HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-25-13-R--
Dave McClung
Ed Werner
www.cityofardenhills.org
Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential
neighborhoods, vital business community, wellmaintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our
longstanding tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play.
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Public inquiries/informational is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council's attention any items not
currently on the agenda. In addressing the Council, please state your name and address for the record, and a
brief summary of the specific item being addressed to the Council. To allow adequate time for each person
wishing to address the Council, we ask that individuals limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written
documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting, or as bench copies, to allow a more timely
presentation.
STAFF COMMENTS
3.A.TCAAP Update
Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director
Documents:MEMO.PDF
3.B.Transportation Update
Terry Maurer, Public Works Director
Documents:MEMO.PDF
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.A.Approval Of Minutes
September 16, 2013, Work Session
September 30, 2013, Work Session
September 30, 2013, Regular
October 14, 2013, Work Session
October 14, 2013, Regular
Documents:WS.PDF,WS.PDF,R.PDF,
WS.PDF,R.PDF
CONSENT CALENDAR
Those items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion under a Consent Calendar format. There will be no separate discussion of these items,
unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event, the item will be removed from the general order of
business and considered separately in its normal sequence on the agenda.
5.A.Claims And Payroll
Ashley Bertrand, Accounting Analyst
Sue Iverson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services
Documents:MEMO.PDF
5.B.Cancellation Of December 30, 2013, City Council Meeting
Amy Dietl, City Clerk
Documents:MEMO.PDF
Accepting The Liability Coverage Limits From The League Of MN Cities Insurance
Trust For 2014
Sue Iverson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF
Planning Case 13 Zoning Amendment 010 Conservation Dist And
011 Parks And Open Space
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF,
ATTACHMENT C.PDF, ATTACHMENT D.PDF
5.E.Planning Case 13014 Lexington Station PUD Amendment Agreement
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF
5.F.Resolution 2013040 Authorizing The Application For Recycling SCORE Grant Funds
From Ramsey County
Ryan Streff, City Planner
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF
5.G.Resolution 2013041 Setting The 2014 Recycling Fee
Ryan Streff, City Planner
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF
Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation Manager
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF
Motion To Acknowledge The Application Of Catholic United Financial For An Exempt
Permit To Conduct A Raffle
Amy Dietl, City Clerk
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF
Planning Case 12 County Road E E Street Flats Certificate Of Completion
Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director
Documents:MEMO.PDF,
PULLED CONSENT ITEMS
Those items that are pulled from the Consent Calendar will be removed from the general order of business and
considered separately in its normal sequence on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
NEW BUSINESS
8.A.Planning Case 13018 Gradient Financial Site Plan Review Sign Standard
Adjustment
Ryan Streff, City Planner
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF,
ATTACHMENT C.PDF, ATTACHMENT D.PDF, ATTACHMENT E.PDF,
ATTACHMENT F.PDF
8.B.Planning Case 13019 Gradient Financial Site Plan Review Accessory Structure
Ryan Streff, City Planner
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF,
ATTACHMENT C.PDF, ATTACHMENT D.PDF, ATTACHMENT E.PDF,
ATTACHMENT F.PDF, ATTACHMENT G.PDF, ATTACHMENT H.PDF
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
9.A.Planning Case 13013 Bethel University
Ryan Streff, City Planner
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF,
ATTACHMENT C.PDF, ATTACHMENT D.PDF, ATTACHMENT E.PDF,
ATTACHMENT F.PDF, ATTACHMENT G.PDF, ATTACHMENT H.PDF,
ATTACHMENT I.PDF, ATTACHMENT J.PDF, ATTACHMENT K.PDF,
ATTACHMENT L.PDF, ATTACHMENT M.PDF, ATTACHMENT N.PDF,
ATTACHMENT O.PDF, ATTACHMENT P.PDF, ATTACHMENT Q.PDF
9.B.Planning Case 132 And B3 Design Standards
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF,
ATTACHMENT C.PDF, ATTACHMENT D.PDF, ATTACHMENT E.PDF
STAFF COMMENTS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:November 25, 2013
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:TCAAP Update
SnellingAvenue Bus Rapid Transit
th
The Snelling Avenue Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route, which will connect the 46Street
(Blue Line) and the Snelling Avenue (Green Line) light rail stations with Rosedale Mall, is
tentatively scheduled to begin operations in 2015. Stops are more widely spaced than regular
bus routes and bus stops have more amenities such as substantial shelters, ticket vending
machines, radiant heat, and real-time bus information.
The Metropolitan Council has announced that it will evaluate a future extension of the Snelling
Avenue BRT line from Rosedale Mall to TCAAP via Snelling and Hamline Avenues. The
extension would run north on Snelling and Hamline Avenues and could serve University of
Northwestern, Bethel University, the County Road E business district, Land O’Lakes and Boston
Scientific. Metro Transit will conduct a study to determine the feasibility of BRT extension to
TCAAP.
Regional Transportation Improvements
An open house to gather public feedback on the design options for the Highway 96/I-35Wand
County Road H/I-35Winterchanges was held at the Ramsey County Public Works facility on
November 19, 2013. Attendees were encouraged to view the concepts for both interchanges and
ask questions of the staff present. The event was well attended with 66 members of the general
public signing-in at the welcome table and more who declined to sign-in. Staff were present from
Arden Hills, Ramsey County, MnDOT, and Kimley-Horn and Associates.
A handout was given to attendees that included a general project summary and project timeline.
16 boards were displayed showing area constraints, concepts for both interchanges, and a basic
overview of TCAAP.
12
Page of
11 comments were submitted in writing at the open house. The nature of the comments consisted
mostly of concerns with bicycle and pedestrian access, access to TCAAP, pros and cons of
roundabouts in general, and the construction impacts of the interchanges. Verbal feedback was
generally positive about the momentum to improve the interchanges and raised concerns similar
to those submitted in writing.
The concept designs are posted on the TCAAP Master Plan page of the City’s website.
Next Steps
City Council review of the first Master Plan draft is scheduled for December 16, 2013. The next
TCAAP open house is tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, January 22, 2014. Master Plan
consultants will also ask for feedback from the JDA and the Planning Commission on January 6
and 8, 2014, respectively. The final Master Plan and the draft AUAR are both expected to be
completed in spring 2014.
22
Page of
STAFF COMMENTS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 25, 2013
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM: Terry Maurer, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Transportation Update
Background
A brief oral update will be provided at the meeting on the US Highway 10 and County Road 96
project.
11
Page of
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING
SEPTEMBER 16, 2013
5:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Pro-Tem Holmes called to order the City
Council Work Session meeting at 5:04 p.m.
Present:
Mayor David Grant (arrived at 5:15 p.m.); Councilmembers Brenda Holden
(arrived at 5:30 p.m.), Fran Holmes, Dave McClung, and Ed Werner (left
meeting at 8:00 p.m.)
Absent:
None
Also present
: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Director of Finance and Administrative
Services Sue Iverson; Public Works Director Terry Maurer; Community Development
Director Jill Hutmacher; Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler; City Planner
Ryan Streff; and City Clerk Amy Dietl
1. AGENDA ITEMS
E. Retreat Ideas/Dates
Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson
stated that in July the Council
discussed five tools used for measuring a cohesive team. She commented that these tools could
be made available to the City free of charge. She questioned if the Council wanted to further
pursue these tools in a full or half-day fall retreat. She proposed holding the fall retreat on
October 24, November 13 or November 25, 26 or 27. Staff requested that the Council discuss
this matter further and provide direction on how to proceed.
Councilmember McClung
understood that the results from the summer profiles showed low
scores for all five areas of behavior. He questioned if the low scores were time sensitive, and if
not, if the retreat could be pushed back to January of 2014.
Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson
explained that this would be further
clarified in the future retreat.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20132
Councilmember Werner
was also in favor of pushing the retreat back to January of 2014. He
suggested one long session be held in lieu of two half-days.
Mayor Pro-Tem Holmes
agreed that January would be better for scheduling purposes and
recommended the retreat be done in one day. She recalled a past retreat where the morning was
used to discuss behaviors and the afternoon was used as a vision/goal setting session.
Councilmember McClung
stated that the identified areas of concern may require more time to
properly bring the group together. He commented that the visioning session may have to be held
at a later date.
Mayor Grant
arrived at the meeting at 5:15 p.m.
Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson
stated that the work could be
accomplished more efficiently if all members of the team would read the book prior to the retreat.
She explained that the workbook would not have to be used and would contact our consultant and
order books.
A.Gateway Signs
Public Works Director Maurer
stated that Jay Higgins from Fourth Dimension and Nick
Tamble from LLG Gardens were present this evening to discuss Gateway Signs with the Council.
He reported that the Council had discussed placing another gateway sign at the intersection of
County Road E2 at Cleveland Avenue. He stated that County Road D and Lexington Avenue
would be another possible location that would require minimal landscaping. The intersection of
Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue would be troublesome due to the fact that the closest City
water lines needed for irrigation are 800 feet away from Highway 96. He explained that rough
estimates for the various sites had been provided by Mr. Higgins and Mr. Tamble. He requested
comments from the Council on how to proceed.
Councilmember Holmes
was in favor of putting a gateway sign at the intersection of County
Road E2 and Cleveland Avenue. This would be seen by a high volume of traffic exiting from the
freeway. She suggested the sign be located on the north side of the intersection at an angle.
Mayor Grant
reported that the Council has received a great deal of positive feedback on the
gateway sign located on the triangle property. He commended Mr. Higgins and Mr. Tamble for
their assistance on this project.
Councilmember Werner
questioned if the intersection of County Road E2 and Cleveland
Avenue would have to be mowed by the City if a gateway sign was installed.
Public Works Director Maurer
explained that the north side of the intersection would not
require any mowing and would have a higher level of visibility.
Jay Higgins,
Fourth Dimension, stated that a sidewalk would be added to this intersection in the
future once the County Road E2 Bridge is reconstructed.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20133
Further discussion ensued regarding the north corner of the County Road E2 and Cleveland
Avenue intersection.
Nick Tamble,
LLG Gardens, anticipated that a gateway sign could be placed at this intersection
and the City could take advantage of the natural setting which would require little need for
landscaping.
Councilmember Holden
arrived at 5:30 p.m.
Councilmember Holmes
asked if a gateway sign at this location would require lighting.
Mr. Higgins
recommended lighting as the sign would be set back from the roadway.
Councilmember McClung
stated he was pleased with how the triangle property turned out;
however, he was not in favor of spending $75,000 on three additional gateway signs at this time.
He would rather put these funds into street, trail and park maintenance. He suggested using signs
similar to the park signs as an alternative to the costly gateway signs.
Councilmember Holden
commented that the businesses in Arden Hills have been requesting
gateway signs and this would be one way to give back to the business community.
Councilmember Holmes
indicated that the gateway signs are very professional looking and they
create an image for Arden Hills, and does not want park style signs used at entrance points to the
City. It is her opinion that the sign at County Road E2 and Cleveland would be reasonable since
no landscaping is required.
Mayor Grant
agreed stating that the timing of the gateway signs and the TCAAP development is
important. He wants . He is in favor of proceeding
with a gateway sign at County Road E2 and Cleveland Avenue.
