HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-01-23 City Council Agenda PacketCorcoran City Council Agenda
January 23, 2025 7:00 pm
a.NAL
1.Call to Order / Roll Call
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Agenda Approval
4.Presentations
5.Open Forum – Public Comment Opportunity
6.Consent Agenda
a.Approval of City Council Minutes
b.Financial Claims
c.ADDED Amendment to Resolution 2025-01 Personnel
Committee Appointments
d.Resolution 2025-07 Appointments of Vacant Positions
e.Outsourcing Newsletter Printing
f.Rules of Decorum
g.Resolution 2025-09 Utility Billing Operations
h.Bechtold Farms Letter of Credit Request
i.Resolution 2025-08 Acting Mayor
j.Address Change Update
k.REVISED Compensation and Classification Study
7.Planning
a.A & A Landscape Concept
b.Lother Subdivision Concept
8.Unfinished Business
a.Downtown Water and Sewer
b.Phil’s Auto Code Compliance
9.New Business
10.Council Reports
11.Closed Session
a.REMOVED Potential Property Aquisition
12.2025 City Council Schedule
13.Adjournment
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: 864 5093 6362
Video Link and Instructions:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86450936362 visit
http://www.zoom.us and enter
Meeting ID: 864 5093 6362
*Please note in-person comments will be taken
at the scheduled meeting where noted.
Comments received via email to Assistant City
Administrator Williams at
nwilliams@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
*
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6a.
Council Meeting
January 23, 2025
Prepared By
Deb Johnson
Topic
January 9, 2025 City Council Meeting
Minutes and January 13, 2025 Council
Strategic Planning Session Minutes
Action Required
Approve Council Meeting Minutes and
Strategic Planning Session Minutes
Summary
Council Action
Approve January 9, 2025 City Council Meeting Minutes and January 13, 2024 City
Council Strategic Planning Session Minutes.
Attachments
6a.1 January 9, 2025 City Council Meeting Minutes
6a.2 January 13, 2025 City Council Strategic Planning Session Minutes
City of Corcoran
City Council Minutes
January 9, 2025, 7pm
1
The Corcoran City Council met on January 9, 2025, 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, Councilors Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp were present.
City Administrator Tobin, Assistant City Administrator Williams, Community Development Director
Davis McKeown, Public Works Director Mattson, and Director of Public Safety Gottschalk were
present.
INAL
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 stated there were several changes to the agenda – Items 6c and 7a were
revised, 6r was removed and 6u was added.
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve the agenda as amended.
Voting Aye: McKee, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries: 4:0)
4.Presentations
a.Oath of Office – Tom McKee, Mayor
b.Oath of Office – Dean Verenkamp, Councilmember
c.Oath of Office – Michelle Friedrich, Councilmember
Assistant City Administrator Williams performed Oaths of Office for Mayor McKee, Councilor
Vehrenkamp and Councilor Friedrich. Councilmember Friedrich joined the Council at the Dias.
d. Longevity Award – Matt Gottschalk, Director of Public Safety
Matt Gottschalk was recognized for his 10 years of service to the City of Corcoran.
e. Compensation and Classification Study Presentation
A representative from Abdo gave a presentation on the Compensation and Classification Study for
the City of Corcoran and addressed questions from the Council.
5.Open Forum - Public Comment Opportunity
Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person during Open Forum for items not included
on the agenda. City Administrator Tobin explained the instructions to participate in the public
comment opportunity.
•Karen Lymongood, 8105 County Road 116, addressed the Council with concerns with
development at Rush Creek across County Road 116 and issues with the developers
concerning the culvert.
•David Foy, 8115 County Road 116, addressed the Council with concerns with the Rush
Creek development and the ditch/channel quality affecting his property. He also addressed
the Council about the City’s Sign Ordinance.
MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Vehrenkamp to extend Mr. Foy’s alotted time for comment
an additional five minutes after exceeding the time limit.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries 5:0)
6.Consent Agenda
a.City Council Meeting Minutes Approval
Action – Approved December 12, 2024 City Council Minutes.
Agenda Item 6a.1.
City of Corcoran
City Council Minutes
January 9, 2025, 7pm
2
b.Resolution 2025-01 Annual Appointments
Action – Adopted Resolution 2025-01 Annual Appointments.
c.REVISED Financial Claims
Action – Approved Financial Claims for January 9, 2025
d.Resolution 2024-02 Holiday Toy & Food Drive
Action – Adopted Resoluton 2024 Recognizing the Holiday Toy and Food Drive Donations.
e.2025 Community Events Schedule
Action – Approved the proposed event dates and proposed funding presented by staff.
f.Park Enhancement Program
Action – Approved Park Enhancement Program, following minor attorney edits.
g.NW Trails and Grant-In-Aid Program 2025 Update
No action necessary. Update only.
h.Planning Commission Annual Report & 2025 Priorities
No action necessary. Information Only
i.Squad Car Insurance Replacement
Action – Authorized staff to replace the totaled sqad car and update the CIP with newer vehicle
information.
j.Resolution 2025-03 Shop with a Cop Program
Action – Accepted the donations and adopted Resolution 2025-03 Recognizing the Corcoran Police
Department Shop With a Cop Program.
k.Parks and Trails Commission Annual Report and 2025 Priorities
No action necessary – Information only.
l.Resolution 2025-05 Supporting Mark Lanterman for Minnesota Cybersecurity Task Force
Action – Adopted Resolution 2025-05 Supporting Mark Lanterman for the Minnesota Cybersecurity
Task Force.
m.NE Corcoran Trunk Infrastructure Pay Request 5
Action – Approved Pay Request 5 to S.R. Weidema in the amount of $290,548.66.
n.Stieg Road Improvements Change Order 2
Action – Approved Change Order 2.
o.Stieg Road Improvements Pay Request 6
Action – Approved Pay Request 6 to Fehn Companies, Inc in the amount of $77,425.17.
p.Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Change Order 7
Action – Approved Change Order 7.
q.Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Pay Request 20
Action – Approved Pay Request 20 to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $955,840.00 for
the work completed and materials stored to date.
r.REMOVED 2024 Annual Report
s.Compensation and Classification Study
Action – Reviewed report in preparation for future Council Action at the January 23, 2025 City Council
Meeting.
t.Part-time Accounts Payable Clerk
Action – Approved the Part-time Accounts Payable Clerk job description and authorized staff to begin
the hiring process to fill the position.
u.Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Change Order 8
Action – Approved Change Order 8.
City of Corcoran
City Council Minutes
January 9, 2025, 7pm
3
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve consent agenda items 6a-6c, 6g-
6i, 6k, 6m-6s and 6u.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries: 5:0)
MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Nichols to approve consent agenda item 6d.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carries 5:0)
MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Friedrich to approve consent agenda item 6e.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carries 5:0)
MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Nichols to approve consent agenda item 6f.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries 5:0)
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve consent agenda item 6j.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries 5:0)
MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve consent agenda item 6l.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp. Lanterman abstained from the vote.
(Motion carries 4:0:1)
MOTION: made by Friedrich, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve consent agenda item 6t.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries 5:0)
7.Planning
a.REVISED Public Hearing – Rush Creek Reserve Wetland Bank Easement Vacation
Mayor McKee opened the Public Hearing.
MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Friedrich to table the Public Hearing to the February 13, 2025
Council Meeting.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries 5:0)
8.Unfinished Business
a.Cannabis Ordinance
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Friedrich to adopt Ordinance 2025-541 Amending Chapter
119 and Title X of the City Code as it relates to Cannabis Businesses and Resolution 2025-04 with
Findings of Fact for Ordinance 2025-541.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carries 5:0)
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp to adopt Summary Ordinance 2025-542 for
Publication.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carries 5:0)
9.New Business
a.Choose Acting Mayor
MOTION: McKee moved, Laterman seconded to appoint Councilor Nichols to Acting Mayor for
calendar year 2025 and direct staff to bring back a Resolution for adoption at the January 23, 2025
Council Meeting.
Voting Aye: Mckee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carries 5:0)
City of Corcoran
City Council Minutes
January 9, 2025, 7pm
4
b. Rules of Decorum
MOTION: Nichols moved, Vehrenkamp seconded to amend the Rules of Decorum to remove
language allowing online comments and adding language to include a courtesy and respect
requirement for speakers and public attendees in the general rules section.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols and Vehrenkamp Voting Nay: Lanterman
(Motion carried 4:1)
MOTION: McKee moved, Nichols seconded to approve the Rules of Decorum as amended.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols and Vehrenkamp Voting Nay: Lanterman
(Motion carried 4:1)
10.Council Reports
Council discussed the need for filling the positions on the Watershed Commission and Parks and
Trails Commission.
11.City Council Schedule
Reminder of the Strategic Planning Session on Monday, January 13, 2025 in the Council Chambers.
12.Adjournment
MOTION: made by Friedrich, seconded by Nichols to adjourn.
Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols and Vehrenkamp.
(Motion carries 5:0)
Mayor McKee adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. January 9, 2025
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________________
Debra Johnson – City Clerk
City of Corcoran
City Council Strategic Planning Session Minutes
January 13, 2025
1
The Corcoran City Council met on January 13, 2025, in Corcoran, Minnesota.
Mayor McKee, Councilors Friedrich, Lanterman, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp were present.
Also present were City Administrator Tobin, Assistant City Administrator Williams, Community
Development Director Davis McKeown, Public Works Director Mattson, and Director of Public Safety
Gottschalk.
OIGINAL
1.City Council Goal Setting Work Session
The session began with a review of the accomplishments of the city in 2024. Council and staff
discussed the City’s core strategies by using the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities,
Threats) Analysis to help identify the city’s competencies and areas that require improvement. This
tool will be used to help set goals and help the Council and staff make informed decisions that drive
growth and improve performance. Council and staff discussed on several focus topics including
enhancing Corcoran’s sense of place and identity, providing diverse community amenities and
recreational opportunities, maintaining excellence in safety and security for the community, ensuring
high quality market-driven growth and providing high quality innovative municipal services.
2.Adjournment
The Strategic Planning Session was adjourned at 8:32 pm on Monday, January 13,
2025.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________________
Debra Johnson – City Clerk
Agenda Item 6a.2.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6b
Council Meeting
January 23, 2025
Prepared By
Reed Kottke
Topic
Financial Claims to January 23, 2025
Action Required
Review and Approval
Summary
Claims require Council review and approval, those permitted per policy have
been completed, while others are pending for Council approval.
Financial/Budget
Claims are within budget or are identified on a case-by-case basis to
confirm funding source and seek Council approvals as necessary.
Options
1. Approve claims as presented.
2. Amend and approve claims.
Recommendation
Approve claims as presented.
Council Action
Consider approving claims as presented.
Attachments
1.Claims approved and processed per policy
2. Claims pending Council approval
Check Range: 36399-36437
Financial Claims 01/16/2025
128,048.73$
-$
128,048.73$
Check Register
(See register for financial claims)
Automatic Deduction (EFT)
Total Expenditures For Approval
Agenda Item: 6b 1
Council Meeting: 01/23/2025 CLAIMS APPROVED AND PROCESSED PER POLICY
Prepared By: Reed Kottke, Accountant
Check Range: 36438-36445
Financial Claims 01/23/2025
934,996.88$
192,636.94$
1,127,633.82$
Date Vendor Amount Description
1/7/2025 MEDSURETY 30.00$ January 2025 COBRA administration
1/8/2025 REVTRAK 21.21$ January 2025 credit card processing fees
1/8/2025 XCEL ENERGY 363.88$ December 2024 bellwether street lights
1/8/2025 US BANK 7,257.36$ December 2024 managing account statement reconciliation
1/9/2025 ADP NET PAY 103,193.13$ PP1 Net wages payable
1/9/2025 ADP TAX WITHHOLDING 35,910.09$ PP1 State/federal tax withholding
1/9/2025 INVOICE CLOUD 1,807.51$ December 2024 credit card processing fees
1/13/2025 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION OF MN 30,013.16$ PP1 Biweekly employee pension contributions
1/13/2025 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 3,024.77$ PP1 Biweekly deferred compensation 457/roth contributions
1/13/2025 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 3,720.66$ PP1 Biweekly HCSP contributions
1/13/2025 OPTUM FINANCIAL 5,812.19$ PP1 Biweekly HSA contributions
1/15/2025 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 1,482.98$ January 2025 life insurance premiums
Total 192,636.94$
Automatic Deduction / Electronic Fund Transfer / Other Disbursement
Check Register
(See register for detail)
Automatic Deduction / Electronic Funds Transfer
Total Expenditures For Approval
Agenda Item: 6b 2
Council Meeting: 01/23/2025 CLAIMS PENDING COUNCIL APPROVAL
Prepared By: Reed Kottke, Accountant
BANK CODE: GEN CHECK DATE: 01/16/2025 INVOICE PAY DATE FROM 01/16/2025 TO 01/16/2025
01/16/2025 02:30 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
Page: 1/1CHECK PROOF FOR CITY OF CORCORAN
# InvoicesTotal AmountCredit TotalInvoice TotalVendor NameVendor CodeCheck #BankCheck Date
1111.14 0.00 111.14 ADAMS PEST CONTROL, INC.98736399GEN01/16/2025
151.95 0.00 51.95 ALTA207136400GEN01/16/2025
2215.96 0.00 215.96 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES227036401GEN01/16/2025
2241.93 0.00 241.93 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC4236402GEN01/16/2025
122,390.20 0.00 2,390.20 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC4236403GEN01/16/2025
6##425.73 22.65 448.38 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER219536404GEN01/16/2025
186.00 0.00 86.00 CUSTOM DOOR SALES INC149036405GEN01/16/2025
115.25 0.00 15.25 DVS82136406GEN01/16/2025
11,029.82 0.00 1,029.82 EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, INC.214136407GEN01/16/2025
13,018.00 0.00 3,018.00 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518190436408GEN01/16/2025
14,827.77 0.00 4,827.77 FIRE HOSE SUPPLY318636409GEN01/16/2025
1996.15 0.00 996.15 HENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTIONS37636410GEN01/16/2025
112,323.01 0.00 12,323.01 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER9936411GEN01/16/2025
15,747.02 0.00 5,747.02 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER9936412GEN01/16/2025
12,815.68 0.00 2,815.68 J&J ATHLETICS203736413GEN01/16/2025
132.24 0.00 32.24 JOSH LAWSONMISC36414GEN01/16/2025
1350.00 0.00 350.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES19136415GEN01/16/2025
1687.40 0.00 687.40 LUBE-TECH & PARTNERS, LLC235036416GEN01/16/2025
32,265.60 0.00 2,265.60 MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP218936417GEN01/16/2025
1523.97 0.00 523.97 CITY OF MEDINA5936418GEN01/16/2025
16,420.00 0.00 6,420.00 MINNESOTA UI FUND252236419GEN01/16/2025
11,223.05 0.00 1,223.05 MN HOIST INSPECTION INC301636420GEN01/16/2025
12,100.00 0.00 2,100.00 NAGELL APPRAISAL & CONSULTING145536421GEN01/16/2025
2530.00 0.00 530.00 NORDIC AUTO GLASS318836422GEN01/16/2025
172,000.00 0.00 72,000.00 NORTH HENNEPIN PIONEER SOCIETY316536423GEN01/16/2025
1299.98 0.00 299.98 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT12836424GEN01/16/2025
11,425.00 0.00 1,425.00 NOVA FIRE PROTECTION INC283136425GEN01/16/2025
11,050.00 0.00 1,050.00 OFFICE ENVIRONMENT BROKERS INC318736426GEN01/16/2025
183.40 0.00 83.40 POWER PLAN OIB29236427GEN01/16/2025
1169.50 0.00 169.50 POWER PLAN OIB29236428GEN01/16/2025
11,124.76 0.00 1,124.76 REPUBLIC SERVICES13836429GEN01/16/2025
11,124.76 0.00 1,124.76 REPUBLIC SERVICES13836430GEN01/16/2025
122.99 0.00 22.99 STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT14836431GEN01/16/2025
1125.00 0.00 125.00 SUSA318536432GEN01/16/2025
1457.92 0.00 457.92 TEAMSTER LOCAL 320158836433GEN01/16/2025
1321.60 0.00 321.60 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO174236434GEN01/16/2025
2518.45 0.00 518.45 TIDE CLEANERS256836435GEN01/16/2025
1860.00 0.00 860.00 ULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC266336436GEN01/16/2025
