,500.00 $35,000.00 100.00% 104 Backwash Tank Insulation (L & M) $35,000.00 $32,500.00 $2,500.00 $35,000.00 I00.00% l 05 Building Perimeter Insulation (L & M) $35,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 42.86% $20,000.00 106 Translucent Wall Panels (L & M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 107 Fiber Cement Siding (L&M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 108 TPO Roofing (L&M) $181,000.00 $181,000.00 109 Firestopping (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 l lO Metal Roofing (L & M) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 111 Metal Roofing Flashing & Trim (L&M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE:02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 A B C D I E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 112 Snow Retention System (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 113 Joint Sealers (L & M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 114 Steel Doors and Frames (L) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 115 Steel Doors and Frames (M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 116 FRP Doors and Frames (L) $7,000.00 $7,000.00 117 FRP Doors and Frames (M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 118 Door Hardware (L&M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 119 Overhead Doors (L&M) $27,000.00 $27,000.00 120 Painting (L&M) $264,000.00 $264,000.00 121 Windows (L & M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 122 Gypsum Drywall (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 123 Acoustical Ceilings (L & M) $3,500.00 $3,500.00 124 Floor Treatment (L&M) $1,500.00 $1,500.00 125 Concrete and Masonry Sealer (L) $1,500.00 $1,500.00 126 Concrete and Masonry Sealer (M) $1,500.00 $1,500.00 127 Painting (L) $500.00 $500.00 128 Painting (M) $500.00 $500.00 129 LouversNents (L & M) $13,000.00 $13,000.00 130 Signs (L & M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 131 Subgrade Preparation (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 132 Aggregate Base (L & M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 133 Site Preparation (L & M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 134 Underground Water Main (L & M) $350,000.00 $75,000.00 $45,000.00 $120,000.00 34.29% $230,000.00 135 Water Main Valves and Hydrant (L & M) $35,000.00 $] 5,000.00 $15,000.00 42.86% $20,000.00 136 Stonn Sewer (L&M) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 137 Sanitary Sewer (L & M) $350,000.00 $125,000.00 $175,000.00 $300,000.00 85.71% $50,000.00 138 Irrigation (L&M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 139 Dewatering (L&M) $50,000.00 $30,000.00 $5,000.00 $35,000.00 70.00% $15,000.00 140 Erosion & Sediment Control (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 100.00% 141 Riprap (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 142 Flexible Paving (L&M) $95,000.00 $95,000.00 143 Concrete Paving (L&M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 144 Concrete Curb & Gutter (L&M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 145 Pavement Markings (L&M) $2,000.00 $2,000.00 146 Fences & Gates (L&M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 147 Seeding & Restoration (L&M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 148 Vegetation Establishment & Maintenance (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE:02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 I A B C D E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 149 Plants (L&M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 150 Filter Equipment (L) $50,000.00 $50,000.00 151 Filter Equipment (M) $850,000.00 $70,352.64 $70,352.64 8.28% $779,647.36 152 Filter Controls (L) $50,000.00 $50,000.00 153 Filter Controls (M) $50,000.00 $50,000.00 154 Filter System Startup $2,500.00 $2,500.00 155 Filter Equipment O&M 's $500.00 $500.00 156 High Service Pumps (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 157 High Service Pumps (M) $150,000.00 $150,000.00 158 High Service Pumps O&M's $500.00 $500.00 159 High Service Pumps Testing and Startup $2,500.00 $2,500.00 160 Backwash Pump (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 161 Backwash Pump (M) $55,000.00 $55,000.00 162 Backwash Pump Testing and Startup $2,500.00 $2,500.00 163 Backwash Pump O&M's $500.00 $500.00 164 Well Pump (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 165 Well Pump (M) $45,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 66.67% $15,000.00 166 Well Pump Testing and Startup $5,000.00 $5,000.00 167 Well Pump O&M's $500.00 $500.00 168 Valve Vault (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 169 Valve Vault (M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 170 Pre-Engineered Building (L) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 171 Pre-Engineered Building (M) $450,000.00 $450,000.00 l 72 Submersible Pumps (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 173 Submersible Pumps (M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 174 Submersible Pumps Testing and Startup $500.00 $500.00 175 Submersible Pumps O&M's $250.00 $250.00 176 Potassium Permanganate Feed Equipment (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 177 Potassium Pennanganate Equipment (M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 178 Potassium Permanganate Feed Equipment Startup $1,000.00 $1,000.00 179 Potassium PennanganateEquipment O&M's $500.00 $500.00 180 Chlorine Gas Feed Equipment (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 181 Chlorine Gas Equipment (M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 182 Chlorine Gas Feed Equipment Startup $1,000.00 $1,000.00 183 Chlorine Gas Equipment O&M's $500.00 $500.00 184 Polyphosphate Feed Equipment (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 185 Polyphosphate Feed Equipment (M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE: 02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 A B C D I E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 186 Polyphosphate Feed Equipment Startup $1,000.00 $1,000.00 187 Polyphosphate Feed Equipment O&M's $500.00 $500.00 188 Fluoride Feed Equipment {L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 189 Fluoride Feed Equipment (M) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 190 Fluoride Feed Equipment Startup $1,000.00 $1,000.00 191 Fluoride Feed Equipment O&M's $500.00 $500.00 192 Initial Supply of Chemicals (L&M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 193 Blower (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 194 Blower(M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 195 Blower Startup $1,000.00 $1,000.00 196 Blower O&M's $500.00 $500.00 197 Blower Vibration Tests $250.00 $250.00 198 Cranes, Hoists, Lifting Hooks (L&M) $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 50.00% $2,500.00 199 Window Treatments (L & M) $500.00 $500.00 200 Lab Furniture (L & M) $1,000.00 $1,000.00 201 Magnetic Flow Meters (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 202 Magnetic Flow Meters Startup $500.00 $500.00 203 Magnetic Flow Meters O&M's $500.00 $500.00 204 Mechanical: General Conditions $50,000.00 $9,000.00 $5,000.00 $14,000.00 28.00% $36,000.00 205 Metallic Process Pipe/Fittings (L) $850,000.00 $60,000.00 $15,000.00 $75,000.00 8.82% $775,000.00 206 Metallic Process Pipe/Fittings (M) $2,375,000.00 $1,025,000.00 $225,000.00 $1,250,000.00 52.63% $1,125,000.00 207 Plastic Process Piping/Fittings (M) $150,000.00 $150,000.00 208 Plastic Process Piping/Fittings (M) $150,000.00 $150,000.00 209 Pipe Identification (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 210 Pipe Identification (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 211 Valves and Accessories (L) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 212 Valves and Accessories (M) $85,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 47.06% $45,000.00 213 Gauges (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 214 Gauges (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 215 Record Plan Process Drawings $250.00 $250.00 216 Pipe Insulation (L & M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 217 Sanitary Below Ground {L) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 100.00% 218 Sanitary Below Ground (M) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 100.00% 219 Sanitary Above Ground (L) $55,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 10.91% $49,000.00 220 Sanitary Above Ground (M) $55,000.00 $7,000.00 $5,000.00 $12,000.00 21.82% $43,000.00 221 Facility Storm Drainage (L) $35,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 71.43% $10,000.00 222 Facility Stonn Drainage (M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 100.00% CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE:02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 I A B C D E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 223 Water Piping (L) $45,000.00 $45,000.00 224 Water Piping (M) $45,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 11.11% $40,000.00 225 Clean-Outs (L) $2,500.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 60.00% $1,000.00 226 Clean-Outs (M) $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 I00.00% 227 Floor Drains (L) $5,000.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 70.00% $1,500.00 228 Floor Drains (M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 100.00% 229 Wall Hydrants (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 230 Wall Hydrants (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 231 Plumbing Fixtures (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 232 Plumbing Fixtures (M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 233 Sump Pumps (L) $15,000.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 73.33% $4,000.00 234 Sump Pumps (M) $25,000.00 $19,000.00 $19,000.00 76.00% $6,000.00 235 Water Heaters (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 236 Water Heaters (M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 237 Sample Taps, Lines and Valves (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 238 Sample Taps, Lines and Valves (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 239 Record Plumbing Drawings $250.00 $250.00 240 Sheet Metal (L) $155,000.00 $155,000.00 241 Sheet Metal (M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 242 Chimneys (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 243 Chimneys (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 244 Dampers (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 245 Dampers (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 246 Duct Insulation (L & M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 247 Grilles/Registers/Diffusers (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 248 Grilles/Registers/Diffusers (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 249 Fans (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 250 Fans (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 251 Fans Startup $250.00 $250.00 252 Fans O & M Manuals $250.00 $250.00 253 Rooftop Units (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 254 Rooftop Units (M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 255 Unit Heaters (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 256 Unit Heaters (M) $25,000.00 $25,000.00 257 Unit Heaters Startup $250.00 $250.00 258 Unit Heaters O & M Manuals $250.00 $250.00 259 Dehumidifier (L) $50.00 $50.00 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE:02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 I A B C D E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) 260 Dehumidifier (M) $50.00 $50.00 261 Dehumidifier O&M's $50.00 $50.00 262 Dehumidifier Start Up $50.00 $50.00 263 Temperature Control (L & M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 264 Temperature Controls Startup $5,000.00 $5,000.00 265 Temperature Controls O&M's $250.00 $250.00 266 Record HYAC Drawings $250.00 $250.00 267 Electrical: General Conditions $300,000.00 $44,000.00 $5,000.00 $49,000.00 16.33% $251,000.00 268 Temporary Electrical $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 100.00% 269 Plant Controls (L) $65,000.00 $65,000.00 270 Plant Controls (M) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 271 Interior Fixtures and Lamps (L) $22,000.00 $22,000.00 272 Interior Fixtures and Lamps (M) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 273 Exterior Fixtures and Lamps (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 274 Exterior Fixtures and Lamps (M) $10,000.00 $10,000.00 275 Distribution Equipment (L) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 276 Distribution Equipment (M) $500,000.00 $78,000.00 $78,000.00 15.60% $422,000.00 277 Branch/Feeder Circuits (L) $40,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 $20,000.00 50.00% $20,000.00 278 Branch/Feeder Circuits (M) $25,000.00 $7,500.00 $5,000.00 $12,500.00 50.00% $12,500.00 279 Generator (L) $!0,000.00 $10,000.00 280 Generator (M) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 281 Fire Alarm (L&M) $1,000.00 $1,000.00 282 Security (L&M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 283 Telephone (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 284 Card Access System (L&M) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 285 Plant Controls (L) $35,000.00 $35,000.00 286 Plant Controls (M) $125,000.00 $125,000.00 287 Computer Equipment (L&M) $70,000.00 $70,000.00 288 Electrical Record Drawings $500.00 $500.00 289 Plant Controls (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 290 Remote Site RTU's (L) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 291 Remote Site RTU's (M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 292 Facility Controls Startup (L&M) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 293 Record Plant Control Documents $500.00 $500.00 294 Record Electrical Conduit and Wire Drawings $500.00 $500.00 295 Change Orders $0.00 CONTINUATION SHEET DOCUMENT G703 AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT, containing APPLICATION NO: 10 Contractor's signed certification is attached. APPLICATION DATE:02/26/24 In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar. PERIOD TO: 02/29/24 Use Column I on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply. ENGINEER'S PROJECT NO: 173420014 I A B C D E F G H ITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGE NO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G+C)TO FINlSH (IF VARIABLE APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G) RATE) (D+E) (NOT IN TO DATE DORE) (D+E+F) GRAND TOTALS $16,728,200.00 $5,686,852.64 $744,500.00 $0.00 $6,431,352.64 $10,296,847.36 Users may obtain validation of this document by requesting of the license a com eted AIA Document D401 - Certification of Document's Authenticity Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, PW Director From: Ash Hammerbeck, PE Steve Hegland, PE Project/File: 227704426 Date: March 4, 2024 Subject: Corcoran WTP - Pay Application #10 Council Action Requested Staff is recommending Council approve Pay Application #10 for the Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Project to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $707,275.00. Summary Rice Lake continued work on the project including surveying, building earthwork, structural testing, main level walls, upper level concrete decks, topping slabs, backwash tank, building perimeter and clearwell insulations, underground water main, water main valves and hydrants, sanitary sewer and obtaining the necessary utilities and materials. This pay request is for the work performed through 2/29/2024. The signed payment request form and pay application is attached for review. Total Contract Value to Date $ 16,728,200.00 Work Completed to Date $ 6,431,352.64 5% Retainage $ 321,567.63 Amount Paid to Date $ 5,402,510.01 Total Pay App #10 $ 707,275.00 Engineer’s Recommendation We have reviewed the request and recommend approving Pay Application #10 to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $707,275.00 for the work completed and materials stored to date. Agenda Item: 7h. Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, PW Director From: Ash Hammerbeck, PE Steve Hegland, PE File: 227704426 Date: March 7, 2024 Reference: Change Order No. 2 – Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Council Action Requested Staff is recommending City Council approve Change Order #2 for the Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Project in the amount of $41,010.06. Summary Due to environmental requirements along the trunk utility corridor, we are recommending having the contractor for the water treatment facility perform the tree removals along the trunk utility corridor which provides the utilities to support the facility before the end of March. Attached to this memo is a figure showing the removal locations. The majority of the removals are just east of the water treatment facility and along with west side of County Road 116 within the Hope Church Development and were identified for removal with the development. There are ten trees along the utility corridor in the outlot of the Bellwether development which will be removed as well. They are mostly ash and basswood with one small maple and one small oak identified on the Bellwether tree survey. Engineer’s Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council review and approve of the attached Change Order No. 2. Agenda Item: 7i. © 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS © 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS Pond #2WNWL-922.0HWL-918.2H W L - 9 1 8 . 