Councilmember Holden
commented that gateway signs are already in the 2013 budget and are an
established goal for the Council. She wants to proceed with gateway signs.
The Council turned their discussion to a potential gateway sign placement at the intersection of
County Road D and Lexington Avenue.
Public Works Director Maurer
noted that this site would be more expensive because it requires
landscaping and water lines.
Mayor Grant
questioned how the Council wanted to progress with the gateway sign.
Councilmember Holden
was in favor of only completing one sign this year, at County Road E2
and Cleveland Avenue.
Mayor Grant
suggested that the Council opt to do both in 2013 as funds were set aside and the
E2 site would require little to no landscaping.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20134
Councilmember Werner
was in favor of the County Road E2 sign at the northern corner of the
intersection.
Councilmember McClung
recommended no signs be done in 2013.
Councilmember Holden
asked for an estimate on the County Road E2 sign.
Public Works Director Maurer
estimated this sign would cost $10,000+. He commented that
he would work with the consultants on the gateway sign proposed for the intersection of County
Road E2 and Cleveland Avenue and have additional information for the Council to review at a
future meeting.
B.Benchmarks for Compensation Study
Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson
explained that Ann Antonsen from
Springsted was present to discuss the Benchmarks for Compensation Study with the Council.
Ann Antonsen,
Springsted, thanked the Council for their time this evening. She provided the
Council with several handouts . Ms. Antonsen reviewed
the pay philosophy handout with the Council in detail noting that comparisons can be made to
neighboring communities. She commented that she will continue gathering information on the
positions within the City, updating job descriptions, position requirements and will complete a
Ms. Antonsen
explained that the next phase of the compensation study will be to gather market
survey information from neighboring communities and communities of similar size. She
reviewed the handout that identified neighboring communities. The information gathered through
this process will allow for the internal positions to be compared to external positions.
Mayor Grant
summarized that based on the 2007 study; Anoka, Dayton, East Bethel, Ham Lake,
Hugo and Robbinsdale were the most similar in size to Arden Hills. He reviewed the list of
benchmark cities that would be used for the 2013 comparison noting six were new and quite a bit
larger than Arden Hills by size and population. He wanted to be assured that the information
gathered provided a clear picture for the City.
Councilmember Holden
recommended that Shoreview be thrown out of the mix because that
City does not compare to Arden Hills based on size.
Ms. Antonsen
stated that this will be kept in mind as Shoreview may have outliers that are not
consistent with Arden Hills.
Councilmember Werner
questioned how many cities would be compared to Arden Hills for the
compensation study.
Ms. Antonsen
anticipated using 15 communities for comparison purposes. She understood that
some of the cities are larger, but will be considered as these neighboring communities compete
with Arden Hills for employees.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20135
Mayor Grant
suggested that White Bear Lake, Fridley, Blaine, Shoreview and Roseville be
removed from the list of consideration, based on their size.
Councilmember Holmes
recommended Maplewood be removed from the list.
Councilmember Holden
was in favor of removing Shoreview, Blaine, Fridley, Roseville, Circle
Pines and Maplewood.
Councilmember Werner
agreed with this suggestion.
Councilmember Holmes
recommended that Circle Pines, Blaine, and Maplewood be removed.
She was in favor of keeping Shoreview and Roseville for comparison purposes.
Councilmember Holden
supported this recommendation.
The Council was in agreement with the recommendation from Councilmember Holmes.
Ms. Antonsen
stated that these communities will continue to be in the pool of comparable
organizations for the gathering of data, but that they would be identified as outliers when
information is presented to the Council.
Mayor Grant
asked if the Council was ready to decide how to position the City employees
salaries. The Council was not prepared to make a decision and will discuss this matter at a future
meeting.
C.Franchise Fees
City Administrator Klaers
explained that he has been in contact with Colette Jurek with Xcel
Energy regarding a potential franchise fee. He noted that Arden Hills is quite unique given the
number of businesses and colleges located in the City. He reported that Ms. Jurek was again
present this evening to review the matter in more detail with the Council.
Colette Jurek,
Xcel Energy, indicated that based on the July Council discussion, she understands
that the Council is interested in collecting $650,000-700,000 in franchise fees. She commented
that Arden Hills has three large energy customers: , and Boston
Scientific and all have multiple premise situations. For this reason, the City may have to consider
charging an annual rate to these large businesses, instead of a basic rate per address.
Mayor Grant
questioned how Xcel Energy determined how franchise fees in the three scenarios
Ms. Jurek
discussed how fees are determined and evaluated by Xcel Energy. She indicated that
there is a unique customer base in Arden Hills.
Councilmember Holden
asked if Presbyterian Homes would be significantly impacted by a
potential franchise fee.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20136
Ms. Jurek
stated that she will investigate this more. Further discussion ensued regarding the
number of meters and customers in Arden Hills. She requested direction from the Council on
how to proceed.
Councilmember Holden
was not in favor of seeking a yearly payment from Bethel as this would
, Presbyterian Homes, and
other large customers. She stated the whole reason this was pursued was that it was supposed to
be easy and fair.
Mayor Grant
noted that all of University of Northwesternre located in
Arden Hills.
Councilmember Holden
supported scenario one given the information provided this evening.
Councilmember Werner
stated that he no longer supported the franchise fee program. He does
lities since Xcel is already raising rates
2-3%.
Councilmember Holden
thought the franchise fee is a great opportunity for the City. She is
more than happy to pay $5.00 per month to raise funds for trails and parks.
Councilmember McClung
indicated that he would like the Council to discuss this matter further
to determine how the funds will be used by the City before proceeding with the franchise fee. He
supported the franchise fee.
Councilmember Holden
stated that each utility user in the City will be assisting to fund future
trails, and the cost for homeowners would be about $60 a year.
Councilmember Holmes
commented that her biggest concern is the unique customer base in
Arden Hills and the lack of information available from Xcel Energy on this topic. She supported
scenario one.
Mayor Grant
stated that additional conversations will need to be held by the Council in order to
determine how these funds would be used by the City. He supported scenario two for electric and
scenario one for gas.
Ms. Jurek
thanked the Council for their input. She commented that she will report back to the
Council in a few weeks with the information requested.
D. Bethel Concept Review
City Planner Streff
explained that Bethel University is interested in purchasing the Country
Financial property located at 2 Pine Tree Drive for higher education. This item was previously
discussed at the August 19, 2013, Council work session. Bethel has been gathering information
and was present to review this information in detail. He commented that a traffic study, parking
analysis, and trail plan have not yet been completed by Bethel University.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20137
Kathleen Nelson,
Senior Vice President for Finance and Administration for Bethel University,
Drive property. She also
discussed the Campus Master Plan noting this was an internal planning document. She indicated
this plan would have to be redone to take into consideration the 2 Pine Tree Drive property.
Mayor Grant
questioned how many students are approved for Bethel University at this time.
City Planner Streff
explained that in 1980, the Council approved a special use permit stating that
the residential population on the campus shall not exceed 2,300 students.
Jay Barnes,
President of Bethel University, stated that the university is within this limit for
resident students, but also has a population of students that live off campus.
Councilmember McClung
decision to purchase the building.
th
Ms. Nelson
discussed the timeline stating that that after the 4 of
July holiday, Country Financial would be aggressively pursuing the sale of their building. She
indicated that if Bethel does not purchase the building, the university will still be leasing
approximately 26,000 square feet of office space at Country Financial.
Councilmember McClung
is pleased that Bethel University is in Arden Hills and wants to see
the college grow. However, he expressed concern with increasing the amount of institutional
space in the City and how this might impact the community.
Ms. Nelson
explained some of these concerns were discussed at the last work session meeting.
She commented that if Bethel proceeds with the Pine Tree Drive project, the university would be
willing to sell other properties within Arden Hills. This would allow for those properties (library
and administrative offices) to go back on the tax roles. She reported the City would be losing
$21,000 per year from the Pine Tree property Drive if purchased by Bethel University.
Mayor Grant
building.
Councilmember Holden
asked if staff knew the present value of the 2 Pine Tree Drive property.
City Administrator Klaers
responded that the 2012 taxable market value was approximately $16
million.
Mayor Grant
Ms. Nelson
stated she could provide this information to Council. She envisioned that Bethel
would be growing into the Pine Tree Drive property over the next 15 years. She commented that
the entire property would not immediately go tax exempt after Bethel purchased the property, but
rather would be based on use. She provided additional information regarding how Bethel
anticipated expanding into the Pine Tree Drive space over the next few years. It was noted that
science classes and the seminary would likely fill this space.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20138
Councilmember Holden
was a strong proponent for safe transportation between the two
properties to ensure that students could pass safely between both sites. She was disappointed that
Bethel did not come before the Council this evening with final plans to sell their other properties.
Ms. Nelson
thanked Councilmember Holden for voicing her concerns. She commented that
Bethel understood the importance of addressing traffic and safety. She noted Bethel would be
completing a traffic study.
Councilmember Holmes
expressed concern with the lack of attentive driving from the Bethel
University students and how this might affect the City if the university expands the size of their
campus.
Mayor Grant
reiterated the importance of Bethel planning for pedestrian safety as Bethel would
have to provide a connection from the current campus to the Pine Tree Drive campus.
Ms. Nelson
stated this may not be completed until after the Minnesota Department of
Transportation completed reconstruction of the County Road E bridge spanning Snelling Avenue
in 2015. She explained that Bethel was willing to make a $500,000 contribution to the trail
connection.
Further discussion ensued regarding the campus master plan.
Mr. Barnes
indicated that
complete a trail that would connect the two properties.
Councilmember Holmes
asked how Bethel would be using the Country Financial building in the
short term.
Ms. Nelson
explained that the Country Financial space would be used in 2013-2014 for the
Nursing P Assistant program and for administrative offices.
Mayor Grant
thanked the Bethel representatives for being present and for the information
discussed this evening.
F. Policy Regarding Newsletter Articles
City Administrator Klaers
requested the Council discuss how newsletter articles should be
handled and if it is necessary to create a policy. This issue was identified by the Council in 2011
goals discussion as a topic that the Council wanted to discuss further. He commented that there
was an issue recently with the tone of an article submitted by a volunteer and that he understood
that there had been concerns in the past about the content of articles that were written by the
elected officials.
Councilmember McClung
understood that a committee member would be speaking with the
volunteer to edit the article submitted so that it could be used in the newsletter. It was his
understanding that the newsletter committee would address and edit all articles that were not
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 20139
submitted by elected officials. This assured that advocacy issues were managed properly prior to
being published.
Councilmember Holmes
stated an article of hers had been edited in the past.
Discussion ensued regarding how newsletter articles would be handled by the newsletter
committee.
Councilmember Holden
recommended the EDC write blurbs on local businesses. She added
that the newsletter committee has been writing about new businesses but including articles on
existing businesses would make them feel more recognized in the City of Arden Hills.
Councilmember McClung
stated that the newsletter committee would have to use their best
judgment to assure the articles do not become ads.
at this time.
