Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-14-11-R ARVEN HILLS Approved: January 9, 2012 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS,MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 14,2011 7:00 P.M. -ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor David Grant called to order the City Council Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant; Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes,Nick Tamble and Ed Werner. Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Public Works Director Terry Maurer; Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher; and Deputy Clerk Rebecca Brazys 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Holmes requested that Item 5H be removed from the Consent Agenda. MOTION: Counilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded the motion to approve the agenda as amended. The motion carried unanimously 2. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL Dave Chmiel, 1861 West Highway 96, referred to email communication he had sent the Council regarding the US 10/Highway 96 improvement project. He restated his concerns regarding the lack of a noise wall for his neighborhood and did not believe that MnDOT had reviewed and re- analyzed all options regarding the requested noise wall. He questioned why MnDOT had offered to build a noise wall for the Briarknoll neighborhood even though that area did not meet the cost effectiveness standards. He did not believe the Council should grant Municipal Consent until the noise wall issue is resolved for his neighborhood. Katie Bach, 1861 West Highway 96, spoke in opposition to the Municipal Consent, and believed that the recent MnDOT response is based on the original data. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14,2011 2 Allen Johnson, 4529 Lake Shore Place, stated a noise wall is needed in his area because of the excessive truck noise. John Lundeen, 1414 Oaks Dr., stated he is an Eagle Scout attending the meeting for his Community and Citizenship badge. Broxton Kinner, 1745 Lake Valentine Road, stated he is also a Boy Scout attending the meeting for his Community and Citizenship badge. Michelle Bickle, Eden Prairie, stated she is in the Master Program at St. Katherine's University and is attending the meeting for her Advocacy course. 3. STAFF COMMENTS None at this time. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. September 26, 2011,Regular Council Meeting B. October 10,2011, Regular Meeting C. October 10, 2011, Work Session Councilmember Holden requested that on Page 7 of the October loth Work Session minutes, under the Elections discussion the following sentence be added: "City staff will be responsible for providing absentee voting opportunities at City Hall." MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded the motion to approve the September 26, 2011 minutes and the October 10, 2011 Regular Meeting minutes as presented, and the October 10, 2011, Work Session minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Claims and Payroll B. Approve Resolution 2011-052 Appointing Susan Cathey to the Communications Committee. C. Adopt Resolution 2011-053 Approving MnDOT Appointing the Commissioner of Transportation as the City's Agent and Authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to Execute Agency Agreement No. 99939. D. Approve 2011 Sanitary Sewer Lining Project Payment #1 to Insituform Technologies USA, Inc. in the Amount of$314,759.99. E. Accept the final Drainage Report prepared by Bolton and Menk dated October 21, 2011, for Townhouse Villages North and Townhouse Villages at Arden Hills. F. Approve the Consulting Contract between the City and Hill Capitol Strategies, Inc. G. Authorize Entering Into a Contract with Bolton and Menk for Phase 1 of the B-2 District Implementation Plan as described in the Scope of Services for a Cost not to Exceed $48,260. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 3 H. Motion tio_ to Approve the City f Arden Hills Safi ty C,,mdfi4tee Policy as Prese.tad. 1. Motion to Approve a Payment in the Amount of$14,514.23 to the Lake Johanna Fire Department which is the City's Share of the Cost of Capital Expenditures for the Rebuilding of Ladder#3 Hydraulics; Replacement of Fire Hose; and Computer, Printer and Software. MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Tamble seconded a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as amended and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 6. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS A. Motion to Approve the City of Arden Hills Safety Committee Policy as Presented. Councilmember Holmes explained that she pulled this item from the Consent Agenda because she would like to discuss it with Sue Iverson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. She stated that she thinks the policy needs editing. MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to table this item. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Consider Drafting a Resolution of Support for the Stadium Proposal on the Arden Hills TCAAP Site. Mayor Grant stated that he asked that this be added to the agenda because he believes it would be good for the Council to provide direction to staff in terms of drafting a resolution of support. Councilmember Tamble stated he has heard the comment many times, "What is in it for the residents?" So he would like the resolution to address those questions by listing such benefits as the remediation process, the 170 acres in addition to the stadium site, the transportation improvements that will be an asset to the region, and jobs. Councilmember Holmes stated another benefit will be getting access to the TCAAP site. Councilmember Holden asked if staff can answer the question of what is in it for residents. City Administrator Klaers responded there are a number of benefits: • the 170 acres would be privately owned and developed over time which would place that property back on the tax base in addition to providing jobs; ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 4 • the site will be remediated (Ramsey County has reached an agreement with the GSA for the purchase of this property pending funding being available. Remediation is a part of that purchase arrangement.); and • transportation improvements are planned that will benefit the whole area for the long term. Community Development Director Hutmacher added that of the $101 million in transportation improvements planned, $86 million are regional improvements that will be helpful to commuters on a daily basis. MnDOT worked with the County to identify transportation improvements that would be a benefit to the system including the fly-over from eastbound I-694 to northbound I- 35W and capacity improvements that will eventually allow managed lanes from the north metro into downtown. Councilmember Holden stated one concern she has is the cost of public safety services. She stated that she would want to see that addressed in the resolution as she does not want Arden Hills residents paying for those costs for stadium events. She then asked what the GSA options are if the purchase by Ramsey County doesn't go through. City Administrator Klaers stated staff is not aware of any change in the GSA plans from what was proposed 12 to 15 months ago prior to the stadium proposal. At that time they were proceeding with plans for a public auction. The Ryan proposal fell apart due mainly to economics. This is a difficult project and he's not sure what type of buyer the GSA would find for this size of a parcel. Mayor Grant commented that the purchase proposal from the County includes a time limit and until that time period lapses, the County will retain their rights related to the offer. Councilmember Tamble asked for clarification on who actually owns the property and who or what the GSA is. City Administrator Klaers explained the history of the property goes back to 1941 when the Federal government acquired the property for use as an ammunition plant. The US Army continued to use the site until the 1990's. The property is owned by the Army and over the past 10 years they have been working to sell land identified as surplus property. Some of the property in the northwest corner has already been transferred to MnDOT, Rice Creek Watershed District and Ramsey County. The GSA is the General Services Administration and is the Federal agency responsible for the disposition or sale of Federally-owned land. Mayor Grant explained that at one point the City had an offer to purchase, but as the housing market crashed, so did that offer. Councilmember Holden added that when Ryan Company was working with the City to develop this site, the Army refused to lower the original asking price even though market rates had decreased by approximately one-third, which is another reason Ryan Company backed out of the deal. Mayor Grant stated he would like the resolution to include the following items: ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 5 - the 170 acre parcel will be for private development which will create a diversified tax base for the city - the superfund site will be addressed - the County's offer to purchase the property is within the budget proposed for the project - highlight transportation improvements which will benefit the entire area Mayor Grant also stated that he does not think any realtor would be able to do anything for the foreseeable future with the TCAAP property. The Ryan proposal would have included $56 million in tax increment financing which would have been a loss of revenue for the City. Ryan's mixed use plan would have been very expensive for the City. He stated that he believes the stadium is a reasonable use. Councilmember Werner agreed with Councilmember Holmes' comment regarding improved access to the TCAAP site being a benefit. Councilmember Holden commented that she would not have been able to support the stadium proposal if the County sales tax were moving forward. She added the following observations: - the cost to the City is less with the stadium proposal - it is a better deal for the City than the Ryan Development was - the City would have had to pay for police and fire for the Ryan development - the Ryan development would have required hundreds of millions in grants - the State is willing to be a partner for the road improvements to the stadium site Councilmember Holden asked that the cost savings be included in the resolution and the resolution should state that the remediation