2 HWL-918.2T26925926920925919921922923924926927928929920925930 919921922923924926927928929931932933934920 920921 920918918919921922923924 918 91 8 91 9 920 925 930935 921 922923924 926 927928929 931932933934 920 925 918 919 921 922924 926 927 928IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I ►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS 21254944.83FES20401949.91DRIP LINE B 805B B20402949.33DRIP LINE20403949.14DRIP LINE20404948.32DRIP LINE20405948.61DRIP LINE20406948.22DRIP LINE20407947.72DRIP LINE20408948.62DRIP LINE20409948.86DRIP LINE20410948.82DRIP LINE20815946.22DRIP LINE B20839946.90DRIP LINE20899945.21DRIP LINE2090220906946.43DRIP LINE20946947.49DRIP LINE20947947.33DRIP LINE21200946.65DRIP LINE21201946.74DRIP LINE21202945.77DRIP LINE21203946.12DRIP LINE21204946.67DRIP LINE21205946.26DRIP LINE21206945.05DRIP LINE21217944.76DRIP LINE21218945.59DRIP LINE21219945.08DRIP LINE21220945.29DRIP LINE21221945.68DRIP LINE21222945.57DRIP LINE CLS21291948.41DRIP LINE E 805 B9509499519 4 8 9 4 9949 949 94994 9 935940 945950 934936937938939 941 942 943 944 946 94 7 94 8 949 9 3 5 940 936 93 7 938 939 941 930 935 927928 929 93 1 932 933 934936937938939 9 29 OSWALD FARM RDCR 11 6 HU N T E R ' S R I D G E IIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIII IIIIIII►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIII►►►► ►► ►► ►►►►►►►►MH- (9)RIM=948.9512" INV OUT=946.05 (SW)MH- (7)RIM=948.8312" INV OUT=945.63 (NW)MH- (8)RIM=948.6812" INV IN=945.48 (SE)12" INV IN=945.48 (NE)12" INV OUT=945.29 (NW)MH- (11)RIM=948.1912" INV OUT=945.49 (SW)MH- (14)RIM=947.9015" INV OUT=946.38 (N)MH- (12)RIM=947.7712" INV IN=944.94 (SE)12" INV IN=944.94 (NE)12" INV OUT=945.03 (SW)MH- (15)RIM=946.4915" INV IN=944.97 (S)MH- (13)RIM=944.8312" INV IN=943.58 (NE)MH- (16)RIM=937.7318" INV OUT=935.94 (N)MH- (17)RIM=936.6518" INV IN=934.86 (S)35 LF @ 0 . 4 3 %39 LF @ 1.47%31 LF @ 1.76%19 LF @ 7.56%157 L F @ 0 . 2 2 %100 LF @ 1 .41%30 LF @ 3 .56%LEGEND:FUTURE NE TRUNK UTILITY DISTURBANCE LIMITSGENERAL NOTES:1.TREE REMOVAL LIMITS FOR SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN WILL BESTAKED IN THE FIELD. ANTICIPATED IMPACT AREAS HAVE BEENSCHEMATICALLY SHOWN. 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS 65038952.74FLAG POLE65039952.92FLAG POLE11109954.94CLNK11110954.56CLNK11111956.32CLNKCLNK12175955.01CLNKllll952 952953954952953IIIII►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►►MH- (21)RIM=951.3412" INV IN=947.64 (SE)12" INV OUT=947.44 (W)MH- (22)RIM=951.2412" INV IN=947.09 (E)12" INV OUT=947.09 (NW)MH-RIM=951.1212" INV OUT=947.77 (NW)29 LF @ 0.45%168 LF @ 0.21% 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS 20756953.38COMM PED65074953.05SAN CO10455951.08CB FL10597952.43L.POST10821953.41L.POST10876953.42L.POST10903950.88CB FL20754953.16DRIP LINE951952953950947948949951952953II►►►►MH- (5)RIM=951.0412" INV IN=947.19 (SE)12" INV OUT=947.19 (NW)MH- (4)RIM=951.0312" INV OUT=947.73 (NW)MH- (6)RIM=2.1712" INV IN=0.00 (SE)40 LF @ 1.36%61 LF @ 1550.69%IIIIIIC1.01EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TREE/SHRUB CLEARING JDPJDPPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER MINNESOTA STEVEN HEGLAND 52243 RIGHTSEE050100N SHEET NUMBERDATENOSURVEYAPPROVEDDESIGNEDDRAWNPROJ. NO.WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE:LIC. NO.REVISIONCHECKEDPlot Date: 02/07/2024 - 1:01pmDrawing name: \\us0242-ppfss01\shared_projects\227705275\drafting\03 - DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\227705275-Z101_TreeClearingPlan.dwgXrefs:, 227705275_WETL, 227705275_XSXT-Compile, 227705275_BORDER, 227704426_XSNO_WT, utility - bw van, Layout - BW Van, Bellwether Existing Conditions 2020, ALTA 72905-313-700, CR 116 - Layout - Bellwether, 227705275_PARCELS_LARGE, 227705275_XSNU_clean2, 227704426_XSNO_3CELL, 227705275_XSNU_clean3, 227705275_XSNU_clean4THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN. CITY OF CORCORAN, MN NE TRUNK INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT 227705275733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55402 www.stantec.comMONTH DAY, 2023050100NLEFTSEE ABOVESEE BELOWSEEWATER TREATMENTPLANT - UNDERCONSTRUCTIONPROTECT EXISTING18" CMP CULVERTREMOVE TREE (TYP.)N050100N050100RIGHTSEELEFTSEEWATER TREATMENTPLANT - UNDERCONSTRUCTIONFUTURE UTILITYFUTURE UTILITYREMOVE AND INDIVIDUAL TREESWITHIN FUTURE PERMANENTEASEMENT AREAS WITHIN WETLAND.FUTURE LIMITSOF DISTURBANCE(TYPICAL) EJCDC® C-941, Change Order EJCDC® C-941, Change Order, Rev.1. Copyright© 2018 National Society of Professional Engineers, American Council of Engineering Companies and American Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO.: 2 Owner: City of Corcoran, Minnesota Owner’s Project No.: Engineer: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Engineer’s Project No.: 227704426 Contractor: Rice Lake Construction Group Contractor’s Project No.: 2305 Project: Water Treatment Plant Contract Name: City of Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Date Issued: 3/6/2024 Effective Date of Change Order: ____________ The Contract is modified as follows upon execution of this Change Order: Description: This change order covers the modifications associated with Change Order Proposal 6 for the Water Treatment Plant Project. This includes the clearing and grubbing of additional trees necessary for the infrastructure to support the water treatment facility. This work will be completed by Rice Lake and their subcontractors as it needs to be completed in March due to environmental factors. Attachments: 1. Change Order Proposal 6 Change in Contract Price Change in Contract Times [State Contract Times as either a specific date or a number of days] Original Contract Price: Original Contract Times: Substantial Completion: December 31, 2024 $ 16,728,200.00 Ready for final payment: March 1, 2025 Previously approved Change Orders: No previously approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion: 0 days $ 19,659.80 Ready for final payment: 0 days Contract Price prior to this Change Order: Contract Times prior to this Change Order: Substantial Completion: December 31, 2024 $ 16,747,859.80 Ready for final payment: March 1, 2025 Increase this Change Order: Increase this Change Order: Substantial Completion: 0 days $ 41,010.06 Ready for final payment: 0 days Contract Price incorporating this Change Order: Contract Times with all approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion: December 31, 2024 $ 16,788,869.86 Ready for final payment: March 1, 2025 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7j. Council Meeting: March 14, 2024 Prepared By: Kevin Mattson Topic: City Hall – Utility Service Connections Action Required: Approval Summary On August 24, 2023, the Council approved the City Center Drive & 79th Place – Street & Utility Improvements project which included sewer and water improvements at the City Hall property. Staff has identified the remaining work items necessary to complete the utility service connections to the City Hall facility including permits, fees, and quoted services. •City Permits/Fees – 1 unit applied for existing structures unless otherwise noted o Sewer/Water Permit - $200.00 o Plumbing Permit - $219.90 (based on $7,500 construction value) o Sewer Connection - $1,318.40 o Water Connection - $1,332.82 o Water meter - $1,500.00 o Sewer TLAC - $7,621.91 o Water SE TLAC - $21,926.49 •Maple Grove Water Connection Fee - $36,024.56 (2.86 acres) •State Permits/Fees o State Plumbing Review - $150.00 o SAC - $9,940 (4 units per MCES determination) •Seal Existing Well Quote - $4,200 (Stevens) •Interior Plumbing Quote - $7,445 (B&D Plumbing) The estimated total cost to complete the utility service connections work is $91,879.08. Staff considered the viability of using the existing well for irrigation purposes, but after review is recommending sealing the well based on history of poor well performance, high maintenance costs, and unpermitted/illegal status in the MDH records. Financial/Budget The project costs are eligible for ARPA funds. Staff are planning to provide a complete ARPA funding breakdown at an upcoming council meeting. There will also be variable monthly sewer and water usage charges that will be incorporated into future facility budgets. Page 2 Options 1. Authorize the City Hall - Utility Service Connections work as outlined in the staff report in the amount of $91,879.08. 2. Decline. Recommendation Authorize the City Hall - Utility Service Connections work as outlined in the staff report in the amount of $91,879.08. Council Action Consider a motion to authorize the City Hall - Utility Service Connections work as outlined in the staff report in the amount of $91,879.08. Attachments N/A 1 CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Special Meeting Minutes February 29, 2024 – 5:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on February 29, 2024, 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 Schultz, and Councilor Vehrenkamp were present. Councilor Nichols was excused. City Clerk Friedrich was present. City Administrator Tobin was excused. 1.Call to Order/Roll Call Mayor McKee called the meeting to order at 5:01 pm. 2.Closed Session – Employee Claims Mayor McKee stated: “The City Council is going into closed to discuss non-public employee claims data which will be discussed in a closed session per Minn. Stat. § 13D.05 subd. 3(b)”. Mayor McKee recessed the Council meeting at 5:03 pm. Mayor McKee reconvened the Council meeting at 6:22 pm. Mayor McKee stated: “In the closed session the city council discussed non-public employee claims data which was discussed in a closed session per Minn. Stat. § 13D.05 subd. 3(b); the City Attorney was provided direction”. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Schultz to authorize staff and the city attorney to enter into an agreement with ADBO Services to complete an assessment of the Human Resources Department. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 4:0) 3.Unscheduled Items No unscheduled items were heard. 4.Adjournment MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Vehrenkamp to adjourn. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 4:0) Meeting adjourned at 6:23 pm on February 29, 2024. Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk Added Agenda Item: 7k. STAFF REPORT Added Agenda Item: 7l. Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Prepared By Michelle Friedrich/Wayne Barnhart Topic 2024 Fee Schedule Amendment Action Required Approval Summary Attached to this report is an ordinance amending the 20 24 Fee Schedule with an adjustment to the Late Fees/Penalties/Cancellation Fees under Administrative Fees from $35 per incident to $30 per incident to align with Minnesota State Statute 604.113 Subd. 2.(a). Financial/Budget Minor costs will be incurred to publish the ordinance. Council Action Adopt Ordinance 2024-517 Amending the 2024 Fee Schedule. Attachments 1.Ordinance 2024-517 Amending the 2024 Fee Schedule. City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2024-517 Motion By: Seconded By: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 2024 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 2024 Fee Schedule. The fees to be charged by the City of Corcoran for 2024 are listed on the attached Exhibit A, (copy is available at City Hall); that said fee schedule is hereby adopted. 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 14th day of March, 2024. 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 Agenda Attachment: 7l1. Reply to St. Michael Sender’s Email Address: Dave@glalawfirm.com March 13, 2024 Via email: Michelle Friedrich - mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Re: Proposed Interim Ordinance No. 2024-_____ Proposed one year moratorium on development applications for properties within the Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial zoning districts of Corcoran. Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: The undersigned and this law firm represent Craig Scherber & Associates, Inc (“Scherber”), the owner of that property identified as PID No. 07-119-23-14-003. As the city is aware, on October 17, 2023, Scherber filed an application with the city for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat for the property (City File No. 23-027). The Scherber Application has been pending since it was filed. A publicly posted notice by the city indicates that the City Council will hold a public hearing on March 14, 2024, to consider an interim ordinance that would establish up to a one- year moratorium on development applications for properties with the Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial zoning districts of Corcoran. Scherber’s property is zoned Transitional Rural Commercial and therefore would be included within the map of the properties the city indicates would be impacted by the proposed interim ordinance. We hereby request that the City Council exclude Scherber’s property from the proposed moratorium. Very truly yours, David J. Lenhardt DJL/cgd cc: Craig Scherber & Associates, Inc. Scott Dahlke Added Agenda Item: 8a. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8a. Council Meeting: March 14, 2024 Prepared By: Natalie Davis McKeown Topic: Interim Ordinance Establishing a Development Moratorium within the Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial zoning districts Action Required: Approval Summary: The City Council reviewed a concept plan at their regular meeting on February 8, 2024. This discussion evaluated the historical use of development rights in the Rural Commercial district and whether there is a desire to continue this practice or to let the underlying district lot standards prevail without the use of development rights to limit development intensity. The Council directed staff to clarify how development rights apply to Rural Commercial (CR) and Transitional Rural Commercial (TCR) properties. Additionally, Council directed staff to move forward with evaluating the underlying district standards to confirm development intensity is balanced with the permitted uses in the district. In order to evaluate and process desired changes, staff recommend a development moratorium within the CR and TCR as an appropriate response to allow the City time to address inconsistencies in the Zoning Ordinance and consider changes to district standards. This will allow for Zoning Ordinance Amendments to be addressed in a timely fashion before further land use applications in these districts are processed. The proposed interim ordinance will protect the planning processes as well as the long-term health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Corcoran. The maximum period of such a moratorium is one (1) year, but a moratorium may be lifted by Council action prior to this if the study is completed earlier. The proposed development moratorium will prohibit any new land use applications in these districts. A moratorium does not impact applications which have received preliminary approval prior to its effective date. We also cannot use the moratorium to extend the 60-day review deadline on existing applications deemed complete. There are no complete applications in these districts at this time. If an incomplete application is deemed complete at this point, it can be denied based on the moratorium, but a formal denial will need to be made by the City. Once the moratorium is in effect, prohibited applications within these zoning districts will not be accepted. Recommendation: Staff recommend adoption of Interim Ordinance 2024-515 establishing a 1-year development moratorium within the CR and TCR zoning districts. Attachments: 1.Ordinance 2024-515 2.Summary Ordinance 2024-516 3.Copies of Public Hearing Notices 4.Map of the affected properties City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2024-515 Page 1 of 2 Motion By: Seconded By: AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA PROHIBITING APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS WITHIN LANDS ZONED AND/OR GUIDED RURAL COMMERCIAL OR TRANSITIONAL RURAL COMMERCIAL OR THOSE LANDS PROPOSED TO BE GUIDED OR ZONED RURAL COMMERCIAL THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Recitals 1.The City Council is actively studying, and will continue to study, suitable comprehensive plan and zoning code standards to yield appropriate density and development intensity within lands zoned or guided Rural Commercial (CR), or those proposed to be so zoned or guided, within the City of Corcoran. 2.A moratorium on development and/or subdivision within such lands within the Corcoran city limits is needed to allow time to develop and finalize appropriate standards to ensure compatibility with other controls and appropriately designate proper and intended density and development intensity within the City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances, and to provide improved guidance for future development within the City. Section 2. Purpose and Intent. The City desires to conduct an in-depth study of the following: Appropriate density and development intensity levels within lands guided or zoned CR and/or those lands proposed to be so zoned or guided to include, without limitation, consideration of appropriate lot sizes, lot standards, development rights map application or possible amendment and appropriate and proper allocation of development rights within such lands. The City will conduct a thorough review of any appropriate amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, zoning ordinances, and/or development rights map. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355 Subdivision 4 allows the City to adopt an interim ordinance to protect the City’s planning process and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the community. The City Council finds that it is necessary to adopt an interim ordinance to allow sufficient time for this study to be conducted to determine whether there is a need to amend the City’s official controls. Section 3. Temporary Prohibition. Pending the completion of the studies referred to above, and/or the corresponding repeal or expiration of this ordinance: 1.The City shall not accept, process, or approve any development, subdivision, or other platting application, site plan, or any other land use applications which affects lands zoned or guided Rural Commercial or Transitional Rural Commercial or which affects Agenda Attachment Item: 8a1. City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2024-515 Page 2 of 2 lands proposed to be guided or zoned Rural Commercial within the City unless such application has received preliminary approval from the City; and 2.Corresponding building permits related to the prohibited applications set forth in Prohibition 1 not associated with a project that received preliminary approval prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall not be processed, approved, or accepted. However, this Prohibition 2 does not prohibit the issuance of building permits which are unrelated to a prohibited application and which propose to alter a structure existing as of the date of this ordinance but not expand or intensify the use of the structure. For illustration and not limitation, this shall include electrical permits and comparable applications. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance becomes effective from and after the date of its passage, and shall remain in effect until the earlier of either: 1) March 14, 2025; or 2) the date of acceptance of the above-named land use study by the City Council and the Council’s corresponding repeal of this ordinance. Adopted by City Council on the 14th day of March, 2024. 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 City of Corcoran March 14, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2024-516 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2024-515 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA PROHIBITING APPROVAL OF NEW PLATS, SITE PLANS, AND OTHER LAND USE APPLICATIONS IN THE RURAL COMMERCIAL AND TRANSITIONAL RURAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. Ordinance 2024-515 issues a moratorium on development applications for all new land use applications, including new plats and site plans, within the Rural Commercial (CR) and Transitional Rural Commercial (TCR) zoning districts of Corcoran, Minnesota pending the study of development density and intensity within the districts and amended standards within the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. A printed copy of the complete ordinance is available for inspection by any person at City Hall during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Ordinance is hereby declared adopted on this 14th day of March, 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk Agenda Attachment Item: 8a2. 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 www.corcoranmn.gov CITY OF CORCORAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR UP TO A ONE (1) YEAR MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE RURAL COMMERCIAL AND TRANSITION RURAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a public hearing at City Hall, 8200 County Road 116, on Thursday, March 14, 2024, at 7:00 PM or as soon thereafter as possible, to consider an interim ordinance that would establish up to a one (1) year moratorium on development applications for properties within the Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial zoning districts of Corcoran. The proposed interim ordinance and map of impacted properties is available at City Hall upon request. The purpose of the moratorium would be to allow time to develop and finalize appropriate standards to ensure compatibility with other controls, appropriately designate proper and intended density and development intensity with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and to provide improved guidance for future development within the City. It is possible that the study will be completed sufficiently in less than one (1) year, in which case it would be anticipated that the moratorium would be lifted before the expiration of one (1) year. All persons wishing to speak on this item in-person will be heard. Comments may be submitted in writing prior to the meeting. Public meetings are viewable over Zoom. Any person wanting to monitor the meeting telephonically or virtually can do so by calling +1 312 626 6799 or visiting www.zoom.us and entering in the Meeting ID 821 6350 4979. Those who are unable to attend the meeting in-person but wish to make a comment may submit a written comment to mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov by Monday, March 11, 2024. For additional information about the Council meeting, please visit www.corcoranmn.gov. Agenda Attachment Item: 8a3. _________________________ Natalie Davis McKeown Planner ______________________ Date Posted at the Corcoran City Office and the City’s website on March 7, 2024 Mailed Notice to Affected Property Owners March 5, 2024 and Reposted March 8, 2024 !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!! !! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! !!!!!!!!! ! !!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!î î î s s òñð òñð ñ ñ ï ï î î s ñ ï ROAD SCHUTTE GLEASON ROAD JUBERT LAKE MEISTER ROAD O L D S E T T L E R S R D HORSESHOE TRAIL STIE G R D WILLOW DRIVEHACKAMORE ROADTRAIL HAVEN ROADCAIN ROADOAKDALE DR STREHLER ROAD PIO N E E R T R COUNTY ROAD 117 ROLLLING HILLS RDLARKIN RD TOWNSHIP OF HASSAN CITY OF GREENFIELDCITY OF MAPLE GROVESCOTT LAKEBECHTOLD ROAD$+ $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ MORIN LAKE GOOSE LAKE COOK LAKE RUS H C R E E K Official Zoning Map 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet Zoning Districts: UR Urban Reserve RR Rural Residential RSF-1 Single Family Residential 1 RSF-2 Single Family Residential 2 RSF-3 Single and Two Family Residential 3 RMF-1 Medium Density Residential RMF-2 Mixed Residential RMF-3 High Density Residential MP Manufactured Home Park P-I Public / Institutional TCR Transitional Rural Commercial CR Rural Commercial C-1 Neighborhood Commercial C-2 Community Commercial DMU Downtown Mixed Use GMU General Mixed Use BP Business District I-1 Light Industrial PUD Planned Unit Development ï Cemetery î ChurchsGolf Course ñ Government Building òñð Public Park !! !!!2040 Metropolitan Urban Service Area City Limit Open Water Shoreland Overlay District Adopted June 2011 19 10 30 116 101 50 19 10 ± Updated September 2020 Agenda Attachment Item: 8a4. From:Stanchion Bar To:Michelle Friedrich Subject:Re: Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Date:Wednesday, March 6, 2024 10:53:03 AM Hi Michelle, I would like to be at the March 14th city council meeting please, regarding July 12/13 Rodeo weekend logistics at the Stanchion. I am proposing to have a band again both nights. The bands would start at 9:30 and end at 12:45am. The rodeo does not wrap up until 10:00/10:30pm. With the cost of the bands. the circus tent, manpower this only makes sense to me. Last year the music was done by 12:15 and a lot of people were leaving to go to the other bar that was having a band till 1:00 am. We will do the last call at 12:45am even though I do have a 2:00am license. Uber drivers will be present again. I am working with St Thomas Church regarding parking. Last year I hired two Corcoran Police Officers, with the addition of two hired security officers. I would like to keep with the Corcoran Police and I will work with them to provide however much security they want me to have. The past two years have run smoothly, it was safe for everyone involved. There were no charges, it was a successful event for the bar and the Community. Sincerely, Kristy Monnens Stanchion Bar Inc. On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 4:04 PM Michelle Friedrich <mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov> wrote: Sounds good! Thanks Kristy! Michelle Friedrich City Clerk City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 www.corcoranmn.gov Direct: 763-400-7031 | Main: 763-420-2288 E: mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov City of Corcoran - A Hidden Gem Waiting To Be Discovered Agenda Item: 10a. STAFF REPORT Added Agenda Item: 12a. Council Meeting February 22, 2024 Prepared By Michelle Friedrich Topic Cropland Bids Action Required Informational Summary Cropland Rental History The City owns property adjacent to County Road 116, just north of City Hall (13-119-23- 32-0001), and another property located at City Park, 20400 County Road 50 (23-119- 23-34-0001). Historically the City utilized RFPs for agricultural rental of the parcels for two-year term agreements. The property located north of City Hall utilizes a two-year agreement which expired December 31, 2023. With the potential park development of the parcel located a City Park, the rental term on the property was changed to a one- year agreement which also expired December 31, 2023. At the February 8, 2024, Council meeting, Council directed staff to complete an RFP cropland bid process for the two city-owned parcels, with a net zero difference for the City regarding property taxes. The RFP opened on March 7, 2024, and closes at 1:00 pm on Wednesday, March 27, 2024, with Council review on Thursday, March 28, 2024. If no bids are received, Council directed staff to utilize Option 1, or Option 3, if Option 1 is not a viable option based on findings with Hennepin County. Financial/Budget Publication costs to post the RFP; Staff time in contacting Hennepin County for Option 1 with a cost TBD; if Option 3 is necessary, cost of staff time to obtain estimates, schedule a vendor, and cost of spraying the parcels 3-4 times over the spring/summer/fall seasons. Staff reviewed costs for spraying the two fields and the average annual seasonal cost was between $18,000 to $24,000 in 2023. Council Action N/A Attachments N/A STAFF REPORT Added Agenda Item: 12b. Council Meeting March 14, 2024 Prepared By Michelle Friedrich Topic Granicus Project Update Action Required Informational Summary •Granicus hardware has been installed. •Training for staff who will train administrative staff and on the software is almost complete. •An introduction to Granicus for staff who will access, and use Granicus software will begin in April. •Granicus setup for staff to begin practice sessions and access Granicus training videos and will occur in late April. •A trial run of creating and publishing the first Council agenda packet using Granicus software is tentatively scheduled for March 28. (Date subject to change based on workload). •A tentative schedule to utilize the streaming feature and create and publish a full agenda packet is on the calendar for April 25. (Date subject to change based on workload). Recommendations N/A Council Action N/A Attachments N/A 1.1 Senator .................... moves to amend S.F. No. 3303 as follows: 1.2 Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert: 1.3 "Section 1. [462.3576] LIMITATION ON AESTHETIC MANDATES FOR CITIES. 1.4 A home rule charter or statutory city must not condition approval of a residential building 1.5 permit, subdivision development, or planned unit development on the use of one or more 1.6 of the following: 1.7 (1) specific materials for aesthetic reasons for property used for a residential purpose as 1.8 defined by the State Building Code; 1.9 (2) residential building or accessory structure to a residential building minimum square 1.10 footage or floor area ratios; 1.11 (3)architectural design elements including, but not limited to, decks, balconies, porches, 1.12 gables, roof pitch, and elevation design standards; 1.13 (4) garage square footage; or 1.14 (5) common space, pools, or any common property necessitating a homeowner's 1.15 association. 1.16 EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective July 1, 2025." 1.17 Amend the title accordingly 1Section 1. COUNSEL JW/HF SCS3303A-202/26/24 03:19 pm Agenda Item: 13a. Updated Agenda Item: 13b. Bill Summary H.F. 2235 As introduced Subject Legalizing Affordable Housing Act Authors Elkins Analyst Chelsea Griffin Justin Cope Date March 6, 2023 Overview This bill contains various provisions related to local land use, building permits, building codes, and fees imposed by local governments. Article 1: Impact Fees Creates a new chapter 462E providing authority and parameters for the imposition of impact fees by certain local governments. Adds impact fee authority sections in other chapters of the law. Section Description – Article 1: Impact Fees [394.245] Impact fees. Authorizes a county board to impose impact fees so long as the board has adopted a comprehensive plan and a capital improvement program. [462.3594] Impact fees. Authorizes a statutory or home rule charter city to impose impact fees so long as the city has adopted a comprehensive municipal plan and capital improvement program. [462E.01] Impact fees; definitions. Defines various terms for the purpose of the new chapter 462E, which contains provisions relating to impact fees imposed by a city, town, or county. [462E.02] Authority. Authorizes a local government to impose impact fees by ordinance. [462E.03] Permitted uses. Requires that a local ordinance imposing impact fees must specify the purposes for which the fees are imposed on new development. The purposes for which such fees may be imposed are enumerated in this section. Also requires any qualified project to be described in the local government’s approved comprehensive plan and capital H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 2 Section Description – Article 1: Impact Fees improvement plan, with specific information required to be included in the capital improvement plan. [462E.04] Establishment of district; payment of fee. Provides that a district is established when the design of the project funded by an impact fee is completed and the governing body of the local government has approved the imposition of the impact fee. States that the impact fee is due and payable from owners of property located in the district once the district is established and notice is issued. Failure to receive the notice does not postpone or excuse any default. Payment of the fee must be made within 90 days of district establishment. The local government must provide the option for a property owner to pay the impact fee over a period of up to ten years at an interest rate that reflects the local government’s own cost of borrowing. [462E.05] Formula; contributions. Requires a local impact fee ordinance to specify the formula by which the cost of the project will be apportioned among the properties in the district. The formula must result in a just and equitable fee. The formula must provide for credits off -setting part or all of the fees that reflect what the new development in the district may have contributed in the form of taxes, other fees, dedications, or other contributions toward the improvement for which the impact fees are imposed. [462E.06] Advisory committee. Requires a local government that imposes impact fees to establish an impact fee advisory committee to assist in developing the ordinance. [462E.07] Exemptions. Provides that an impact fee ordinance may provide exemptions from impact fees for low- and moderate-income housing if the need for such housing is identified in the comprehensive plan. [462E.08] Segregation of fees; refund. Requires impact fees to be placed in a separate account and used only for qualified projects. A local government that imposes an impact fee must refund any fee that is not spent by the time a project is complete. Refunds are in the amount proportional to the payment by the party. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 3 Section Description – Article 1: Impact Fees [462E.09] Notice; recording. Requires impact fees paid or due to be recorded and notice of such fees to be provided to a purchaser of real property. [462E.10] Model impact fee ordinance. Requires the League of Minnesota Cities, in collaboration with other stakeholders, to develop a model impact fee ordinance for local governments on or before December 31, 2023. Article 2: Environmental Review and Comprehensive Land Planning Section Description – Article 2: Environmental Review and Comprehensive Land Planning Development guide. Amends the statute for Metropolitan Council development guide requirements to provide that the adoption and amendment of the council’s development guide and the adoption and amendment of its metropolitan system plans, other policy plans, and metropolitan system statements do not constitute conduct t hat causes or is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction as defined under the environmental rights chapter of the law, or governmental action as defined under the chapter of the Minnesota Statutes on environmental policy. Effective the day following final enactment. [473.8651] Environmental review. Provides that the adoption or amendment of comprehensive plans and fiscal devices and official controls consistent with Metropolitan Council comprehensive planning statutes does not constitute conduct that causes or is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction as defined under the environmental rights chapter of the law. Effective retroactively from March 1, 2018, and applies to actions commenced on or after that date. Applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. Article 3: Planning and Zoning Amends statutes related to conflicts between comprehensive plans and local government official controls and other regulations and policies. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 4 Section Description – Article 3: Planning and Zoning Adopted by ordinance. Clarifies that official controls do not conflict with a county comprehensive plan if the official controls permit all of the uses permitted or required in the comprehensive plan at the permitted or required densities and the official controls prohibit all of the uses that are prohibited by the comprehensive plan. Official controls for land guided for commercial or industrial use may be more specific than the comprehensive plan regarding the kinds of commercial or industrial uses allowed in specific locations. Applies to official controls adopted by a county board. Interim ordinance. Provides that a housing proposal that is consistent with the city comprehensive plan on the date of submission and is submitted or pending before the adoption of an interim ordinance is exempt from the regulations, restrictions, or prohibitions in the interim ordinance. General requirements. Clarifies that official controls do not conflict with a land use plan if the official controls permit all of the uses that are permitted or required in the land use plan at the permitted or required densities and the official controls prohibit all of the uses prohibited by the land use plan. Official controls for land guided for commercial or industrial use may be more specific than the comprehensive plan regarding the kinds of commercial or industrial uses allowed in specific locations. Applies to official controls adopted by a city or town. Terms of regulations. Clarifies that regulations do not conflict with a comprehensive plan if the regulations permit all of the uses permitted or required in the comprehensive plan at the permitted or required densities and the regulations prohibit all uses that ar e prohibited by the comprehensive plan. Regulations for land guided for commercial or industrial use may be more specific than the comprehensive plan regarding the kinds of commercial or industrial uses allowed in specific locations. Applies to regulations adopted by a city or town. Affordable, life-cycle goals. Provides that only parcels consistent with the policies of the Metropolitan Development Guide and zoned for multifamily housing at the guided level of density may qualify toward a municipality’s affordable and life-cycle housing goals. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 5 Section Description – Article 3: Planning and Zoning Applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. No conflicting zoning, fiscal device, official control. Clarifies that fiscal devices and official controls do not conflict with a comprehensive plan if they permit all of the uses permitted or required in the comprehensive plan at the permitted or required densities and they prohibit all of the uses prohibited by the comprehensive plan. Fiscal devices and official controls for land guided for commercial or industrial use may be more specific than the comprehensive plan regarding the kinds of commercial or industrial uses allowed in specific locations. Applies to fiscal devices and official controls adopted by cities, counties, and towns in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. No conflict with plans. Clarifies that fiscal devices and official controls do not conflict with a comprehensive plan if they permit all of the uses permitted or required in the comprehensive plan at the permitted or required densities and they prohibit all of the uses prohibited by the comprehensive plan. Fiscal devices and official controls for land guided for commercial or industrial use may be more specific than the comprehensive plan regarding the kinds of commercial or industrial uses allowed in specific locations. Applies to fiscal devices and official controls adopted by cities, counties, and towns in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. Amendments. Provides that a development application that is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan must be processed in accordance with section 15.99. Applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. Article 4: Limiting Regulations on Residential Development Contains amendments to several sections of the Minnesota Statutes that relate to residential development. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 6 Section Description – Article 4: Limiting Regulations on Residential Development Authority for zoning. Adds industrialized or modular buildings for residential use that conform with applicable rules and all other zoning ordinances to the structures that may not be prohibited by regulation. Two-family property; permitted uses. Authorizes a two-family property, like a duplex or single-family property with an accessory dwelling unit, as a permitted use in all areas zoned for single-family residential use and in any residential subdivision development provided the property complies with all municipal standards. Requirements imposed by the municipality for such properties must be reasonably related to protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare. [462.3575] Limiting regulations on residential development. Creates a new section 462.3575 limiting certain regulations on residential development. Subd. 1. Application. Clarifies which official controls the section applies to. Subd. 2. Planned unit development. Prohibits a municipality from requiring a planned unit development agreement in lieu of a proposed residential development if the proposed development complies with existing city zoning ordinances, subdivision regulation, or qualifies as a conditional use. Planned unit development agreements must be available to the public at least seven days before review of the agreement. Subd. 3. Limitation on aesthetic mandates. Prohibits a municipality from conditioning approval of a building permit, subdivision development, or planned unit development on specific materials for aesthetic reasons. Subd. 4. Limitation on square footage; accessory structures. Prohibits a municipality from requiring minimum square footage for a residential building or an accessory structure to a residential building. Also prohibits a municipality from requiring more than one garage stall for a single-family dwelling. Article 5: Municipal Dedication F ees Amends the municipal dedicated land provisions to cap fees, amend fee payments, and provide record keeping requirements. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 7 Section Description – Article 5: Municipal Dedication Fees Dedication. Adds sidewalks to uses of dedicated land. Requires a municipality to maintain records detailing the purposes for which money was obtained and the manner in which it was spent to further those purposes. Allows a municipality to accept a combination of buildable land and cash fees for a dedication. Caps the total value of a dedication at ten percent of the fair market value of the proposed subdivision. Certain land dedicated for trails factors into the calculation of the total value of the dedication. Non-buildable land may be dedicated above and beyond the ten percent cap. Prohibits a municipality from requiring a dedication of land for roads beyond the minimum engineering standards for urban roadways. A dedication of land for a street that is not a collector or arterial street cannot exceed a curb-to-curb width of 32 feet along with associated utilities and sidewalks, as appropriate. Article 6: Metropolitan Area Density of Development Creates requirements for land use plan residential development densities. Section Description – Article 6: Metropolitan Area Density of Development Land use plan. Provides that a land use plan and the related official controls must provide for an average density of residential development of no less than four units per acre for an area that has not been previously subdivided for residential development and that is not connected to the metropolitan disposal system. In areas guided for single-family homes, a minimum of 25 percent of the land must allow for a minimum density of eight units per acre. Land that is intended to remain rural must be guided and zoned at a density of no more than one unit per ten acres. Effective the day following final enactment and applies to a land use plan amendment proposed on or after that date. Applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. Article 7: Metropolitan Council; Sewer Availability Charges Creates a new sewer availability charge adjustment requirement. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 8 Section Description – Article 7: Metropolitan Council; Sewer Availability Charges Allocation of treatment, interceptor costs; reserved capacity. Requires the Metropolitan Council to adjust the sewer availability charge (SAC) so that development in unsewered areas is assessed at actual density, but no less than four SAC units per acre. Effective January 1, 2024, and applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. Article 8: Building Permit Deadlines Adds building permits to agency action deadline statute. Section Description – Article 8: Building Permit Deadlines Definitions. Adds written applications for building permits to the definition of “request”. Deadline for response. Adds written requests for building permits to agency approvals or denials with a 60 day deadline. Requires an agency to approve or deny a building application as expeditiously as possible. An agency that approves or denies a building permit application more than 60 days from receipt of the application must refund all relevant permitting fees to the applicant within five business days of the date of the decision on the application. Article 9: Building Permit Fees Requires the commissioner of labor and industry to establish valuation criteria for certain properties for municipal building permit fee purposes. Section Description – Article 9: Building Permit Fees Valuation. Requires the commissioner of labor and industry to establish a cost per square foot valuation of certain residential properties and accessory utility buildings for the purpose of setting building permit fees by municipalities. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 9 Article 1 0: Energy Cost Disclosure Creates a new requirement for disclosure of utility costs for residential real property. Section Description – Article 10: Energy Cost Disclosure [513.62] Energy cost disclosure requirement. Creates a new section 513.62 which requires a seller of residential real property to disclose to a prospective purchaser the total cost of utility usage over the previous 12-month period along with information about how the cost compares to the average cost of such utilities per residential household statewide. A utility company must provide this information at the request of the seller or a seller’s representative. Also requires this information to be included in the real estate listing for the property along with the most recent Home Energy Rating System Index score, if the property has one. Article 11: Construction and Development Fee Report Amends statutory requirements for municipal reporting of construction and development - related fee collections to the Department of Labor and Industry. Section Description – Article 11: Construction and Development Fee Report Annual report. Increases the threshold for municipally collected construction and development- related fees required to be reported annually to the Department of Labor and Industry to fees in excess of $7,000 in the reporting year. Artic le 1 2: Oak Grove, Nowthen Land U se Exceptions Repealed Section Description – Article 12: Oak Grove, Nowthen Land Use Exceptions Repealed Metropolitan Council. Requires the Metropolitan Council to review and amend its development guide, policy plans, and system statements to be consistent with the repealer in section 2. Effective the day following final enactment and applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. H.F. 2235 As introduced Minnesota House Research Department Page 10 Section Description – Article 12: Oak Grove, Nowthen Land Use Exceptions Repealed Repealer. Repeals special laws requiring the Metropolitan Council to modify its Metropolitan Development Guide, system plans, for the cities of Oak Grove and Nowthen. Effective the day following final enactment. Minnesota House Research Department provides nonpartisan legislative, legal, and information services to the Minnesota House of Representatives. This document can be made available in alternative formats. www.house.mn/hrd | 651-296-6753 | 155 State Office Building | St. Paul, MN 55155 March 5, 2024 Re: City comments on SF 3080 (“Legalizing Affordable Housing Act”) Chair Port and Members of the Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention Committee: The League of Minnesota Cities, Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, Metro Cities, Minnesota Association of Small Cities and Municipal Legislative Commission appreciates the opportunity to provide comments in opposition to SF 3080 (Draheim). Cities are concerned with the bill’s broad preemption of city land use and zoning authorities, particularly as they are unlikely to address important housing issues across Minnesota. Housing is a statewide issue. The best way to ensure that housing issues in the metro area and greater Minnesota are adequately addressed is to approach statewide solutions to housing in a comprehensive way that: (1) addresses the full housing spectrum, (2) supports local innovation, (3) provides incentives instead of mandates, and (4) provides community-specific solutions throughout Minnesota. While we appreciate the provisions in Article 1 of the bill that seeks a clear path for cities to impose impact fees to support new development and the clarification in Article 2 that exempts comprehensive plans are exempt from review under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act, SF 3080 unfortunately falls short of a comprehensive approach. The legislation includes no policy that promotes housing affordability. Instead, it broadly preempts city zoning and land use authority. Zoning is an important planning tool that benefits communities economically and socially, improves health and wellness, and helps conserve the environment. The bill would limit this beneficial tool in multiple ways: Requiring that all cities, regardless of infrastructure capacity, up-zone all single-family zoned areas to allow for duplexes or an accessory dwelling unit on a single lot Severely deteriorating the tool that allows the development of smaller homes and lots – planned unit developments Capping land dedication and park dedication fees Prohibiting cities from requiring roads that exceed certain widths which in conjunction with limitations on off-street parking in the bill, could pose significant challenges Prohibiting cities from conditioning any approvals on material, design, or other conditions if not currently required by the State Building Code (which is meant to be a minimum safety standard) even to promote energy efficiency or similar goals; and Mandating the refunding of all building permits if not approved or denied within 60-days even if delay is outside of city control. Thank you for consideration of our concerns. We look forward to working with Senator Draheim and other legislators to address housing challenges in cities across the state. Sincerely, Daniel Lightfoot League of Minnesota Cities Tom Poul Municipal Legislative Commission Ania McDonnell Metro Cities Elizabeth Wefel Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities Cap O’Rourke Minnesota Association of Small Cities Agenda Item: 13b. 3/8/24, 3:55 PM HF 4009 Status in the House for the 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?f=HF4009&b=house&y=2024&ssn=0 1/1 Office of the Revisor of Statutes Description Minimum allowable densities established on residential lots in cities, authorization of middle housing types to be built on residential lots required, subdivision of residential lots authorized, parking requirements established by cities limited, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency required to create model ordinance, city aesthetic mandates on residential building permits limited, and multifamily residential development requirements established. Authors (30) Kraft ; Howard ; Nash ; Elkins ; Wolgamott ; Dotseth ; Hornstein ; Kozlowski ; Sencer-Mura ; Feist ; Greenman ; Agbaje ; Olson, L. ; Finke ; Keeler ; Hussein ; Pursell ; Jordan ; Gomez ; Her ; Hassan ; Garofalo ; Xiong ; Hemmingsen-Jaeger ; Igo ; Hicks ; Smith ; Cha ; Moller ; Curran Actions Separated Chronological House 02/19/2024 02/22/2024 02/22/2024 02/26/2024 02/29/2024 03/04/2024 03/07/2024 03/07/2024 Introduction and first reading, referred to Housing Finance and Policy pg. 11288 Intro Committee report, to adopt as amended and re-refer to State and Local Government Finance and Policy pg. 11363a Authors added Hassan, Garofalo, and McDonald pg. 11409 Authors added Xiong, Mekeland, Hemmingsen-Jaeger, Igo, Hicks, and Smith pg. 11476 Author stricken Clardy pg. 11523 Author added Zeleznikar pg. 11590 Authors stricken McDonald; Mekeland; Zeleznikar pg. 11712 Author added Curran pg. 11712 HF 4009 Status in the House for the 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) Current bill text: 1st Engrossment Add HF 4009 to MyBills Version List Companion: SF3964 Companion Text Senate Search Revisor number: 24-06653 Long Description Further Committee Actions House Research Summary Fiscal Notes Agenda Item: 13c. 3/8/24, 3:56 PM SF 3964 as introduced - 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=SF3964&version=0&session=ls93&session_year=2024&session_number=0 1/4 O f f i c e o f t h e R e v i s o r o f S t a t u t e s Jump to page/line #eg. 2.1 Version List Authors and Status Pdf Rtf A bill for an act relating to local government; establishing minimum allowable densities on residential lots in cities; requiring the authorization of middle housing types to be built on residential lots; authorizing subdivision of residential lots; limiting parking requirements established by cities; requiring the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency to create a model ordinance for cities; limiting city aesthetic mandates on residential building permits; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. [462.3575] CITY MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES AND ASSOCIATED REQUIREMENTS. Subdivision 1. Definitions. (a) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given. (b) "Accessory dwelling unit" means any building that contains one dwelling unit used, intended, or designed to be built, used, rented, leased, let, or hired out to be occupied, or occupied for living purposes and is located on the same property as an existing dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit may be attached or detached from the existing dwelling. (c) "Affordable housing" means a residential dwelling unit affordable to households at or below 115 percent of the area median household income, for an owner-occupied unit, or at or below 60 percent of the area median household income, for a unit that is leased. The deed or declaration for the unit must also contain a restrictive covenant requiring the property to remain affordable housing for at least ten years, if the unit is owner-occupied, or at least 30 years if the unit is leased. (d) "All-electric and efficient home" means a residential dwelling unit that utilizes electricity as its sole source of energy for heating, hot water heating, cooling, and appliances and meets the most current minimum efficiency standards of a zero energy ready home under the Zero Energy Ready Home Program administered by United States Department of Energy. (e) "City" means a home rule charter or statutory city. (f) "Cottage housing" means residential dwelling units on a lot with a common open space that either: (1) is owned in common; or (2) has units owned as condominium units with property owned in common and a minimum of 20 percent of the lot size as open space. (g) "Courtyard apartment" means a building with up to four attached residential dwelling units arranged on two or three sides of a yard or garden. (h) "Duplex" means a two-family home, classified as an IRC-2 in the State Building Code and not meeting the definition of townhouse. (i) "Fiveplex" means a building containing five residential dwelling units intended for nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. (j) "Fourplex" means a building containing four residential dwelling units intended for nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. (k) "Lot" means any contiguous parcel of land in the possession of, owned by, or recorded as the property of the same claimant or person. (l) "Major transit stop" means a stop or station for a guideway or busway, as the terms are defined in section 473.4485, subdivision 1. (m) "Middle housing" means buildings that are single-family detached homes and residential properties that are compatible in scale, form, and character with single-family detached homes. Middle housing includes all of the following housing types: SF 3964 as introduced - 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) Posted on 03/05/2024 09:47am KEY: stricken = removed, old language.underscored = added, new language. 