137.50 0.00 37.50 ZIEGLER INC22336437GEN01/16/2025
## Denotes that check has vendor credit applied.
Num Stubs: 0Num Checks: 39 Num Invoices: 61 Total Amount: 128,048.73
BANK CODE: GEN CHECK DATE: 01/23/2025 INVOICE PAY DATE FROM 01/23/2025 TO 01/23/2025
01/16/2025 03:11 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
Page: 1/1CHECK PROOF FOR CITY OF CORCORAN
# InvoicesTotal AmountCredit TotalInvoice TotalVendor NameVendor CodeCheck #BankCheck Date
177,425.17 0.00 77,425.17 FEHN COMPANIES186836438GEN01/23/2025
173,330.00 0.00 73,330.00 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518190436439GEN01/23/2025
120,491.14 0.00 20,491.14 CITY OF HANOVER5736440GEN01/23/2025
1154,846.00 0.00 154,846.00 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TRST159436441GEN01/23/2025
1169,026.20 0.00 169,026.20 PARK PLACE STORAGEMISC36442GEN01/23/2025
190,714.70 0.00 90,714.70 CITY OF ROGERS22936443GEN01/23/2025
1290,548.66 0.00 290,548.66 SR WEIDEMA193936444GEN01/23/2025
158,615.01 0.00 58,615.01 WEST SUBURBAN FIRE DISTRICT11336445GEN01/23/2025
Num Stubs: 0Num Checks: 8 Num Invoices: 8 Total Amount: 934,996.88
CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL
INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 1/5Page: 01/16/2025 03:57 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
EXP CHECK RUN DATES 01/10/2025 - 01/23/2025
JOURNALIZED
PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK
Check #AmountChk DateInvoiceInvoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number
Check 36399
36399111.1401/16/254021493PEST CONTROL MAINTENANCEADAMS PEST CONTROL, INC.11/27/24100-41900-50401
111.14Total For Check 36399
Check 36400
3640051.9501/16/2520921ANNUAL AWARDSALTA12/02/24100-41900-50210
51.95Total For Check 36400
Check 36401
36401135.7801/16/2520250110FINANCE PRINTER INK CARTRIDGE QTY 2AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/10/25100-41500-50207
3640180.1801/16/2511PX-YHD1-NJCKPENS MAGNETS SPICE RACK MONITOR STANDAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/09/25100-43100-50200
215.96Total For Check 36401
Check 36402
3640288.4301/16/25093P22356SLACK ADJUSTER KITBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/09/24100-43100-50220
36402153.5001/16/25950S1336MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
241.93Total For Check 36402
Check 36403
3640377.5201/16/25093P25098TPMS KIT SQUAD 570BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC12/04/24100-42100-50220
36403667.6801/16/25093P25813JUMBO GREEN TANK BRUSH GREEN W/ BUMPERBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC12/24/24100-43100-50210
36403153.5001/16/25950S1339MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1338MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1337MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1335MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1334MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1333MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1332MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1331MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403153.5001/16/25950S1330MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTIONBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
36403263.5001/16/25950S1327MINNESOTA STATE DOT INSPECTION AND TECH DRIVE TIMEBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC10/10/24100-43100-50220
2,390.20Total For Check 36403
Check 36404
36404127.0801/16/25100X08332301ADMIN DRINKING WATER DECEMBER 2024CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER12/31/24100-41900-50210
3640459.0001/16/25100X08332301-2ADMIN DRINKING WATER JANUARY 2025CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER12/31/24100-41900-50210
3640486.0001/16/25100X08254901POLICE DRINKING WATER OCTOBER 2024CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER12/31/24100-42100-50210
3640490.3001/16/25100X08288503POLICE DRINKING WATER NOVEMBER 2024CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER12/31/24100-42100-50210
3640486.0001/16/25100X08356300POLICE DRINKING WATER JANUARY 2025CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER01/20/25100-42100-50210
36404(22.65)01/16/2520250120POLICE DRINKING WATER CREDITCULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER01/20/25100-42100-50210
425.73Total For Check 36404
Check 36405
3640586.0001/16/250318865-IN2X35 LW/RW CONEDCUSTOM DOOR SALES INC12/19/24100-42100-50223
86.00Total For Check 36405
Check 36406
3640615.2501/16/2500-139283852016 FORD EXPLORER NDL815 RENEWALDVS12/31/24100-43100-50403
15.25Total For Check 36406
Check 36407
364071,029.8201/16/2598293BACKGROUND CHECKSEMPLOYEE RELATIONS, INC.11/30/24100-41900-50300
1,029.82Total For Check 36407
Check 36408
364083,018.0001/16/250525463NEPTUNE 360 AMR QTY 1200FERGUSON WATERWORKS #251812/31/24601-49400-50210
CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL
INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 2/5Page: 01/16/2025 03:57 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
EXP CHECK RUN DATES 01/10/2025 - 01/23/2025
JOURNALIZED
PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK
Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number
Check 36408
3,018.00 Total For Check 36408
Check 36409
364094,827.77 01/16/2524003HOSE SUPPLIES / ACCESSORIESFIRE HOSE SUPPLY12/31/24100-45200-50210
4,827.77 Total For Check 36409
Check 36410
36410996.15 01/16/2524CORELECTION BALLOTS & MAINTENANCEHENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTIONS12/05/24100-41410-50210
996.15 Total For Check 36410
Check 36411
3641112,323.01 01/16/2552799-20241231TAX ID 52799 CROP LAND TAXESHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER12/31/24100-41900-50430
12,323.01 Total For Check 36411
Check 36412
364125,747.02 01/16/2552800-20241231TAX ID 52800 CROP LAND TAXESHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER12/31/24100-41900-50430
5,747.02 Total For Check 36412
Check 36413
364132,815.68 01/16/2515720PUBLIC WORKS UNIFORMS FINAL 2024J&J ATHLETICS12/31/24100-43100-50417
2,815.68 Total For Check 36413
Check 36414
3641432.24 01/16/2520250103AMEX FUEL REIMBURSEMENT 20240927JOSH LAWSON01/03/25100-42100-50212
32.24 Total For Check 36414
Check 36415
36415350.00 01/16/25417019ADVANCED PROGRAM - PLYMOUTH COHORTLEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES11/19/24100-41110-50207
350.00 Total For Check 36415
Check 36416
36416148.40 01/16/253669113MOBIL 6/1 QT CASE, FILTER, AND FULL SYNTEHETIC 5W-20 GA BOXLUBE-TECH & PARTNERS, LLC11/25/24100-42100-50220
36416539.00 01/16/253669113MOBIL 6/1 QT CASE, FILTER, AND FULL SYNTEHETIC 5W-20 GA BOXLUBE-TECH & PARTNERS, LLC11/25/24100-43100-50212
687.40 Total For Check 36416
Check 36417
36417225.00 01/16/2520241130LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES 20241130MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP12/31/24100-41600-50300
364171,782.60 01/16/2520241231LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES 20241231MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP12/31/24100-41600-50300
36417258.00 01/16/2520240930LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES 20240930MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP12/31/24100-41600-50300
2,265.60 Total For Check 36417
Check 36418
36418523.97 01/16/2500008360SHARED SIGNAL LIGHTING FEBRUARY - AUGUST 2024CITY OF MEDINA12/31/24100-43100-50381
523.97 Total For Check 36418
Check 36419
364196,420.00 01/16/252024Q42024 4TH QUARTER UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITSMINNESOTA UI FUND12/31/24100-41500-50140
6,420.00 Total For Check 36419
Check 36420
364201,223.05 01/16/252729ANNUAL INSPECTION CRANE AUTOMOTIVE LIFTSMN HOIST INSPECTION INC12/31/24100-43100-50223
1,223.05 Total For Check 36420
Check 36421
364212,100.00 01/16/253303420130 LARKIN ROADNAGELL APPRAISAL & CONSULTING01/01/25101-41900-50300
CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL
INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 3/5Page: 01/16/2025 03:57 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
EXP CHECK RUN DATES 01/10/2025 - 01/23/2025
JOURNALIZED
PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK
Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number
Check 36421
2,100.00 Total For Check 36421
Check 36422
3642260.00 01/16/2523279LABOR FOR CHIP REPAIRNORDIC AUTO GLASS12/31/24100-42100-50403
36422470.00 01/16/2523276LABOR FOR WINDSHIELDNORDIC AUTO GLASS12/31/24100-42100-50403
530.00 Total For Check 36422
Check 36423
3642372,000.00 01/16/2520250109BURSCHVILLE SCHOOL REPAIR DONATION NORTH HENNEPIN PIONEER SOCIETY01/10/25208-41900-50490
72,000.00 Total For Check 36423
Check 36424
36424299.98 01/16/25540503288240186TON PORTABLE HYD RAM AND THREADED BASENORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT10/14/24100-43100-50210
299.98 Total For Check 36424
Check 36425
364251,425.00 01/16/2520250101FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSPECTION 2025NOVA FIRE PROTECTION INC01/01/25100-43100-50223
1,425.00 Total For Check 36425
Check 36426
364261,050.00 01/16/2527943STORAGE CABINETS WITH KEYOFFICE ENVIRONMENT BROKERS INC12/31/24100-43100-50210
1,050.00 Total For Check 36426
Check 36427
3642783.40 01/16/25P9449714ALARM SYSTEMPOWER PLAN OIB01/03/25100-43100-50210
83.40 Total For Check 36427
Check 36428
36428169.50 01/16/25P9440014LAMP QTY 1 AT362406POWER PLAN OIB01/03/25100-43100-50210
169.50 Total For Check 36428
Check 36429
364291,124.76 01/16/250894-006922051CONTRACT RECYCLING SERVICE NOVEMBER 2024REPUBLIC SERVICES12/31/24100-43201-50300
1,124.76 Total For Check 36429
Check 36430
364301,124.76 01/16/250894-006962307CONTRACT RECYCLING SERVICE DECEMBER 2024REPUBLIC SERVICES12/31/24100-43201-50300
1,124.76 Total For Check 36430
Check 36431
3643122.99 01/16/25I1732978ARK FREEZEEP - IRRITANT AEROSOLSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT12/05/24100-42100-50417
22.99 Total For Check 36431
Check 36432
36432125.00 01/16/25202501012025 MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION - J PAVEYSUSA01/09/25601-49400-50433
125.00 Total For Check 36432
Check 36433
36433457.92 01/16/2520250101UNION/TEAM LEGAL DUES DECEMBER 2024TEAMSTER LOCAL 32001/01/25100-00000-21707
457.92 Total For Check 36433
Check 36434
36434321.60 01/16/2581541-00HEAVY DUTY BINTERMINAL SUPPLY CO11/27/24100-43100-50210
321.60 Total For Check 36434
Check 36435
CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL
INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 4/5Page: 01/16/2025 03:57 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
EXP CHECK RUN DATES 01/10/2025 - 01/23/2025
JOURNALIZED
PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK
Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number
Check 36435
36435249.55 01/16/2520241130UNIFORM CLEANING OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2024TIDE CLEANERS12/31/24100-42100-50417
36435268.90 01/16/25202410231UNIFORM CLEANING DECEMBER 2024TIDE CLEANERS12/31/24100-42100-50417
518.45 Total For Check 36435
Check 36436
36436860.00 01/16/2524123000CITY HALL/PD CLEANING DECEMBER 2024ULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC12/31/24100-41900-50401
860.00 Total For Check 36436
Check 36437
3643737.50 01/16/25IN001727035HOSEZIEGLER INC12/03/24100-43100-50220
37.50 Total For Check 36437
Check 36438
3643877,425.17 01/23/25227704864PAY REQUEST #6 - STIEG ROAD IMPROVEMENTSFEHN COMPANIES01/01/25100-00000-22205-087
77,425.17 Total For Check 36438
Check 36439
3643973,330.00 01/23/250537449LF 5/8 QTY 244 / R900 WALL QTY 245FERGUSON WATERWORKS #251812/31/24601-49400-50210
73,330.00 Total For Check 36439
Check 36440
3644020,491.14 01/23/2520250101FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 2025 Q1CITY OF HANOVER01/01/25100-42200-50300
20,491.14 Total For Check 36440
Check 36441
36441154,846.00 01/23/25202501102025 PROPERTY/CASUALTY COVERAGE PREMIUMLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TRST01/10/25100-41900-50360
154,846.00 Total For Check 36441
Check 36442
36442169,026.20 01/23/25ER0015CASH SURETY RELEASE - PARK PLACE STORAGEPARK PLACE STORAGE12/31/24100-00000-22205-082
169,026.20 Total For Check 36442
Check 36443
3644390,714.70 01/23/2520250101FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 2025 Q1CITY OF ROGERS01/01/25100-42200-50300
90,714.70 Total For Check 36443
Check 36444
36444305,840.70 01/23/25227705275-5PAY REQUEST #5 - NE CORCORAN TRUNK INFRASTRUCTURESR WEIDEMA01/01/25601-00000-16500
36444(15,292.04)01/23/25227705275-5PAY REQUEST #5 - NE CORCORAN TRUNK INFRASTRUCTURESR WEIDEMA01/01/25601-00000-20610
290,548.66 Total For Check 36444
Check 36445
3644558,615.01 01/23/252-2399FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 2025 Q1WEST SUBURBAN FIRE DISTRICT01/01/25100-42200-50300
58,615.01 Total For Check 36445
CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL
INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 5/5Page: 01/16/2025 03:57 PM
User: RCKOTTKE
DB: Corcoran
EXP CHECK RUN DATES 01/10/2025 - 01/23/2025
JOURNALIZED
PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK
Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number
621,923.95 Fund 100 GENERAL FUND
2,100.00 Fund 101 LONG-TERM PLANNING FUND
72,000.00 Fund 208 LAWFUL GAMBLING
367,021.66 Fund 601 WATER
Fund Totals:
1,063,045.61 Total For All Funds:
City of Corcoran January 23, 2025
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-01
Page 1 of 2
Motion By:
Seconded By:
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS FOR
THE CITY OF CORCORAN FOR 2025
WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran (City) is required to designate the official newspaper, official
depositories and signatories, make annual appointments within the organization of the City, as well as
other defined organizational items as defined by State Statute and City Codes.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City hereby makes the following appointments
for the year 2025.
1.Official Newspaper
Crow River News, (aka Sun Media) 10917 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie MN 55344
2.Planning Consultant
Landform, 105 S. Fifth Avenue, # 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401
3.Engineer
Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director/Engineer
4.Engineering Consultant
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., One Carlson Parkway, Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55447
5.Attorney – Civil and Criminal
John Thames - Carson, Clelland & Schreder, 6300 Shingle Creek Parkway, Suite 305,
Minneapolis, MN 55430-2190
6.Parks Planning Consultant
Hoisington, Koegler, Group Inc., DBA: HKGi, 800 North Washington Avenue, Minneapolis,
MN 55401
7.Auditor and Auditing Services
Schlenner, Wenner & Co
630 Roosevelt Road, Suite 201, P.O. Box 1496, St. Cloud, MN 56302
8.Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Representative
Tom Anderson – Commissioner
9.Insurance Agent
Associated Benefits and Risk Consulting, 6000 Clearwater Drive | Minnetonka, MN 55343
10.Animal Control Officer
Monticello Animal Facility, 203 Chelsea Road, Monticello, MN 55362.
11.Assistant Weed Inspector
Dwight Klingbeil, Planner/Code Enforcement
Agenda Item 6c.
City of Corcoran January 23, 2025
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-01
Page 2 of 2
12.Official Depositories
Farmers State Bank of Hamel
Northland Securities
4M Fund
13.Official Signatory
The following individuals are hereby authorized as official signatories for the City:
a.Mayor/Tom McKee
b.City Administrator/Jason Tobin
c.City Clerk/Debra Johnson
14.Authorized for funds transfer and inquiry at Farmers State Bank of Hamel and PMA/4M
The following individuals are hereby authorized for funds transfer and inquiry for the City
checking and savings accounts at Farmers State Bank of Hamel:
a.Mayor/Tom McKee
b.City Administrator/Jason Tobin
15.Personnel Committee Appointments
Mayor Tom Mckee
Councilor Dean Vehrenkamp
VOTING AYE VOTING NAY
McKee, Tom McKee, Tom
Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle
Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark
Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy
Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 9th day of January, 2025.
________________________________
Tom McKee – Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________________ City Seal
Debra Johnson – City Clerk
City of Corcoran January 23, 2025
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-07
Page 1 of 2
Motion By:
Seconded By:
RESOLUTION APPOINTMENTS OF VACANT POSITIONS FOR THE CITY OF CORCORAN,
MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized the position listed in this resolution for hiring in
2024;
WHERAS, the preferred candidates were identified and offered listed positions;
WHEREAS, the City fosters a work environment that rewards performance and recognizes
commitment to Corcoran’s mission, vision, and values in ways that better posture staff to
support current needs and future growth of the City of Cocoran; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Corcoran City Council RESOLVES as follows:
1)Beau Hartneck is appointed as Police Officer effective December 30, 2024, at step 4 in
Grade 11.
2)Seth Gellman is appointed as Community Development Administrative Assistant effective
January 13, 2025 at step 3 Grade 3.
3)Jack Peluf is appointed as Police Officer effective January 27, 2025 at the starting step in
Grade 11.
VOTING AYE VOTING NAY
McKee, Tom McKee, Tom
Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle
Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy
Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark
Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of January, 2025.
Agenda Item 6d
City of Corcoran January 23, 2025
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-07
Page 2 of 2
________________________________
Tom McKee – Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________________ City Seal
Debra Johnson – City Clerk
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6e.
Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Nalisha Williams, Assistant City
Administrator
Aaron Headrick, Communications Specialist
Topic:
Outsourcing Newsletter Printing
Action Required:
Approval
Summary:
The City of Corcoran has managed the printing process of its quarterly newsletter
internally for many years. After reviewing the operations, it has become clear that
outsourcing the printing of the newsletter could lead to significant efficiencies.
Currently, the city is printing newsletters in-house which involves several inefficiencies,
which include:
• High costs: Printing and distributing newsletters internally require significant staff
time, increased printer maintenance costs, and materials costs.
• Delays: The current process involves our Communications Specialist
(approximately 30 hours of their time) loading and unloading newsletters and
paper into the printer and fixing/resolving printer issues as they arise from the
large printing quantity.
Outsourcing the printing of the newsletter to an experienced, professional printing
company would resolve these issues. Professional printing companies have
streamlined processes and the scale to reduce costs, which would help ensure more
timely and cost-effective delivery of the newsletter.
Staff has met with several vendors to explore the idea of outsourcing newsletter printing
and has narrowed down the selection to two vendors; Daily Printing (Plymouth) and
Contemporary Images (Medina).
The tables below highlight the quarterly cost breakdown for the newsletter with the
current internal printing processes, printing through Contemporary Images (Medina),
and printing with Daily Printing, INC. (Plymouth). It should be noted that printing and
mailing costs are subject to increase with the growth of residential developments.
Internal Printing – City Hall (Quarterly)
Estimated Staff
Hours Spent on
Printing
–
30 hours of
Communications
Specialist Rate:
Paper Cost
Breakdown
–
5 cases
(25 reams):
Postage Cost
Breakdown:
Total Quarterly
Newsletter Cost
-
In-House Printing:
$1,142.40 $572.45 $2,422.62 $4,137.47
Contemporary Images – Medina (Quarterly)
Newsletter
Printing (16
pages)
Mail Handling
and Data
Processing
Fee:
Postage Cost: Delivery Fee to
Post Office: Total:
$2,836.50 $445.00 $1,281.00 $25.00 $4,587.50
Financial/Budget:
The City is currently spending about $4,137.47 per quarter to internally print the
quarterly newsletter. By working with Daily Printing, INC, the City would save
approximately $821.57 per quarter.
Council Action: Request Council approve the quarterly newsletter printing quote
with Daily Printing, INC. – Plymouth.
Daily Printing, INC. – Plymouth (Quarterly)
Newsletter
Printing (16
pages):
Mail Handling
and Data
Processing
Fee:
Postage Cost: Service Fee: Total:
$2,089.00 $337.00 $886.88 $3.02 $3,315.90
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6f.
Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Jay Tobin
Topic:
Rules of Decorum
Action Required:
Review and Approve
Summary:
Corcoran City Council provided feedback to update the rules of decorum for public
meetings on January 9, 2025. Staff has updated the language as directed by Council.
Financial/Budget:
Minor costs in staff time updates and a City Attorney review.
Council Action:
1.Review and Approve the updated Rules of Decorum for meetings of the City
Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Trails Commission, and Charter
Commission.
2. Provide Staff Additional Feedback for Further Updates.
3.Table for future action.
Attachments:
1.Current Rules of Decorum
A Hidden Gem Waiting To Be Discovered
www.corcoranmn.gov
Rules of Decorum for meetings of the City Council, Planning Commission,
Parks and Trails Commission, and Charter Commission
The City of Corcoran wishes to give everyone an opportunity to be heard on matters before the City while protecting its ability
to carry out the business of the City. In order to provide ample comment opportunity, attendees may speak at Open Forum,
or prior to an agenda item section during the Public Comment Opportunity provided the following rules are followed:
General Rules
Persons not recognized by the Mayor or Chairperson should refrain from commenting, interrupting a speaker at the podium,
conducting conversations with other members of the audience, or creating any other type of disruption causing distraction to
a member of the Council, Commissioner, city employees, or a speaker at the podium.
All persons wishing to address the Council or Commission shall approach the podium in-person when recognized by the
Mayor or Chairperson and clearly state their name, address, and subject being addressed directing comments to the Council
or Commission. Proper decorum is expected at all times and speakers are asked to treat everyone with respect and afford
courtesy to the Council or Commission, City Staff and to all other members of the public attending, by refraining at all times
from rude and derogatory remarks, reflections as to integrity, abusive comments and statements as to motives and
personalities.