will be done. Councilmember Holmes commented that after the Ryan proposal, the City had tried to make a park in a portion of the north end of this site, but the cost was prohibitive. She then referred to a statement by Representative Betty McCollum that the stadium plan is the last, best chance for the TCAAP site to be cleaned up and put into productive use. Councilmember Tamble commented that this is a big decision with lots of uncertainties and one that not very many cities face. We need to eliminate risk to the City as much as possible but in the end the decision is solely made by the GSA and the City is just a part of the process. Mayor Grant directed staff to draft a resolution and place it on the Council's November 281h agenda. At that meeting, if residents wish to address the Council, they may do so within time limits. B. CIP—Surface Water Management Plan Update Public Works Director Terry Maurer explained that according to State law and Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) policy the City must update our Surface Water Management Plan within two years of RCWD adopting their update plan. The City's plan must be brought into compliance with RCWD's plan. RCWD adopted its 2010 Watershed Management Plan (WMP) ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 6 on June 9, 2010, so the City needs to have its update Plan approved by the RCWD Board of Managers by June 9, 2012. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the 2011 CIP includes $100,000 for updating the City plan. However, in his review of this item it has always been his intent to get as much useful information with this update while still meeting the requirement to bring our plan into compliance with RCWD's plan. The type of additional information he would like to acquire is an inventory of ponds and other water bodies the City is responsible for maintaining along with GPS locations, photos, and inspections of all inlets/outlets to these ponds. The inspection function is a requirement of our current MS4 permit; and we are supposed to be done with this work, but we have not even started. The pond inventory will be a requirement of our new MS4 permit which should be issued in 2012. Public Works Director Maurer stated that after much discussion and analysis of how to achieve both of these goals, he believes the best way will be to break them into separate tasks. The best and most cost-effective way to successfully get our plan updated and approved by RCWD is through our JPA with Roseville using Steve Kummer, Maplewood staff engineer. Director Maurer stated that he believes that Steve has most of the expertise to complete the update over the next several months. The little bit of expertise Steve is lacking would be supplemented with a small (less than$7,500) consultant contract with SEH, the consulting firm Maplewood uses for this type of work. Public Works Director Maurer stated that Steve has reviewed our current plan,the requirements for the update and discussed with SHE the outside expertise he would need, and has prepared a budget to accomplish the update for approximately $25,000 including the small consultant contract. Using some of the remaining CIP budget of$100,000, Public Works Director Maurer stated that he would like to solicit proposals from the City's pool of consultants to do the field inventory mentioned above. Once we have those proposals we would bring them back to the City Council for authorization to proceed. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Werner seconded the motion to authorize staff to expend up to $25,000 through the Joint Powers Agreement and consultants for the update to our Surface Water Management Plan as required by State law and RCWD policy and to direct staff to solicit consultant proposals to complete an inventory of our ponds and inlets/outlets. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Municipal Consent for US 10/Highway 96 Public Works Director Maurer stated that Ramsey County is proposing an interchange improvement to the intersection of US 10 and Highway 96. Earlier this year the City was presented with a MnDOT staff approved layout and Municipal Consent was requested. A Public Hearing was held by the City Council on July 11, 2011. Also, this project was discussed with representatives of Ramsey County at work sessions on April 25, 2011, August 15, 2011, and September 19, 2011. At the September 26, 2011, Council meeting, Resolution 2011-048 was ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 7 adopted disapproving the final layout of the US 10/Highway 96 Improvement with four conditions. Those conditions were as follows: 1. MnDOT is currently undertaking an improvement to I-694 at TH51. This project will have the bridge over I-694 from Hamline Avenue to TH51 (Snelling Avenue) closed for most of the next two years. MnDOT is also planning to let a contract to widen the Lexington Avenue Bridge. Although this work will be completed under traffic, it will have an effect on the flow of traffic across the bridge. Therefore, to maintain some minimal mobility for local traffic to move north to south, Highway 96 shall not be closed in the same year that the Lexington Avenue Bridge widening is completed. 