3/8/24, 3:56 PM SF 3964 as introduced - 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=SF3964&version=0&session=ls93&session_year=2024&session_number=0 2/4 (1) duplexes; (2) triplexes; (3) fourplexes; (4) fiveplexes; (5) sixplexes; (6) townhouses; (7) stacked flats; (8) courtyard apartments; (9) cottage housing; and (10) single-family detached homes. (n) "Residential dwelling unit" or "unit" means a residential dwelling unit for the use of a single owner or tenant and applies to any type of residential structure unless otherwise specified. (o) "Single-family detached home" means any building that contains one residential dwelling unit used, intended, or designed to be built, used, rented, leased, let, or hired out to be occupied, or occupied for living purposes that is not attached to another structure. (p) "Sixplex" means a building containing six residential dwelling units intended for nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. (q) "Stacked flat" means a nontransient residential building of no more than three stories on a lot zoned for residential development in which each floor is a residential dwelling unit. (r) "Townhouse" means a single-family residential dwelling unit constructed in a group of three or more attached units in which each unit extends from the foundation to the roof and with open space on at least two sides. Each single-family residential dwelling unit shall be considered a separate building. Separate building service utilities shall be provided to each single-family residential dwelling unit when required by the State Building Code. (s) "Triplex" means a building containing three residential dwelling units intended for nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. Subd. 2. Middle housing types permitted. A city must authorize at least six types of middle housing other than single-family detached homes to be built on residential lots in the city to achieve the density requirements in this section. Subd. 3. Cities of the first class; required residential densities. (a) A city of the first class must permit the development of at least four residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is more than one-half mile from a major transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: (1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city must permit the development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; (2) if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; or (3) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are also affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least eight residential dwelling units on the lot. (b) A city of the first class must permit the development of at least six residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is one-half mile or less from a major transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: (1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city must permit the development of at least eight residential dwelling units on the lot; (2) if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least eight residential dwelling units on the lot; or (3) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are also affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least ten residential dwelling units on the lot. (c) The requirements of this subdivision apply regardless of the types of middle housing authorized by the city under subdivision 2. Subd. 4. Other cities; required residential densities. (a) A city of the second, third, or fourth class must permit the development of at least two residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is more than one-half mile from a major transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: (1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city must permit the development of at least three residential dwelling units on the lot; (2) if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least three residential dwelling units on the lot; or (3) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are also affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least four residential dwelling units on the lot. (b) A city of the second, third, or fourth class must permit the development of at least four residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is one-half mile or less from a major transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: (1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city must permit the development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; (2) if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; or 3/8/24, 3:56 PM SF 3964 as introduced - 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=SF3964&version=0&session=ls93&session_year=2024&session_number=0 3/4 (3) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are also affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least eight residential dwelling units on the lot. (c) The requirements of this subdivision apply regardless of the types of middle housing authorized by the city under subdivision 2. Subd. 5. Municipal standards. (a) Any standards, performance conditions, or requirements imposed by a city for residential dwelling units permitted under subdivisions 3 and 4 must directly relate to protecting public health, safety, and general welfare. (b) A city may not use official controls to prohibit the application of this section, including imposing performance conditions, standards, requirements, ordinances, fees, exactions, and dedications on any residential dwelling unit or development that are more restrictive than those in this section or other law or rule. Subd. 6. Commercial district designation. A city that does not have a major transit stop within the boundaries of the city must designate the boundaries of at least one commercial district in the city. The commercial district must be adjacent to residential property. The boundaries of the commercial district must be treated as a major transit stop for the purposes of determining properties to which the densities in subdivisions 3 and 4 apply. Subd. 7. Accessory dwelling units authorized. (a) An accessory dwelling unit may be built on any residential lot in a city, regardless of total lot size, street frontage, connectivity between the accessory dwelling unit and the primary dwelling on the lot, and whether the lot is occupied by the property owner, so long as the accessory dwelling unit is built in conformance with the State Building Code. (b) A city may permit more than one accessory dwelling unit to be built on a residential lot. Subd. 8. Minimum lot size permitted. (a) A city may, by ordinance, require a minimum lot size in accordance with this subdivision to which the density requirements of subdivisions 3 and 4 apply. (b) A minimum lot size for a city of the first class must not be greater than: (1) 2,500 square feet for a single-family detached home, duplex, triplex, fourplex, fiveplex, sixplex, stacked flat, and courtyard apartment; or (2) 1,200 square feet for a townhome and cottage housing. (c) A minimum lot size for a city of the second, third, or fourth class must not be greater than: (1) 4,000 square feet for a single-family detached home, duplex, triplex, fourplex, fiveplex, sixplex, stacked flat, and courtyard apartment; or (2) 1,200 square feet for a townhome and cottage housing. Subd. 9. City official controls; limitations. (a) City official controls establishing, directly or indirectly, the permitted size, scale, or form of a building may only impose the following limitations: (1) building height maximums; (2) yard or setback requirements; (3) maximum lot coverage; (4) impervious surface maximums; (5) lot width minimums; (6) lot area minimums; and (7) a maximum number of residential units per lot. (b) City official controls must not impose architectural features, minimum square footage, garage square footage, or floor area ratios and must not create practical difficulties in the placement of residential units on any lot. (c) City official controls establishing, directly or indirectly, the maximum square footage, gross floor area, or other size standard for residential dwelling units must be increased by at least ten percent per single-family unit built on a lot where multiple single-family units will be developed. A city may opt not to adjust a height standard for single-family units entitled to other standard adjustments under this paragraph. (d) A city must reduce a setback standard by at least one foot for an all-electric and efficient home. Subd. 10. Parking requirements limited. (a) A city may not require off-street parking space for a residential dwelling unit that is one-half mile or less from a major transit stop. (b) A city may not require more than one off-street parking space per residential dwelling unit that is over one-half mile from a major transit stop. Subd. 11. Affordable housing; replacement required. Affordable housing on a residential lot may only be demolished or remodeled for the construction of middle housing if the middle housing development will create at least as many affordable housing units as exist in the structure to be demolished or remodeled. Subd. 12. Subdivision of lots permitted; administrative review process established. (a) Notwithstanding any law, rule, or ordinance to the contrary, a city must permit a residential lot to which the density requirements of subdivisions 3 and 4 apply to be subdivided in a manner that allows all units to be built on the property to be single-family detached homes. (b) A residential lot created from the subdivision of property under paragraph (a) that is smaller than a minimum lot size required pursuant to subdivision 8 is not subject to the density requirements under subdivisions 3 and 4. 3/8/24, 3:56 PM SF 3964 as introduced - 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=SF3964&version=0&session=ls93&session_year=2024&session_number=0 4/4 (c) Notwithstanding any law, rule, or ordinance to the contrary, a city must permit units on residential lots created from the subdivision process under paragraph (a) to share water, wastewater, and sanitary sewer infrastructure. (d) A city shall process an application to subdivide a residential lot in accordance with the procedures under subdivision 13. Subd. 13. Administrative design review process established. (a) Notwithstanding section 462.358, subdivision 3b, or any other law, rule, or ordinance to the contrary, a city must establish an administrative design review process for building permits for middle housing development projects and subdivision applications under subdivision 12. The administrative review process must review and approve or deny such building permit and subdivision applications based on the application's alignment with the city's comprehensive plan and other applicable zoning requirements. The administrative review process shall not involve a public hearing unless one is required by state or federal law or the project involves or affects a lot located in a historic district under section 138.73. The city may hold a public hearing on a building permit or subdivision application under this section for requests for variances from city zoning requirements. Except as provided in paragraph (b), an application subject to the administrative design review process must be approved or disapproved within 60 days following the receipt by the city of a completed application by the applicant. If the city fails to approve or disapprove an application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved. (b) A city must specify in writing all requirements for an application for a building permit for middle housing or for a subdivision to be considered complete. The written completion requirements must accompany each application. (c) An applicant may direct the city to toll the 60-day review period for an application for a building permit for middle housing or for a subdivision application under subdivision 12. The applicant may also direct the city to begin to run the 60-day time period for an application that was previously tolled upon request by the applicant. A request under this paragraph must be in writing. A city may not charge a fee to the applicant for a request under this paragraph. Subd. 14. Model ordinance. (a) On or before December 31, 2024, the commissioner of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency must develop and publish a model ordinance for adoption by cities that addresses the requirements of this section. On or before July 1, 2025, a city must adopt the model ordinance under this subdivision or amend its official controls to be consistent with the requirements of this section as part of an alternative density plan under subdivision 15. (b) The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency must convene an advisory group of stakeholders to provide information during the development of the model ordinance. The advisory group must represent expertise in city administration, housing affordability, housing construction, municipal land use planning and zoning, and any other topics that the agency determines are necessary. Subd. 15. Alternative density plans. A city may develop an alternative density plan and submit the plan to the commissioner of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for approval. The commissioner may approve an alternative density plan under this subdivision only if the city demonstrates that the plan will result in an equal or greater amount of middle housing production that would occur with the adoption of the model ordinance under subdivision 14. The commissioner must approve or disapprove an alternative density plan within 120 days of the day of receipt of the plan by the commissioner. Subd. 16. Exception. This section does not apply to any parcel located in a floodplain. Subd. 17. State Building Code; State Fire Code. This section does not modify any requirement of the State Building Code or State Fire Code. EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective July 1, 2025, except that subdivisions 1, 14, and 15 are effective July 1, 2024. Sec. 2. [462.3576] LIMITATION ON AESTHETIC MANDATES FOR CITIES. A home rule charter or statutory city must not condition approval of a residential building permit, subdivision development, or planned unit development on the use of one or more of the following: (1) specific materials for aesthetic reasons for property used for a residential purpose as defined by the State Building Code; (2) minimum square footage or floor area ratios; (3) architectural design elements, including but not limited to decks, balconies, porches, gables, roof pitch, and elevation design standards; (4) garage square footage; or (5) common space, pools, or any common property necessitating a homeowner's association. EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective July 1, 2024. LEAGUE of MINNESOTA CITIES February 20, 2024 COAUTIO ,, ••GREATER MN CITIES Re: City comments on HF 4009 ("Missing Middle Housing") MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION Dear Chair Howard, Vice Chair Agbaje and Members of the House Housing Finance and Policy Committee: The League of Minnesota Cities, Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, Metro Cities, Minnesota Association of Small Cities, and Municipal Legislative Commission appreciate the opportunity to provide comments in opposition to HF 4009 (Kraft) as amended by the DE amendment. Our organizations and the cities we represent are deeply concerned with provisions in the bill that broadly preempt city zoning and land use authorities, remove public input in the residential development process, ignore long range local comprehensive plans and lack consideration for how cities utilize zoning and land use to ensure the health safety and welfare for residents and scale infrastructure to support new housing density. Cities across the state have implemented innovative changes at the local level with community engagement to address their individual zoning and land use ordinances, provide local resources to ensure affordability, and create opportunities for new development across the housing spectrum. Zoning is hyper local as is each community's locally identified housing needs, public infrastructure capacity to accommodate new density, and advancing other individual community goals including historic preservation and protection of natural resources. While housing is a statewide issue, addressing housing affordability and availability must continue to be locally driven to account for these nuances. The Missing Middle Housing bill as currently drafted, unfortunately falls short of policy that supports state-local partnership for residential development. Instead, the bill as written replaces existing zoning and land use authorities with an overly broad and rigid framework that eliminates the ability for all cities to account for nuances and be responsive to local conditions. In addition to the overall breadth of the preemptive nature of the policy proposed in the bill, numerous provisions in the proposed legislation pose serious practical questions for how city operations would function under the bill and either lack clarity or directly conflict with existing statute in ways that would likely result in litigation including: Section 1 of the bill creates minimum levels for density on all residential lots, which would force cities of the first class to allow between four and ten residential units and all other cities to accept between two and eight residential units on any residential lot regardless of its size or water and sewer infrastructure capacity or other state and federal requirements including stormwater management, fire and EMS access, and other standards. The