G. Upcoming Meeting Schedule/Agendas
City Administrator Klaers
reviewed the upcoming meeting schedule and agendas with the
thth
Council. He requested the Council consider meeting prior to the September 30 and October 14
Council meetings in work session to discuss the TCAAP master plan and the AUAR. He
recommended the meetings begin at 5:30 p.m. The Council was in favor of this suggestion.
st
City Administrator Klaers
suggested that the franchise fees be discussed again on October 21
with Colette Jurek.
2. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND STAFF UPDATES
Councilmember Holden
requested clarification from staff regarding what Bethel University has
committed to thus far.
th
Mayor Grant
commented that the TCAAP Open House will be held on Tuesday, September 17.
Mayor Grant
recommended the triangle parcel become a City park to allow it to be included in
Councilmember Holmes
was in favor of reducing the number of City paid cell phone expenses.
She requested this be reviewed further at a future budget meeting.
City Administrator Klaers
noted that he will be out of town attending a conference September
rdth
23 through 27, 2013.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
noted that US Bank is marketing the Carrol
Furniture property. Her hope is for the property to be repurposed or torn down and rebuilt.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 201310
Councilmember HoldenCouncilmember Holmes
and were in favor of offering $300,000 for
the Carrolthe property to be demolished and the sidewalks to
be properly completed.
Mayor Grant
requested staff seek additional information on the expense of demolishing the site
and report back to the Council at a future meeting.
ADJOURN
Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council work session at 9:02 p.m.
__________________________ __________________________
Amy Dietl David Grant
City Clerk Mayor
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
5:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Pro-Tem Holmes called to order the City
Council work session at 5:34 p.m.
Present:
Mayor David Grant (arrived at 5:52 p.m.); Councilmembers Brenda
Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave McClung, and Ed Werner
Absent:
None
Also present
: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Public Works Director Terry Maurer;
Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher; Community Development Intern
Matthew Bachler; and City Planner Ryan Streff
1. AGENDA ITEMS
A.Council Input on TCAAP Master Plan
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that an open house was held on
September 17, 2013. The event was well attended and a lot of interaction took place. She
indicated that the consultants present tonight would be reviewing: the comments from the
developer interviews which were conducted in July 2013; the results of the panel and stakeholder
engagement workshop that was held in July 2013; and the feedback that was received at the
September open house. Staff requested input from the Council on their ideas for the Master Plan
th
as Kimley-has of the process. On October 14 the
Council will be asked to approve the development scenarios for the AUAR. It was noted that a
draft Master Plan should be available for the Council to review in December.
Brian Smalkoski,
Kimley-Horn, reviewed the master planning schedule. He noted that his team
is moving on from the discovery phase into developing a draft Master Plan that will be discussed
by the Council in December. Over the next few months, the input received will be worked into
this plan. The plan will then be adopted in 2014. After that point, draft policies and regulations
will be addressed in order to complete the AUAR in a timely manner.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 30, 20132
Jessica Laabs,
Kimley-Horn, discussed the comments received from the developer interviews in
further detail with the Council, along with the public comments received at the open house. She
explained that Opus, CSM, Lennar, and Ryan Company were the developers interviewed.
Common themes expressed through these conversations include the belief that the TCAAP site is
very attractive, it is in a great location, it offers great open space, and that it needs to be completed
in phases. She added that given the scale of the project, flexibility is needed while the space is
developed. Access to and from the development and a regional storm water system were also
expressed as concerns.
Ms. Laabs
commented that Pulte Homes, United Properties, the Urban Land Institute, and
members from the St. Paul Chamber were present at the developer panel and stakeholder
engagement workshop on July 30, 2013. The developers expressed the importance of having
amenities available that would cater to the people living and working on the site. She asked for
reactions from the Council based on these comments.
Councilmember McClung
was not surprised by the statements and thanked the consultants for
gathering this information as it reinforced the fact that the City is heading in a positive direction.
Councilmember Holden
stated that the panel discussion and developer interviews have led her to
believe that the development cannot be 50/50 commercial and residential. More residential will
be needed to support the commercial. She further discussed the recently sold Pulte Homes in
Arden Hills.
Councilmember Werner
was pleased that the younger generation and their needs were being
considered through the development of this site. It was his understanding that the strong school
district would also pull young families into the community.
Ms. Laabs
discussed the citizen input received at the open house noting land use, transportation,
environmental or sustainability features, and parks and open space were main areas of concern.
She stated that he open house. Further discussion
ensued regarding the panel event and the open house.
Andrew Dresdner
, Cunningham Group, explained that a zoning exercise took place at the open
house in which the residents were asked to divide the TCAAP site into roadways, residential,
commercial, and green space. He reviewed the information gathered from these plans. The
residents were not in favor of having the main spine road on the east and wanted to see the
sus that commercial development be placed at
both entrances (north and south) of the site, with housing on the east.
Councilmember Holmes
questioned how many residents/citizens were in attendance at the open
house.
Mr. Smalkoski
estimated that nearly 100 people attended the event between residents and elected
officials.
Mayor Grant
arrived at the meeting at 5:52 p.m.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 30, 20133
Councilmember Holmes
asked if the split spine road would be maintained by the County or the
City.
Public Works Director Maurer
stated that there is a provision under State Aid that would allow
State Aid mileage. This maintenance issue will have to be worked out between the City and
County.
Mayor Grant
commented that the County has agreed to construct the spine road. He questioned
if this roadway was to split, if the County would construct both.
Public Works Director Maurer
was uncertain, but anticipated that the County agreed to the
construction of one main corridor that would connect County Road 96 to County Road H. This
issue will have to be further discussed with the County as the Master Plan develops.
Ms. Laabs
indicated that she brought up the split roadway issue to the County and this will
require further discussion between the City and the County.
Councilmember Holmes
expressed concern with moving forward on the Master Plan or AUAR
until further information is known about the capacity of the spine road through the TCAAP site.
Mr. Smalkoski
explained there is a capacity continuum based on the zoning of the site. He
indicated that at least 2.2 million square feet of non-residential along with 1,500 units of
residential can be accommodated by the two access points. He stated that County Road H would
be reconfigured/reconstructed. He stated that the only capacity issue at this time is how much
traffic the intersection at Highway 96 could handle.
Councilmember Holmes
expressed concern with traffic levels for people living within the
TCAAP site. She did not want to see the new residents having time-consuming delays and
congestion when trying to exit or enter the site.
Further discussion ensued regarding traffic in Arden Hills.
Councilmember Holden
requested further information on the improvements planned for County
Road H.
Mr. Smalkoski
indicated that these improvements have not yet been determined.
Mayor Grant
commented that a mix of uses within the development would assure that peak
traffic concerns were minimized.
Councilmember Holmes
asked if a split spine road would reduce congestion within the
development.
Mr. Smalkoski
stated this would allow for more capacity, but again, the main hold-up will be the
intersection at Highway 96.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 30, 20134
Councilmember Holden
was in favor of having a split road through the site and not a spine road.
This would assure that the development is more accessible.
Councilmember Holmes
expressed concern with the traffic level that could flow through the
County Road I intersection. She did not want to see the wildlife corridor disturbed.
Councilmember Holden
commented that she did not want to see the spine road become a
thoroughfare or short cut for Shoreview residents.
Councilmember McClung
agreed this may happen but understood that traffic would readjust as
necessary if congestion occurred at County Road H.
City Administrator Klaers
requested comment on the residential/commercial split for the
TCAAP site.
Councilmember Holden
understood that commercial may be overbuilt in the surrounding area
noting the TCAAP site may have more residential than commercial property.
Mayor Grant
agreed with this assessment. He believed the residential areas would build out
faster and this could be an advantage to the development. The City may have to wait for the
commercial areas to develop.
City Administrator Klaers
stated that residential development would allow for a critical mass to
take hold of the site which would be crucial for the future success of commercial developments.
Mr. Dresdner
requested the Council discuss the proposed mix of commercial uses for the
TCAAP site, between open space, commercial, light industrial, and industrial properties.
Mayor Grant
indicated he could support high-end light industrial or a business campus with
higher paying jobs.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
explained this would be further broken down
when the Council discusses design standards and regulations with Gateway Planning.
The Council discussed the current industrial developments located in the City of Arden Hills.
Mayor Grant
supported having retail near the thumb, so long as there is a focal point. He was in
favor of having several open space amenities which could serve as focal points, versus one large
park.
Councilmember McClung
wanted to see the City maintain some level of flexibility in case the
AHATS property was to become available to the City at some point in the future.
Councilmember Holden
was in favor of a regional storm water system with a water feature.
Councilmember McClung
agreed with this suggestion.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 30, 20135
Discussion took place on preferred options for the residential development on the TCAAP site.
Discussion ensued regarding the AUAR process and the two different AUAR development
scenarios.
City Administrator Klaers
thanked the Council for their input. He reported the Master Plan and
AUAR would continue moving forward.
ADJOURN
Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council work session meeting at 6:56 p.m.
__________________________ __________________________
Patrick Klaers David Grant
City Administrator Mayor
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
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 regular City
Council meeting at 7:02 p.m.
Present:
Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave
McClung, and Ed Werner
Absent:
None
Also present
: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Public Works Director Terry Maurer;
Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher; Finance Analyst Kyle Howard;
Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler; and City Planner Ryan Streff
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a
motion to approve the meeting agenda as presented. The motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
2. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL
None.
3. STAFF COMMENTS
A. TCAAP Update
Community Development Director Hutmacher
reported that the first open house for the
TCAAP master planning process was held on September 17, 2013. The purpose of this open
house was to provide information about the master planning process, share background
information on the redevelopment site including site constraints, and solicit input on site
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20132
opportunities and issues. Over 80 people were in attendance. The following boards were on
Site context and features
Transportation and access Environmental features
Topography and elevations Parks, trails, and open space
Key lessons from developer panel/developer interviews
Community Development Director Hutmacher
explained that attendees were asked to
comment on residential and commercial building types, open space types, and neighborhood
patterns. Attendees also had an opportunity to participate in a land use exercise in which they
could distribute their preferred mix of residential, retail, office, and park uses across the site.
Photos were taken of each completed exercise and projected onto a screen in the room.
Comments received at the open house largely addressed the following themes:
Emphasize trails and provide multi-modal connectivity
Limit the amount of development to preserve the natural environment
Create regional destination in the form of shopping centers or community attractions and
amenities
Place non-residential uses on the west and residential on the east part of the site
Focus on small and local businesses
Incorporate indoor and outdoor sporting/recreation facilities
Provide lifecycle housing opportunities (young professionals, families, retirees)
Find a way to incorporate alternative energy production
Make sure there is ample green space and active space
Make provisions for transit service
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that input from public and stakeholder
engagement, including City Council and JDA comments, will be utilized along with technical
analysis of traffic, land use, and environmental factors to develop two scenarios for the
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) document. An AUAR is a form of environmental
documentation through Minnesota State Rules that evaluates a development scenario (or several
scenarios) for an entire geographical area rather than a specific project. The AUAR must include a
scenario based on the existing comprehensive plan.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
reported the master planning process is on
schedule. The consultants anticipate having a draft of the Master Plan prepared for Planning
Commission and City Council review in December 2013. At the next TCAAP open house in
January/February 2014, attendees will be asked to provide feedback on the draft Master Plan. The
final Master Plan and the draft AUAR are both expected to be completed in spring 2014.