Should a member or members of the audience be identified as disorderly, the Mayor or Chairperson has the right to declare
the meeting temporarily recessed and call for the removal of said person(s) from the premises. The City Council or
Commission may by vote to reinstate an individual who has been removed.
Council and Commission members must accord courtesy to each other, City Staff and to all other members of the public
attending, by refraining at all times from rude and derogatory remarks, reflections as to integrity, abusive comments and
statements as to motives and personalities.
The same rules of conduct noted in this policy shall also apply to anyone speaking during any portions of the public meetings.
Open Forum
“Open Forum” provides an opportunity to be heard and is not an opportunity to debate an issue. The Council or Commission
does not typically act on items brought up under “Open Forum” so they may allow time to thoroughly research the respective
matter(s) and provide a measured and fair response. Matters raised may be referred to staff and a response, if necessary,
will be provided to the speaker. If a matter will need to be brought back to the Council or Commission at a future meeting,
staff will notify the speaker at such time that a meeting date has been determined.
Generally, a time period of no more than 20 minutes is reserved for public comment, with each speaker receiving a 5-minute
time limit. Each speaker should observe this time frame and plan their remarks accordingly. Upon request, the Mayor may
extend the time of any speaker subject to the consent of the Council or Commission.
Speakers shall address all statements and questions to the Mayor or Chairperson who may, in turn, refer any questions or
research requests to staff. Speakers should strive to provide only factual information and refrain from repeating comments
made by other speakers.
Agenda Items
Citizens may request permission to speak on agenda items by completing a public comment card found on a cart or table at
the entrance of the Council Chambers and handing it to City staff, the Mayor, or Council. Citizens are invited to offer
comments up to 5 minutes in length, not including time for answering questions by the Council or Commission. Upon request,
the Mayor may extend the time of any speaker subject to the consent of the Council or Commission.
If numerous requests to speak on an agenda item are received, the Mayor or Chairperson will inform the Council or
Commission of the number of requests. The Mayor or Chairperson, or any member of the Council or Commission may
propose a total length of time for public comment on the item, which must be approved by the majority of Council or
Commission members to be effective. The Mayor or Chairperson will use the gavel to indicate when the time for public
comment is in order.
The Council and Commissions expect applicants and petitioners, or their representatives make presentations to the Council
or Commission within 15 minutes, not including time for answering questions. Upon request, the Mayor or Chairperson may
extend the time subject to the consent of the Council or Commission. Submission of written material in advance is strongly
encouraged and expected. The Council and Commissions request previously submitted written material not be read in its
entirety.
Public Hearings
Public hearings will be conducted as required by state laws and regulations, the City Charter, the City Code, and these
procedures where they are not in conflict with them. Public hearings on development issues are held by the Planning
Commission. The City Council does not conduct another public hearing but can choose to allow public comment,
especially if new information is available.
Attachment Item 6f.
City of Corcoran
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
January 23, 2025 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-09
Page 1 of 1
Motion By:
Seconded By:
RESOLUTION ACKOWLEDGING KELSEY MEER’S INCREASED
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR UTILITY BILLING IN THE INTERIM FROM
ASSUMPTION OF DUTIES TO APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPENSATION AND
CLASSIFICATION STUDY
WHEREAS, utility billing responsibilities transferred to Kelsey Meer on 1 May, 2024 as part of a Council
approved organizational restructuring as a result of the elimination of the Accounting Clerk position; and
WHEREAS, it was agreed that the Public Works Administrative Assistant job description would be
rewritten to reflect the significant addition of utility billing responsibilities concurrent with rewriting the
Administrative Assistant for the Admin Section to include addition of Deputy Clerk responsibilities – all as
part of the approved Compensation and Classification Study; and
WHEREAS, the Compensation and Classification Study was severely delayed from a projected
completion no later than the end of the 3rd Quarter 2024, due to unprojected staffing shortages which
necessitated a shift in priority of effort to delivering city elections; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Corcoran City Council RESOLVES, as follows:
1) Kelsey Meer has successfully fulfilled utility billing responsibilities for the City of Corcoran since
May 1, 2024, resulting in countless reports of improved customer service along with the critical
identification and resolution of previously unidentified systemic utility billing problems.
2) The completed Compensation and Classification Study validated that the addition of utility
billing responsibilities to the previous Public Works Administrative Assistant job description
were significant, and the delayed receipt of the appropriate corresponding pay raise (grade
change) was no fault of the employee.
3) Serving as Public Works Administrative Assistant/Utility Billing Coordinator in the interim from
May 1, 2024 until implementation of the Compensation and Classification Study results, Kelsey
Meer will receive an additional 8% wage increase in keeping with established City practice.
VOTING AYE VOTING NAY
McKee, Tom McKee, Tom
Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle
Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark
Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy
Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of January
2025.
Tom McKee – Mayor
ATTEST:
City Seal
Deb Johnson – City Clerk
Agenda Item 6g
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6h.
Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Lauren Letsche / Kevin Mattson
Topic:
Bechtold Farms Letter of Credit Request
Action Required:
Decision
Summary:
Bechtold Farms has been working towards closing out their development which is
anticipated in 2025.
As progress continues in terms of the outstanding work completed, Bechtold Farms has
requested additional reductions to the Letter of Credit sureties beyond administrative
authority per the development contract.
After the developer completes all outstanding items, the development will advance to
the warranty period of the process.
Financial/Budget:
The current surety balance is $107,661.91 Staff has reviewed the remaining work items
for the development and recommends retaining $55,000.00.
Options:
1. Authorize the reduction of Letter of Credit sureties for Bechtold Farms to $55,000.00
as requested.
2. Authorize the reduction of Letter of Credit sureties for Bechtold Farms at a different
amount.
3. Decline.
Recommendation:
Authorize the reduction of Letter of Credit sureties for Bechtold Farms to $55,000.00 as
requested.
Council Action:
Consider a motion to authorize the reduction of Letter of Credit sureties Bechtold Farms
to $55,000.00 as requested.
Attachments:
1. N/A
City of Corcoran January 23, 2025
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-08
Page 1 of 1
Motion By:
Seconded By:
RESOLUTION APPOINTING JEREMY NICHOLS AS ACTING MAYOR FOR
THE CITY OF CORCORAN FOR 2025
WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran (City) is required to designate an Acting Mayor from its
Councilmembers to perform the duties of the Mayor during the disability or absence of the Mayor from
the City or, in case of vacancy in the office of Mayor until a successor has been appointed and qualifies
as defined by State Statute M.S. 412.121.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City hereby appoints Jeremy Nichols as Acting
Mayor for 2025.
VOTING AYE VOTING NAY
McKee, Tom McKee, Tom
Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle
Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark
Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy
Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of January 2025.
________________________________
Tom McKee – Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________________ City Seal
Debra Johnson – City Clerk
Agenda Item 6i.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6j.
Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Mike Pritchard
Topic:
Address Change Update
Action Required:
Information
Summary:
On July 7, 2024, in an effort to improve general way finding and for mail, deliveries, in-
home services, and visitors, as well as public safety response, Council approved
changes to several addresses where Staff noted discrepancies and confusion.
Because 2024 was a Presidential election year, Staff decided to suspend the changes
until after the elections (and holidays) as it may create confusion or cause problems
with the election process. This report is to notify City Council that Staff will now be
moving forward with the changes and notifications to residents as approved. A copy of
the original report is attached fore reference.
Financial/Budget:
Minimal impact to budget. The changes will require four new street signs for Bridle Path
West and supplies for mailings.
Attachments:
1.July 7, 2024 Address Change Staff Report
2.Address change maps
a.Bridle Path
b.Fir Lane North
c.ADUs
3.Resident Address Change Notification Letter
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7j.
Council Meeting:
July 25, 2024
Prepared By:
Mike Pritchard
Topic:
Address Changes
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
Staff has found several address discrepancies which have caused some confusion
to residents, including general way finding and for mail, deliveries, in-home services,
and visitors, as well as public safety response. The City assigns street names based
on the City’s Street Naming policy, first adopted in 2015 and updated in 2019, as
well as the County’s addressing range: (East to West: 19100-29000; and South to
North: 6200-10900). Staff has identified the following areas that we would
recommend making address changes to:
1.Bridle Path (Ravinia). The Ravinia subdivision was platted prior to the City
adopting a formal address and street naming policy; therefore, Lennar’s
proposed street names were not subject to the policy. The addressing was
however subject to the County range system. This led to addresses being
within the same range on two separate parts of a curvilinear/meandering
street. (See attached map.) Staff is proposing to update addresses on the
west side of Bridle path by adding a directional designation: Bridle Path West,
to the street name. The address number would not change.
2.Fir Lane North (Bass Lake Crossing South). Bass Lake Crossing was platted
correctly, as Fir Lane. Bass Lake Crossing South, however, was platted with
the street name Fir Lane North, thus leading to confusion. (See attached
map.) The County’s stance has been that the street name provided on the
recorded plat is the street name that must be used for addressing, however,
in further discussions, the County has agreed to update street names per City
requests. Staff is proposing to remove the North designation on Fir Lane
North in Bass Lake Crossing South. The address number would not change.
3.Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU). The City has received multiple requests for
ADU’s recently. These are separate dwelling units, attached to or detached
from the principal structure, that are located on a single property. It was found
that providing separate addresses for the units caused some confusion as
Hennepin County’s addressing and property information website is only
capable of showing one address per PID. Corcoran’s Community
Development team, and Public Safety, along with Hennepin County staff
discussed addressing options and determined best practices to ensure timely
ATTACHMENT 1.
public safety response for these accessory dwelling units. The ADU will share
the same address with the principal structure but will have separate unit
indicators if attached and separate building indicators if detached. Staff is
proposing the following changes (see attached maps):
a. 6330 Snyder Road - Building A and Building B
b. 22600 Oakdale Drive - Building A and Building B
c. 6516 Valley View Road - Unit A and Unit B
Staff will use similar past practice for changing street names and address. A
notification letter will be sent to the property owner/resident stating the reason for the
change as well as the existing and new address, along with the effective date. Staff
will notify Hennepin County and Sheriff Dispatch and update the addresses in all
City databases. Address changes would not typically be brought to Council for
review; however, staff believes that because we are processing multiple updates
and these changes will affect 62 properties, it is appropriate to provide this
information to City Council and request authorization to proceed.
Financial/Budget:
Minimal impact to budget. The changes will require four new street signs for Bridle Path
West.
Options:
1. Authorize staff to notify residents and update addresses as described.
2. Deny the address update and/or provide further direction.
Recommendation:
Authorize staff to notify residents and update addresses as described.
Council Action:
Consider a motion authorizing staff to update addresses as described.
Attachments:
1. Address change maps
a. Bridle Path
b. Fir Lane North
c. ADUs
2. Resident Address Change Notification Letter
Br
i
d
l
e
P
a
t
h
W
e
s
t
F
i
r
L
a
n
e
www.corcoranmn.gov
8200 County Road 116
Corcoran, MN 55340
Phone: 763-420-2288
Administrative Offices Public Works Offices
9100 County Road 19
Corcoran, MN 55357
Phone: 763-420-2652 Phone: 763-420-8966
Police Department Offices
8200 County Road 116
Corcoran, MN 55340
Date
Resident
Address
City, State, Zip
RE: Address Change Notification
Dear property owner or resident:
As you may or may not be aware, there has been some confusion regarding addresses in your area. In an
effort to improve public safety response and general way finding for mail, deliveries, in-home services, and
visitors, as well as to ensure consistency in addressing throughout the City, your address is being updated. You
Property Identification Number (PID) as well as your legal description will remain the same.
Your current address: old address will be updated to: new address.
The new address will be sent by the City to Hennepin County Property Identification Services, Hennepin
County Emergency Dispatch, and all City Departments. This change will become effective on DATE.
Unfortunately, the City cannot update your address with all your service providers. We are providing a
notification checklist with this letter that we hope you find helpful through the process.
We appreciate your understanding and participation in helping us to alleviate confusion and make emergency
response as efficient as possible.
Sincerely,
City of Corcoran
Cc: Property File
Encl: Address Change Notification Checklist
Address Change Notification Checklist
Please note this list is provided as a guide and may not include all service providers.
United States Postal Service
The IRS
Your employer
DMV/Driver’s License
Passport
Vehicle registration
Voter registration
School, College, or University
Insurance companies
Auto insurance
Home or renter’s insurance
Life insurance
Medical insurance
Utilities
Cable, Telephone, and Internet
Electric
Natural Gas
Garbage and Recycling
Community
Family and friends
Place of worship
Membership Clubs or Organizations
Financial institutions
Bank
Credit card company(s)
Lenders (Home, Auto, Etc.)
Investment services
Tax preparation services
Medical Providers
Dentist
Primary care doctor
Specialty clinics (vision, chiropractic, etc.)
Veterinarian
Subscription services
Ecommerce delivery sites (ex. Amazon, etc.)
Print subscriptions
Streaming services
Subscription boxes (ex. Hello Fresh, Ipsy, etc.)
Apps (including map and smart home apps)
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6k.
Council Meeting
January 23, 2025
Prepared By
Nalisha Williams
Topic
Classification and Compensation Study
Action Required
Approval
Summary
Following the completion of Human Resource and Cultural Assessments for the city -
consultants recommended, and staff requested a “Position Classification and
Compensation Study”. City Council approved a proposal to move forward having Abdo
conduct the study on April 11, 2024.
Abdo presented the report results at the January 9, 2025, City Council meeting. The report
presented included a proposed step and grade table with 17 grades and 8 steps, with a
4% increase between each step.
In order to avoid negative implications for current staff the transition from step 7 to 8 was
increased from 4% to 5%.
Additionally, the policy for reclassification submittals and reclassification appeals are
included with this memo.
Financial/Budget
$76,700 to be paid for from “Central Services” business unit as a “Transfer” expense.
Recommendation
Staff recommends Council adoption of the Classification and Compensation report
prepared by Abdo and the Reclassification Guidelines and Process effective February 15th,
2025
Council Action
1. Request Council adopt the Classification and Compensation study completed by
Abdo
2. Request Council approve the Reclassification Guidelines and Process
Attachments
1. Abdo Position Updated Step/Grade Table
2. Reclassification Guidelines and Process
CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA
POSITION REVIEW & RECLASSIFICATION GUIDELINES AND PROCESS
Purpose and Scope:
The City of Corcoran is committed to maintaining a fair, consistent, and predictable position classification and
compensation program for the benefit of all employees. While the City will take reasonable measures to ensure that all
positions are accurately reflected in position descriptions and classification points and grades, there may be instances
where a formal review of a specific position is warranted. The following information provides guidance related to the
general classification methodology used by the City, formal review request eligibility criteria, and the reclassification
process.
Definitions:
Classification Determination is the outcome of the analysis process that results in the allocation of a pay grade level to a
position.
Comparable Position is comparable to the position under review in its functions, responsibilities and accountabilities, direct
supervisor responsibilities, and/or organizational hierarchy and scope.
Department Head is a leader to which all positions in the department report up to.
Direct Supervisor is to whom an incumbent directly reports to.
Incumbent is an employee who has been appointed to the position under review on a continuous basis or a fixed term.
Job Analysis is the process used to measure the relative worth of positions within an organization at a point in time.
Job Description (JD) is an approved City document which outlines the primary accountabilities and responsibilities of a
position and the essential and desirable criteria required to undertake the position.
Reclassification is a change in classification due to an up, down, or lateral pay grade change.
Methodology:
The City utilizes a formal methodology to conduct position analysis and classification and positions will be scored using a
plan adapted from the Hay Method. The model assigned each position a score in the following categories (adapted from
the State of Minnesota 2009 Hay Manual): Know-How, Problem Solving, Accountability, and Special Conditions. The
following information provides a summary of factors and considerations used to apply this classification method.
• Know-How represents the knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) an employee needs to be successful in a
particular job. The Hay Method places the greatest emphasis on Know-How. Know-How is defined as an expert
skill, information or body of knowledge that imparts an ability to cause a desired result. The Know-How category
is the most heavily weighted category. If a position is more easily learned, the position will point toward the lower
end of the scale.
Know-How category is further divided into three parts: Depth and Breadth of Job-Specific Knowledge (aka
Technical and Specialized Know-How and Job-Specific Knowledge); Integrating Know-How (aka Managerial
Breadth or Know-How); and Human Relation Skills (aka Human Relations Know-How). A number is assigned for
total Know-How points by making several separate choices for each of the three elements described and an
overall assessment.
• Job-Specific Knowledge includes the position’s requirements for knowledge and skills related to practices,
procedures, specialized techniques and professional disciplines. It also includes basic and job-specific
supervisory and managerial knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), when appropriate. This aspect of Know-How
does not make distinctions among differently sized managerial jobs nor does it include human relation skills. It is
important to remember that this element measures the requirements of the position, not the qualifications of an
incumbent.
• Integrating Know-How considers the need to integrate and manage progressively more diverse functions and is
used to rank managerial breadth and scope, from similar to very different functions. When required, basic and
job-specific supervisory and managerial knowledge, skills and abilities are included in the Job-Specific part of a
Know-How rating. The overall size of an organization directly influences the number of managerial breath
categories, because the organizational size often reflects requirements for increased managerial complexity and
diversity.
• Human Relation Skills is the third element of a job’s Know-How rating. It is the active, practicing interpersonal
skills typically required for productive working relationships to work with, or through, others inside and/or outside
of the organization to get work accomplished. It assumes that each job requires a foundation of basic human
relations skills. To be effective, an employee must typically be proficient at the highest level of Human Relations
Skill regularly required for the position.
• Problem Solving is the process of working through details of a problem to reach a solution. Problem solving may
include mathematical or systematic operations and can be a gauge of an individual’s critical thinking skills.
Problem Solving measures the intensity of the mental process that uses Know-How to: (1) identify, (2) define, and
(3) resolve problems. It is a percentage of Know-How, reflecting the fact that “you think with what you know.”
This is true of even the most creative work. Ideas are put together from something already there. The raw material
of any thinking is knowledge of facts, principles and means.
• Context includes the influences or environment that limit or guide decision-making such as rules, instructions,
procedures, standards, policies, principles from fields of science and academic disciplines. Positions are guided
by organizational, departmental or functional goals, policies, objectives and practices circumscribed by
procedures and instructions. In general, policies describe the “what” of a subject matter, procedures detail the
steps needed to follow through on a policy (i.e., how, where, when, by whom) and instructions outline the specific
aspects of how to perform the tasks, such as the operation of a machine or how to select the appropriate letters
to use in particular situations.
• Thinking Challenge includes the nature of the problems encountered and the mental processes used to resolve
the problems. The scale ranges from simple problems to very complex issues, with the premise that simple
issues recur regularly in the same form and after a while are resolved by rote or instinct, but very difficult issues
require substantial thinking and deliberation. The types of situations encountered and the processes involved in
identifying, defining or resolving related problems are considered. Thinking Challenge reflects the degree of
difficulty in finding improvements and adapting to changes.