2. Ramsey County and/or MnDOT shall re-evaluate the noise analysis work completed for the southwest quadrant of US 10 and Highway 96 to determine if a different length noise wall and/or a different height noise wall would meet the criteria for cost effectiveness. 3. The Concrete Barrier Type F planned to be installed adjacent to Lakeshore Place as part of the improvement shall be increased in height to the tallest Type F barrier that can be slip-formed in this location. 4. Ramsey County shall make every effort short of utilizing eminent domain procedures to realign the west end of the noise wall on the north side of Highway 96 so it is in the appropriate location to facilitate a further extension with future highway improvements Public Works Director Maurer explained that on October 21, 2011, staff received a response from Ramsey County to the City's four conditions and a copy of an October 10, 2011, letter from Peter Wasko, MnDOT Metro District Noise and Air Quality Supervisor, dealing with Condition #2. Also, Chris Chromy has provided a memo for the City regarding his review of Condition #2 responses from MnDOT. Basically, Ramsey County's responses to the City's four conditions are: 1. The US 10/Hwy 96 project will be constructed in 2013 so that Highway 96 is not closed in the same year that MnDOT widens the Lexington Avenue Bridge. 2. A re-analysis of all the available noise data indicates that there is no length and/or height noise wall for the southwest quadrant that meets the cost-effective criteria for inclusion of such noise wall in the project. 3. The barrier for Lakeshore Place has been increased to 63 inches in height (56 inches above ground level). 4. Ramsey County agrees with Condition#4 and will pursue accomplishing it. Public Works Director Maurer stated that based on these responses from Ramsey County, and the memo from Chris Chromy, staff recommends granting Municipal Consent to the US 10/Highway 96 Improvement. Approving Resolution 2011-054 would approve the final layout for the improvement thereby granting municipal consent and rescinding Resolution 2011-048. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 8 Joe Lux, Ramsey County Transportation Planner, explained that this project is at a point now where it will not be constructed in 2012. The County also agrees with the City that it's not a good idea to begin this project at the same time that the Lexington Avenue improvements are taking place. The goal is to let the US 10/Highway 96 project in late 2012 for construction as early as possible in 2013. Mr. Lux explained that after the last Council meeting on this item, he, Public Works Director Maurer, and Jim Tolaas from Ramsey County, all met with the MnDOT area engineer Mark Lindeberg. They got permission to approach Peter Wasko; the MnDOT Noise and Air Quality Supervisor, to look at the noise analysis. He stated that he explained to Mr. Wasko that the issue is not noise from Highway 96 but from US 10 that affects the Lake Shore Place homes so his analysis was based on what can be done about the noise from US 10 for those homes. Mr. Wasko concluded that the single line of homes on Lake Shore Place would not meet the cost-effective threshold. Regardless of the wall height or length, the same number of homes would be affected per foot of wall and that does not meet the cost-effective threshold. Councilmember Tamble asked if we had received data from that analysis with decibel readings to confirm their findings. Public Works Director Maurer stated they have all the data from the previous studies. No additional noise analysis was done because there have been several different noise studies prepared by several different consultants. He then referred to a memo in the Council's packet from Chris Chromy, the City's consultant, and he had reviewed Mr. Wasko's analysis and found that there is no way to make this cost-effectiveness. Mr. Chromy also found that even with the addition of three platted lots into the calculation, the noise mitigation costs would remain above the established reasonableness threshold of$3,250 per decibel reduced per residence. In a recent conversation with Mr. Chromy, he indicated that the closest he could get to the $3,250 threshold was $4,400. Mayor Grant stated he needs to see what was considered in this analysis; such as the placement of the wall and varying wall heights. Mr. Lux responded that essentially they looked at a wall from 1,500 to 2,000 feet long shifted north and south along Highway 96 and they looked at two wall heights: 10 feet and 20 feet. The conclusion was that a 10-foot wall would cost $10,785 per decibel reduced per resident and a 20- foot wall would cast $5,839 per decibel per resident. To go any higher than that would be cost prohibitive because of footings required for a greater height. Councilmember Holmes asked when they looked at shifting the location of the wall to the south, did that extend all the way to I-694. Mr. Lux responded that they analyzed various lengths; the original wall proposed was modeled at 1,500 feet long. Mr. Cmiel, Lake Shore Place resident, proposed a wall 2,000 feet long. They looked at shifting both lengths north and south. Councilmember Tamble asked how much difference it would make to use today's conditions versus the 2008 figures used for this analysis. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG NOVEMBER 14, 2011 9 Mr. Lux stated that the numbers would essentially be the same. As far as the vacant lots on Lake Shore Place, he explained that even if those lots were included it still would not meet the required threshold. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the $3,250 per decibel per resident is also based on the cost of $20.00 per square foot for the wall. The cost-effectiveness formula is based on numbers that are fixed in time, comparing "apples to apples" when determining whether or not a wall is cost effective. Councilmember Tamble asked if the previous offer for the Briarknoll noise wall could be mimicked for this project. Public Works Director Maurer stated that nobody at MnDOT was able to answer the question about why that offer was made on Briarknoll. But MnDOT has made it very clear that they would not make such an offer again. In fact, the new law doesn't even allow that type of offer to be made. Mayor Grant asked if the three vacant lots were included in the analysis. Mr. Lux responded that they were not included because the law is clear that vacant lots are not to be included unless a building permit had been issued on those lots. He added that even when they ran the numbers to include those three lots, the minimum cost-effectiveness threshold was not met. Mayor Grant asked for detail on those numbers. Public Works Director Maurer stated that he believes the vacant lots were included in the $4,400 figure determined by Mr. Chromy. Councilmember Holmes stated that the law does not allow platted lots to be included in determining cost-effectiveness so those numbers are irrelevant. Public Works Director Maurer commented that the real issue is that there is only one row of homes and the law doesn't give any breaks for lower density. Councilmember Tamble asked where the noise threshold would have to be to make the noise wall feasible for the number of homes on Lake Shore Place. Mr. Lux responded that he has no idea. Mayor Grant asked how many more homes would have to be included to make the noise wall cost effective. Mr. Lux responded that he has no idea; the total number of homes would have to be known to determine whether or not the threshold is met. Councilmember Holden asked if Mr. Lux is a noise engineer. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 10 Mr. Lux responded that he is not. Councilmember Tamble asked what time constraints the City is facing to pass Municipal Consent. Public Works Director Maurer stated that the Council is under no time constraints as they have already acted on Resolution 2011-048 which still stands at this time. If the Council does not act on the proposed resolution, the ball is in the County's court; they can proceed to the Appeal Board or attempt to get the Council comfortable with the project. If they proceed to the Appeal Board and the Board finds in favor of the City, Ramsey County will not have the right to get the Commissioner to overturn the Appeal Board decision because this project does not involve an interstate highway. MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to adopt Resolution 2011-054 approving the Final Layout of the US 10/Highway 96 Improvement and rescinding Resolution 2011-048. Councilmember Tamble commented that this is a difficult situation with the noise abatement concerns and because the residents were here before the roads. Also, the Council is limited by statutes with regards to the offer to this neighborhood that was made to Briarknoll. Councilmember Holmes questioned the disparity that Councilmember Tamble referred to because there was an offer made by MnDOT to Briarknoll but no noise wall was built because the City didn't agree to pay the difference in cost. Even if MnDOT were to make the same offer for this project, it wouldn't be fair for the City to agree to assist with the cost of a noise wall when they did not do so for Briarknoll. She then stated that the Council has dealt with the sound wall issue many times and what she has found is that if a specific area meets the State standards, they get the noise wall. If they don't meet the standards, they don't get the noise wall. The standards are set and there's not a lot the Council can do. Councilmember Holden stated that when the Briarknoll area was before the Council, she made it very clear that she would not use a significant amount of City monies for a noise wall; those costs would be assessed to the homeowners. She stated that she would take the same position with this project;she would not want to use a large amount of City funds for the benefit of so few homes. Mayor Grant asked how many homes were included in this project analysis. Mr. Lux responded that based on the project limits, there were nine homes included. Mayor Grant commented that if there were homes on the three vacant lots that would be a 25% increase which would put it pretty close to the required threshold for cost-effectiveness. Mayor Grant stated he doesn't believe the City s getting very good answers on this matter. Councilmember Holmes commented that the City has the report from Chris Chromy which states "Even with the addition of three platted lots into the calculation, the noise mitigation costs would remain above the established reasonableness threshold of $3,250 per decibel reduced per residence." ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 11 Mayor Grant stated he wants to know by how much the threshold is not met. Councilmember Holmes pointed out that the letter from MnDOT answers that question by stating the following: "A 20 foot high wall was analyzed and the results showed that the wall would cost $5,839 per decibel reduced per residence. A 10 foot high wall was also modeled and the results showed that the lower wall would cost$10,875 per decibel reduced per resident." Councilmember Tamble stated that he would like to see the supporting data. Councilmember Holmes stated that if the Council wants more information, the matter should be tabled. Public Works Director Maurer commented that if the Council wants more information, the County can provide that or they can ask MnDOT to provide it. He added that Chris Chromy has analyzed the data a number of different ways and has met with Mr. Cmiel several times, but Chris is not MnDOT. Councilmember Holden referred to Chris Chromy's memo,particularly the fourth bullet. Public Works Director Maurer stated that he could ask Chris Chromy to provide an estimate of how much this project area is above the threshold. Councilmember Tamble stated that he thinks the residents want to see that due diligence proved. Public Works Director Maurer commented that based on the Council's resolution, he thought the information provided by the County was adequate. Councilmember Holden questioned why the County is before the Council 14 months before the project is scheduled to begin. Mr. Lux responded that a year is not a long time considering the size of this project; they have to let the contract in 2012 and acquire right-of-way prior to that which takes approximately one year. He then referred to the final point in Pete Wasko's letter which states "Based on the information that I have, the analyses that were performed for both I-694 Environmental Assessment (EA) and the TH 10/County Road 96 EA, I find no noise barrier that would meet with MnDOT's requirement." Councilmember Tamble stated that to get literature that does not "hammer home" why this area does not meet the threshold is an issue. He questioned what he is supposed to tell residents. Public Works Director Maurer commented that he, Joe Lux, and Chris Chromy have been meeting with Mr. Cmiel for almost as long as Mr. Maurer has been with the City. Both Mr. Lux and Mr. Chromy have gone through the numbers so this is not the only time that letters have been prepared stating this area does not meet the threshold; it stated that in the EA, and it was stated every time they met to analyze the numbers in a different way. He stated it does not work because of the density. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 12 MOTION: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded the motion to table Item 9A— Municipal Consent for US 10/Highway 96, until the City can get a detailed analysis of what the numbers mean; what was studied; where the wall was studied and at what heights. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mayor Grant stated that his hope would be that at the November 28th meeting, information can be provided. The Council and the residents want to see the detail. Councilmember Holden stated she would like to see the information clearly stated in bullet points so it's in black and white and easy to understand. 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Werner requested that a review of the overnight parking policy be placed on an upcoming work session agenda. He also stated the Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee has three vacancies. Information can be obtained on the City website or by calling City Hall. Councilmember Tamble reminded everyone that the Red Cross is conducting blood draws in Arden Hills. Councilmember Holden reported the following: - Economic Development Commission would like to hold another State of the City event next year. - The Communications Committee asked for a small increase in the budget for 2012. - On-street parking should be reviewed at an upcoming work session. - Waste hauler rates are supposed to be charging a uniform price agreed to with the City. Councilmember Holmes reported that at the Ramsey County Board meeting tomorrow, they will discuss the offer to purchase the 430 acres for the proposed stadium. Mayor Grant commented that he had also been approached about on-street parking. He noted that 144 citations were issued and agreed that this needs to be discussed at a work session. He then reported that school board candidates have not yet removed their signs following the election on November 8. They do have 10 days to comply and asked staff to follow-up on this issue. He also advised that those signs not removed within the 10 days will be removed by the City. ADJOURN MOTION: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to adiourn. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:50 p.m. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETNG—NOVEMBER 14, 2011 13 Patrick Klaers David Grant City Administrator Mayor •