B. Transportation Update
Public Works Director Maurer
discussed the US 10/Highway 96 road construction project with
the Council. He reviewed several photographs that displayed the progress being made on the
project. He commented the project has remained on schedule and would be completed yet this
fall.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20133
Councilmember McClung
thanked staff for the project update and photographs.
C. State of the City Report
Community Development Director Hutmacher
explained the State of the City event was held
on September 12tended.
Councilmembers and Economic Development Commission Chair Ed von Holtum spoke on the
TCAAP project; economic development goals; current transportation and development projects;
and improvements along County Road E. Foundation Board Member Tamble spoke on the Arden
Hills Foundation. The event was videotaped by CTV and once the video is available, a link will
Councilmember Holmes
thanked staff for their assistance with the State of the City.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A.Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Item - Claims and Payroll
B.Motion to Authorize Purchase of Two Toro Zero-Turn Mowers
C.Motion to Appoint Brent Bartel to the Planning Commission
D.Motion to Approve Payment No. 1 to Classic Protective Coatings, Inc., for the
South Water Tower Rehabilitation Project in the Amount of $151,050.00
E.Motion to Approve Payment No. 1 to SAK Construction, LLC, for the 2013
Sanitary Sewer Lining Improvements in the Amount of $292,178.73
F.Motion to Approve Payment #4 to North Valley, Inc., in the Amount of
$115,012.46 for the 2013 Pavement Management Program
G.Motion to Approve 2013 Capital Reimbursement to Lake Johanna Fire Department
in the amount of $19,335.60 for Rescue Truck 4
MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Werner seconded a
motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented and to authorize
execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
6. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS
None.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.Delinquent Utility Bills
Finance Analyst Howard
stated that delinquent utility amounts are certified to Ramsey County
quarterly. A list of utility accounts with a delinquent balance was compiled and notices dated
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20134
August 15, 2013, were mailed. These customers were informed of their delinquent status and
were asked to make payment of the delinquent balance by September 20, 2013. Utility accounts
with an unpaid delinquent balance after September 20, 2013, will be certified to Ramsey County
to be added to property taxes payable in 2014. The certification amount is equal to the unpaid
delinquent balance plus an eight percent penalty.
Finance Analyst Howard
indicated that the City will request that Ramsey County levy the
delinquent balances against the respective properties. Staff recommended the Council hold a
public hearing and approve a resolution certifying the list of delinquent utility accounts.
Mayor Grant
opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m.
With no one coming forward to speak, Mayor Grant closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
Councilmember McClung
encouraged homeowners to pay their utility bills in a timely manner.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a
motion to approve Resolution #2013-038, Adopting and Confirming Quarterly
Special Assessments for Delinquent Utilities. The motion carried unanimously
(5-0).
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Lexington Station Signage Plan
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that the applicant, Roberts Management Group,
has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment for a sign plan for the Lexington
Station redevelopment project at 3833 Lexington Avenue North.
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that on July 8, 2013, the City Council approved
a Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development for Phase I of the
Lexington Station redevelopment project at 3833 Lexington Avenue in Planning Case 13-003. A
signage plan for the Phase I development was not included in the approved PUD. Roberts
Management Group is now requesting an amendment to the existing PUD to include a sign plan
for the property. The applicant has submitted plans that include the dimensions and locations of
the proposed monument sign and wall signage.
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that the monument sign would be located
on Lexington Avenue towards the southern end of the Phase I development, adjacent to the access
driveway currently serving 3771 Lexington Avenue. The sign copy area would measure 15 feet
tall by 9 feet wide, or 135 square feet. The height of the sign would be 26 feet and 9 ½ inches.
Community Development Intern Bachler
indicated there are a total of ten retail bays in the
Phase I building. For the two larger bays at the southern and northern ends of the building, the
applicant has requested a total of 240 square feet of wall signage. The signage would be divided
equally between the three building walls on the end units. For the remaining eight central bays,
115 square feet of wall signage is being requested. This amount would be divided between the
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20135
western façade facing the interior of the development and the eastern façade facing Lexington
Avenue.
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that small blade signs are also proposed to be
located between retail bays on the western side of the building. These signs would measure four
(4) square feet in area and would hang from a rod extending approximately three feet from the
building wall. A total of seven blade signs are proposed.
Site Data
Future Land Use Plan: Commercial
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Zoning: B-3: Service Business District
Current Lot Sizes: 1.34 Acres
Topography: Level
Community Development Intern Bachler
reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation
along with portions of City Code Chapters 12 and 13.
Community Development Intern Bachler
provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1. The property is located in the B-3 Zoning District and in Sign District 5.
2. The Planned Unit Development at 3833 Lexington Avenue was approved by the City on
July 8, 2013, in Planning Case 13-003. The approved Planned Unit Development did not
include a sign plan for the property.
3. The applicant is proposing an amendment to the approved PUD for a sign plan that
includes a monument sign and wall signage.
4. The City has adopted special design standards for the B-3 Zoning District, which include
provisions on signage.
5. The proposed PUD Amendment is in considerable conformance with the requirements of
6.
Zoning Code.
7. ode, flexibility has been
requested by the applicant due to the site conditions unique to the property at 3833
Lexington Avenue.
8.
through a negotiated process with a developer.
9. The signage plan would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a
whole, and it is consistent with the size and orientation of the property on which the signs
would be located.
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that the Planning Commission discussed
this item at their September 4, 2013, meeting. The Planning Commission recommended approval
of Planning Case 13-014 for an amendment to the Final Planned Unit Development for Phase I of
Lexington Station at 3833 Lexington Avenue, as amended by the following eleven (11)
conditions:
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20136
1. The signage plan shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the
City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission.
2. The retail bay at the northern end of the Phase I building shall be permitted no more than
140 square feet of wall signage. The total wall signage shall be divided between 40 square
feet on the west façade, 60 square feet on the north façade, and 40 square feet on the east
façade.
3. The retail bay at the southern end of the Phase I building shall be permitted no more than
140 square feet of wall signage. The total wall signage shall be divided between 40 square
feet on the west façade, 60 square feet on the south façade, and 40 square feet on the east
façade.
4. Each of the eight central retail bays in the Phase I building shall be permitted no more than
80 square feet of wall signage. The total wall signage shall be divided between 40 square
feet on the west façade and 40 square feet on the east façade.
5. In the event that a tenant occupies multiple retail bays in the Phase I building, the tenant
shall be allowed up to 30 square feet of wall signage per additional bay occupied. This
amount shall be divided between up to 15 square feet of signage on the west façade and up
to 15 square feet of signage on the east façade.
6. Wall signs shall be comprised of individual cut letters and shall not extend more than 12
inches from the wall they are attached to. Wall signs shall be consistent in appearance and
the spacing between signs shall be balanced.
7. Blade signs shall not extend beyond the front edge of the canopies on the west façade and
shall have an area of no more than four (4) square feet. Blade signs shall have a minimum
vertical clearance of eight (8) feet from the sidewalk to the bottom of the sign.
8. The sign copy area on the blade sign shall not be included when calculating the permitted
area for wall signage per tenant.
9. The monument sign on Lexington Avenue shall not exceed twenty-six feet and nine and
on- in height. The monument sign shall be setback a minimum of
five (5) feet from the property line.
10. Prior to approval of a PUD Amendment Agreement, the applicant shall submit a revised
sign plan that removes the window banner coatings.
11. Sign permits shall be applied for prior to the installation of any signage on the property.
Councilmember Holden
asked if the blade signs would be lit.
Community Development Intern Bachler
indicated that the blade signs would not be lit, but the
wall signs would be lit internally.
Councilmember Holden
stated the monument sign was too large.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a
motion to approve Planning Case 13-014 an amendment to the Final PUD for
Phase 1 of the Lexington Station redevelopment proposal at 3833 Lexington
Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, as amended by the
eleven (11) conditions in the September 30, 2013 Report to the City Council.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20137
Councilmember Werner
indicated that, according to the City sign ordinance, the proposed signs
were excessive.
Mayor Grant
stated this was the case, but that this development was a PUD and for that reason,
was allowed some flexibility.
Councilmember Holden
indicated she could support the 920 square feet of wall signs for the
building.
Councilmember Holmes
agreed stating her main concerns were with the monument sign. She
was in favor of having the monument sign not exceed 20 feet.
Mayor Grant
questioned why the monument sign was not proposed to have 10 tenant panel
signs.
Community Development Intern Bachler
commented that the applicant understands that one
tenants may occupy two or more spaces within the proposed development. For this reason, the
applicant proposed to have seven tenant panel signs on the monument sign.
Councilmember Holden
wanted to see the monument sign reduced in size by one-third. She
would like to see the height of the sign brought down to 17 feet and each tenant panel sign be 14
square feet in area.
Councilmember McClung
initially hesitant on the proposed size, but was now in agreement. He stated that the sign was set
back from the roadway. He recommended the Council approve the sign height at 20 feet.
Councilmember Holden
stated she could support this, except for the fact that the building would
also have an excessive amount of wall signage.
Mayor Grant
asked if another monument sign would be added along Lexington Avenue during
Phase 3 of the development.
Community Development Intern Bachler
indicated this would likely be the case.
Mayor Grant
was not in favor of this development having two extremely large monument signs,
and excessive wall signage within the development.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holmes
seconded a motion to revise Condition 9 reducing the height of the
monument sign to 20 feet with the maximum sign area being 120
square feet.
Councilmember McClung
explained the proposed monument sign would be setback
approximately 60 feet from Lexington Avenue and the sign height being 20 feet would assist with
visibility. He commented that the applicant could have an additional monument sign with the
Phase 1 development along Red Fox Road and was only requesting one. He stated this
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20138
development would spur further development in the area and he wanted to see it be extremely
successful.
Councilmember Holden
expressed concern that Shannon Square tenants would come before the
City requesting additional signage if this sign amendment were approved.
Councilmember Holmes
supported the monument sign at 20 feet. She requested clarification on
the maximum sign area.
Community Development Intern Bachler
discussed the sign copy area of the sign in further
detail with the Council. He stated the sign copy area recommended by staff originally was 135
square feet.
Councilmember McClung
commented that monument signs direct traffic into adjacent
developments. He did not want to see the tenant panel signs made too small as this would make it
difficult for passing traffic to read the signs. He recommended the Council offer the developer
some level of flexibility on the monument sign.
Councilmember Holden
believed that a 20 foot monument sign would provide enough space for
the tenant panel signs to be legible to passing traffic. She recommended the sign copy area be
reduced to 100 square feet, as this would allow the monument sign to remain proportional.
Mayor Grant
questioned how far off the Lexington Avenue curb the monument sign would be
placed.
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained the monument sign would be
approximately 60 feet from the curb.
Councilmember McClung
called the question on the amendment motion.
The amendment carried (5-0).