• Accountability does not mean being responsible for getting one’s own work done. Rather, it reflects responsibility
for actions and their consequences and the measured effect of the job on end results for the organization.
Accountability includes three factors: Freedom to Act/Empowerment, Magnitude, and Job Impact.
• Freedom to Act/Empowerment involves the degree of personal or procedural control or guidance exercised over
the position. For example, what constraints are put on an employee in this job? How closely supervised is the
position? What kinds of decisions are made higher up in the organization?
• Magnitude is the portion of the total organization encompassed by the position’s primary purpose. It’s most
typically indicated by the general dollar size of the area(s) most directly affected by the job, i.e., the resources
over which the position has control or influence. A variety of factors are considered such as size of budget is
employee responsible for, what degree of influence is held and is this person a decision maker.
• Job Impact is considered to be indirect (indirect or contributory) or direct and measurable (shared or primary). It
involves the way in which the position’s actions affect end results in the agency. For example, how does the
employee influence the business - directly or indirectly? Does the employee provide advisory or interpretive
services for others to use in making decisions? Is the job an information-recording one? Does it provide a
necessary service with a relatively small effect on the business of the agency? “Contributory” and “primary” are, by
far, the most frequently used options.”
• Special Conditions consider the physical effort, environmental conditions, hazard exposure, and sensory attention
demands that an employee is commonly subject to in the position. For example, two positions may be assigned
identical points in all other areas but the position that is regularly required to work in extreme outdoor conditions
(i.e., heat or extreme cold) would receive additional points for these factors.
Information For Department Heads And Staff:
The analysis of the work value of a position is the measure of the relative worth of positions within an organization at a
point in time. This means that the City of Corcoran Classification and Compensation compares the work that is performed
not only to similar jobs, but also on a scale that encompasses all City positions.
Submissions for reclassification of a position(s) may be made by the Department Head or an incumbent(s) who occupies
the position or group of positions. The incumbent may submit a request for a position reclassification review with or without
the support of the unit. However, all updated job descriptions must be reviewed and approved by the related Department
Head, the City Administrator, and the Council prior to formal classification review.
An incumbent may submit their JD for reclassification no more than once every twenty-four (24) months, unless otherwise
authorized by the City Administrator. In addition, in order to be eligible to submit a position for reclassification, an incumbent
must be performing the duties, as written, for a minimum of six (6) months prior to initiating the reclassification request
and meet the minimum qualifications of the requested classification.
Department Head are also eligible to submit requests for position reclassification for positions which fall under their direct
management. Where the Department Head initiates a reclassification process, there is no requirement to gain the
incumbent’s agreement to the JD although it is encouraged to have a discussion regarding the document with the
incumbent.
The Department Head may submit a request for reclassification of a position at any time the supervised incumbent has
been performing at a higher level for a minimum of six (6) months.
In general, Reclassification requests can only be submitted by:
• Incumbent
• Department Head
• City Administrator
Reasons for Classification Review:
Existing positions require formal analysis for possible reclassification when there have been significant changes to the
position that are deemed to be ongoing in nature and may have resulted in a significant increase in the work value, or impact,
of the position.
Changes in a position may result from the duties and responsibilities having significantly evolved over time including new
duties or a redistribution of duties within a work area. The City will determine the appropriate pay grade level and
classification of a position by undertaking an overall analysis of the following, using the Abdo Method described above:
• Consideration of the position in relation to the work being performed.
• Changes to the position taking into consideration the Abdo Methodology criteria.
• Comparable positions to ensure equity and consistency in measurement of work value within the unit and across
the City.
• The ongoing nature of the changes to the duties, responsibilities, and essential requirements.
All of the above factors are considered when making an overall analysis of work value – one factor alone is unlikely to
demonstrate an increase in the relative worth of a position.
The following factors or circumstances are not valid considerations in the analysis of position classification:
• The incumbent’s performance in the position.
• Length of service or time in the position.
• Education beyond the minimum required education of the classification.
• Knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) the incumbent may have that are not directly relevant to the position
under review.
• Anomalies and inequities in terms of other positions within the City.
• Short term duties performed in addition to the incumbent’s regular position description duties; a one-off or
short-term project is not considered as a basis for reclassification.
• Mechanism for retention of incumbent.
• An increase in the work volume alone is not considered the basis for reclassification; there must be a
demonstrated change and increase in work value or impact.
Steps For Requests for Submitting A Reclassification:
Step 1: Discussion
If there have been significant ongoing changes to the position duties and responsibilities, this may result in a change in the
work value of the position and possibility of the need for reclassification. Contact your Department Head to discuss updating
your Job Description (JD).
*If incumbent is Department Head or City Administrator, they should work with their Direct Supervisor.
Step 2: Initiate Reclassification Action
If Department Head determines the employee’s JD should be updated, the employee and Department Head will develop the
recommended modified JD – the updated JD should reflect the revised duties and responsibilities.
The Department Head, per policy, certifies that the JD is accurate.
Note: To avoid confusion about duties and responsibilities, Department Heads should discuss any changes to the JD with the
incumbent who occupies the position which is proposed to be reclassified. Department Heads/Direct areSupervisors are not
required to gain the incumbent’s agreement to the changes; however, incumbents should be made aware of the pending
classification review.
Step 3: Routing
The Department Head routes the updated JD to the Assistant City Administrator. The Assistant City Administrator will
collaborate with the City Council Personnel Committee to review and provide recommendations promptly.
The Assistant City Administrator will present the recommendations to the City Council for approval.
*The City Council must formally approve the updated JD before any further action can be taken.
Step 4: Position Analysis
Once the updated JD has been approved by the City Council, the Assistant City Administrator will work with Abdo to conduct
an analysis, to review the reclassification documents, and make a reclassification determination, within 30 calendar days.
The Assistant City Administrator and City Council Personnel Committee will review Abdo’s determination, and the Assistant
City Administrator will bring forth the reclassification determination to the City Council for approval.
*All final reclassification determinations must be formally adopted by the City Council.
Step 5: Approval
If adopted by the council, the Department Heads and Assistant City Administrator will finalize the reclassification action by
notifying the incumbent and obtaining a signed copy of the new JD and classification. These signed documents will be
retained in the department personnel file to ensure all parties are aware of the expectations of the position.
Effective Date of Reclassification
Reclassification requests should be promptly submitted for evaluation and final determination (no later than 30 calendar
days after Council adoption). The effective date of an approved reclassification request should normally coincide with the
date the JD is formally adopted by the City Council. In exceptional circumstances, the Assistant City Administrator may
determine an earlier effective date of reclassification upon written request.
Reclassification Appeal
If the incumbent is not satisfied with the reclassification determination, they may submit a request for an appeal to the City
Administrator. The appeal must be filed within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the reclassification determination. The
City Administrator may engage an objective third party consultant to review the JD and classification within three months
of the filed appeal and to make an independent recommendation to City leadership and Council. The City Council shall
promptly render a decision and tThe final decision will be communicated by the City Administrator. If the original
classification decision made by the City is upheld by the third party and the incumbent chooses to accept the independent
decision, they will be eligible to apply for a new classification review six (6) months after the receipt of the appeal decision.
Page 1 of 16
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7a.
City Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Natalie Davis McKeown
Topic:
A+A Tree and Landscape Concept Plan
(PID 18-119-23-13-0002)
(City File No. 24-043)
Action Required:
Direction
Review Deadline: March 19, 2025
1. Application Request
The applicant, A+A Tree and
Landscape, LLC, requests an
opportunity to appear before the
City Council to solicit informal
comments on a concept plan for the
parcel that wraps around the Public
Works facility located near the
southeast corner of County Road
10 and County Road 19 (legally
described as Outlot A of Kariniemi
Meadows). The applicant would like
to use the property as a yard waste
recycling location, parking for their
landscaping company, as well as
lease out space for parking and
equipment storage to others.
2. Background
Outlot A of Kariniemi Meadows was platted in 2022 with 4 development rights on 71.39
acres. The City Council had several concept plan discussions with the developer for
Kariniemi Meadows about the potential for this outlot to eventually be subdivided for
commercial development which would require a comprehensive plan amendment and
re-zoning. The City Council expressed a general openness to consider such a change
to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map at that time. However, a formal
application to make these changes was not submitted with the Kariniemi Meadows plat
application.
3. Context
Zoning and Land Use
Figure 1 Site Location
Page 2 of 16
The property is currently zoned Rural Residential (RR), and the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan guides the property Rural/Ag Residential. A large portion of the site is also within
the Shoreland Overlay district for Rush Creek. The outlot is currently farmed. The
property is outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA).
Surrounding Properties
The land use designation, zoning district, and existing land use for the surrounding
properties are provided in the table below. All surrounding properties are outside of the
MUSA.
Direction Land Use Guiding Zoning District Current Land Use
North Rural
Service/Commercial
Rural Commercial
(CR)
D&D Service
South Rural/Ag Residential RR Agriculture
East Rural/Ag Residential RR Single-Family Homes
West Public/Semi-Public Public/Institutional Public Works Facility
Rural/Ag Residential RR Single-Family Homes and
Agriculture
Natural Characteristics of the Site
Rush Creek runs along the east boundary of the site separating the property from the
single-family lots for Kariniemi Meadows. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Natural
Resource Inventory Areas map reflects a Reed Canary Dominant Flood Plain following
Rush Creek as well as a High-Quality Maple/Basswood Community in the southeast
portion of the parcel.
Figure 2 Natural Resource Inventory Areas
Page 3 of 16
A wetland delineation was completed for this site as part of the Kariniemi Meadows
development in 2022. A new wetland delineation is not needed at this time. There are 7
wetlands within the project boundaries, and these are shown on the concept plan.
3. Analysis
Planning staff coordinated review of the concept plan with Engineering and Public
Safety; their memos enclosed in this report and incorporated into the following analysis
as appropriate. The applicant is responsible for reviewing the entirety of both memos
and incorporating the feedback as the project moves forward.
Figure 3 Concept Plan
Use
Page 4 of 16
The concept plan includes a few different uses and components. One of the primary
uses proposed is a yard waste recycling facility that will intake different yard waste
items that will be stockpiled and eventually processed on site into mulch, logs, and
black dirt to be sold. The narrative notes the expected customers include residents and
commercial companies looking to recycle yard debris. Required equipment for the site
include loaders, a tub grinder, and trucks to move the materials in and out of the
property. The proposed hours of the yard waste facility in the narrative are 8AM to 5PM
Monday through Friday, particularly for any unloading and processing. However, it is
also noted they eventually plan to have a gate with a code or pass that will allow for
access to the site outside of the normal hours.
The other primary use of the site is truck parking and storage of equipment for the
applicant’s landscaping business, and they would also like to lease out space to other
companies in need of truck parking and equipment storage.
The narrative indicates the initial phase of their business will only include a temporary
gate booth that would remain until the site access can be controlled with a gate code or
card entry. Bathroom facilities would be handled through the use of a porta potty until a
future building is constructed. The applicant explains there are future plans for an office
front and a shop for vehicles and equipment. However, an estimated timeline for the
building is not provided, and it is noted by the applicant that it will take time to build the
site and business up before they will move forward with a building.
The property is currently an outlot with development rights which limits the potential use
of the site. The outlot is required to be re-platted as a lot to allow for the proposed
commercial use and site improvements. The commercial nature of the concept plan
would require the property to be re-guided to Rural Service/Commercial in the 2040
Comprehensive Plan and rezoned to the CR district. However, the CR district does not
currently allow the primary proposed uses (a yard waste recycling facility and a parking
lot without a principal building).
Additionally, leasing of exterior parking and storage space for businesses that do not
have office space within the building on the site is also not allowed within the Zoning
Ordinance. Staff notes the City just removed mini-storage and self-storage as a use in
2024. While the proposed storage will be exterior in nature rather within a storage unit,
exterior parking spaces and equipment storage seems to be a similar use as to what
was recently removed from the CR district.
A temporary structure that is not used for habitation can be approved for not longer than
1 year as an Interim Use Permit in the CR district. However, it is unclear if this will be
enough for the applicant’s purposes, and the wording in code prevents an extension of
the IUP beyond 1 year. Staff notes from viewing the aerials of a similar facility in Maple
Grove that there is a gate shack with what looks to be a temporary modular/satellite
office space. So, a temporary gate shack without a permanent building does not seem
to be unusual for a yard waste recycling facility. It is unclear how bathrooms are
Page 5 of 16
handled, but this can be researched further by staff if a Zoning Ordinance Amendment
were to move forward to allow the use. It should be noted the facility in Maple Grove
does not double as a parking and equipment storage area to be accessed by
employees for more than one business. Staff is concerned with a porta potty being
relied upon on a semi-permanent basis with employees regularly utilizing the site.
The southwest corner of the site has a note that this area will be a separate use with
separate access. The applicant will need to explain how this area will be managed with
the initial phase of development. For example, will this area be seeded with regular
maintenance? Will it be farmed?
The City Council should provide feedback on the following:
1. Is there support to re-guide and rezone the property to allow for commercial
development?
2. Is there support to amend the Rural Commercial district to allow some or all the
proposed uses not currently allowed within the district?
a. If so:
i. Is it preferred these uses be allowed by-right, via a conditional use
permit, and/or through an interim use permit?
ii. Is there any feedback on standards to consider including in such a
Zoning Ordinance Amendment?
iii. Are porta potties on a semi-permanent basis acceptable?
1. Are there performance standards the Council would want to
see applied? (e.g., setbacks from property lines and
wetlands/Rush Creek, screening, etc.)
3. Is the leasing of exterior storage and parking space for vehicles and equipment
to other companies acceptable without other businesses being a tenant of a
building on the site?
Lot Analysis
Lot standards for the CR district are as follows:
Minimum Standard
Minimum Lot Area 2.5 acres
Minimum Lot Width 100 ft.
Minimum Lot Depth 200 ft.
Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks
- Front, Major Roadways 100 ft.
- Front, All Other Streets 50 ft.
- Side and Rear 20 ft.
- Adjacent to Residential 50 ft.
Maximum Principal Building Height 35 ft.
Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage 50%
Page 6 of 16
The site far exceeds the minimum lot size standards, and a subdivision into multiple lots
is not currently proposed. The only building proposed at this time is a temporary gate
booth. An approximate location for this structure is provided on the concept plan, and it
appears that it would be able to comply with all setbacks if placed north of the access
road. The proposed concept is below the 50% maximum impervious surface coverage
limit (16.5 acres of impervious / 71.39 gross acres = 23.11%). The proposed wood
recycling yard is more than 300 feet away from residential properties as noted in the
narrative. While a permanent structure is not proposed at this time, there will be
stockpiles estimated at a height of 20’ to 30’ per the applicant. The maximum principal
building height in this district is 35’.
The Council may want to discuss whether they would want to see the same setback and
height limits for structures applied to stockpiles, or if a different standard should be
applied.
Shoreland Overlay
In addition to the above district standards, a large portion of the site is also subject to
the Shoreland Overlay district standards. Specifically:
- Structure setback of 100’ from the Ordinary High-Water Level.
o Structures without water-oriented needs must be double the structure
setback, or screened from view from public waters by vegetation,
topography, or both.
- Septic setback of 75’ from the Ordinary High-Water Level.
- Structure setback of 30’ from top of bluff.
- Impervious surface coverage of lots must not exceed 25% of the lot area.
- Shoreland vegetative buffer and monuments requirements as outlined in Section
1050.020, Subd. 6.
Again, while there are no permanent structures proposed, the Council should provide
feedback on whether the Shoreland setbacks provisions make sense to apply to
stockpiles on the site.
Large parking areas are proposed within the Shoreland. The concept plan indicates that
16.5 acres of impervious surface is proposed with the current site layout. However,
some of this is located outside of the Shoreland Overlay district, and the acreage of the
site within the Shoreland Overlay district was not provided. This data would need to be
confirmed with a formal land use application should this project move forward. The
applicant will also need to keep this limitation in mind when considering the footprint and
location of future building locations on the site that may also fall within the Shoreland.
Wetland Overlay
There are 7 delineated wetlands within the project boundaries, and these are shown on
the concept plan with buffers. The City’s Natural Resources Communities Quality
Page 7 of 16
Ranking map confirms wetlands near the creak are medium quality, and the other
wetlands are not shown on the map so are also assumed to be of medium quality. A
formal application will need to show required wetland buffer monuments and certify the
following to confirm compliance with the Wetland Overly standards:
- Wetland Buffer Average Width – 25’
- Wetland Buffer Width (Min.) – 20’.
- Wetland Buffer Width (Max.) – 40’.
There is also a 15’ structure setback from wetland buffers, and a 5’ setback is required
for roads and parking lots. The Council should discuss whether stockpiles should abide
by the structure setback.
Wetland buffers will need to be established with this development. The Engineering
Memo requires a wetland buffer establishment plan to be provided with the submittal of
a formal application. This must detail where there is existing buffer vegetation that will
be preserved, how and when the new buffers will be planted, and a schedule for
maintenance.
Exterior Storage
Section 1060.010 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates exterior storage. Generally,
exterior storage is only allowed as an accessory use in conjunction with a principal use
and a principal building. There are a number of regulations pertaining to the storage of
vehicles and equipment that are applicable to this site which may have an impact on the
proposed use and site design. Specifically:
A. In the commercial zoning districts, up to 3 commercial vehicles such as
delivery and service trucks up to 12,000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating
(GVWR) may be parked without screening if such vehicles relate to the
principal use. Construction equipment, trailers, and vehicles over 12,000
pounds GVWR shall require screening.
B. No motor vehicle repair work of any kind shall be permitted in conjunction with
exposed off-street parking facilities, except for minor repairs of vehicles
owned by the occupant or resident of the principal use for which the parking
space is intended.
C. No exterior storage of car parts is allowed at any time.
D. Per Chapter 80 of the City Code, inoperable or junk motor vehicles cannot be
stored outside of an enclosed garage or building.
E. Per Chapter 82 of the City Code, a vehicle is parked if it remains in one
location for less than 72 hours. A vehicle is considered storage when it
remains in one location for 72 hours or more.
F. Equipment is considered exterior storage regardless of the length it remains
in a single location.
Page 8 of 16
G. All exterior storage in non-residential zoning districts must be located in the
rear or side yard and shall be screened so as not to be visible from adjoining
properties and public streets.
The concept plan and narrative indicate the labeled parking areas will also be used for
storage. However, storage has a different screening standard than parking within the
Zoning Ordinance. With this in mind, the applicant will need to clearly define storage
versus parking areas should the project move forward.
Based on the applicant’s narrative explaining vehicles will be parked year-round on the
site along with the seasonal nature of the applicant’s landscaping businesses, it seems
likely that the parking areas will have at least some vehicles that are stored for 72 or
more hours during the winter months. It is unclear how to best reconcile this with the
proposed use the rest of the year. Council should provide feedback on whether all
parking areas would need to be screened to account for the potential for these areas to
turn into storage areas throughout the year, or if flexibility to the underlying code could
be addressed as part of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow the proposed uses.