bill does not consider overall lack of public infrastructure capacity, but forces cities to accept additional density without any consideration for how re-sizing infrastructure will be paid for to support the additional density, which will ultimately be borne by existing residents. Section 1 of the bill imposes unreasonable minimum lot size requirements to support the level of density mandated in the bill. Both Section 1 of the Missing Middle Housing bill and the DE amendment mandate new administrative review requirements that eliminates a resident's ability to voice concerns over material impacts a project would have on their property by eliminating all public hearing requirements for most residential development projects. Added Agenda Item: 13d. Page2 Section 1 of the bill requires cities without a major transit stop to identify a commercial district in the city where high density development must be accepted despite most cities in Minnesota having neither and in hundreds of cities would result in allowing higher density multifamily buildings on all lots despite being well beyond the capacity of most greater Minnesota cities. -The bill as amended by the DE amendment would force a city to accept by right up to a 150-foot multifamily building in certain areas of a city on any parcel even if that parcel was next to a single-family owner-occupied home without adequate ability to ensure reasonable setbacks for fire and safety. Section 1 of the bill also creates an exhaustive list for city zoning and land use authority, which leaves out si gnificant life safety and public, health, safety, and welfare considerations that are included in longstanding city zoning and land use authority including emergency services access, fire safety, public infrastructure capacity, utility access, etc. The exhaustive list in the Missing Middle Housing bill, which includes height restrictions appear to directly contradict provisions in the DE amendment that prohibit restrictions on height. -The bill in limiting minimum parking requirements while requiring higher density could result in developers underbuilding parking resulting in spillover onto city streets that were not designed to accommodate dense on street parking. -The bill also includes contradictions within the bill itself including references that missing middle housing must be "compatible in scale, form, and character" with other housing while also broadly eliminating the ability for cities to impose those standards with the preemption of architectural desi gn standards in section 2, which is overly broad and subjective likely resulting in legal challenges. Thank you for consideration of our concerns. We look forward to continuing to work with Representative Kraft and other legislators to identify incentives-based approaches that support cities in their efforts to address local housing needs. Rigid state-mandated frameworks that remove community- engagement and lack consideration for how cities pay for and plan for infrastructure to support new residential density will create serious consequences for cities across the state. Sincerely, Daniel Lightfoot League of Minnesota Cities Tom Poul Municipal Legislative Commission Ania McDonnell Metro Cities Patricia Nauman Metro Cities Elizabeth W efel Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities Cap O'Rourke Minnesota Association of Small Cities LEAGUE of MINNESOTA CITIES March 7, 2024 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION Re: City comments on SF 3964 ("Missing Middle Housing") and SF 3980 (Multifamily residential in commercial areas) Dear Chair Port and Members of the Senate Housing and Preventing Homelessness Committee: The League of Minnesota Cities, Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, Metro Cities, Minnesota Association of Small Cities, and Municipal Legislative Commission appreciate the opportunity to provide comments in opposition to SF 3964 (Mitchell) and SF 3980 (Pha). Our organizations and the cities we represent are deeply concerned with provisions in these bills that broadly preempt city zoning and land use authorities, remove public input in the residential development process, ignore long range local comprehensive plans and lack consideration for how cities utilize zoning and land use to ensure the health safety and welfare for residents and scale infrastructure to support new housing density. Cities across the state have implemented innovative changes at the local level with community engagement to address their individual zoning and land use ordinances, provide local resources to ensure affordability, and create opportunities for new development across the housing spectrum. Zoning is hyper local as is each community's locally identified housing needs, public infrastructure capacity to accommodate new density, and advancing other individual community goals including historic preservation and protection of natural resources. While housing is a statewide issue, addressing housing affordability and availability must continue to be locally driven to account for these nuances. SF 3964 and SF 3980 as currently drafted, unfortunately fall short of policy that supports state-local partnership for residential development. Instead, the bills as written replaces existing zoning and land use authorities with an overly broad and rigid framework that eliminates the ability for all cities to account for nuances and be responsive to local conditions. In addition to the overall breadth of the preemptive nature of the policy proposed in the bills, numerous provisions in the proposed legislation pose serious practical questions for how city operations would function under the bill and either lack clarity or directly conflict with existing statute in ways that would likely result in serous unintended consequences including: Section 1 of SF 3964 creates minimum levels for density on all residential lots, which would force cities of the first class to allow between four and ten residential units and all other cities to accept between two and eight residential units on any residential lot regardless of its size or water and sewer infrastructure capacity or other state and federal requirements including stormwater management, fire and EMS access, and other standards. -Neither SF 3964 nor SF 3980 considers overall lack of public infrastructure capacity, but forces cities to accept additional density without any consideration for how re-sizing infrastructure will be paid for to support the additional density, which will ultimately be borne by existing residents. Section 1 of SF 3964 imposes unreasonable minimum lot size requirements to support the level of density mandated in the bill. -Both SF 3964 and SF 3980 mandate new administrative review requirements that eliminates a resident's ability to voice concerns over material impacts a project would have on their property by eliminating all public hearing requirements for most residential development projects. Page2 Section 1 of SF 3964 requires cities without a major transit stop to identify a commercial district in the city where high density development must be accepted despite most cities in Minnesota having neither and in hundreds of cities would result in allowing higher density multifamily buildings on all lots despite being well beyond the capacity of most greater Minnesota cities. -SF 3980 would force a city to accept by right up to a 150-foot multifamily building in certain areas of a city on any parcel even if that parcel was next to a single-family owner-occupied home without adequate ability to ensure reasonable setbacks for fire and safety. -Section 1 of SF 3964 also creates an exhaustive list for city zoning and land use authority, which leaves out significant life safety and public, health, safety, and welfare considerations that are included in longstanding city zoning and land use authority including emergency services access, fire safety, public infrastructure capacity, utility access, etc. The exhaustive list in SF 3964,which includes height restrictions appear to directly contradict provisions in SF 3980 that prohibit restrictions on height for multifamily developments. -Both SF 3964 and SF 3980 in limiting minimum parking requirements while requiring higher density could result in developers underbuilding parking resulting in spillover onto city streets that were not designed to accommodate dense on street parking. -SF 3964 also includes contradicting provisions including references that missing middle housing must be "compatible in scale, form, and character" with other housing while also broadly eliminating the ability for cities to impose those standards with the preemption of architecturaldesign standards in section 2, which is overly broad and subjective likely resulting in legal challenges. Thank you for consideration of our concerns. We look forward to continuing to work with Senators Mitchell and Pha and other legislators to identify incentives-based approaches that support cities in their efforts to address local housing needs. Rigid state-mandated frameworks that remove community- engagement and lack consideration for how cities pay for and plan for infrastructure to support new residential density will create serious consequences for cities across the state. Sincerely, Daniel Lightfoot League of Minnesota Cities Tom Poul Municipal Legislative Commission Ania McDonnell Metro Cities Patricia Nauman Metro Cities Elizabeth W efel Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities Cap O'Rourke Minnesota Association of Small Cities LEAGUE MINNESOTA CITIES Resources liame. > New, & P11blirn1iau, > News. > I egi:slatiw News Insurance Trust Log Jn Memberlink Marketplace Advocacy Learnlng & Events Careers Aboullhe League Contact News & PubRcatfons Search 0. > J..·fissing Middle Housing Dill Includes Myriad of Statewide Zoning aud Land Use Preemption Provisions News & PubHcatjons News Latest News Legislative News General News For the Media + City Announcements City News Roundup Publications + Your LMC Resource Daniel Lightfoot IGR Representative & Federal Relations Manager (651) 281-129Sor (800) 925-1122 dligbtfoot@\mc org Missing Middle Housing Bill Includes Myriad of Statewide Zoning and Land Use Preemption Provisions February 20, 2024 Legislation to be beard Feb. 20 in the House Housing Finance and Policy Committee seeks to broadly preempt city zoning and land use authority and require residential density in many cities. l:lE..1lK!2/ the "Missing Middle Housing" hill authored by Rep Larry Kraft IDFL-St. Louis Park)/Sen Njco!e MjtcheH IDFL-Woodbury) and JiE.jjllj)/SE.'l2Bllauthored by Rep A!jcja Kozlowski IDFL- DulutJ1)/ Sen Susan Pba (DFL-Brooklyn Park) will be considered by the House Hansing Finance and PoHcy Committee- The bills, which are likely to be combined via an amendment, contain myriad of provisions that broadly preempt city zoning and land use authority and mandate various levels of density on residential and commercial lots regardless of infrastructure capacity while also crealing required administrative review processes that eliminate public input. Details of the proposed legislation lVhile there are cities in all regions of tJ1e state that have adjusted their zoning ordinances over time to accommodate varying degrees of density, these decisions were made at the local level and ensured adequate infrastructure capacity while including public input from community members impacted by these changes. \Vh..ile the amendment clarifies several issues the League has raised and exempts Great ?i.Uonesota cities with popuJations of 5,000 or less from certain requirements, the Missing Middle Housing bill combined with HF 4010/SF 3980 still eliminates the ability for cities across the state to do either by including the following provisions in the bill language that was introduced: • Sets a base level for density allowed on any residential lot by right (or without needing to go through a discretionary review processes) regardless of size at 2 units statewide and 4 units in cities of the first class. If certain conditions are met, 8 units are allowed in second-, third•, and fourth-dass cities and 10 units may be allowed per lot in cities of the first class. • Forces admin.istrative approvals of projects that meet the standards in the bill language and prohibits public input in the approval process. • Limits minimum lot size requirements to no greater than 2,500 square feet for first class cities and 4,000 square feet for all other cities except for Greater Minnesota cities with populations of less than 5,000. • Requires all cities to accept Accessory Dwelling Units on all residential lots regardless of size and allows property owners to subdivide their lots by right. • Prohibits off-street parking from being required close to major transit stops and limits off.street parking minimum requirements to l spot per unit in other areas. • Allows multifamily buildings to be built up to 150 feet tall on any lot in a commercial zoning district. • Broadly prohibits design standards for residential development and eliminates minimum square footage and floor area ratio requirements. Next steps The League has been in conversations with the bill authors and will continue to advocate for local control when it comes to local decision-making authority on residential development. Cities are encouraged to reach out to their legislators with concerns regarding this bill. Read more news actides LEAGUE, MINNESOTA CITIES Resources Hwne > News & PPhlications > liew. > I egislative News Insurance Trust Log In Memberlink Marketplace Advocacy Leaming & Events Careers About the League Contact News & Publications Search Q. > Senate Housing Committee to Acton Omnibus Zoning Package) Includes Language That Would Restrict City Authority News & Publicatjons News Latest News Legislative News General News For the Media + City Announcements City News Roundup Publications + Your LMC Resource Daniel Lightfoot IGR Representative & Federal Relations Manager (651) 281-1295 or (800) 925-1122 dlightfoot@lrnc org Senate Housing Committee to Act on Omnibus Zoning Package, Includes Language That Would Restrict City Authority March 11, 2024 The omnibus zoning package will be advanced to the Senate State and Local Government and Veterans Committee for consideration. On March 7, the Senate Housing and Homelessness Pceveotiao Committee heard three bills including the problematic "Missing Middle Housing Bill" and laid all three over for possible inclusion in an omnibus bill. The bills considered by the committee were: • SE..3261, the "Missing Middle Housing Bill" authored by Njcole Mitchell (DFL-Woodbury). • authored by Susan Pha (DFL-Brooklyn Park) that would allow multifamily buildings by right in commercial areas. • SE..1001.authored by Liz Boldon (DFL-Rochester), which would prohibit cities from zoning out emergency housing facilities in commercial or industrial areas. The three bills could be combined to create an omnibus zoning package during a second hearing by the Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention Committee on March 12. The package is likely to advance to the Senate State and Local Government and Veterans Committee for consideration. The League of Minnesota Cities along with other city organizations provided written testimony citing concerns with SF 3964 and SF 3980. Prior Lake City Manager Jason Wedel and Cambridge City Administrator Evan Vogel provided testimony before the committee on behalf of the League. The League also submitted written testimony citing concerns with SF 4601. • Yiew the written testimony regarding SF 3964 and SF 3980 C!ld(1 • View the written testimony regarding SF 460) {pc!O.. Cities, especially cities represented by lawmakers on the Senate State and Local Government and Veterans Committee, are encouraged to reach out to their legislators with concerns regarding these three bills. Read mare news articles 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 02/09/24 REVISOR (SENATE AUfHORS: PHA) KRB/HL 24-06741 SENATE STATE OF MINNESOTA NINETY-THIRD SESSION DATE D-PG OFFICIAL STATUS 02/19/2024 II 658 Introduction and ftrst reading Referred to State and Local Government and Veterans 03/07/2024 12068 Withdrawn and re-referred to Housing and Homelessness Prevention A bill for an act as introduced S.F. No. 3980 relating to local government; establishing requirements for multifamily residential developments in cities; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. [462.3571) MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Subdivision 1. Definitions. (a) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given. (b)"Affordable housing development" means a multifamily residential development in which: ( 1) at least 20 percent of the residential units are for households whose incomes do not exceed 50 percent of the area median income; or (2)at least 40 percent of the residential units are for households whose incomes do not exceed 60 percent of the area median income. The deed or declaration for an affordable residential unit must also contain a restrictive covenant requiring the property to remain affordable housing for at least 30 years. ( c)"City" means a home rule charter or statutory city. ( d) "Residential unit" means a residential dwelling for the use of a single owner or tenant. Subd. 2. Multifamily residential developments. (a) Multifamily residential developments are a permitted use in any zoning district that is not zoned as industrial or agricultural, subject to compliance with all municipal standards. Section 1. 02/09/24 REVISOR KRB/HL 24-06741 as introdnced 2.1 (b) A multifamily residential development may be mixed use so long as at least 50 2.2 percent of the square footage of the development is dedicated to residential use. 2.3 Subd. 3. Proximity to certain transportation infrastructure. A multifamily residential 2.4 development must not be located less than 500 feet from a federal interstate highway, airport, 2.5 or rail line. The limitation under this subdivision does not apply to a state trunk highway, 2.6 county state-aid highway, or other local road. 2.7 Subd. 4. Compliance with comprehensive plan; zoning. A multifamily residential 2.8 development must be approved by a city if it is consistent with the comprehensive plan on 2.9 the date of submission and complies with all state and municipal standards. 