Councilmember Holmes
discussed the proposed window banner coatings and recommended
these be included in the PUD Amendment request. This would ensure that the applicant would
not have to reapply for an amendment to the sign plan in the future.
Councilmember Holden
questioned why the window banner coatings were requested by the
applicant.
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated the window banner coatings were originally
requested to allow the tenants to block out several windows of the corner bays. The applicant has
since removed this request from consideration because the applicant is still negotiating leases for
this space. He explained the applicant may use spandrel glass instead of coating the windows. He
recommended the Council not address this issue at this time. Further discussion ensued regarding
the use of spandrel glass versus transparent glass.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 20139
Community Development Director Hutmacher
indicated the original PUD allowed only for
transparent glass. However, staff was in favor of allowing spandrel glass in lieu of banner
coatings.
Councilmember Holden
asked if the Council should approve the use of spandrel glass.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
explained there were still a number of
unknowns and suggested the Council hold off until the tenants for the corner bays were secured.
Mayor Grant
suggested the Council direct staff to report back once the tenants for the corner
bays were secured by the applicant.
Councilmember Holmes
was in favor of allowing staff to negotiate this issue with the applicant.
Councilmember Holden
recommended that the applicant go through the PUD amendment
process again if significant changes were made to the windows.
City Planner Streff
commented that the Council could direct staff to negotiate window coverage
for store rooms and kitchens with the applicant.
Councilmember Holmes
asked if staff was comfortable with this suggestion.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
supported this recommendation.
Councilmember McClung
was in favor of retaining flexibility for staff and the developer, but
stated a PUD amendment may be necessary considering the tenants were unknown.
Mayor Grant
requested comment from the applicant.
Tim Gilbert
, Roberts Management Group, 1851 Berkley Road in White Bear Lake, stated the
possibility of spandrel glass was still unknown. He commented it may be necessary to use
spandrel glass if a restaurant was to locate in one of the corner bays.
Councilmember Holmes
withdrew her recommendation and suggested the Council take no
action addressing the windows at this time.
Councilmember McClung
questioned if Condition 10 should be removed.
Community Development Intern Bachler
recommended Condition 10 remain worded as is.
The amended motion carried (5-0).
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 30, 201310
Councilmember McClung
recommended staff post the photos of the US 10/Highway 96 road
He commented his road was recently
reconstructed/restriped and this has assisted in slowing traffic in his neighborhood.
Councilmember Werner
stated that his schedule has changed and he will be in attendance at the
th
October 14 City Council meeting.
Councilmember Holden
explained that Northeast Youth and Family Services is hosting an event
this Thursday.
Councilmember Holden
stated that in looking at possible franchise fees, 46% of the City
taxable value is tax-exempt.
Mayor Grant
indicated that the e street flats now has a third sign on the building. He requested
staff investigate this further. He questioned when the final Certificate of Occupancy would be
issued for this property.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
explained the property was very close to
receiving the Certificate of Occupancy. There are several minor issues that need to be addressed
with the lobby seating and outdoor lighting.
Mayor Grant
reviewed a letter he received from Impact 7G regarding cell phone service. He
Mayor Grant
requested an update on the water tower project.
Public Works Director Maurer
explained the tan color was almost done and the logos will take
four days to complete. He anticipated the project would be finished by mid-October.
City Administrator Klaers
reported the fall cleanup day will be Saturday, October 5, 2013, from
8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Public Works Facility.
ADJOURN
MOTION: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to
adjourn. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mayor Grant
adjourned the regular City Council meeting at 8:35 p.m.
__________________________ __________________________
Patrick Klaers David Grant
City Administrator Mayor
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 14, 2013
5:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Grant called to order the City Council work
session at 5:34 p.m.
Present:
Mayor David Grant; Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave
McClung, and Ed Werner
Absent:
None
Also present
: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Director of Finance and Administrative
Services Sue Iverson; Public Works Director Terry Maurer; Community Development
Director Jill Hutmacher; City Planner Ryan Streff; and City Clerk Amy Dietl
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The Council accepted the agenda as presented.
2. AGENDA ITEMS
A.Development Options for AUAR
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that based on Council direction at the
September 30, 2013, special work session meeting, Kimley-Horn has prepared two development
scenarios (zoning and maximum development) and an order formally initiating the Alternative
Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process. She explained that Kimley-Horn was requesting that
the Council review and discuss the development scenarios and AUAR order prior to the October
14, 2013, Council meeting.
Beth Kunkel
, Kimley-Horn, indicated she has been working with Ramsey County and City staff
in preparation for developing the proposed scenarios for the AUAR. It was noted that Kimley-
Horn was seeking to address the Council long-term needs through the development of the
TCAAP site. She then discussed the AUAR process in further detail.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 20132
Ms. Kunkel
reviewed the minimum and maximum development potentials for TCAAP
explaining that traffic access would be a key factor. At this time, the zoning scenario consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan would allow up to 1,500 residential units, 500,000 square feet of
retail, and up to 1.7 million square feet of non-retail/commercial. The maximum scenario
increases these uses to 2,500 residential units, 550,000 square feet of retail, and almost 2 million
square feet of non-retail/commercial. These would be the two bookends for realistic development
on the site.
Councilmember Holden
requested further information on the assumptions as to how the site
would be accessed.
Brian Smalkoski
, Kimley-Horn, explained that the assumption made was that the County Road H
and Highway 96 intersections with I-35W would be reconstructed as part of MnDOT and Ramsey
County projects. He indicated that further information on these projects would be available in
November. The hope would be to have better accommodations for pedestrians and bicycles.
Mayor Grant
stated that Kimley-Horn has made assumptions on these intersections in order to
create the proposed scenarios.
Ms. Kunkel
indicated this was the case and then discussed the two goals of the AUAR. The first
would be to define the limitations to the critical mitigations that would be required based on the
maximum development scenario. The second goal would be to evaluate the potential density of
the site development.
Councilmember Holden
expressed concern that one-third of the proposed residential units could
enter the TCAAP site from County Road I if a connection is provided.
Mr. Smalkoski
discussed the assumptions made for the estimated trips per use for the site for
residential, retail and commercial uses.
Councilmember Holmes
stated that she needed further information on the assumptions made by
the consultants to know if the Council should proceed with the maximum development scenario.
She found the information provided to be too vague to make an informed decision.
Mr. Smalkoski
stated that
detail. He explained that both of the proposed scenarios would be investigated in great detail
along with the impacts on the site. He indicated the proposed zoning scenario was created after
that the maximum scenario was based on
comments from the public and Council which indicated that the market may favor residential
development and provided an option that would increase the retail available on the site.
Mayor Grant
questioned if actual development could be less or more than the scenarios.
Mr. Smalkoski
reported that actual development could be less than the zoning scenario but not
more than the maximum scenario.
Councilmember Holden
asked how the maximum scenario was established.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 20133
Mr. Smalkoski
indicated the limits for residential, retail and commercial were raised after high
level analysis was completed on what he believed were the capacity limits of the transportation
infrastructure.
Councilmember Werner
commented that this document would be a good starting point between
the two scenarios. After completion of the AUAR, the Council could then make an informed
decision on how to proceed with the development.
Councilmember Holmes
questioned why Kimley-Horn selected 2,500 residential homes as the
maximum.
Ms. Kunkel
stated this was an educated maximum guess of what the site could handle for
generated trips.
Councilmember McClung
reiterated that the proposed scenarios were not locking the Council
into anything. The AUAR would provide the Council with data to make informed decisions for
the Master Plan.
Councilmember Holmes
stated it would have been helpful for the Council to have been able to
review and analyze the assumptions made for the development scenarios.
Councilmember Holden
indicated she too wanted to greater understand how the bookends were
established.
Ms. Kunkel
discussed this matter further with the Council noting that after the AUAR analysis
was completed, the Council would be able to understand what the site could handle for residential,
retail and commercial property.
Mayor Grant
stated that the consultants would be able to report back to the Council with details
on the proposed scenarios as the AUAR process continues.
Councilmember Holmes
was in favor of delaying action until the Council could review the
assumptions made by the consultant.
Mayor Grant
supported the Council taking action on the AUAR with the proposed development
scenarios.
Councilmember Werner
understood the concerns expressed regarding the assumptions,
however, he supported having the AUAR process move forward.
Mayor Grant
suggested the Council move onto the next item on the agenda.
B.Round Lake Road Project
Public Works Director Maurer
explained that Kristie Elfering of Elfering and Associates was
present to review the preliminary Findings of the Feasibility Report on the Round Lake Road
project. He explained the
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 20134
Council before being shared with the property owners at an informational meeting. He discussed
the available right-of-way, proposed improvements, Rice Creek Watershed requirements,
estimated project costs and funding options for Round Lake Road. Staff is requesting the
Council provide direction on the proposed improvements and funding for the project.
Public Works Director Maurer
reported the watermain along Round Lake Road
indicated that this line would provide a third
redundancy for getting water to the TCAAP site. It was noted that the sanitary sewer services for
these properties would not be disrupted through the reconstruction. He reviewed how analysis of
the cost to eliminate Lift Station 11 showed that this part of the project was not cost effective.
Staff reviewed information
Kristie Elfering
, Elfering and Associations, discussed the estimated expense for this project. She
noted the road reconstruction would cost just under $1.5 million, and would cover the
replacement of the road, storm sewer system, curb and gutter. Replacement of the water lines as
part of this project could cost an additional $300,000.
Public Works Director Maurer
explained how the project could be funded by using both City
funds and assessments. He stated that the Assessment Manual called for assessing 70% for
commercial and industrial roads. He also noted that there is no assessable property on the west
side of Round Lake Road. This calculation results in assessment rates of approximately
$210/Front foot for the east side. He projected these numbers were reasonable based on past City
discussions of Round Lake Road improvements. This assessment rate would generate $500,000.
The remaining $1 million would have to be covered by the City.
Mayor Grant
questioned if PIR funds could be used for this project.
Public Works Director Maurer
stated PIR, MSA, and/or TIF funds could be used.
Councilmember Holden
asked why residential properties were paying 50% of road
reconstruction expenses, when commercial properties only had to pay 35%.
Public Works Director Maurer
clarified that 70% of the costs would be assessed, 35% to the
City (west side with no assessable property) and 35% to the property owners (east side). He
commented that the proposed percentage was up for discussion by the Council.
Mayor Grant
Councilmember McClung
questioned the balance in the PIR and TIF funds available for this
project.
City Administrator Klaers
reported that, based on EDA and Council action in July and August
with the non-increment funds, the PIR balance was increased by $1,027,000 and the balance in the
TIF fund was $159,000.
Councilmember Holden
questioned how the project costs broke down between streets and sewer
improvements.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 20135
Ms. Elfering
stated that $1.2 million of the project costs would cover the street and trail expenses
while $275,000 would be spent on storm sewer improvements. There are no sanitary sewer
improvements in this project.
Public Works Director Maurer
inquired if the Council supported the proposed $200 per foot
assessment rate for the adjacent property owners.
Councilmember Holden
questioned why the City was proposing to charge the commercial
properties less than has been charged to residential properties.