Refuse
The concept plan does not include details on how garbage and trash on the site will be
managed. No exterior storage of trash or garbage is permissible except in an accessory
building enclosed by walls and a roof or in closed containers within a totally screened
area. Because there would be no permanent principal building during the first phase of
this proposal, a closed container within a totally screened area would be required as the
City Code does not currently allow an accessory building to be constructed prior to a
principal building.
Lighting
The site must comply with the lighting regulations in Section 1060.040. Lighting leading
into or within the site is not shown or discussed in the concept plan submittal. Typically,
one streetlight is required for rural developments at the intersection leading into the
development. The Engineering Memo provides that the street lighting locations shall be
reviewed by Public Safety with the final lighting location determined at the time of final
plat approval. Any lighting used to illuminate the off-street parking areas shall be so
arranged as to reflect glare away from adjoining property, adjacent residential uses, and
public rights-of-way.
Building Standards
As previously stated, a permanent building is not proposed with the initial phase of this
concept plan. However, the applicant should consider the building standards outlined in
Section 1060.050 of the Zoning Ordinance as there are material standards for non-
residential buildings that will need to be kept in mind for the intended future phases that
will involve at least one building.
Page 9 of 16
Parking
Section 1060.060 of the Zoning Ordinance provides the City’s regulations for Parking
and Loading areas. The applicant proposes general vehicle parking areas for the yard
waste recycling component of the site. Additionally, the applicant proposes parking
areas to be utilized for his landscaping company and similar companies looking to lease
parking spaces.
Since the intended uses as proposed are not currently contemplated in the City Code,
there is not an existing formula to apply to the minimum parking requirements. The most
similar uses contemplated in the Zoning Ordinance assume that there will be a principal
building, so there is a square footage component to the formula. Should this concept
plan move forward, staff will identify a recommended parking formula for the uses on
the site that can be included in the Zoning Ordinance Amendment.
The applicant’s narrative indicates that drive aisles and parking areas will be delineated
through signage. Drive aisles and parking lots must meet a minimum front setback of
100’ (or 50’ with enhanced landscaping) along the County Roads. Additionally, parking
lots and drive aisles must meet a minimum setback of at least 10’ from side and rear
property lines. Further, a 5’ setback is required from wetland buffers. The Public Safety
memo requires the drive aisles to be no less than 12’ wide and highly recommends a
minimum drive aisle width of 20’ to accommodate two-way traffic.
Individual parking spaces and dimensions are not shown on the concept plan. A parking
plan must be provided should the project move forward that outlines the dimensions of
parking stalls and drive aisles to confirm compliance with the following dimensional
standards:
Aggregate parking areas are proposed. The Engineering Memo indicates all areas
designated for parking shall have concrete curbing and a paved surface per the
Corcoran City Code (ribbon curbing is acceptable). However, there is a provision in the
Zoning Ordinance that allows gravel parking lots in the CR under the following specific
set of conditions:
1. The City Engineer has reviewed the grading plan and finds that surface water
is managed in compliance with City and State requirements.
Page 10 of 16
2. A dust control program is provided by the landowner and approved by the
City Council.
3. Handicapped accessible routes are provided on site in compliance with State
and Federal requirements.
4. The gravel parking areas are fully screened to a height of 3 feet from the
public streets and adjoining properties.
5. The commercial development requiring the parking is seasonal in nature
(operates 9 months or less per calendar year).
6. Landscaped areas equal to 10% of the lot area shall be provided in parking
lots that contain space for 50 or more cars.
7. Areas designed for storage purposes only, which are fenced and properly
screened, may be permitted to utilize other durable and dustless surface
materials subject to the approval of the City Council.
8. Loading areas established after March 23, 2004, shall be prohibited within
300’ of residentially zoned or guided property unless completely screened by
an intervening building. Loading areas not requiring screening by an
intervening building shall be screened from adjacent residentially zoned or
guided property using berms, fences, or walls to provide 100 percent opacity
to a height of at least 10 feet. The height of the screening shall be measured
from the grade of the loading areas.
Based on the applicant’s narrative, the leased parking will be a year-round operation.
With this in mind, at least one of the above standards cannot be satisfied, and a paved
parking lot would be required. Council should provide feedback whether there is support
to deviate from this standard. More data would need to be provided with a formal
application to confirm the other standards could be satisfied.
Landscaping
Section 1060.070 provides the landscaping and screening requirements. A detailed
landscaping plan was not submitted as part of the sketch plat application. The
applicant’s narrative states an intention to utilize soft evergreen trees, such as
arborvitaes, to help absorb noise on the site, but it is noted that these can take time to
grow. Section 1060.070, Subd. 2 (G), provides the following minimum tree calculations
for non-residential uses:
a. One overstory tree per 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area or one
tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter; whichever is greater.
b. One understory shrub for each 300 square feet of building or one tree per 30
lineal feet of site perimeter; whichever is greater.
Since only a temporary structure is proposed at this time, a landscaping plan would
need to be provided using the formula based on the perimeter of the site. The
Page 11 of 16
landscape plan submitted with a more formal application must complete these
calculations.
Buffer Ordinance
A buffer yard class “D” is required between the CR and RR districts and must be
established along the east and south perimeters of the site. This buffer yard must be
included on the landscaping plan and held within an easement protecting the plantings
and limiting other uses within these spaces. These buffer areas must include native
plantings and prairie grass for the ground cover. The table below provides the different
options for planting requirements based on the applicable buffer yard class and buffer
width selected by the applicant.
Buffer Yard Options
Buffer Yard
Class Width
Overstory
Plantings1
Understory
Plantings1
Shrubs or
Tall
Native
Prairie
Plantings1
2 Structures3
D
30
feet 6 9 36
Minimum 6-foot
fence
40
feet 4 6 24
Minimum 6-foot
fence
40
feet 8 12 24 None
50
feet 6 9 18 None
50
feet 3 4 9
Minimum 6-foot
berm
1 per 100 feet of distance
2 Requirement must be met by shrubs, tall native prairie plantings, or a
combination deemed acceptable by the City
3 Fences are subject to requirements in Section 1060.080
Other Required Screening
Parking stalls with 4 or more stalls must be screened to a height of at least 3 feet from
properties guided or zoned residential and from public streets. The applicant’s narrative
provides that there will be trees on the backside of the parking areas. Detailed
information on any existing vegetation or new plantings proposed for parking screening
must be provided with a formal application for review.
Page 12 of 16
Exterior storages areas are required to be screened with the use of landscaping,
fencing, and walls with the existing topography where possible. When the existing
topography prohibits effective screening, berming may be used. Planting screens are
the preferred method and must consist of hardy trees that will provide a minimum of
80% opacity year-round. Planting screens shall contain a mix of overstory and
understory plantings and a mix of deciduous and coniferous materials. Fences or walls
may also be used in conjunction with landscaping to provide screening with a minimum
of 80% opacity provided. Screening shall not interfere with drive or pedestrian visibility
for vehicles entering or existing the premises. When the topography requires berming,
berms shall not exceed a 3:1 slope.
Fences and Walls
Standards for fences and walls are outlined in Section 1060.080. The applicant’s
narrative indicates that there will be a security gate and fencing to manage the site.
Additionally, it provides that the parking areas will have a fence of at least 3’ but could
be potentially as tall as 12’. The location of any fencing is not shown on the concept
plan. Fences require a zoning permit if located within a drainage and utility easement,
25-feet from lot frontages, or 10’ from an interior lot line. A building permit is required for
fences over 7’ in height. Fences are subject to a 100’ setback from County Roads if the
fence is at or exceeds 50% opacity or 4 feet in height (there is some flexibility when the
fence does not exceed 7’ in height and is required by Code for screening). The setback
from County Roads can be reduced to 60’ with reduced landscaping as outlined in
Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(K). Fences can be located within this setback with an
opacity of less than 50% (e.g., wrought irons, chain link, split rail, etc.) and a height that
doesn’t exceed 4’ in height. Fences over 7’ tall must meet all building setback
requirements for the CR districts. Additionally, fencing must allow a 30’ sight visibility
triangle from intersections and driveways on the property and adjacent properties.
Streets & Access
A proposed paved access into the site is shown on the concept plan just north of Public
Works. Per the Engineering Memo, the development shall provide a new public
roadway north of the Public Works site and connect the Public Works site to the new
roadway. This is consistent with conversations that were had as part of the Kariniemi
Meadows concept plans when access in this area was discussed. The final access
location is subject to approval by Hennepin County. Further, an additional access to
County Road 19 for the southern portion of the site will need to be approved by
Hennepin County. If not approved, the public roadway would need to be extended
through the site to service that area.
A tree farm area is indicated in the northeast corner of the site near County Road 10.
Access to this area must be identified on the site plan as part of a formal application. A
revised concept plan submitted by the applicant on January 13th indicates a turnaround
area in the northwest portion of the site. However, not enough detail is provided to
Page 13 of 16
evaluate the proposed turnaround to confirm whether it is in line with City specifications.
The Public Safety memo identified the need for a circulation plan to evaluate turning
radiuses, circulation patterns, and drive aisle widths. Additionally, internal circulation
areas, including parking lots, must pass a roll test.
Hennepin County provided initial feedback on the concept plan as well. Left and right
turn lanes are recommended depending on the volume of traffic anticipated. The gate is
a concern, and it is noted the gate should be as far back as possible with adequate
width to double up the queue if necessary to ensure access to the site does not create a
queueing problem on County Road 19.
Grading/Stormwater
The Engineering Memo details a number of items related to grading and stormwater
management on the site. The stormwater management basins shown on the concept
plan will require further review and will likely need to be moved further away from Rush
Creek to meet all City standards. Hennepin County also noted concerns with the
stormwater management basis in relation to the proposed impervious surface coverage
and the proximity to an impaired stream and floodway. Any existing drainage pattern
alterations will require approval from Hennepin County as well as the watershed.
Additional details are needed regarding proposed site grading in areas with proposed
aggregate surface. Any gravel areas shall require Best Management Practices (BMPs)
in place to control the limits of gravel based on the approved site plan areas while
preventing erosion or migration of materials. Additional details will also need to be
provided on the grading of the proposed stormwater ponds. A stormwater management
plan and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required. The project
must comply with all City and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission
standards. Finally, a formal site plan must identify all proposed impervious surface
areas to ensure the stormwater infrastructure and BMPs are sized appropriately for
anticipated development areas.
Utilities
Sine the property is not located within the MUSA, the site would be served by private
well and septic. The applicant narrative explains bathroom facilities, at least prior to a
building on the site, would be provided by a porta potty. Since several areas of the site
plan are noted for future use, staff recommends the development review the lot for
potential well and septic locations for current and future locations to ensure viable
buildings and lots.
Noise
The noise from the proposed equipment can be loud and ongoing. The applicant’s
narrative states an intention to utilize soft evergreen trees, such as arborvitaes, to help
absorb noise on the site, but it is noted that these can take time to grow. Regardless,
Page 14 of 16
the site must comply with MN Pollution Control Standards. The Council should discuss if
they would like to see additional strategies utilized to mitigate noise from the site.
Signage
Signage must comply with the standards outlined in Chapter 84 of the City Code. No
information on signage for the
site was provided with the
concept plan.
Trail
There is remaining trail work
that must be completed as
part of the Kariniemi Meadows
approvals. The trail has been
field located through this site,
but it has yet to be
constructed. It is expected the
trail construction will require
significant tree removal. The
concept plan does not show
the trail easement in the
correct location. The Council
should provide feedback on
whether they would like to
reopen the discussions on the
proposed trail location. When
development proceeds on
Outlot A, the applicant will
need to provide temporary
construction easements for
trail construction as part of the
conditions of approval.
Site Plan Approval
Site plan approval is required
for all commercial uses. The
applicant’s narrative states the proposed layout is tentative and temporary as it relates
to the equipment storage and the wood recycling area. It will be important for the final
site plan to identify the boundaries for the different components and uses of the site. For
example, there can be flexibility for exterior storage within designated storage areas, but
approved storage areas and locations cannot be expanded or moved without approval
of a site plan amendment. The applicant will want to keep this in mind as they consider
the layout they want to move forward for site plan approval.
Figure 4 Trail Easement from Kariniemi Meadows
Page 15 of 16
Next Steps
Assuming the applicant chooses to proceed with the application as proposed, the
anticipated process is outlined as follows:
1. Land use application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning to CR, and
a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to add proposed uses to CR.
2. Land use application for Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, potentially a Conditional and
Interim Use Permit (dependent on how the uses are approved in the Zoning
Ordinance Amendment), and potentially a Variance.
3. Land use application for Final Plat.
4. Watershed approval of City-approved final grading and stormwater plans.
4. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council review and discuss the concept plan and
provide the feedback. The following specific items identified in the staff report are as
follows:
1. Is there support to re-guide and rezone the property to allow for commercial
development?
2. Is there support to amend the Rural Commercial district to allow some or all the
proposed uses not currently allowed within the district (i.e., yard waste recycling
facility and a parking lot without a principal building)?
a. If so:
i. Is it preferred these uses be allowed by-right, via a conditional use
permit, and/or through an interim use permit?
ii. Is there any feedback on standards staff and the applicant should
consider to inform such a Zoning Ordinance Amendment?
iii. Are porta potties on a semi-permanent basis acceptable?
1. Are there screening or setback requirements the Council
would want to see applied? (e.g., setbacks from property
lines and wetlands/Rush Creek, screening, etc.)
3. Is the leasing of exterior storage and parking space for vehicles and equipment
to other companies acceptable without other businesses being a tenant of a
building on the site?
4. Should the same structure setbacks and height limits in the CR, Shoreland
Overlay, and Wetland Overlay apply to stockpiles? Or should there be a different
standard applied?
5. How should the concern that parking areas will turn into storage areas during
winter months for space that is leased year-round to seasonal businesses be
addressed? Do all parking areas need to be screened to account for the potential
for these areas to turn into storage areas, or should flexibility to the underlying
code be addressed as part of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow the
proposed uses?
Page 16 of 16
6. Based on the applicant’s narrative, at least one standard to allow for a gravel
parking lot in the CR cannot be satisfied as it is a year-round operation. Does
Council want to allow deviation from this standard?
7. The Council should discuss if they would like to see additional strategies utilized
to mitigate noise from the site other than planting of trees.
8. The Council should provide feedback on whether they would like to reopen the
discussions on the proposed trail location.
The Council should provide clear direction to the applicant so that they can decide
whether to proceed with a formal application. Any comments given by the City Council
are advisory in nature and non-binding. While the comments are non-binding, the
applicant will consider the input from the City Council when they prepare their formal
submittal.
Attachments:
1. Applicant’s Narrative
2. Concept Plan
3. Engineering Memo
4. Public Safety Memo
5. Hennepin County Email
To address the questions sent over, the piles will be between 20 and 30
feet tall, within the first year we will have a gated code or card entry gate
installed at the entrance to the yard , until this process is completed, we
will have a temporary shack inside the fence for check in to the yard until
the automated system is installed. The 8 employees stated on the last
info sent over are employes of A+ A Tree & Landscaping LLC not
employees of the yard. The fence will be a minimum of 3 feet tal l for the
parking area but will more than likely be taller 6 or 12 feet tall. For the
time being a porta-potty will be used until future build is planned. The
drainage control will have berms directed to the storm water run off
areas. The parking areas and the drive isle will be defined by signage. The
commercial tenant parking is not a 9 month term it is a year round
parking. Dust control will be a in house program or a outsourced
program. There is no buildings or parking lots yet for customers and and
at that time we will have handicap parking addressed. with in the first
year we will be opening up the tenant par king and the wood recycling
yard. The gate and aggregate roads will be done first year as well. The
wood recycling yard is already 300Ft away from any residential property.
We will be looking to have the trail moved to the southside of the
property for county rd 19 otherwise the trail will be going in -between 2
commercial properties fenced off on both sides. The layout of the
property is ten tative and temporary as to equipment parking and what
not for the wood recycling yard. The tub grinder will be moved as
necessary to accommodate the workings of the yard and processing. It
will be moved in and hauled out until the purchase of our own tub grinder
is completed.
1/13/25, 4:09 PM tg7000-tub-grinder-in-action (670×445)
https://www.vermeer.com/getmedia/874d05f4-cec9-4580-ac6d-d4d5e7db6aed/tg7000-tub-grinder-in-action?width=670&height=445&ext=.jpg 1/1
>>
>
R
U
S
H
C
R
E
E
K
>
>
>
K>>>
<
<
<
R
U
S
H
C
R
E
E
K
<
<
<
CCCCCRCRCRCR
EREREEEEEEEEEKEKEKKK>KKKKKKK>>>>>>>
E
E
E
EEEE
CO RD No 10
CO
R
D
N
o
1
9
EL
L
E
R
Y
L
A
N
E
CI
V
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
SI
T
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
PLAN LEGEND:
Memo
To: Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works
Director
From: Kent Torve, City Engineer
Steve Hegland, PE
Project: A+A Tree & Landscape Concept
Review
Date: January 13, 2025
Exhibits:
This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents:
1. Concept Plan – A+A Tree and Landscape dated November 13, 2024
Comments:
General:
1. In addition to engineering comments, the proposed concept plan is subject to planning, zoning, and
land-use requirements and shall meet all other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran.
2. Final approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission must be attained before any
site grading or activity may commence.
3. The adjacent Kariniemi Meadows development has several outstanding development items to be
completed within the project location including establishing the wetland buffers and creating the
offroad trail (which would include associated tree removals). This proposed development should be
aware of and not interfere with those responsibilities.
Plat:
1. The applicant shall have all drainage and utility easements provided and shown and all platting
requirements met per the City Code.
2. D&U easements shall be provided over the 100-year floodplain, delineated wetlands, and the wetland
buffers.
a. Easement should cover the upstream floodplain elevation and provide elevation labels on
construction plans for future use in building permit review.
3. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all stormwater infrastructure including drainage
piping, stormwater ponding areas, stormwater treatment areas and EOF’s.
4. There is an existing trail easement through the proposed development that does not match the
location shown on the site plan. The trail easement shall be preserved or alternative path shall be
identified to be reviewed and approved by the City.
5. County Road 19 ROW dedication shall be reviewed by Hennepin County.
January 13, 2025
A+A Tree & Landscape
Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director
Page 2 of 3
Transportation
1. The development shall provide a new roadway north of the public works site and shall connect the
public works site to the new roadway. Hennepin County will review and approve the access location.
Development shall be responsible for meeting any Hennepin County requirements for this access.
2. All roadways shall be constructed in accordance with City Standards.
3. All areas designated for parking shall have concrete curbing and a paved surface per Corcoran City
Code. Ribbon curb is acceptable.
4. An additional access to County Road 19 for the southern portion of the site will need to be approved
by Hennepin County and if not approved, the public roadway would need to be extended through the
site to service that area.
5. Street lighting locations shall be reviewed by Public Safety and final lighting locations shall be
determined at the time of Final Plat.
6. Identify on site plan how the northern Tree Farm Area will be accessed. Any access routes should be
incorporated into site plans and he site stormwater management plan.