2.10 Subd. 5. Applicable zoning standards. (a) A city may not impose more restrictive 2.11 standards to a multifamily residential development than those that apply to property zoned 2.12 for the current use of the parcel. 2.13 (b) A city must not impose a height requirement on a multifamily residential development2.14 that is less than the tallest structure within a one-quarter mile radius of the parcel on which 2.15 the development will be built or the maximum height permitted under the city's official 2.16 controls, whichever is higher, so long as the maximum height of the development is no 2.11 more than 150 feet. 2.18 ( c) A city must not impose a setback requirement on a multifamily residential2.19 development that is less than the smallest minimum setback distance required of a structure 2.20 within a one-quarter mile radius of the parcel on which the development will be built. 2.21 Subd. 6. Parking requirements limited. A city may not require more than one off-street 2.22 parking space per residential unit. 2.23 Subd. 7. Affordable housing development; height requirements. (a) An affordable 2.24 housing development must be permitted to exceed both a maximum height requirement and 2.25 a maximum floor area ratio limitation imposed by city official controls as provided in 2.26 paragraphs (b) and ( c ). The authority in paragraphs (b) and ( c) that produces the tallest 2.27 development with the most number of affordable housing units on the parcel shall be applied 2.28 to the affordable housing development. 2.29 (b) An affordable housing development may either:2.30 (1) exceed the height requirement for the zoning district where the affordable housing2.31 development will be located by 35 feet in height; or 2.32 (2) match the maximum allowed height in any zoning district within one mile of the 2.33 affordable housing development, so long as the maximum height is no more than 150 feet. Section 1. 2 02/09/24 REVISOR KRB/HL 24-06741 as introduced 3.1 ( c) An affordable housing development must be permitted to do one of the following, 3.2 whichever results in the largest development: 3.3 ( 1) exceed the maximum density as permitted by city standards or the city's 3.4 comprehensive plan by 30 percent; 3.5 (2) exceed the lot coverage ratio by 30 percent; 3.6 (3) exceed the floor area ratio by 30 percent; or 3.7 ( 4)exceed the maximum impervious lot coverage area by 30 percent. 3.8 Subd. 8. Administrative review process. (a) Notwithstanding any law, rule, or ordinance 3.9 to the contrary, a city must establish an administrative review process for building permit 3.10 applications for multifamily residential development projects. The administrative review 3.11 process must review and approve or deny such building permit applications based on the 3.12 application's conformity with the city's comprehensive plan, other applicable zoning 3.13 requirements, and state law. An application may not be approved contingent on the 3.14 development being a part of planned unit development, the approval of a conditional use 3.15 permit, the completion of a study, or other condition that is not related to conformity with 3.16 the city's comprehensive plan, zoning requirements, and state law. 3.17 (b) An application denial must be in writing and must describe the reasons for denial 3.18 and the ways the application or development design can be amended to receive approval at 3.19 a future date. Nothing in this subdivision prevents an applicant who received a denial from 3.20 submitting a new application for the same multifamily residential development, which shall 3.21 be treated by the city as a new submission. 3.22 ( c)The administrative review process shall not involve a public hearing unless one is 3.23 required by state or federal law. Approval or denial of an application does not require 3.24 approval by the city council or a subcommittee of the council. 3.25 ( d) An application subject to the administrative review process under this subdivision 3.26 must be approved or denied within 60 days following the receipt by the city of a completed 3.27 application by the applicant. If the city fails to approve or deny an application within 60 3.28 days, the application shall be deemed approved. The city may not request an extension for 3.29 review of the application from the applicant. 3.30 ( e) A city may request that an applicant incorporate certain design elements into the 3.31 development that go beyond the criteria in state law and city official controls. The applicant 3.32 may incorporate those elements in the design of the development but is not required to do 3.33 so. Section 1. 3 02/09/24 REVISOR KRB/HL 24-06741 as introduced 4.1 Subd. 9. Local funds. Notwithstanding any law, rule, or ordinance to the contrary, a 4.2 city may not inlpose requirements on a multifamily residential development that are more 4.3 restrictive than the requirements in this section if a multifamily residential development is 4.4 funded in whole, or in part, with local funds or is located in a tax increment financing district 4.5 or other special district created by the city. 4.6 EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective January 1, 2025. Section 1. 4 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-l SENATE STATE OF MINNESOTA NINETY-TIDRD SESSION (SENATE AUTHORS: PORT and Mitcbell) DATE D-PG OFFICIAL STATUS 02/08/2023 733 lntroduction and first reading Referred to Housing and Homelessness Prevention 03/22/2023 2199 Comm report: To pass 2199 Second reading 11498 Rule 47, returned to Housing and Homelessness Prevention l st Engrossment S.F. No. 1370 03/13/2024 12159a Comm report: To pass as amended and re-refer to State and Local Government and Veterans 12197 Autbor added Mitchell 1.1 A bill foran act 1.2 relating to housing; amending provisions relating to building pennit processing 1,3 and fees; amending provisions relating to land use and planning; prohibiting 1.4 counties and municipalities from enacting ordinances prohibiting emergency shelter 1.5 facilities; establishing requirements for municipalities to allow multifamily 1.6 residential developments; defining middle housing; requiring permitting middle 1.1 housing types in residential areas; authorizing accessory dwelling units; limiting 1.s off-street parking requirements for residential development; limiting aesthetic 1.9 mandates on residential project approvals; limiting requirements for homeowners 1.10 associations on residential project approvals; amending Minnesota Statutes 2022, 1.11 sections 15.99, subdivisions 1, 2; 326B.153, by adding a subdivision; 394.25, by 1.12 adding subdivisions; 462.357, by adding a subdivision; proposing coding for new 1,13 law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462. 1.14 BE IT ENACTED BY TIIE LEGISLATURE OF TIIE STATE OF MJNNESOTA: us Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 15.99, subdivision 1, is amended to read: 1.16 Subdivision 1. Deimitions. (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms shall 1.17 have the meanings given us (b) "Agency" means a department, agency, board, conunission, or other group in the 1.19 executive branch of state government; a statutory or home rule charter city, county, town, 1.20 or school district; any metropolitan agency or regional entity; and any other political 1.21 subdivision of the state. 1.22 ( c) "Request" means a written application for a building pennit, or a written application 1.23 related to zoning, septic systems, watershed district review, soil and water conservation 1.24 district review, or the e,rpansion of the metropolitan urban service area, for a pennit, license, 1.2s or other governmental approval of an action. A request must be submitted in writing to the 1.26 agency on an application form provided by the agency, if one exists. The agency may reject Section l. Added Agenda Item: 13e. SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 l st Engrossment 2.1 as incomplete a request not on a form of the agency if the request does not include 2.2 information required by the agency. A request not on a form of the agency must clearly 2.3 identify on the first page the specific permit, license, or other governmental approval being 2.4 sought. No request shall be deemed made if not in compliance with this paragraph. 2. s ( d)"Applicant" means a person submitting a request under this section. An applicant 2.6 may designate a person to act on the applicant's behalf regarding a request under this section 2.1 and any action taken by or notice given to the applicant's designee related to the request 2.s shall be deemed taken by or given to the applicant. 2.9 Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 15.99, subdivision 2, is amended to read: 2.10 Subd. 2. Deadline for response. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, section 2.11 462.358, subdivision 3b, or 473.175, or chapter 505, and notwithstanding any other law to 2.12 the contrary, an agency must approve or deny within 60 days a written request for a building 2.13 permit, or a written request relating to zoning, septic systems, watershed district review, 2.14 soil and water conservation district review, or expansion of the metropolitan urban service 2.1s area for a permit, license, or other governmental approval of an action. Failure of an agency 2.16 to deny a request within 60 days is approval of the request. lf an agency denies the request, 2.11 it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time that it denies the request. 2.1 s (b)When a vote on a resolution or properly made motion to approve a request fails for 2.19 any reason, the failure shall constitute a denial of the request provided that those voting 2.20 against the motion state on the record the reasons why they oppose the request. A denial of 2.21 a request because of a failure to approve a resolution or motion does not preclude an 2.22 immediate submission of a same or similar request. 2.23 ( c) Except as provided in paragraph (b ), if an agency, other than a multimember governing 2.24 body, denies the request, it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time that 2.2s it denies the request. lf a multimember governing body denies a request, it must state the 2.26 reasons for denial on the record and provide the applicant in writing a statement of the 2.21 reasons for the denial. lf the written statement is not adopted at the same time as the denial, 2.2s it must be adopted at the next meeting following the denial of the request but before the 2.29 expiration of the time allowed for making a decision under this section. The written statement 2.30 must be consistent with the reasons stated in the record at the time of the denial. The written 2.31 statement must be provided to the applicant upon adoption. Sec. 2. 2 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 3.1 Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 326B.153, is amended by adding a subdivision 3.2 to read: 3.3 Subd. 5. Valuation. The commissioner must establish a cost-per-square-foot valuation 3.4 of residential buildings for the purpose of setting building permit fees by municipalities. 3.5 Residential buildings include one-and two-family buildings, townhouse buildings, and 3.6 accessory buildings. 3.7 Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 394.25, is amended by adding a subdivision to 3.8 read: 3.9 Subd. 11. Emergency shelter facility. (a) "Emergency shelter facility" means a facility 3.10 that provides a safe, sanitary, accessible, and suitable emergency shelter for individuals and 3.11 families experiencing homelessness, regardless of whether the facility provides emergency 3.12 shelter during the day, overnight, or both. The emergency shelter facility must conform 3.13 with the State Building Code under chapter 326B and the State Fire Code under chapter 3.14 299F. 3.15 (b)A county shall not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that prohibits 3.16 emergency shelter facilities. A county may prohibit an emergency shelter facility in areas 3 .17 zoned for residential, agricultural, or heavy industrial uses, or as required by law to conform 3.18 with the State Building Code, State Fire Code, or other state requirements. 3.19 Sec. 5. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 394.25, is amended by adding a subdivision to 3.20 read: 3.21 Subd. 12. Homeowners associations. (a) A county must not condition approval of a 3.22 residential building permit, residential subdivision development, or residential planned unit 3.23 development on the creation of a homeowners association or on the inclusion of any terms 3.24 in a homeowners association bylaws, articles of incorporation, or any other governing 3.25 document that is not required under state law. 3.26 (b)A county must not require that a residential property be part of a homeowners 3.27 association or provide an incentive for such membership. The county must also not require 3.28 or incentivize a homeowners association to adopt terms or conditions not required under 3.29 state law. Sec. 5. 3 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-l l st Engrossment 4.1 Sec. 6. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 462.357, is amended by adding a subdivision to 4.2 read: 4.3 Subd. lj. Emergency shelter facility. (a) "Emergency shelter facility" means a facility 4.4 that provides a safe, sanitary, accessible, and suitable emergency shelter for individuals and 4.5 families experiencing homelessness, regardless of whether the facility provides emergency 4.6 shelter during the day, overnight, or both. TI1e emergency shelter facility must conform 4.7 with the State Building Code under chapter 326B and the State Fire Code under chapter 4.8 299F. 4.9 (b)A municipality shall not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that prohibits 4.10 emergency shelter facilities. A municipality may prohibit au emergency shelter facility in 4.11 areas zoned for residential, or agricultural, or heavy industrial uses, or as required by law 4.12 to conform with the State Building Code, State Fire Code, or other state requirements. 4.13 Sec. 7. [462.35711 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. 4.14 Subdivision 1. Defmitions. (a) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have 4.15 the meanings given. 4.16 (b)"Affordable housing development" means a multifamily residential development in 4.17 which: 4.18 (1) at least 20 percent of the residential units are for households whose incomes do not 4.19 exceed 50 percent of the area median income; or 4.20 (2) at least 40 percent of the residential units are for households whose incomes do not 4.21 exceed 60 percent of the area median income. 4.22 The deed or declaration for an affordable residential unit must also contain a restrictive 4.23 covenant requiring the property to remain affordable housing for at least 30 years. 4.24 (c)"Municipality" means a home rule charter city, statutory city, or town. 4.25 ( d)"Multifamily residential development" means a single residential building with more 4.26 than eight dwelling units or a mixed-use building with commercial use on the ground floor 4.27 and at least half of the usable square footage is for residential uses. Multifanilly residential 4.28 development is not middle housing as defined in section 462.3575, subdivision 1. 4.29 ( e) "Residential unit" means a residential dwelling for the use of a single owner or tenant. 4.30 Subd. 2. Multifamily residential developments. (a) Multifamily residential 4.31 developments are a permitted use in any mixed-use, multifamily, or commercial zoning 4.32 district, subject to compliance with all municipal standards. Sec. 7. 4 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 5.1 (b)A multifamily residential development may be mixed use so long as at least 50 5.2 percent of the usable square footage of the development is dedicated to residential use. 5.3 Subd. 3. Applicable zoning standards. (a) A municipality must not impose a height 5.4 requirement on a multifamily residential development that is less than the tallest commercial 5.5 or residential building within a one:9uarter mile radius of the parcel on which the 5.6 development will be built or the maximum height permitted under the municipality's official 5.7 controls, whichever is higher. 5.8 (b)A municipality must not impose a setback requirement on a multifamily residential 5.9 development that is more than the smallest minimum setback distance required of a new 5.10 building within a one-quarter mile radius of the parcel on which the development will be 5.11 built. 5.12 Subd. 4. Parking requirements limited. A municipality may not require more than one 5.13 off-street parking space per residential unit 5.14 Subd. 5. Affordable housing development; height requirements. (a) Subject to section 5.15 462.358, subdivision 2a, an affordable housing development must be permitted to exceed 5.16 both a maximum height requirement and a maximum floor area ratio limitation imposed by 5.17 municipality official controls as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c). The authority in 5.18 paragraphs (b) and ( c) that produces the tallest development with the most number of 5.19 affordable housing units on the parcel shall be applied to the affordable housing development. 5.20 (b)An affordable housing development may either: 5.21 ( 1) exceed the height requirement for the zoning district where the affordable housing 5.22 development will be located by 35 feet in height; or 5.23 (2) match the maximum allowed height in any zoning district within one mile of the 5.24 affordable housing development. 5.25 ( c) In addition to all previous allowances, an affordable housing development must be 5.26 permitted to do one of the following, whichever results in the largest development: 5.27 (1) exceed the maximum floor area ratio or dwelling unit count permitted by municipality s.2s standards or the municipality's comprehensive plan by 30 percent, whichever allows for 5.29 greater density; 5.30 (2)exceed the lot coverage ratio by 30 percent; 5.31 (3)exceed the floor area ratio by 30 percent; or 5.32 (4)exceed the maximum impervious lot coverage area by 30 percent. Sec. 7. 5 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 6.I (d) A municipality that does not approve a project under section 462.358, subdivision 6.2 2a, must provide the applicant with written justification and reasous for the disapproval 6.3 within seven days of the disapproval. Where iusufficient infrastructure is the reason for 6.4 disapproval, a municipality must include credentialed evidence ill the written justification. 