Public Works Director Maurer
reviewed the numbers with the Council and discussed the
differences between the per unit residential rate and the per foot pricing for commercial projects.
For residential PMP projects, the City pays for 50% of the street and with this Round Lake Road
project, the City is paying only 30% of the street.
Councilmember Holden
expressed concern that Lift Station No. 11 would not be eliminated
through this project. She asked if the City had future funds for that project.
Public Works Director Maurer
stated that $250,000 would have to be set aside for future
improvements for Lift Station No. 11.
The Council supported the proposed assessment rates for the Round Lake Road project.
Mayor Grant
recessed the meeting at 6:57 p.m.
Mayor Grant
reconvened the meeting at 9:25 p.m.
C.County Road E Improvement Project Costs and Assessment Options
Public Works Director Maurer
explained that last year the City hired Bolton & Menk to prepare
a Feasibility Report for the Phase I Improvements to County Road E. He noted the proposed
project was estimated to cost $1.8 million and Ramsey County has committed to funding
approximately half of that cost leaving the City with $900,000. Staff has focused on a 50/50 split
between assessments and the City funding the remaining expense. He explained that Mr. Thomas
would be presenting the Council with an assessment method on both front footage assessments to
the properties along County Road E and an area assessment to the whole B-2 District.
Marcus Thomas
, Bolton & Menk, reviewed the proposed layout and improvements for County
Road E and the projected costs in detail with the Council. He explained that a bicycle lane would
be added, along with sidewalks on the north and south sides of County Road E. He discussed the
changes proposed for the signals and intersections.
Councilmember Holden
asked if the
on County Road E could be improved or upgraded through the improvement project. She was in
favor of improving the
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 20136
City Administrator Klaers
commented that the property owners were not interested in adding
curbs or medians to the shared driveway for access reasons. He indicated that the property has
existed in its current condition for quite some time. He explained that staff could speak to the
property owners further regarding this matter.
Mr. Thomas
discussed the project costs noting they had remained constant at $1.8 million with
half of the expense being covered by Ramsey County. He indicated MnDOT would be
contributing $14,000 for signal work at the Connelly Avenue intersection. The remainder of the
project costs would have to be funded by the City. He commented that the City could choose to
assess a portion of this expense to the benefiting property owners. He explained that he and City
staff discussed this matter with the City Attorney, Tom Scott, and it was found that the proposed
aesthetic improvements would not reach as far as the operational roadway improvements. For
this reason, the general advice was to consider the adjacent properties to be the ones benefiting
from the proposed aesthetic improvements, while the entire B-2 District would benefit from the
operational improvements.
Mr. Thomas
ties, which
was approximately $430,000. He reviewed the proposed assessment amounts for each lot along
County Road E noting the rates would range from $150 to $84,000 depending on the parcel. He
found that the methodology used for the assessment rates gave a fair representation of benefit
based on the size of each parcel.
Councilmember Holden
reported that several properties along County Road E were required to
put sidewalks in and have not. She recommended this work be completed.
Public Works Director Maurer
understood ttreet Flats were
required to have sidewalks. Agreements were reached with the City or escrow funds have been
set aside for these improvements. This work has been delayed due to the changes that were
proposed for County Road E. He explained that another side of this issue was that some property
owners had put sidewalks in that would be removed or altered through this project.
Councilmember Holmes
recommended that the Pine Tree Drive property be further reviewed to
ensure that the pedestrian trail required by Bethel University was addressed. She questioned if the
lighting expense for this project was correct.
Public Works Director Maurer
stated that the lighting for the project was estimated to be
$500,000. He reiterated that this was an estimate and the actual expense may be reduced after the
Feasibility Study was complete.
Councilmember Holden
asked if any of the water lines would be replaced through this project.
Public Works Director Maurer
stated that the water lines would be inspected, but a full
replacement was not planned.
Councilmember McClung
requested further information on how the project would be assessed.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 20137
Public Works Director Maurer
explained that 50% of the project, which included the roadway,
sidewalk and aesthetic improvements, would be assessed.
Councilmember Holmes
supported the assessments as proposed by staff. The Council was in
agreement.
Mr. Thomas
thanked the Council for their input. He commented that the next step would be for
the City to order the Feasibility Report and for the Council to address several easement issues for
the proposed sidewalks.
ADJOURN
Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council work session at 10:10 p.m.
__________________________ __________________________
Amy Dietl David Grant
City Clerk Mayor
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OCTOBER 14, 2013
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 regular City
Council meeting at 7:03 p.m.
Present:
Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave
McClung, and Ed Werner
Absent:
None
Also present
: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Director of Finance and Administrative
Services Sue Iverson; Public Works Director Terry Maurer; Community Development
Director Jill Hutmacher; City Planner Ryan Streff; and City Clerk Amy Dietl
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Councilmember Holden
requested Item B be removed from the Consent Agenda for further
discussion.
Councilmember Holmes
requested Item C be removed from the Consent Agenda for further
discussion.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a
motion to approve the meeting agenda as amended. The motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
2. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL
Gregg Larson, 3377 North Snelling Avenue, discussed the September 16, 2013, work session
meeting. He discouraged the Council from moving forward with franchise fees. He found the
franchise fee to be a regressive, hidden tax. He explained that heating rates are projected to rise
13% this winter and will He felt that Arden Hills'
residents deserved better leadership.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20132
Elizabeth Garsky, 1795 Lake Valentine Road, expressed concern with the poor condition of her
roadway given the high level of traffic this summer due to road construction. She explained that
she discussed this matter with a representative at MnDOT. She then presented the Public Works
Director with several photographs showing the poor condition of Lake Valentine Road.
3. STAFF COMMENTS
A. TCAAP Update
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that all but one building has been
demolished on the TCAAP property. She explained that Building 502 will have asbestos
abatement completed this winter and will be demolished in the spring.
B. Report on JDA Denver Visit
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that on August 1 and 2, 2013, the JDA
visited three redevelopment areas in Denver: Stapleton, Fitzsimons-Anschultz, and Lowry.
Following the visit, Commissioners and staff completed questionnaires detailing the insight
gained from the visit. The completed questionnaires have been compiled and summarized. The
report completed does not include every comment, but focuses on the recurring themes that were
evident in many responses. The JDA reviewed this report at its October 7, 2013, meeting and the
Responses regarding the best features of the
Denver redevelopments can be generally categorized as diversity, design, and public spaces.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
addressed diversity within the 3 development
areas. She noted that in Lowry and particularly in Stapleton, housing styles and architecture are
varied, yet fit together well in terms of scale. Homebuilders are not allowed to construct housing
-pe. Elevations and colors cannot be repeated
on a block. Types of housing are also diverse. Thoughtful design assures that diverse housing
types (single-family, paired homes, multi-family) are well-integrated in neighborhoods. The mix
of housing types also allows a diversity of incomes and ages. Older residents may live in senior
housing in close proximity to their younger family members. Young professionals, families, and
empty nesters may find suitable housing within a single neighborhood.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
provided comment on design. She explained
that much of the diversity is accomplished through a high level of design. Both Stapleton and
Lowry utilize extensive design guidelines that are applicable to all development in the community.
The design guidelines promote consistent quality and a unified aesthetic. With the high level of
design, although densities were approximately 12 units per acre, the development does not seem
exceedingly dense. Infrastructure also contributes to design. Utilities are buried. Alleys are used
extensively to eliminate garages on public roads. Two-lane streets and landscaped medians are
used to give streetscapes a pedestrian scale and diminish the tendency of roadways to divide
neighborhoods.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
then discussed the importance of public spaces.
She commented that both Lowry and Stapleton have significant public spaces that encourage
community interaction. Stapleton has a retail-focused town center and an open public green space
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20133
that is used for large events. Lowry also has a retail core and extensive parks and trails. In the
neighborhoods, substantial landscaping in public areas and even on private property is maintained
by the homeowners association. Public art creates a unique community character.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that despite the many achievements of
the Denver redevelopments, questionnaire responses noted a few missed opportunities. All of the
Denver redevelopments lacked significant transit options. An LRT connection will soon be
provided to Stapleton; however, the station will be built in a less-than-ideal location. The
Anschutz-Fitzsimons redevelopment has little on-site residential or retail uses that could be
complementary to the office/medical uses. Respondents noted the absence of commercial
development and high-quality, on-site employment opportunities at both Stapleton and Lowry. All
of the redevelopment areas have limited infrastructure or other connections that could integrate
the redevelopment areas with the surrounding communities.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
discussed several lessons that the JDA has
taken away from the visit for the TCAAP development. Questionnaire responses suggested nine
general lessons for the TCAAP redevelopment project:
que history.
Like Stapleton, Anschutz-Fitzsimons, and Lowry,
TCAAP has unique history. The contributions of the site and the people who worked at
TCAAP should be documented and preserved as the site is redeveloped.
Establish multi-modal transportation.
Provide options for future transit connections.
Value pedestrians and bicycles as well as vehicles.
Include a town center area or other community gathering spaces.
Provide
opportunities for interaction. Build a sense of community through the design of public
spaces.
Promote an urban-hybrid design.
Allow smaller setbacks and yards. Consider alleys
where appropriate. Design a streetscape that has a human scale and that encourages
walking and community interaction.
Support moderate density with high-quality design.
Develop design guidelines that
create consistency across the site while also requiring diversity of architecture and building
types.
Enhance community character with public art and amenities.
Differentiate the
TCAAP redevelopment with public art, landscaping, and the design of public amenities.
Connect TCAAP to the rest of Arden Hills and surrounding communities.
Provide
transportation and trail connections. Design public spaces so that they are inviting to
people outside of TCAAP. Maintain some consistency between TCAAP and the rest of
Arden Hills.
Work to achieve balance
between. . .
The needs of TCAAP with the rest of Arden Hills.
Commitment to the vision with flexibility for market changes.
Commitment to the vision and market realities.
Build consensus
. . .
Between the City and the County on redevelopment goals.
In support of the vision among the community and developers.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20134
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that while respondents named potential
risks for the TCAAP development including financial risks, market changes, and abandonment of
the vision over the development period given changes in staff and officials; the rewards for the
City and County for a successful redevelopment project were greater. Revitalizing and reusing the
site was considered a significant accomplishment in itself. The long-term stability of the tax base
is a primary goal. Enhancing and differentiating
was seen as a way to preserve property values and attract new investment. Lastly, respondents saw
the potential to establish Arden Hills as a model for environmental and economic sustainability,
connectivity among people and communities, and livability for residents across a range of
demographics.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated the next steps for the City Council will
be to provide feedback on this report which will be provided to the master planning consultants
for consideration as they draft the Master Plan.
Councilmember Holmes
expressed concerns with the JDA and asked if the County could better
communicate with the City on the TCAAP redevelopment project.
David Sand
, JDA Chair, stated that this is a valid concern and stated there has been a fairly good
consensus on how to redevelop the site. He explained that the AUAR and master planning
process will require a great deal of communication between the two entities. There will have to
Councilmember Holden
thanked Mr. Sand for his service to the City of Arden Hills and for his
leadership as the Chair on the JDA.