Grading /Stormwater
1. Eastern stormwater management basins are likely too close to Rush Creek to meet all city standards.
Further review will be required.
2. Additional details shall be provided regarding the site grading in areas with proposed aggregate
surface. All parking areas shall have pavement in accordance with City Code and any gravel areas
shall have BMP’s in place to clearly control the limits of gravel to the approved areas and prevent
erosion or migration of materials.
3. Additional details shall be provided regarding the grading of stormwater ponds and the installation of
storm sewer infrastructure.
4. A stormwater management plan shall be provided. Similar rural commercial developments use
approximately 5% to 7% of buildable land area for stormwater management due to heavy soils.
5. The systems are privately owned and shall conform to the City Stormwater Guidelines and Elm Creek
Watershed Management Commission Standards. Applicant could consider regional pond planning
to minimize the number of pond areas and maximizing buildable areas.
6. It is assumed that all wetland buffers will be established with this development. A buffer establishment
plan shall be provided noting the details on where existing buffer vegetation will be preserved, and
how and when the new buffers will be planted as well as a plan and schedule for the maintenance.
7. Preparation of and compliance with a SWPPP shall be required for construction.
8. Site plans shall identify all proposed impervious areas at time of preliminary plat to ensure that
stormwater infrastructure and BMP’s are sized for anticipated development areas.
January 13, 2025
A+A Tree & Landscape
Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director
Page 3 of 3
Water/Sanitary Sewer
1. This development is outside of the MUSA and any proposed uses would be serviced via private well
and septic systems.
2. The site plan shows a variety of exterior uses, but several areas are noted for future use. We would
recommend the development review lot for potential well and septic locations for current and future
locations to ensure viability of proposed and future lots.
End of Comments
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF CORCORAN
8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340
763.420.2288
E-mail - general@corcoranmn.gov / Web Site – www.corcoranmn.gov
Memo
To: Planning (Planners Lindahl and Davis McKeown)
From: Director of Public Safety Gottschalk
Date: December 4, 2024
Re: City File 24-043 A+A Tree and Landscape Concept Plan
A Public Safety plan review meeting was held on December 4, 2024, to review the submitted
application materials for the A+A Tree and Landscape Concept Plan. In attendance were the
following: Police Chief Gottschalk, Fire Chief Leuer, Fire Chief Fehrens, Fire Chief Malewicki,
Building Official Rosenau, Construction Services Supervisor Pritchard, Planner Klingbeil, and
Community Development Director Davis McKeown. The comments below are based on the materials
received by the City as of November 19, 2024, and are intended as initial feedback. Further plan
review will need to be completed as site plans are finalized.
1. A full road access into the site that meets City specifications is needed.
2. A site circulation plan will be required with the preliminary application. This must address
the following:
• Turning radiuses for internal circulation for firetrucks must be provided based on
the enclosed specifications.
• Circulation patterns for in and out of the proposed gate for the site.
• Interior circulation must be delineated with drive lanes as a bare minimum width
of at least 12’ but 20’ is highly recommended.
• Internal circulation areas must pass a roll test.
3. Gravel parking areas and drive lanes must pass a roll test.
4. Temporary bathrooms are not sufficient based on the proposed number of employees that
will access the site regularly.
5. Outdoor storage of combustible items must comply with all applicable regulations.
6. It is recommended that the City sets a limit on the height of the proposed piles of yard
waste.
7. The business owner will need to prevent tracking on to the public roadway.
• Vehicles should be cleaned regularly.
• Compliance with the City’s MS4 permit will be required.
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:Dwight Klingbeil
To:Natalie Davis
Subject:Fw: [External] A+A Tree & Landscaping Concept Plan (City File 24-042)
Date:Friday, January 10, 2025 4:20:19 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Outlook-lsli1qao.png
County Comments for A+A Concept:
From: Transportation.Plats <Transportation.Plats@hennepin.us>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 3:58 PM
To: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov>
Subject: RE: [External] A+A Tree & Landscaping Concept Plan (City File 24-042)
Hi Dwight —
Here are our comments on A+A’s proposal:
CSAH 19 is a high-speed roadway. We recommend left and right turn lanes depending
on the volume of traffic expected.
We want to be sure traffic won’t back up onto CSAH 19, especially with a gated
driveway. We would want the gate as far as reasonable from the roadway and with
adequate width to double up the queue if necessary.
We would like to see internal circulation plans.
Recycling site like this is needed, especially with emerald ash borer.
Will need to see stormwater report to make sure Ordinance 22 is met. Stormwater
management basins are definitely going to be pulling their weight here. 16.5-acres
of impervious surface immediately adjacent impaired stream and floodway. It’s
outside our wheelhouse, but they’re definitely going to have to work with MPCA
and watershed to make sure not discharging anything extra in terms of pollutants
or increased flow under CSAH 10.
The existing drainage patterns shall not be altered unless approved by Hennepin
County. Watershed district approval and drainage calculations are required if the
work alters existing drainage patterns. Post-construction flow rates entering
Hennepin County’s drainage system, overland or through pipes, shall not exceed
CAUTION: This email was sent from outside of Hennepin County. Unless you
recognize the sender and know the content, do not click links or open attachments.
pre-construction rates for the two-, 10- and 100-year events. From
https://www.hennepin.us/your-government/ordinances/ordinance-22
Thanks — Dan
Dan Patterson
PlannerTransportation Planning
hennepin.us
701 Fourth Avenue SouthMinneapolis, MN 55415 MCL608
From: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2024 2:01 PM
To: Kevin Mattson <kmattson@corcoranmn.gov>; Torve, Kent <kent.torve@stantec.com>; Hegland,
Steven <steven.hegland@stantec.com>; Transportation.Plats <Transportation.Plats@hennepin.us>;
Matt Gottschalk <mgottschalk@corcoranmn.gov>; Ryan Burns <rburns@corcoranmn.gov>
Cc: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov>; Kendra Lindahl <klindahl@landform.net>
Subject: [External] A+A Tree & Landscaping Concept Plan (City File 24-042)
Hello all,
We received a concept plan to operate his landscaping business at A+A Tree &
Landscaping LLC. This use is likely to resemble a Yard Waste Recycling facility. Please
have all comments returned by January 13, 2025.
Thank you,
Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify
the sender of the transmission error and then promptly permanently delete this message from
your computer system.
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7b.
City Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Dwight Klingbeil
Topic:
Lother Subdivision Concept Plan
(PID 12-119-23-22-0009)
(City File No. 24-048)
Action Required:
Feedback
1. Application Request
The applicants, Brian and Jacque Lother, request
an opportunity to appear before the City Council to
solicit informal comments on a concept plan for a
proposed subdivision of the parcel located at
10110 County Road 116 (PID 12-119-23-22-0009),
on the northeast corner of County Road 116 and
Hunters Ridge. The proposal includes subdividing
the property into 22 single-family villa lots and one
outlot on the 9.87-acre site.
2. Background
The subject property is an existing lot within the
Hunters Place 2nd Addition, which was approved by
Council on February 18, 2021. The subdivision
created a 3.25-acre site for a new City well and water treatment plant and a 9.88-acre
site, which preserved the Lother home and
accessory buildings.
3. Context
Zoning and Land Use
The site consists of a single 9.87-acre parcel at
10110 County Road 116 (PID 12-119-23-22-0009).
The property is zoned Single Family Residential 1
(RSF-1) and guided Existing Residential. The site
is located within the 2040 Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA) boundary and is in the first
stage of the 2040 staging plan.
Surrounding Properties
Figure 1 Project Location
Figure 2 Zoning Map
Page 2 of 3
The guiding, zoning, and existing use of the surrounding properties are detailed in the
table below. All surrounding properties are within the MUSA.
Direction Guided Zoning District Use
Staging
Phase
North (west) Existing Residential RSF-1
Water Treatment
Facility 1
North (east) Existing Residential
Urban Reserve
(UR) Residential 4
East Existing Residential
Urban Reserve
(UR) Residential 4
South Existing Residential
Urban Reserve
(UR) Residential 4
West
Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
Planned Unit
Development
(PUD) Residential 1
Natural Characteristics of the Site
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan Natural Resources Inventory Areas Map identifies no
significant communities on the site. The 2040 Wetland Locations and Classifications
Map indicates a shallow marsh and a deep marsh along the northwestern corner of the
property. There also is an existing pond in the furthest northeast corner of the site.
4. Analysis
Planning staff coordinated review of
the concept plan with Public Works
and Engineering as well as the
Public Safety team. Memos from the
City Engineer and Public Safety are
enclosed in this report as well as
incorporated into the following
analysis as appropriate. The
applicant is responsible for reviewing
the entirety of both memos and
incorporating the feedback as the
project progresses.
Use
The proposed subdivision consists
of 22 single-family villa lots, ranging
in size from 8,276.4 – 38,768.4
square feet as well as one outlot
containing existing wetlands and Figure 3 Concept Plan
Page 3 of 4
proposed stormwater ponding. The use of a single-family development is a permitted
use in low-density residential districts within the MUSA. The outlot will either trigger the
need for a Homeowners Association to govern and manage the shared outlot or should
be incorporated into the surrounding lots.
Lot Analysis
The site is currently zoned Single Family Residential 1 (RSF-1). The lot standards for
the existing RSF-1 district are as follows:
RSF-1 Standard
Minimum lot area 20,000 square feet
Minimum lot width 100 feet
Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks:
Front, from Major Roadways* 100 feet
Front, from all other streets 40 feet
Front Porch (≤ 120 square feet) 30 feet
Side (living) 10 feet
Side (garage)*** 5 feet
Rear 30 feet
Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet
*Major Roadways are state highways and county roads.
*** Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall
be 15 feet.
The minimum lot size of the existing RSF-1 district is 20,000 square feet, or 0.46 acres.
Only two lots within the concept plan (Lots 12 and 13) would comply with this
requirement. The lot sizes proposed would require rezoning the property to a district
that allows smaller lot dimensions. The lot standards for the RSF-2 and RSF-3 district
are as follows:
Standard RSF-2 RSF-3
Minimum lot area 11,000 square feet 7500 square feet
Minimum lot width 80 feet 65 feet
Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks:
Front, from Major Roadways* 100 feet 100 feet
Front, from all other streets 20 feet 20 feet
Front Portch (≤ 120 square feet) 15 feet 15 feet
Side (living) 10 feet 10 feet
Side (garage)*** 5 feet 5 feet
Rear 30 feet 30 feet
Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet
*Major Roadways are state highways and county roads.
Page 4 of 5
*** Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall
be 15 feet.
The concept plan proposes 22 lots ranging in size from 0.19 acres to 0.89 acres. The
RSF-2 district allows a minimum lot area of 11,000 square feet (0.252 acres), whereas
the RSF-3 district has a minimum lot area requirement of 7500 square feet (0.172
acres). Only eight of the lots within the concept plan would comply with the minimum lot
area requirements of the RSF-2 district, while all 22 lots would comply with the area
requirements of the RSF-3 district.
The proposed subdivision also consists of a variety of lot widths ranging from 57 ft –
120 ft. The RSF-2 district requires a minimum lot width of 80 feet, while the RSF-3
district requires a minimum lot width of 65 feet. Only six lots within the concept plan
comply with the lot width requirements of the RSF-2 district, while nineteen lots comply
with the RSF-3 lot width requirements. There are three lots that currently fail to meet the
lot width requirement (Lots 11, 16, and 19). Lots 11 and 16 are on a cul-de-sac which
means the lot width requirement is measured at the minimum front setback. However,
even with this flexibility, the lot width is estimated to be below 65 feet.
The concept plan does not illustrate building pad locations, however, based on the
building setback lines, it appears that several lots along County Road 116 will face
difficulties complying with the minimum setback requirements from County Roads. The
minimum setback for frontages along County Road 116 is 100 feet in all zoning districts.
This can be reduced to 60’ with enhanced landscaping along the County Road. The
new lots created that will abut County Road 16 appear to indicate a setback of less than
50 feet. Staff notes that complying with a 60-foot setback may be particularly
challenging for Lots 1 and 2.
Lot 12 contains the existing home of the property owner with a barn both with
nonconforming setbacks from County Road 116. The structure setback from County
Road 116 will be further reduced with dedication of new right-of-way (ROW). It appears
the barn would be able to comply with a 60-foot setback with enhanced landscaping, but
the house setback may drop down to as low as 47 feet. This deviation would require
approval of a variance.
The remaining front and rear setbacks appear to be compliant with the RSF-3 district
requirements. The side yard setbacks are different depending on which side contains
the garage, which requires a 10 ft setback, and the living portion of the home, which
requires a 5 ft setback. The concept plan does not make a distinction between these
two options. However, the setback lines on the concept plan appear to take an average
of the two setback requirements and illustrates a 7.5 ft side yard setback for each lot.
Staff believes each lot is capable of complying with the specific side yard setbacks. A
formal application will need to show building pads to clarify the garage side, building
side, and applicable side setbacks for each lot.
Page 5 of 6
Based on the lot analysis of the proposed subdivision, Staff believes the closest
comparable zoning district is the RSF-3 district. The concept plan would comply with the
minimum lot size requirements of this district and would mostly comply with the
minimum lot width requirements. The three lots that fail to meet the lot width
requirement should be reconfigured prior to the formal application to meet the RSF-3
minimum standards. The setbacks from County Road 116 does need to be corrected to
60 feet for the new lots under the assumption enhanced landscaping will be provided,
and the buildability of Lots 1 and 2 should be evaluated by the applicant. If the applicant
determines that the minimum dimensional standards cannot be met, other alternatives
include a variance or a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rather than
RSF-3.
Density
The property is currently guided as Existing Residential in the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. This land use designation does not contemplate future subdivision and anticipates
a density of 0.5/units per acre. The applicant’s narrative indicates a desire to reguide
the property to low density residential which would allow subdivision at a density of 3-5
units per acre. Based on the data provided for the concept plan and the City’s pre-
development density formula (which is what the City uses to evaluate density at the
concept plan and preliminary plat stages of a development), the pre-developable area is
7.94 acres. With 22 units proposed, the pre-development density is estimated at 2.77
units per acre. This number can go up or down as a development moves forward
depending on factors such as wetland buffers or loss of any lots to meet other
requirements.
With a density of 2.77 units per acre, this proposal seems to be closer aligned with the
Conservation Residential land use category which allows subdivision of 2 to 3
units/acre. The intent of the Conservation Residential land use category is to is closer
aligned with the Conservation Residential land use category (2 to 3 units/acre). The
Council may wish to provide feedback on the potential for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to re-guide this property to Conservation Residential.
The Conservational Residential category was adopted with the following description:
This land use designation identified areas for residential development at an
average density of 2 to 3 units per acre. It is expected to primarily accommodate
single-family homes, but twin-homes would also be allowed by the Zoning
Ordinance. This land use category will be used sparingly for sites within the 2040
MUSA boundary where a lower density is desirable due to the extent of natural
resource preservation within a development site.
The concept plan appears to be designed to minimize impacts to wetlands and an
existing tree line in the middle of the site. The Council should discuss whether they
believe this proposal satisfies the criteria to re-guide the property to the Conservation
Residential land use category.
Page 6 of 7
Architectural Design Requirements
All urban residential zoning districts must comply with the design requirements provided
in Section 1040.040, Subd. 8 of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant and potential
builders should review this section of the Ordinance in its entirety. The development is
expected to comply with these standards. A minimum of 5 different front elevation styles
must be provided. No example elevations were provided for evaluation. Homes in
proximity to each other shall not look alike in terms of the combination of color of siding,
accent, and roofing materials as compared to the two homes on each side and the three
homes directly facing the home under consideration.
The front elevation shall have material consisting of brick, stone, stucco, fiber cement
board, redwood, cedar, or something similar. Additionally, the front elevation shall have
no more than 75% of any one type of exterior finish unless the finish is brick, stucco,
and/or stone. Further, if vinyl siding is proposed, it must be used in combination with the
above discussed materials, and a minimum of 3 different variations in color, style,
and/or material is required. The building materials and percentages would need to be
confirmed on the example elevations provided in the preliminary application.
The residential architectural standards require the front elevation to consist of doors,
windows, and variations of the wall face with the use of architectural elements such as
pilasters or columns, wainscots, or canopies. Garages must be architecturally styled to
match the exterior design of the home and must not comprise more than 55% of the
viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage. Allowable roofing materials
include asphalt shingles, wood shingles, concrete, clay, ceramic tile, or residential steel
roofing with hidden fasteners. Roof overhangs must be at least 12 inches. Architectural
elements, measurement and percentage of the garage structure, and roof details must
be confirmed with the preliminary application.
Each façade that faces a street shall receive equal architectural treatment as the front
elevation in terms of materials and articulation. The following lots appear to have
multiple facades that are oriented or visible to a public street: 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 12-14, and
22. Lot 9 arguably may have a façade that faces the cul-de-sac to the west, but the
existing tree line may impact the visibility of that façade assuming it remains as
proposed. More information would need to be provided to confirm whether the side
elevations on this lot will be visible from the cul-de-sac. It is possible the lots that are
impacted by this requirement could increase depending on the final road arrangement.
All other elevations that are not visible from a street must make an effort to incorporate
elements from the front elevation, and each side elevation must include at least one
window or door opening. And lastly, a maximum of 18 inches of the foundation may be
exposed on any elevation.
Lot 12, containing the existing homestead, is arguably subject to all of the above
architectural standards. It could be argued the existing structures are legal,
nonconformities. However, it appears there will be multiple visible facades created by
Page 7 of 8
the new frontage on the cul-de-sac to the east. In other words, the proposed change is
creating a new nonconformity from this standard. The existing architecture may satisfy
this requirement, but more information would need to be provided. If the existing
architecture does not meet this standard, a variance would be required at least from this
standard, or the applicant would have to upgrade the existing house. It will be helpful for
the Council to provide direction on how to address the architecture of the existing home
as it relates to these standards.
Accessory Structure
Lot 12 with the existing homestead includes existing accessory structures. The project
narrative is silent on the intent of these buildings. However, the concept plan seems to
suggest the building furthest west will be removed to allow for the proposed
development, but the accessory structure to the north is suggested to remain. However,
in urban residential districts, accessory buildings shall not exceed 1,000 square feet or
25% of the rear yard, whichever is less. Additionally, accessory buildings cannot be
located in the front yard within urban residential districts. The size and location of the
barn do not meet these standards. At the same time, there may be historical value to
allow the barn to remain as long as possible. It should also be noted the concept plan
indicates there is a potential for Lot 12 to be subdivided further in the future which would
result in removal of the barn at that time. The Council should discuss whether they
believe a variance makes sense to address the barn until there is a future subdivision.
Streets & Access
The concept plan shows two access points within the development, both coming from
the western end of Hunters Ridge. Street A is a cul-de-sac that provides access to Lots
1 – 4, while Street B is a dead-end street that provides access to Lots 5 – 11, 13 – 22,
and the Water Treatment Facility. Direct access on to County Road 116 for the water
treatment facility and the existing home on Lot 12 would likely be diverted the new
proposed local street network as a requirement of Hennepin County.