6.s Subd. 6. State Building Code; State Fire Code. This section is subject to the 6.6 requirements under the State Building Code under chapter 326B and the State Fire Code 6.7 under chapter 299F. 6.8 Sec. 8. [462.3575) MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES AND ASSOCIATED 6.9 REQUIREMENTS. 6.10 Subdivision 1. Definitions. (a) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have 6.11 the meanings given 6.12 (b) "Accessory dwelling unit" meaus a smaller, independent residential dwelling unit 6.13 located on the same lot as a dwelliug. An accessory dwelling unit may be attached or detached 6.14 from the existing dwelling. Accessory dwelling unit does not include sacred communities 6.Is and micro-unit dwellings under section 327.30 and temporruy family health care dwellings 6.16 under section 462.3593. 6.17 ( c) "Affordable housing" means a residential dwelling unit affordable to households at 6.18 or below 115 percent of the area median household income, for an owner-occupied unit, or 6.19 at or below 60 percent of the area median household income, for a unit that is leased. The 6.20 deed or declaration for the unit must also contain a restrictive covenant requiring the property 6.21 to remain affordable housing for at least ten years if the unit is owner-occupied, or at least 6.22 30 years if the unit is leased. 6.23 (d) "All-electric and efficient home" means a residential dwelling unit that utilizes 6.24 electricity or a combination of electricity and thermal energy as its sole source of energy 6.2s for heating, hot water heating, cooling, and appliances and meets the most current minimum 6.26 efficiency standards of a zero energy ready home under the Zero Energy Ready Home 6.27 Program administered by United States Department of Energy. 6.28 ( e) "Cottage housing" means residential dwelling units on a lot with a common open 6.29 space that either: 6.30 (1)is owned ill common; or 6.31 (2) has units owned as condominium units with property owned in common and a 6.32 minimum of 20 percent of the lot size as open space. Sec. 8. 6 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 l st Engrossment 1.1 (f)"Courtyard apartment" means a building with up to four attached residential dwelling1.2 units arranged on two or three sides of a yard or garden. 7.3 (g)"Duplex" means a two-family home, classified as an IRC-2 in the State Building 7.4 Code and not meeting the definition of townhouse. 7.5 (h)"Fiveplex" means a building containing five residential dwelling units intended for 7.6 nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. 7.7 (i)"Fourplex" means a building containing four residential dwelling units intended for 7.8 nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. 7.9 G) "Lot" means any contiguous pan::el of land in the possession of, owned by, or recorded1.10 as the property of the same claimant or person 1.11 (k)"Major transit stop" means a stop or station for a guideway or busway, as the terms1.12 are defined in section 473.4485, subdivision 1. 7.13 (1) "Middle housing" means buildings that are single-family detached homes and 7.14 residential properties that are compatible in scale, form, and character with single-family 7.15 detached homes. Middle housing includes all of the following housing types: 7.16 (1) duplexes; 7.17 (2) triplexes; 7.18 (3) fourplexes; 7.19 (4) fiveplexes;1.20 (5)sixplexes;1.21 (6) townhouses;1.22 (7) stacked flats; 7.23 (8) courtyard apartments; 7.24 (9) cottage housing;1.25 (10)single-family detached homes; and 1.26 (11)twin homes. 1.21 (m)"Municipality" means a home rule charter city, statutory city, or town. 1.2s (n)"Residential dwelling ml.it" or "unit" means a residential dwelling unit for the use of 7.29 a single owner or tenant and applies to any type of residential structure unless otherwise 7.30 specified. Sec. 8. 7 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 8.1 (o)"Single-family detached home" means any building that contains one residential 8.2 dwelling unit used, intended, or designed to be built, used, rented, leased, let, or hired out 8.3 to be occupied, or occupied for living purposes that is not attached to another structure. s.4 (p)"Sixplex" means a building containing six residential dwelling units intended for 8.5 nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. 8.6 (q) "Stacked flat" means a nontransient residential building of no more than three stories 8.7 on a lot zoned for residential development in which each floor is a residential dwelling unit. s.s (r)"Townhouse" means a single-family residential dwelling unit constmcted in a group 8.9 of three or more attached units in which each unit extends from the foundation to the roof 8.1 o and with open space on at least two sides. Each single-family residential dwelling unit shall s.11 be considered a separate building. Separate building service utilities shall be provided to s.12 each single-family residential dwelling unit when required by the State Building Code. 8.13 (s)"Triplex" means a building containing three residential dwelling units intended for 8.14 nontransient occupancy and not meeting the definition of townhouse. 8.15 Subd. 2. Middle housing types permitted. A municipality must authorize at least six 8.16 types of middle housing other than single-family detached homes to be built on residential s.11 lots in single-family zones in the municipality to achieve the density requirements in this s.18 section. 8.19 Subd. 3. Cities of the first class; required residential densities. (a) Subject to section s.20 462.358, subdivision 2a, a city of the first class must permit the development of at least four s.21 residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is more than one-half mile from a major s.22 transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: 8.23 (1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city must permit the 8.24 development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; s.2s (2)if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city must permit the development 8.26 of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; or s.21 (3)if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are 8.28 also affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least eight residential 8.29 dwelling units on the lot. 8.30 (b) Subject to section 472.358, subdivision 2a, a city of the first class must permit the 8.31 development of at least six residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is one-half 8.32 mile or less from a major transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: Sec. 8. 8 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 9.1 ( 1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city must pennit the 9.2 development of at least eight residential dwelling units on the lot; 9.3 (2) if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city must permit the development 9.4 of at least eight residential dwelling units on the lot; or 9.s (3) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are 9.6 also affordable housing, the city must permit the development of at least ten residential 9.7 dwelling units on the lot. 9.8 ( c)The requirements of this subdivision apply regardless of the types of middle housing 9.9 authorized by the city under subdivision 2. 9.10 (d) A municipality that does not approve a project under section 462.358, subdivision 9.11 2a, must provide the applicant with written justification and reasons for the disapproval 9.12 within seven days of the disapproval. Where insufficient infrastructure is the reason for 9.13 disapproval, a municipality must include credentialed evidence in the written justification. 9.14 Subd. 4. Other cities and towns; required residential densities. (a) Subject to section 9.15 462.358, subdivision 2a, a city of the second, third, or fourth class or town must pennit the 9.16 development of at least two residential dwelling units on any residential lot that is more 9.17 than one-half mile from a major transit stop, unless one of the following criteria are met: 9.18 (1)if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city or town must permit 9.19 the development of at least three residential dwelling units on the lot; 9.20 (2)if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city or town must pennit the 9.21 development of at least three residential dwelling units on the lot; or 9.22 (3) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are 9.23 also affordable housing, the city or town must pennit the development of at least four 9.24 residential dwelling units on the lot. 9.25 (b)Subject to section 462.358, subdivision 2a, a city of the second, third, or fourth class 9.26 or town must pennit the development of at least four residential dwelling units on any 9.27 residential lot that is one-half mile or less from a major transit stop, unless one of the 9.28 following criteria are met: 9.29 ( 1) if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes, the city or town must pennit 9.30 the development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; 9.31 (2)if at least two of the units are affordable housing, the city or town must pennit the 9.32 development of at least six residential dwelling units on the lot; or Sec. 8. 9 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 10.1 (3)if all of the units are all-electric and efficient homes and at least two of the units are 10.2 also affordable housing, the city or town must permit the development of at least eight 10.3 residential dwelling units on the lot. 10.4 ( c) The requirements of this subdivision apply regardless of the types of middle housing 10.s authorized by the city or town under subdivision 2. 10.6 (d)A municipality that does not approve a project under section 462.358, subdivision 10.1 2a, must provide the applicant with written justification and reasons for the disapproval 10.s within seven days of the disapproval. Where insufficient infrastructure is the reason for 1 o.9 disapproval, a municipality must include from a public works director or a similarly qualified 10.10 person evidence in the written justification. 10.11 Subd. 5. Municipal standards. (a) Municipal official controls must not impose standards 10.12 that create practical difficulties in the placement or building of residential units on any lot. 10.13 (b)Any standards, performance conditions, or requirements imposed by a municipality 10.14 for residential dwelling units permitted under this section must allow for all missing middle 10.1s types authorized under subdivision 2 to be built. 10.16 (c)Any limits or restrictions on missing middle development must directly relate to 10.11 protecting public health, safety, and general welfare. 10.1s Subd. 6. Accessory dwelling units authorized. (a) An accessory dwelling unit may be 10.19 built on any residential lot in a municipality, regardless of total lot size, street frontage, 10.20 connectivity between the accessory dwelling unit and the primary dwelling on the lot, and 10.21 whether the lot is occupied by the property owner. 10.22 (b) A municipality may permit more than one accessory dwelling unit to be built on a 10.23 residential lot. 10.24 Subd. 7. Minimum lot size permitted. (a) A municipality may, by ordinance, require 10.2s a minimum lot size in accordance with this subdivision to which the density requirements 10.26 of subdivisions 3 and 4 apply. 10.21 (b) A minimun1 lot size for a city of the first class must not be greater than: 10.2s (1)2,500 square feet for a single-family detached home, duplex, triplex, fowplex, 10.29 fiveplex, sixplex, stacked flat, and courtyard apartment; or 10.30 (2)1,200 square feet for a townhome and cottage housing. 1 o.31 ( c) A 1ninimum lot size for a city of the second, third, or fourtll class or a town must not 10.32 be greater than: Sec. 8. 10 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 11.1 (1)4,000 square feet for a single-family detached home, duplex, triplex, fourplex, 11.2 fiveplex, sixplex, stacked flat, and courtyard apartment; or 11.3 (2)1,200 square feet for a townhome and cottage housing. 11.4 Subd. 8. Parking requirements limited. (a) A municipality may not require an off-street 1 u parking space for a residential dwelling unit that is one-half mile or less from a major transit 11.6 stop. A municipality may require that disability parking spaces be provided in compliance 11.1 with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 11.s (b)A municipality may not require more than one off-street parldng space per residential 11.9 dwelling unit that is over one-half mile from a major transit stop, except that additional 11.10 disability parking spaces may be required to meet the requirements of the Americans with 11.11 Disabilities Act. 11.12 Subd. 9. Affordable housing; replacement required. For cities of the first class, 11.13 affordable housing on a residential lot may only be demolished or remodeled for the 11.14 construction of middle housing if the middle housing development will create at least as 11.1 s many affordable housing units as exist in the structure to be demolished or remodeled. This 11.16 subdivision does not apply to housing in a blighted area defined under section 469.002, 11.11 subdivision 11. 11.1s Subd. 10. Alternative density plans. A municipality that adopts zoning controls prior 11.19 to June 30, 2025, that would allow for residential construction leading to an increase in 11.20 density of more than 100 percent in single family zones as permitted uses is not subject to 11.21 the requirements in this section. 11.22 Subd. 11. Exception. This section does not apply to any parcel located in a floodplain. 11.23 Subd. 12. State Building Code; State Fire Code. This section is subject to the 11.24 requirements under the State Building Code under chapter 326B and the State Fire Code 11.2s under chapter 299F. 11.26 Sec. 9. [462,3576) LIMITATION ON AESTHETIC MANDATES FOR CITIES. 11.21 A municipality must not condition approval of a residential building permit, residential 11.2s subdivision development, or residential planned unit development on the use of one or more 11.29 of the following, unless to conform with state and local historic district requirements, the 11.30 State Building Code in chapter 326B, and the State Fire Code in chapter 299F: 11.31 (1)specific materials for aesthetic reasons; Sec. 9. 11 SF1370 REVISOR JSK S1370-1 1st Engrossment 12.1 (2)residential building or accessory structure to a residential building minimum square 12.2 footage or floor area ratios; 12.3 (3) design elements for aesthetic reasons including, but not limited to, decks, balconies, 12.4 porches, gables, roof pitch, and elevation design standards; 12.s (4)garage square footage; or 12.6 (5)common space, pools, or any common property necessitating a homeowner's 12.1 association. 12.s Sec. 10. [462.3577) MUNICIPALITIES; HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS. 12.9 ( a) A municipality must not condition approval ofa residential building permit, residential 12.10 subdivision development, or residential planned unit development on the creation of a 12.11 homeowners association or on the inclusion of any terms in a homeowners association 12.12 by laws, articles of incorporation, or any other governing document that is not required under 12.13 state law. 12.14 (b)A municipality must not require that a residential property be part of a homeowners 12.1s association or provide an incentive for such membership. The municipality must also not 12.16 require or incentivize a homeowners association to adopt terms or conditions not required 12.11 under state law. 12.1s Sec. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. 12.19 This act is effective July 1, 2025. Sec. 11. 12 City of Corcoran 2024 City Council Schedule Agenda Item: 14. Below is a tentative schedule for City Council meetings. The items and schedule are subject to change. March 28, 2024 • Logo and City Branding Update • Planning Project Update • NW Trails Resolution of Support DNR Trails Funding • Woodland Hills CPA, RZ, PP and Variance (City file 23-033) • Khacholing Center CHOL IUP (City file 23-029) • Revise Commerical/Industrial Zonng Districts-3 Phases (City file 23-023) • Tavera 6th FP and FPUD (city file 23-032) (Kendra) • Tavera 6th Easement Vacation (city file 23—032) (Kendra) tentative • Tavera 4th Easement Vacation (city file 24-004) tentative • THC Moritorium and Regulations Follow Up • Pioneer Trail FP and FPUD (City file 23-030) • Tavera 6th FP and FPUD (City file 23-032) • Award Cropland Bids if applicable • Conference Room Video/Audio Cameras • Job Description Update – Assistant City Engineer • Job Description – Utility Superintendent • Organics Recycling Update • Review 4M Fund Investments – Corey Boyer from 4M will present • ARPA Discussion • Finance Policy – spending thresholds • Building Services Consultant • Hennepin County Signal Agreement – CR 116 & Hackamore Road • City Assessor Contract • 610 Extention • Comparable Cities Discussion April 11, 2024 • LPR Camera Discussion • Firearms Ordinance Review April 17, 2024 (Rescheduled from April 15, 2024) • Rockford School Board Meeting April 25, 2024 • Proclamation – National Public Service Week • State Public Safety Funds Plan • K-9 Program Discussion Page 2 of 3 • Planning project update • Chastek Farms RZ, PP, PUD (City File 23-034) • Scharber Garage CUP (City File 24-005) - tentative • Fairway Shores Villas – CPA, RZ, PP, PUD (City File 24-006) - tentative • Red Barn Pet Retreat VAR and FP (City File 24-007) - tentative • Pioneer Trail FP and FPUD (city file 23-030) – Incomplete (tentative) • Park Signs May 9, 2024 • Proclamation – National Police Week May 23, 2024 (Joint Work Session - Tentative) • Joint Work Session with Planning Commision (MET Council Representative) o Comp Plan Review May 23, 2024 • Proclamation – National Public Works Week June 13, 2024 • RFP – History and Discussion of RFP Schedule • Construction Hours Sign Update* June 27, 2024 • July 11, 2024 • July 25, 2024 August 8, 2024 August 22, 2024 September 10, 2024 • Annual Charter Commission Meeting September 12, 2024 September 26, 2024 • Communications Assistant – Transition to FT November 14, 2024 • Tort Liability Coverage Waiver • Certification of General Election 2024 Page 3 of 3 November 25, 2024 December 16, 2024 • MS4 Permit Review dates with Jay on Joint Commisison Meetings -Parks and Trails