C.Transportation Update
Public Works Director Maurer
provided the Council with an update on the US 10 and Highway
96 road construction project. He reviewed several photographs of the roadway and sound wall.
Staff discussed the progress of the project and noted paving has begun on Highway 96. He
anticipates that the project will be open for traffic in approximately five weeks.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A.August 19, 2013, Work Session
B.August 26, 2013, Work Session
C.August 26, 2013, Regular
D.September 9, 2013, Work Session
E.September 9, 2013, Regular
MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a
motion to approve the August 19, 2013, work session minutes; August 26,
2013, work session minutes; August 26, 2013, regular City Council meeting
minutes; September 9, 2013, work session minutes; and September 9, 2013,
regular City Council meeting minutes as presented. The motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20135
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A.Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Item - Claims and Payroll
B.JPA with Ramsey County Elections
C.Amendment to City Code Chapter 3 Regulating Residential Rental Properties
MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Werner seconded a
motion to approve the Consent Calendar as amended removing Items B and C
for further discussion and to authorize execution of all necessary documents
contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
6. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS
A.JPA with Ramsey County Elections
Councilmember Holden
requested further information on this item. She questioned how much
money was budgeted for the equipment purchase.
Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson
reviewed an updated JPA from
Ramsey County with the Council. She explained that the only changes to the document were that
Spring Lake Park was removed and the maintenance fees were slightly higher. She commented
that the ballot marking devices were State mandated and the new equipment will be purchased
jointly with the County. She estimated the equipment costs between $10,000-20,000; however the
expense came in over $26,000. She also stated that the County still had some HAVA funds to use
for these purchases that needed to be used in 2014 or would need to be returned to the State. If
this was done our cost would increase.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a
motion approving the proposed Joint Powers Agreement with Ramsey County
for new voting system acquisition and operation. The motion carried (5-0).
B.Amendment to City Code Chapter 3 Regulating Residential Rental Properties
Councilmember Holmes
requested further information on this item.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
explained that the proposed amendment would
clarify the occupancy levels within residential rental properties. In addition, the City would now
have the ability to issue citations.
Councilmember Holmes
e City Code.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated that this definition is already included in
the Definitions section of the Zoning Code. A reference to the existing definition is being added
to the rental regulations section of the City Code to clarify occupancy requirements for landlords
and tenants, and to allow the City to issue citations in situations where the allowed occupancy is
exceeded.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20136
The Council requested updates when the City issues citations related to the rental licensing
ordinance.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a
motion to adopt Ordinance 2013-009 amending Section 335 of the City Code
regulating residential rental properties. The motion carried (5-0).
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.TCAAP Development Discussion Opportunity for Residents
Mayor Grant
stated that under the public hearing section, citizens have an opportunity to discuss
ideas regarding the TCAAP development.
Mayor Grant
opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m.
With no one coming forward to speak, Mayor Grant closed the public hearing at 7:53 p.m.
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. TCAAP AUAR
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated at a special work session meeting on
September 30, 2013, Kimley-Horn presented information on the AUAR process and development
scenarios. An AUAR is a form of environmental documentation through Minnesota State Rules
that evaluates a development scenario (or several scenarios) for an entire geographical area rather
than a specific project. Development scenarios are established based upon the comprehensive
Community Development Director Hutmacher
indicated that the AUAR will test the
development so that Arden Hills as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) has information
available to make informed decisions about the level of development and mitigation. An AUAR
process is formally initiated by RGU order, which establishes the study area and scenarios to be
addressed, and officially starts the AUAR process.
Beth Kunkel
, Kimley-Horn, provided the Council with a presentation and further defined the
work that will be completed within the AUAR. She reviewed the requirements within the AUAR
noting that the study will address the study area boundary and development scenarios. She
explained that two development scenarios are proposed for study in the AUAR. The first scenario
lopment limits included
in the Ct of development to maximum
density based on the anticipated capacity of the transportation network. Allowed uses within the
427 acres include retail, non-retail commercial (office, light industrial), residential, and park
space.
Zoning Scenario:up to 1,500 residential units; 500,000 square feet of retail; and 1,700,000 square
feet of non-retail commercial
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20137
Maximum Development Scenario:up to 2,500 residential units; 550,000 square feet of retail; and
1,950,000 square feet of non-retail commercial.
Ms. Kunkel
reviewed the AUAR project timeline, noting the AUAR would take approximately
six months to complete. She requested the City Council approve a zoning scenario and a
maximum development scenario for evaluation in the AUAR and approve a resolution ordering
the AUAR.
Councilmember Holden
stated that the existing zoning contemplated a project area of 585 acres.
She recommended that staff keep in mind that approximately 30 acres will be lost for a trail
section. She wanted to see this land accounted for and a reduction made in both scenarios.
Mayor Grant
commented that this is an eight percent reduction in the land available for
redevelopment.
Councilmember Holden
was in favor of reducing the proposed residential units, retail space and
commercial space by eight percent to reflect the land loss for the trail.
Mayor Grant
suggested that the eight percent be rounded up to ten percent which would scale the
number of residential units down by 150 units.
Ms. Kunkel
explained that the numbers could be reduced by ten percent for the study.
Mayor Grant
indicated that after calculating the numbers again, seven percent of the total project
area will be lost to the trail section.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a
motion to approve two development scenarios to be evaluated in the
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) reducing the development
scenarios by seven percent (7%).
Councilmember McClung
commented that he would not be able to support the motion as
proposed. He is in favor of the recommendation from staff as this allows for more flexibility in
the future.
Councilmember Holden
stated that her intent is to have the scenarios more closely reflect the
actual amount of land that is available for redevelopment. She wanted to see the minimum and
maximum amounts for residential be realistic.
Mayor Grant
reviewed the impacts that would be made to the residential units if the scenarios
were reduced by seven percent.
Councilmember Werner
supported the original recommendation made by Kimley-Horn.
The motion failed (2-3) (Holmes, McClung and Werner opposed).
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20138
MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Werner seconded a
motion to approve two development scenarios to be evaluated in the
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR).
Councilmember Holmes
stated that she would not support this motion or the previously
amended motion as the Council does not have enough information regarding the proposed
development scenarios.
The motion carried (3-2) (Holden and Holmes opposed).
MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Werner seconded a
motion to adopt Resolution #2013-039 Ordering the AUAR. The motion
carried (3-2) (Holden and Holmes opposed).
B. State of the District Upcoming Levy Referendum Question on November
Ballot
Dan Hoverman
, Mounds View School District Superintendent, thanked the Council for their
time. He introduced Bob Helgeson of the Mounds View School Board who was also in
attendance this evening.
Bob Helgeson
, Mounds View School Board, provided a presentation on behalf of the school
district. He explained that Mounds View schools were focused on adding value. The districts
mission statement and equity promise was reviewed in detail along with the priorities for the
upcoming school year. These priorities include all-day every day kindergarten for 2014, early
college program implementation at Mounds View High School, financial stability through levy
renewal in 2013, and contract negotiations to enhance financial stability while securing the best
employees.
Mr. Helgeson
discussed how the demographics in the district have been changing over the past
20 years. He indicated that the districts enrollment has remained steady over this time, while the
number of students receiving free and reduced lunch has doubled during this period.
Mr. Helgeson
reviewed the performance standards that have been achieved by Mounds View
School District students. It was noted the district had the fourth highest number of National Merit
students in the State of Minnesota students were one to three grade
levels above the national average for standardized tests. These achievements are a testament to
the commitment the district has to its students.
Mr. Helgeson
discussed the STEAM program taking place at the districts middle schools. He
noted this program had focused learning on Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Math.
The numerous benefits of the early college program were then reviewed. He stated that all
students could now receive a two year degree by the time they graduated high school. This
program received the 2013 Grand Prize from the States Local Government Innovation Award.
Mr. Helgeson
provided comment on the value of the education the students in the Mounds View
School District were receiving. He indicated that a spring community survey shows 90% of the
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 20139
community felt they were receiving a good value from their investment in the public schools, with
91% of residents stating the quality of the education was excellent or good. In addition, 91% of
the residents were proud and would recommend the Mounds View schools to others.
Mr. Helgeson
stated that the 2006 levy will expire in 2014. If voters do not renew the proposed
levy, the local schools will stop receiving $11.5 million each year. He explained that the district
was not asking for an increase, but was simply hoping to renew the current levels being paid to
schools. This would assure that class sizes could be maintained and current programming would
remain in place.
Mr. Helgeson
reviewed several measures that have been taken by the district to contain costs. He
indicated administrative costs for the district were low when compared to districts of similar size,
while the investment made in each student was the highest when compared to districts of similar
size. He played a video for the Council regarding the proposed levy and encouraged all Arden
th
Hills residents to support the levy on November 5.
Mayor Grant
thanked Mr. Helgeson for his presentation. He questioned when the proposed levy
would expire.
Mr. Helgeson
explained that the proposed levy would serve the district for eight years.
Mayor Grant
requested further information on the early college program in the Mounds View
School District.
Mr. Hoverman
discussed the numerous benefits of this program at length with the Council. He
commented that there are approximately 585 students participating in this program. He noted that
the program was extremely attractive due to the tuition savings offered to parents.
Mayor Grant
commended the school district on their achievements and wished them all the best
with the upcoming levy vote.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A.Gateway Sign at County Road E-2/35W
Public Works Director Maurer
stated that since the September 16, 2013, work session, staff has
been working with Jay Higgins of Fourth Dimensions, LLC, and Nick Tamble of LLG Gardens on
a gateway sign installation at County Road E-2 and 35W. Based on discussion at a previous work
session, staff has focused on the north side of County Road E-2 because of increased visibility to
all traffic near that intersection.
Public Works Director Maurer
explained that the first issue staff worked on with Mr. Higgins
and Mr. Tamble was the size of the sign. On the north side, the sign will be slightly set back from
the roadway and slightly elevated on the natural ground level. He explained that Mr. Higgins
fabricated an aluminum frame the size of the triangle parcel sign and took photos of it in the
general area being considered for installation. Based on this process, it is recommended that the
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 201310
gateway sign be about 50% larger, roughly 15 feet wide by 9 feet tall at the highest point. Mr.
Higgins estimated that this sign would cost approximately $24,070 to manufacture and install.
Public Works Director Maurer
indicated that staff also met with Mr. Tamble at the site to
discuss landscaping around the sign. With the natural setting and lack of water for an irrigation
system, Mr. Tamble is suggesting limestone rock outcroppings cascading down the slight incline
from the sign location with some plants and shrub material that are more draught tolerant. Mr.
Tamble estimates $7,500 should be budgeted for landscaping. This cost would be reduced with
City cHe requested the Council discuss the matter further and direct staff on how to
proceed.
Councilmember Werner
asked if the sign would be slanted to face the west for viewing.
Public Works Director Maurer
discussed how the sign would be positioned at the intersection.
He explained that some of the vegetation would have to be cleared out and mowed down to assist
in making the sign more visible.
Councilmember Holmes
commented that she was not in favor of putting a sign at this corner of
the intersection given the poor visibility. She recommended the sign be located near the office
building.