The Northeast District Plan (Appendix C in the Zoning Ordinance) states cul-de-sacs
should be avoided in factor of a continuous road network. City staff recommends
removal of Street A and loop Street B to Hunters Ridge. In addition to compliance with
the Northeast District Plan, there are Engineering and Public Safety considerations for
this connection. Per the Engineering Memo, abutting cul-de-sacs are discouraged due
to the additional maintenance and stubbed utilities. The Public Safety Memo advises for
connectivity to improve emergency accesses throughout the development.
As part of a formal application, Engineering will review the impacts from the proposed
development to Hunters Ridge to determine if improvements are required. At the very
least, staff anticipates a sidewalk requirement on Hunters Ridge for future connection to
Bellwether. For newly constructed streets, the applicant will need to comply with the
Northeast District Street standards for local roads as shown below.
Page 8 of 9
Parking
Parking standards are provided in Section 1060.060 of the Zoning Ordinance. Single-
family homes require two parking spaces per unit. This will likely be satisfied with the
garages and driveways for the single-family homes.
Trails and Parks
A proposed off-road trail is shown in the 2040 Parks and Trails Plan. However, the
alignment of the trail in the Hope Meadows development shifted the trail alignment
south of the properties on Hunters Ridge. An off-road trail will not be required as part of
this development; however, a public sidewalk will be required consistent with the street
standards of the Northeast District.
Lighting
Street lighting will be required as part of the development. Proposed lighting locations
were not provided on the concept plan. The final street lighting locations are subject to
review by Public Safety with the final plat, must comply with the performance standards
in Section 1060.040 of the Zoning Ordinance, and the style is also determined by the
applicable utility company.
Landscaping
A landscaping plan was not provided with this concept plan. The applicant will be
expected to comply with the City’s landscaping standards in Section 1060.070 of the
Zoning Ordinance, as well as the specific landscaping standards of the Northeast
District as described in Appendix C of the Zoning Ordinance.
Buffer Ordinance
The site is currently zoned RSF-1, however, review of the lot analysis showed that this
development is not compatible with this zoning district. For the sake of evaluating the
buffer yard ordinance at this stage, the proposed development would be considered an
RSF-3 zoning district. A buffer yard class “A” will be required for the area abutting the
water treatment facility, and a buffer yard class “B” along the north, east, and south of
the development. This buffer yard must be included on the landscaping plan, but it will
not count toward the other minimum landscaping requirements. The table below
provides the planting requirements based on the applicable buffer yard class.
Page 9 of 10
Buffer Yard Options
Buffer Yard
Class Width
Overstory
Plantings1
Understory
Plantings1
Shrubs or
Tall
Native
Prairie
Plantings1
2 Structures3
A4
10
feet 1 2 0 None
15
feet 1 1.5 0 None
20
feet 0.5 1.25 0 None
B
10
feet 1 4 6
Minimum 4-foot
fence
20
feet 3 6 9 None
20
feet 1 2 3
Minimum 4-foot
fence
30
feet 2 4 12 None
30
feet 1 2 4
Minimum 4-foot
berm
1 per 100 feet of distance
2 Requirement must be met by shrubs, tall native prairie plantings, or a
combination deemed acceptable by the City
3 Fences are subject to requirements in Section 1060.080
Utilities
The Engineering Memo touches on various items related to municipal sewer and water
for the site. As part of the feasibility study, Engineering will review the need to loop
utilities from Street B to Street A to avoid reconfiguring existing infrastructure on
Hunters Ridge. Plans and profiles for all utilities as well as valve and hydrant locations
will be reviewed at the time of final plat. Impact to the existing sanitary system as well
as existing utility easements will be reviewed as part of the grading plan.
Stormwater Management
The concept plan shows a stormwater pond located in Outlot A, which is in the
northeastern potion of the site. The Engineering Memo explains that the proposed
location of this pond may conflict with trunk sanitary sewer and watermain utilities. Any
impacts to these utilities should be avoided or mitigated. A formal application will require
Page 10 of 11
submittal of a stormwater management plan that complies with the standards of the City
as well as the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission. The applicant should
refer to the City of Corcoran Stormwater Guidelines for Development Review for
standards.
The Engineering Memo also details the drainage swale present through the site. The
applicant must ensure that the drainage channel is properly stabilized to prevent erosion
within the backyards of the developed lots.
Wetlands
The 2040 Wetland Locations and Classifications map indicates the presence of a
shallow march and deep marsh in the northeast corner of the site where the outlot is
proposed. A wetland delineation must be conducted prior to a formal submittal to ensure
no additional wetlands exist on the site. Once all wetlands on the site have been
delineated, wetland buffers will need to be shown along with the required wetland buffer
monuments at the time of preliminary plat. The wetland buffer establishment plan must
confirm whether the applicant plans to use existing buffers as allowed and defined by
the Wetland Overlay District, or if they plan to establish new buffers. The wetland buffer
establishment plan will be reviewed and approved by the City’s Environmental
Specialist.
PUD Design Standards
There are a number of areas where the staff report noted a variance may be needed for
the proposed concept plan to move forward or additional revisions are required.
Typically, multiple variances for a development suggest it should be handled as a PUD.
If the applicant is unable to reconfigure the lots to meet these requirements while
maintaining the minimum density requirements of the Conservation Residential land use
designation, the applicant may consider rezoning the site to a PUD rather than RSF-3.
A PUD allows for variations to the strict application of land use regulations to improve
site design while incorporating design elements that exceed the City’s standards to
offset the effect of any variations. The applicant’s narrative did not indicate an intent to
rezone to a PUD, but it is worthwhile to provide a brief analysis of the proposed concept
plan’s ability in achieving said standards.
A. Appropriate Integration
PUDs must appropriately integrate into existing and future development. This may be
accomplished through the use of similar lot sizes, density, setbacks, and design as well
as the continuation of existing land uses, providing architectural transitions, landscape
buffering, or other means. To the west is Hope Meadows, a mixed-use development
that includes a number of uses, including multi-family apartment buildings, townhomes,
and detached villa lots. Of these uses, the townhomes are the nearest to the proposed
development.
Page 11 of 12
Hope Meadows PUD Standards
Commercial
and multi-family
buildings Townhomes Attached Villas
Minimum Lot Area
25,000 square
feet
4,500 square feet per
unit
14,5000 square
feet per unit
Minimum Lot Width 150 feet N/A N/A
Minimum Lot Depth N/A N/A N/A
Minimum Principal
Structure Setbacks
Front, Major Roadways
50 feet with
enhanced
landscaping
per Section
1060.070, Subd
2(K)
50 feet measured
from the front lot line
of the base lot N/A
Front, Other Steets 25 feet
25 feet measured
from the lot line of the
base lot
25 feet
measured from
the front lot line
of the base lot
- Side None
- 10 feet measured
from the side lot line
of the base lot
- 15 feet between
attached structures
separated by a
common area
- 10 feet
measured from
the side lot line
of the base lot
- 20 feet
between
attached
structures
separated by a
common area
- Rear None
25 feet measured
from the rear lot line
of the base lot
25 feet
measured from
the rear lot line
of the base lot
The development to the east and south is the Hunters Place neighborhood, which
includes a number of larger lots ranging from 2.17 to 10.36 acres. The Council may
choose to consider discussing whether they believe the concept provides an
appropriate integration within the surrounding area, and if there are design elements the
applicant could include to achieve such an integration.
B. Variety and Enhanced Design
A low-density residential PUD must include at least 5 different styles of detached homes
and should meet the City’s established architectural standards. Section 1040.040,
Page 12 of 13
Subd. 8 provides design standards for single-family homes that are applicable to
properties within the RSF-1, RSF-2, RSF-3 zoning district previously discussed.
C. Open Space
As currently proposed, a minimum of 12% of the pre-developable area must be set
aside as open space. Open space consists of upland areas accessible for the common
use of all residents within the PUD. A 12% requirement for this site is estimated to
equate to 1.18 acres. The concept plan includes a 2.32-acre outlot, which contains
existing wetlands and a stormwater pond. It is unclear how much of this lot is upland,
and how accessible/usable it would be to the residents of the development. The Council
may also waive or reduce the open space requirement at their discretion when an
applicant shows that the open space cannot be accommodated with other City
requirements (including minimum density requirements) and/or proposed public
benefits.
If the applicant proceeds with a PUD application, an open space plan must be submitted
with the preliminary PUD development plan. The open space plan must illustrate the
use and/or function of the open space areas and include any proposed improvements
and/or design features of the open space areas.
D. Perimeter Buffer
In addition to the buffer yard landscaping requirement of the RSF-3 district, a perimeter
buffer would be required for portions of the development that abut County Road 116.
E. Public Accessibility
When a PUD includes natural features such as a lake, public access must be provided
to those features. The proposed site does not include such natural features, this PUD
design standard does not apply.
F. Discretionary Standards
The City Council has the authority to impose other standards for a proposed PUD as
are reasonable and necessary to protect and promote the general health, safety, and
welfare of the community and surrounding areas. If additional standards are desired, the
Council may wish to provide this feedback to the applicant now.
G. Prohibited Features and Modifications
PUDs with detached homes must be designed to avoid interior perimeter roads that are
parallel to arterial roadways, to avoid creating a wall of homes. Staff believes that the
final interior roadway will be curvilinear and will not include this prohibited feature.
The applicant will not be able to request flexibility from meeting the minimum required
screening and buffering standards unless the applicant can show there is a site
Page 13 of 14
constraint out of their control that justifies the variation and proposes an alternative
screening method that meets the intent of the screening requirements.
PUD Benefits
PUDs should seek to satisfy several of the identified public benefits in the City’s PUD
Public Benefit Policy. The size and constraints of the site and flexibility requested will be
considered when determining an appropriate number of public benefits proposed with a
is proposed to justify granting a PUD. The City identified 27 public benefits within the
policy, but potential benefits not captured by the policy can be discussed as part of the
concept plan. The City-identified public benefits are attached to this report for reference.
The Council may want to consider what public benefits they would want prioritized
within this small development. Staff notes that preservation of the barn may be seen a
public benefit.
Summary of Discussion Points
Next Steps
Assuming the applicant moves forward with the project, the next steps are outlined
below:
1. Wetland Delineation Application
2. Comprehensive Plan Amendment
3. Preliminary Land Use Application –
a. Option A: Rezone to RSF-3, Preliminary Plat, and a potential Variance.
b. Option B: Rezone to PUD, Preliminary PUD plan, Preliminary Plat.
i. Neighborhood meeting required for a Planned Unit Development.
4. A land use application for a Final Plat (and Final PUD if necessary).
5. Watershed approval of City-approved final grading and stormwater plans.
5. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council review and discuss the concept plan and provide the
applicant with informal comments. The Council should provide clear direction to the
applicant so they can decide whether to proceed with a formal application. In summary,
the Council may wish to provide feedback on the following:
- A comprehensive plan amendment to re-guide the site from Existing Residential
to Conservation Residential.
- Rezoning the site from RSF-1 to RSF-3 with potential for variances.
- Rezoning the site from RSF-1 to PUD to address potential areas of desired
flexibility.
o How the proposal fits within the minimum PUD Design requirements.
o Prioritization of public benefits the Council would like to see for a PUD of
this size.
- Areas noted where a variance/flexibilities/revisions may be required:
o Variance for County Road setback for existing house on Lot 12.
Page 14 of 14
o Minimum lot width requirement.
o Architectural standards as they related to the existing single-family home
on Lot 12.
o The size and location of the existing barn on Lot 12.
Any comments provided by the Council are advisory in nature and are non-binding.
While the comments are non-binding, the applicant will consider the input from the City
Council prior to a formal submittal.
Attachments:
1. Applicant Narrative dated December 19, 2024
2. Concept Plan Exhibit
3. Engineering Memo dated January 13, 2025
4. Public Safety Memo dated January 8, 2025
5. City of Corcoran PUD Public Benefit Policy
DRAWING KEY
ACCESS TO WATER TREATMENT FACILITY
LAND USE SUMMARY
EXISTING WETLAND TO REMAIN
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POND
PRESERVED TREES
FUTURE SUBDIVISION POSSIBLE
TO ALLOW FOR 23 LOTS TOTAL
1
2
SINGLE FAMILY VILLAS (22+ LOTS)
LESS 116 ROW DEDICATION: .17 ACRES
LESS WETLANDS/BUFFERS: 1.93 ACRES
NET DEVELOPABLE AREA: 7.77 ACRES
23 UNITS - MINIMUM DENSITY
NOTE: SITE & BUFFER AREAS TO BE VERIFIED
TOTAL SITE AREA: 9.87 ACRES
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
3
4
5
LOT 1
.26 AC
FB
LOT 2
.33 AC
FB
LOT 3
.27 AC
WO
LOT 4
.25 AC
WO
LOT 5
.26 AC
WO
LOT 6
.27 AC
WO
LOT 7
.28 AC
WO
LOT 9
.25 AC
WO
LOT 10
.25 AC
WO
ST
R
E
E
T
B
ST
R
E
E
T
A
HUNTERS RIDG
E
CO
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
1
1
6
LOT 11
.20 AC
FB/LO
LOT 12
.89 AC
EXISTING
HOME
LOT 13
.43 AC
FB/LO
LOT 14
.20 AC
WO
LOT 15
.21 AC
WO
LOT 16
.21 AC
WO
LOT 17
.24 AC
WO
LOT 18
.25 AC
WO
LOT 19
.24 AC
WO
LOT 8
.23 AC
FB/LO
LOT 20
.19 AC
FB/LO
LOT 21
.19 AC
FB/LO
LOT 22
.22 AC
FB/LO
1 3
2
2WATER
TREATMENT
FACILITY
HOPE MEADOWS
TOWNHOMES
FUTURE
MULTIFAMILY
OUTLOT A
2.32 AC
4
LOTHER SUBDIVISION
CONCEPT PLAN
CORCORAN, MINNESOTA
DECEMBER 19, 2024
W
L
WL WL
W
L
WL
SCALE IN FEET
0 10050
5
5
5
Memo
To: Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works
Director
From: Kent Torve, City Engineer
Steve Hegland, PE
Project: Lother Subdivision Concept Review Date: January 13, 2025
Exhibits:
This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents:
1. Concept Plan – Lother Subdivision Concept Plan dated December 19, 2024.
Comments:
General:
1. Comments provided are preliminary based on the concept plan provided. Additional comments
should be anticipated on future submittals that include more details of the development.
2. In addition to engineering comments, the proposed concept plan is subject to planning, zoning, and
land-use requirements and shall meet other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran, NPDES,
ECWMC, Hennepin County, etc.
3. Development plans should confirm if existing home site will be connected to proposed public utilities
and how access will be provided. Hennepin County will review plan and may require access to come
from new roadway.
Plat:
1. The applicant shall have all drainage and utility easements provided and shown and all platting
requirements met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements (5’ – 10’) shall be provided along
property lines, as standard per City requirements.
2. Easements should be provided over all infrastructure used for the maintenance, conveyance and
treatment of stormwater.
3. Easements should be provided over any/all public infrastructure as applicable.
4. Any existing easements should be provided to the City for review. Vacation of existing easements
currently in place requires a City process and should be identified in the project schedule.
5. County Road 116 ROW designation shall be reviewed by Hennepin County.
Transportation
1. Hunters Ridge will need to be reviewed for impacts from the proposed development to determine if
improvements shall be required.
2. It is expected that sidewalk will be recommended along Hunters Ridge for future connection to
Bellwether.
January 13, 2025
Lother Subdivision
Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director
Page 2 of 2
3. It is recommended that the cul-de-sac currently adjacent to Lots 10-13 be extended to the south in
conjunction with the removal of Street A.
4. Street lighting locations shall be reviewed by public safety and final lighting locations shall be
determined at the time of final plat.
5. It is anticipated that Street B will connect to the Water Treatment Plant and will ultimately be the
primary access route for the facility.
Grading /Stormwater
1. The current location of the stormwater management pond may conflict with trunk sanitary sewer and
watermain utilities. Any impacts to the utilities should be avoided or mitigated.
2. A stormwater management plan shall be provided to confirm that stormwater management is in
accordance with City of Corcoran and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Standards.
3. A wetland delineation shall be completed for the site to ensure no additional wetland are present,
including near the drainage swale through the site. The site plan may need to be adjusted to ensure
that any wetlands or associated buffers are incorporated into the site plan.
4. It is assumed that all wetland buffers will be established with this development. A buffer establishment
plan shall be provided noting the details on where existing buffer vegetation will be preserved, and
how and when the new buffers will be planted as well as a plan and schedule for the maintenance.
5. Preparation of and compliance with a SWPPP shall be required for construction.
6. A large drainage swale is present through the site. The development shall ensure that the drainage
channel is properly stabilized to prevent future erosion within the backyards.
Watermain/Sanitary Sewer
1. Sewer and water utility service is anticipated to be from the north end of the property. Gas, electric,
and other private and public utilities are located adjacent and/or on the property. Preservation of
existing easements and coordination with all public and private utilities will be required.
2. Utility service to Street A as it is currently configured may not be feasible without looping utilities from
Street B which would reconstructing Hunters Ridge between Streets A & B. Extending the northern
cul-de-sac south and removing Street A is recommended.
End of Comments
Page 1 of 1
MEMO
Date: January 8, 2025
To: Planning (Community Development Director Davis McKeown and Planner Klingbeil)
From: Lieutenant Burns
Re: City File 24-048 Lother Concept Plan
A Public Safety plan review meeting was held on January 8, 2025, to review the submitted Concept Plan
application for the Lother Subdivision. In attendance were the following: Police Chief Gottschalk,
Lieutenant Burns, Fire Chief Leuer, Fire Chief Albers, Fire Chief Malewicki, Building Official Rosenau,
Construction Services Supervisor Prichard, Planner Klingbeil, and Community Development Director
Davis McKeown. The comments below are based on the materials submitted on July 23 & September 4,
2024.
1. Cul-de-sacs near the west side of the development should be connected for increased circulation
and improved emergency access.
2. All cul-de-sacs must meet City specifications.
3. An emergency siren is anticipated for this area and is likely to be installed on this development.
Page 1 of 9
Corcoran PUD Public Benefits Policy
1. Placement of uses so as to integrate with adjacent uses.
Purpose: To reward developments that make connections to adjacent properties and uses.
Criteria: This public benefit can be accomplished if there is an opportunity to connect adjacent
uses and such connections are made. Examples include the following:
- Placing features, such as private parks and conservation areas, contiguous to
existing or planned private parks or conservation areas (as long as there was a
choice to put it somewhere else.)
o It is seen even more of a public benefit when there are no restrictions for
public access to these areas.
o Public parks are not eligible as a public benefit under this category.
- A conscious effort to link the neighborhood to public or semi-public uses (schools,
religious institutions, etc.).
- Adjacent development has the opportunity to link to the development in question.
2. Collaboration with adjoining landowner(s).
Purpose: To encourage an open dialogue between many landowners.
Criteria: This public benefit may be accomplished when a developer demonstrates collaboration
with property owners and residents within the surrounding neighborhood.
Applicants must host a neighborhood meeting early in the process as a required
component of the PUD process. It may be seen as a public benefit when applicants
demonstrate that they incorporated meaningful feedback and continued ongoing
discussions in an effort to work with neighboring property owners to create a more
unified plan for the larger neighborhood. Collaboration may also offer a better chance
to accomplish other identified public benefits.
3. Appropriately located neighborhood scale commercial/office uses.
Page 2 of 9
Purpose: To reward developments
that provide small scale
commercial/office uses.
Criteria: This benefit will be
considered on a very
limited basis and may be
accomplished when small
scale commercial/office
uses are appropriately
located within or adjacent
to a residential or mixed-
use neighborhood. This
category is typically not
applied to land guided as
low-density residential in
the City’s Comprehensive
Plan; however,
consideration will be
given to appropriately located non-residential uses contemplated in RSF-1, RSF-2, or
RSF-3 (e.g., daycare facilities, educational facilities, and places of worship).
4. Percentage of units within ¼ mile of an identifiable neighborhood focal point.
Purpose: Encouragement to give
new neighborhoods a
unique identity and to
serve as an ordering
device.
Criteria: This public benefit may be
satisfied if approximately
20% of units within a
development are within ¼
mile of an identifiable
neighborhood focal point.
Examples of neighborhood focal points
include the following: parks, greens,
squares, monuments, historic structures (silos, barns, granaries, etc.), picnic shelters, and
community gardens. Monument entrance signs into a development are not considered an
identifiable neighborhood focal point, but may be considered as a visual terminus discussed
subsequently in this document.
5. Distribution of attached units.
Page 3 of 9
Purpose: Encourage smaller clusters of attached units to be more integrated/intermixed within
the larger development.
Criteria: This benefit can be satisfied if no more than 1/3 of attached units within the
development are located in the largest cluster of attached homes.
In other words, a PUD must have at least 3 separately located groups of attached units
dispersed throughout the development with no more than 1/3 of the total attached
units located within a single group.
Example: If there are 100 attached units in a project, there must be at least three separate
clusters of attached homes with the largest group of homes not exceeding 33 units.
6. Creation of open space using multi-story buildings.
Purpose: Promote the creation of open space using multi-story buildings.
Criteria: This benefit may be met if it is demonstrated that the applicant purposefully used multi-
story buildings for the purpose of creating open space.
This is not a benefit possible in PUDs for land guided as existing residential or low
density residential in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
7. Visual Termini
Purpose: Encourage the placement of monuments, statutes, gazebos, or other landmarks at the
end of streets.
Page 4 of 9
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied with the incorporation of a visual termini. An
entrance monument providing neighborhood identity may qualify to satisfy this public
benefit. Other termini examples (such as statutes and gazebos) that are less common
may be considered more of a public benefit than an entrance monument sign for the
development.
8. Attached units are embedded.
Purpose: Reduce the amount of attached units visible from major roadways.
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied if attached units abut no more than 30% of the
perimeter of a major roadway (in linear feet).
Only areas where there is an opportunity to build units will be included in the total
perimeter measurement. Wetlands or otherwise unbuildable areas will not be included.
Attached units are not considered to abut the ROW if there is an outlot or feature
between them and the ROW of the area is landscaped and/or has a setback exceeding
60 feet.
This criterion is only applicable to proposals with land guided as low-density, medium-
density, or mixed residential and detached units are a component of the proposed
development. Areas guided for high-density and mixed use are not expected to satisfy
this identified public benefit.
Example: A development has 1,000 linear feet of major roadway and 200 feet of the major
roadway has attached units adjacent to it.
9. Exceptional Landscaping to Buffer Homes From Major Roads.
Purpose: Buffer homes from major roadways.
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied if a heavily landscaped buffer is provided along
major roadways. Any newly planted vegetation must be salt tolerant. The landscaping
should be comprised of a variety of overstory and understory trees, evergreens, and/or
shrubs in general conformance with the parameters outlined for Buffer Yard Class B in
Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(J)(1)(f). An open decorative fence may also be incorporated
into the buffer. Retention of existing woods or healthy, mature landscaping where
Page 5 of 9
possible is preferred and may qualify towards the buffer even when the exact
parameters of Buffer Yard Class B are not satisfied.
10. Percentage of units within 1,000 feet walk from a park.
Purpose: Promote location of parks within a short walk from people’s homes.
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied if at least 20% of the homes within a development
are within a 1,000-foot walk from a private or public park.
This will be measured along roadways and/or trails.
11. Internal Trail Connections
Purpose: Encourage the creation of off-road trails within a neighborhood.
Criteria: This benefit may be met by the creation of internal trails to provide pedestrian and/or
bicycle movement within a development.
12. Cul-de-sacs are open ended.
Purpose: Foster the creation of pedestrian and bicycle connections or trail systems along arterial
and collector roadways.
Criteria: To satisfy this public benefit, approximately 50% of the cul-de-sacs within the
development should be open ended. If there is an existing or proposed trail abutting an
open-ended cul-de-sac, a trail connection must be provided.
Cul-de-sac with a trail connection to the arterial at the end.
Page 6 of 9
13. Open Space is consolidated and usable.
Purpose: Create open space areas that can be usable to the neighborhood, either passively or
actively.
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied if the open space is created based on the following
guidelines:
- Buildings are organized around the open space.
- Open space is a framing and organizing feature.
- Open space is accessible to the local population within the neighborhood.
- Open space is designed in such a way that it doesn’t appear as though it is
someone’s backyard.
-Stormwater ponds canbe incorporated as a design feature.
- It is preferred that applicants commit to making privately owned open space
accessible and usable to the larger public.
It is not expected for open space to achieve all of the above guidelines, but a good faith
effort to incorporate as many of the guidelines as possible is expected for this public
benefit to be satisfied.
14. Open space is connected with green (natural) corridors.
Purpose: Connect open spaces and reduce the occurrent of isolated open space areas.
Criteria: Where open space is not consolidated, it will be seen as a public benefit to link open
space with natural corridors. A well-designed combination of open space areas, trails
(formal or informal), and stormwater ponds can help to achieve the purpose of this
identified public benefit.
15. Viable open space master plan is created.
Purpose: Encourage developers to create a unified open space plan for their proposed
neighborhoods and to use that open space as an organizing device for the
neighborhood.
Page 7 of 9
Criteria: It may be seen as a public benefit if developers provide a master open space plan that
highlights open space areas and the pedestrian corridors and connections between
them. The master plan must also identify long-term maintenance practices and
responsibilities.
16. Natural resources and features are retained.
Purpose: Encourage the preservation of significant or unique natural resources and/or
topographical features if they exist.
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied when a developer retains high-value and/or unique
natural features of a site where possible.
Examples of desirable features include high quality natural communities as identified in
the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Natural Resources Inventory Areas map, trees, ravines,
and hilltops.
A PUD is not expected to retain all identified natural resources or features, particularly
on sites comprised of large areas of high quality natural communities. However, an
applicant must provide a detailed narrative explaining their efforts to minimize the
removal and/or alteration of natural features while achieving their own vision for the
site. If multiple natural plant communities are identified on the site, the applicant
should attempt to retain areas of each type of community.
17. Extensive internal landscaping.
Purpose: Encourage a larger amount of landscaping than required by code.
Criteria: This public benefit may be satisfied if a proposal includes at least 120% of the minimum
landscaping units required in the underlying Zoning Ordinance.
18. Use of native plants in landscaping.
Purpose: Use vegetation that is better adapted to our climate to reduce water consumption and
required maintenance.
Criteria: This benefit may be satisfied if landscaping incorporates appropriate use of native
plants.
19. Use of preferred trees in landscaping.
Purpose: Encourage incorporation of tree species identified the City as a preferred species..
Criteria: This benefit may be satisfied if proposed landscaping is primarily comprised of trees
species identified as preferred in the Northeast District Plan and Design Guidelines.
However, PUD proposals located in the Town Center should be primarily comprised of
the identified “Suggested Trees for the Town Center” provided in the Southeast District
Plan and Design Guidelines.
Page 8 of 9
20. Existing rural structures are retained and/or reused.
Purpose: Preserve existing structures that are in good condition and have historical value.
Criteria: This public benefit is satisfied with the incorporation of existing structures, foundations,
etc., into the development for aesthetic and historic preservation purposes.
Preservation of a silo is particularly desired within the community.
Historic structures can be used as identifiable neighborhood centers if integrated into
park/open space.
Developers, homebuilders, Homeowner Associations, and homebuyers will not be
required to retain historical structures (that were retained as a public benefit in the
approval of a PUD) when it is determined it is no longer structurally or financially
feasible. If/when this occurs, a visual terminus, such as a gazebo or monument, can
replace the rural structure to satisfy the intent of this category.
21. Higher Architectural Standards
Purpose: Encourage a higher architectural standard within PUD proposals.
Criteria: This public benefit is met when a developer goes above and beyond the architectural
standards required in code.
Residential developments that honor Corcoran’s rural character by incorporating the
recommended architectural styles identified in the Southeast District Plan will satisfy
this category.
A commitment to use regional building materials may also be considered a public
benefit.
22. Lot Size Variety
Purpose: Encourage larger lot sizes.
Criteria: This public benefit may be met if at least 10% of the lots within the development exceed
a lot width of 65’ or exceed a lot area of 7,500 square feet.
23. Larger Tree Sizes
Purpose: Encourage developments to provide more effective screening and mature landscaping
within the first few years of construction.
Criteria: It may be considered a public benefit for developers to commit to planting at least 25%
of the required overstory trees at the following sizes:
Potted/Bare Root or Balled and Burlapped
Shade Trees 4” diameter
Evergreen Trees 10’
Page 9 of 9
24. Natural restoration work
Purpose: Reward developments that restore wooded areas, prairies, wetlands, soils, etc.
Criteria: It may be considered a public benefit if at least 5 acres of natural restoration work is
completed to restore wooded areas, prairies, and wetlands.
Removal of buckthorn also qualifies under this public benefit.
25. Extraordinary environmental protection
Purpose: Reward any other unregulated environmental protection that has not already been
addressed.
Criteria: It may be considered a public benefit when there is other extraordinary environmental
protections implemented not already addressed by this document.
26. Areas of parkland, woodland, or other open space (above minimum)
Purpose: Encourage creation of open space areas in a development, whether they are active park
areas in a development or passive woodland areas or other open space.
Criteria: It may be seen as a public benefit when additional acres are set aside for dedicated
parkland (if accepted by the City) or other open space areas that are in outlots or
conservation easements.
Wetlands and areas on steep slopes would not count.
Open space areas must be 50 feet or larger in the smallest dimension to be counted in
this category.
27. Innovation and Utilization of New Technologies and Materials
Purpose: Reward innovative proposals that include new and creative design approaches and/or
utilize new technologies and/or building materials within the overall site layout,
buildings, and/or other development features.
Criteria: It may be seen as a benefit when PUD plans feature creative and efficient methods of
design or incorporate new technologies or materials. For example, the use of building-
integrated solar technology (AKA solar skins) for a development that provides high
energy efficiency while being aesthetically compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 8a.
Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Mike Pritchard
Topic:
Mandatory Sewer and Water Connections
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
In 2016 the City initiated the downtown utility and street improvement project, extending
water and sewer infrastructure, and improving streets. The project included a deadline
for properties to be connected to the water and sewer system by May 1, 2019. By
request, the connection deadline was extended in 2019 until May 1, 2020, further
extended in 2020, to August 31, 2021, and further extended in 2021, to June 30, 2023.
In 2021 Council discussed the extension to June 30, 2023, as the final extension.
Staff received another property owner request for the mandatory connection deadline to
be extended and reviewed on February 23, 2023. At that time, 7 properties remained
unconnected.
The Council approved a final extension date of October 31, 2024, and directed Staff to
send letters to the affected properties. Letters were sent in March of 2023.
As of November 18, 2024, there are 2 downtown properties remaining that are required
to connect to municipal sewer and water:
1. 7525 Commerce Street
a. The street and utility improvement assessments were paid in 2016; The
TLAC and connection fees were not paid or financed with the City at that
time; however, they were paid when sewer and water connection Permits
were issued in 2019 however, the work was not completed.
b. Ownership changed 2023.
c. The new owner was sent a Connection Deadline Letter in March 2023
stating the new deadline of October 31, 2024.
d. Staff is not aware of any correspondence with the new owner regarding
connection.
2. 7590 Commerce Street
a. Staff has had multiple conversations and corresponded with the property
owner and contractor but have not received a permit application to date.
b. The property owner and contractor have inquired about financing options
and were advised by Staff that the City did not have a mechanism or
policy in place for this situation, but that they could request Council to
direct staff to research or review.
c. The property was assessed the street and utility improvements and has a
finance agreement with the City for TLAC and connection fees.
d. The total fees due at permit issuance would be: $5,656.00 and are broken
down as follows:
City Connection Permit Fees: $251.00
City Meter Fee: $435.00
Met Council SAC Fee: $4,970.00
Financial/Budget:
Staff time will continue to accrue costs until this is resolved.
Council Action:
Staff identified the following options for the City Council to consider on each property:
7525 Commerce Street
1. Direct staff to work with the City Attorney to evaluate and pursue enforcement
options.
2. Extend deferral period for property to connect.
3. Council recommends other alternatives.
Staff recommends the Council to direct staff to move forward with option 1.
7590 Commerce Street
1. Affirm the property owner is expected to pay for the permit and connection fees
to bring the site into compliance.
2. The City pays the fees and assesses the cost to the property owner.
3. Council recommends other alternatives.
Staff recommends the Council to direct staff to move forward with option 1.
Page 1 of 4
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8b.
City Council Meeting:
January 23, 2025
Prepared By:
Dwight Klingbeil
Topic:
Phil’s Auto Code Violation
(PID 26-119-23-11-0029)
Action Required:
Direction
1. Background
In September 2023, the City’s Code Enforcement officer was notified of an illegal
parking lot expansion on the property at 7590 Commerce Street. The City’s Code
Enforcement Officer inspected the site and compared the parking pad to historic aerial
photos and confirmed an expansion on the northern end of the lot occurred.
Staff met with the property owner in September of 2023. During said meeting, staff
informed the property owners of the need for a Site Plan Amendment and walked
through the application process. The Code Enforcement Violation was put on pause
while the property owners gathered the materials necessary for a site plan amendment
application.
In July of 2024, after not receiving application materials from the property owner, staff
requested Council direction as part of a larger Code Enforcement update. During the
July 25, 2024, Council meeting, Council allowed a one-year extension for the property
owner to submit a Site Plan Amendment application for the expanded parking area. This
extension was allowed with the condition that the illegal expansion area not be utilized
until a Site Plan Amendment was approved. In August, the Code Enforcement Officer
attempted to reach out to the property owner via email but received no response. The
Code Enforcement Officer was able to contact the property owner via telephone several
weeks later. During this call, the Code Enforcement Officer requested a meeting with
the property owner to go over the conditions of the one-year extension and finalize a
compliance agreement. The property owner recalled no such requirement and
expressed the burden the condition would place on his business.
On October 24, 2024, the Code Enforcement Officer and the business owner walked
the site to discuss the condition. During this meeting, the business owner explained his
current parking demands, his need for the expanded area, and the difficulties he faced
financing the Site Plan Amendment application. The Code Enforcement Officer again
informed that utilization of the parking area was not allowed until it is approved as part
of a Site Plan Amendment. The property owner asked if the City preferred that they park
the overflow on the street. After discussing with Planning, Public Works, and Public
Safety, it was confirmed that the business should not rely on public roadways to satisfy
their business needs, and better site management is necessary.
Page 2 of 4
After relaying this message to the property owner, he requested his code violation be
brought back to City Council for reconsideration.
2. Summary
Based on previous Council discussions, the property was granted a one-year extension
to July 25, 2025, to apply for a Site Plan Amendment contingent upon a formal
compliance agreement. A formal compliance agreement has not been successfully
established at this time due to the disagreement on utilization of the expanded parking
area. The business owner believes this is too burdensome on his business and
requests Council reconsider this condition. Staff requests that Council provide direction
for this code violation as it relates to the one-year extension.
3. Financial/Budget:
Staff time will continue to accrue costs until this is resolved.
4. Council Action
Staff identified the following options for the City Council to consider:
1. Affirm previous extension with a formal compliance agreement with a condition
that the parking expansion area is not utilized.
a. Clarify whether street parking on Commerce Street is acceptable for
overflow parking in the meantime.
2. Affirm previous extension with a formal compliance agreement with removal of
the condition regarding utilization of the parking expansion area.
3. Move forward with enforcement action since a formal compliance agreement has
not been reached and the expansion area continues to be utilized.
4. Council recommends other alternatives.
Staff recommends the Council direct staff to proceed with option 1.
Attachments
1. Arieal image of property (2022)
2. Arieal image of property (2024)
Page 3 of 4
Page 4 of 4
2025 CITY OF CORCORAN
APRIL
S M T W T F S
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
MAY
S M T W T F S
27 28 29 30 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
JUNE
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
JULY
S M T W T F S
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
AUGUST
S M T W T F S
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
SEPTEMBER
S M T W T F S
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
OCTOBER
S M T W T F S
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
NOVEMBER
S M T W T F S
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 1 2 3 4 5 6
DECEMBER
S M T W T F S
30 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Meetings Mayor Contracted Services
Council Tom McKee tmckee@corcoranmn.gov Planning 612-638-0225
Council Quarterly Work Sess. Council Members Engineer 763-479-4209
Planning Commission Michelle R.
Friedrich Building Inspector 763-479-1720
Parks & Trails Commissions Mark
Lanterman mlanterman@corcoranmn.gov City Assessor 612-348-2943
City Holiday Jeremy Nichols jnichols@corcoranmn.gov Septic / Henn Co. 612-543-5200
Alternative Meeting Dates Dean
Vehrenkamp dvehrenkamp@corcoranmn.gov Republic Services 763-972-3335
JANUARY
S M T W T F S
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
FEBRUARY
S M T W T F S
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
MARCH
S M T W T F S
23 24 25 26 27 28 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
mfriedrich@corcoranmn.gov
City of Corcoran
2025 City Council Schedule
(as of January 23, 2025)
Below is a tentative schedule for City Council meetings subject to change.
January 13, 2025 – Strategic Work Session (1 of 2) (4:30-8:30PM)
January 23, 2025
January 27, – Strategic Work Session (2 of 2) (4:30-8:30PM)**To Be Rescheduled
February 21-22, 2025 Elected Leaders Institute – Foundational/Advanced Program (Plymouth)
February 27, 2025
March 13, 2025
March 27, 2025
April 10, 2025
April 24, 2025
May 8, 2025
May 22, 2025
June 12, 2025
June 23, 2025* (TBD – Moved for League of Minnesota Cities Conference) (NOTE: Monday)
June 25-27, 2025 League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference (Duluth)
July 10, 2025
July 24, 2025
August 14, 2025
August 28, 2025
September 11, 2025
September 25, 2025
October 9, 2025
October 16, 2025
November 13, 2025
November 24, 2025* (NOTE: Monday)
December 11, 2025