Councilmember McClung
opposed the gateway sign and expressed concern with the growing
size, scale and expense of the project. He suggested that the expense for the sign be invested in
Councilmember Holden
supported the gateway signs as they assisted in branding the City of
Arden Hills and were a priority for the Council. She suggested the sign be placed near the office
building as the area was already mowed.
Mayor Grant
wanted to see the gateway sign move forward, however, he was not convinced this
corner of the intersection was the proper location. He stated he was surprised by the proposed
expense.
Councilmember Werner
indicated that the south side of the intersection may be a better fit for
the gateway sign. The sign would be in a manicured location and the size could be reduced.
Councilmember Holden
suggested the sign proceed on the south corner of the intersection to
assure it could be completed yet this fall.
Public Works Director Maurer
estimated the cost for the gateway sign would be reduced by half
if the sign were moved to the south corner of this intersection. He commented that the sign would
have to be pushed back from Cleveland Avenue to assure that sight lines were clear.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to
County Road E-2 and 35W for a cost not to exceed $17,000. The motion
carried (4-1) (McClung opposed).
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 14, 201311
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Werner
stated that he will not be able to attend the November 12, 2013,
Council meeting.
Councilmember Holden
commented that the water tower looked really nice. She questioned if
the franchise fee issue was brought up in a recent newspaper article.
City Administrator Klaers
indicated that the City considering a franchise fee was part of the
Bulletin newspaper article on the City of Mounds View franchise fee program. Also, an article is
being written for the December issue of the City newsletter
this topic.
Councilmember Holmes
indicated that the ice rink at Freeway Park was recently painted by
Bethel University students. She thanked Bethel for completing this work.
Mayor Grant
read a letter he received from the GFOA and discussed the Distinguished Budget
Award that the City of Arden Hills will be receiving.
ADJOURN
MOTION: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to
adjourn. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mayor Grant
adjourned the regular City Council meeting at 9:21 p.m.
__________________________ __________________________
Amy Dietl David Grant
City Clerk Mayor
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:Ashley Bertrand, Sue Iverson
SUBJECT: Claims & Payroll
Requested Action:
Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Item – Claims and Payroll
1.
Supporting Documents:
Payroll
2013 Payroll #23-1 .........................................................................$ 1,534.01
2013 Payroll #24 ............................................................................$ 77,230.15
Total Payroll $ 78,764.16
Accounts Payable Claims Through 11/22/2013
Paid Claims (Check No 0 Sales Tax Payment) ..................................$ 16,469.00
Paid Claims (Check No 42648-Check No 42677) .............................$ 35,485.90
Paid Claims (Check No 42678-Check No 42743) .............................$ 95,863.14
Paid Claims (Check No 42744-Check No 42748) .............................$ 552,047.57
Total Claims $699,865.61
11
Page of
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
PAYROLL # 23-1
CHECKS DATED:11/08/13
Biweekly:10/19/13-11/01/13
Payment Method
EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONSAMT.
CITY BENEFIT
EFT
FIT0.00
EFT
SIT0.00
EFT
FICA Oasdi88.3588.35
EFT
FICA Medicare20.6620.66
TOTAL TAXES109.01109.01
A/P Check*
Health Premium0.000.00
A/P Check*
Dental Premium 0.00
A/P Check*
FSA Health Care Reimb.0.00
A/P Check*
FSA Dependent Care Reimb.0.00
TOTAL FLEXIBLE SPENDING0.000.00
HSA Health Saving 0.000.00
EFT
Health Care Savings Plan
0.00
EFT
Health Care Savings Plan-2%0.00
EFT
Health Care Savings Plan-4%0.00
TOTAL HEALTH SAVINGS0.000.00
EFT
PERA0.000.00
EFT
ICMA0.000.00
A/P Check*
Central Pension Fund-Union0.00
EFT
MN State Retirement System0.00
TOTAL RETIREMENT0.000.00
A/P Check*
IUOE 49 Dues (Union)0.00
A/P Check*
LTD/STD Insurance0.00
*
PERALifeInsurance0.00.A/PCheck
PERALifeInsurance000 A/PCheck
A/P Check*
Life/Addl/Dep Life0.000.00
EFT
MN Child Support0.00
A/P Check*
Public Employee Long Term Care 0.00
A/P Check*
UNUM 0.00
A/P Check*
Avesis-Vision Care0.00
TOTAL VOLUNTARY0.000.00
Total Employee Deductions109.01
PR Check # 17566
Net Payroll1,315.99
EFT
Direct Deposit0.00
Gross Payroll Tie-Out1,425.00
STD/LTD Gross - Up0.00
Plus City Paid Benefit109.01
ICMA Benefit Held0.00
TOTAL PAYROLL COST1,534.01
FICA TIE-OUT
Gross Payroll1,425.00
Less Total FSA0.00
Plus Employer Match ICMA0.00
Plus ICMA Benefit Held0.00
Net P/R Subject to FICA1,425.00
FICA Oasdi @ 6.20%88.35
FICA Medicare @ 1.45%20.66
Note: Federal and State Payroll Tax obligations are satisfied by means
of utilizing the "Taxtel" Electronic Tax Deposit Service. Trans-
fers are typically made two business days after the payroll date.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Check Approval
* A/P Checks can be found on the report.
Checks may be paid this week or the following week.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
PAYROLL # 24
CHECKS DATED:11/22/13
Biweekly:11/02/13-11/15/13
Payment Method
EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONSAMT.CITY BENEFIT
EFT
FIT6,884.65
EFT
SIT2,800.13
EFT
FICA Oasdi3,745.453,745.45
947.19 EFT
FICA Medicare947.19
TOTAL TAXES14,377.424,692.64
A/P Check*
Health Premium1,426.590.00
A/P Check*
Dental Premium 0.00
A/P Check*
FSA Health Care Reimb.177.08
A/P Check*
FSA Dependent Care Reimb.208.33
0.00
TOTAL FLEXIBLE SPENDING1,812.00
HSA Health Saving 443.960.00
EFT
Health Care Savings Plan0.00
EFT
Health Care Savings Plan-2%260.19
EFT
Health Care Savings Plan-4%179.56
0.00
TOTAL HEALTH SAVINGS883.71
EFT
PERA3,895.444,518.73
EFT
ICMA3,948.73334.37
A/P Check*
Central Pension Fund-Union614.40
EFT
MN State Retirement System321.73
4,853.10
TOTAL RETIREMENT8,780.30
A/P Check*
IUOE 49 Dues (Union)131.04
A/P Check*
LTD/STD Insurance0.00
*
PERALifeInsurance32.00.A/PCheck
PERALifeInsurance3200 A/PCheck
A/P Check*
Life/Addl/Dep Life123.550.00
EFT
MN Child Support171.66
A/P Check*
Public Employee Long Term Care 40.60
A/P Check*
UNUM 132.05
A/P Check*
Avesis-Vision Care8.94
TOTAL VOLUNTARY639.840.00
Total Employee Deductions26,493.27
PR Check # 17567-17572
Net Payroll1,290.16
EFT
Direct Deposit39,900.98
Gross Payroll Tie-Out67,684.41
STD/LTD Gross - Up0.00
Plus City Paid Benefit9,545.74
ICMA Benefit Held0.00
TOTAL PAYROLL COST77,230.15
FICA TIE-OUT
Gross Payroll67,684.41
Less Total FSA1,812.00
Plus Employer Match ICMA0.00
Plus ICMA Benefit Held0.00
Net P/R Subject to FICA65,872.41
FICA Oasdi @ 6.20%3,745.45
FICA Medicare @ 1.45%947.19
Note: Federal and State Payroll Tax obligations are satisfied by means
of utilizing the "Taxtel" Electronic Tax Deposit Service. Trans-
fers are typically made two business days after the payroll date.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Check Approval
* A/P Checks can be found on the report.
Checks may be paid this week or the following week.
Ashley Bertrand
From:eservices.mdor@state.mn.us
Sent:Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:03 AM
To:
Ashley Bertrand
Subject:Your Recent Return and Payment Requests
This email is an automated notification and is unable to receive replies.
Sales and Use Tax - Return Submitted
Thank you, your request has been submitted. Please allow 3 business days for your return to appear online.
Please allow 3 business days from 20-Nov-2013 for your payment to appear online. You can change or cancel
this request until 5:00 p.m. Central time.
Confirmation Summary
Submitted Date and Time: 20-Nov-2013 9:02:49 AM
Legal Name: ARDEN HILLS CITY OF
Federal Employer ID: 41-6008992
User Who Submitted: Accounting Analyst
Type of Request
Return for 10/31/2013
Submitted:
Account Name: ARDEN HILLS CITY OF
Minnesota ID: 9047998
Return Summary
Return Confirmation
0-685-809-792
Number:
Account Type: Sales & Use Tax
Filing Period: 31-Oct-2013
Projected Amount/Credit
$16,469.00
Due:
Payment Summary
Payment Confirmation
1-759-551-616
Number:
Account Type: Sales & Use Tax
Filing Period: 31-Oct-2013
Payment Amount: $16,469.00
Payment Type: Return
Payment Date: 20-Nov-2013
Bank Name: US BANK NA
Bank Account Number: ********9377
1
Contact Us
If you need further assistance, contact our Sales and Use Tax Division at (Metro Area) 651-296-6181, (Greater
Minnesota) 800-657-3777, (TTY Users) Call 711 for Minnesota Relay, or (email) SalesUse.Tax@state.mn.us.
Business hours are 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Monday - Friday.
How to View and Print this Request
You can see copies of your requests by going to the History Tab.
This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain nonpublic / private
data. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, use, or distribution of the information
included in this message and any attachments is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us and immediately and permanently delete this message and any attachments. Thank you.
2
!"#$%&'&()*
+,* -$.*"&/)
0#*12&#,)*'3(*1"1&!4
%1/!"*425567767859$:$$;295 <
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
+./0"1"+1."/23')$45 "6)4 7"8"6 '95 ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>=?5565@67859
A!B85855?@:AC
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867=67859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$;93G>
A!B$85855?@:AC$J "&)$$;93G>
$=7>=?$J "&)2$;93G>
$;93G>
+./0"1"+1."/23')$45 "6)4 7"8"6 '95 "<,*)4=
>?@A"1"++BC":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>=G5565@67859
A!B555=7859
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565=67859C B*E(*1$7859$ K%$+)&##585:=@578:=75;8$5==388
A!B$555=7859$J "&)$$5==388
$=7>=G$J "&)2$5==388
>?@A"1"++BC"<,*)4=$5==388
ADEF"1"G)'*,-"6)-3"8"H')9 4" ,":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@85565@67859
A!B59585@
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865@67859J&!4*E$./#F &)$L**;7;:=G;88:=77=@$;@388
A!B$59585@$J "&)$$;@388
$=7>@8$J "&)2$;@388
ADEF"1"G)'*,-"6)-3"8"H')9 4" ,"<,*)4=$;@388
E.I."1"G 577J -K 'L7"/,J1<,"6*,' ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@55565@67859
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$5
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
A!B9;59?7
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865?67859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$@>39G
A!B$9;59?7$J "&)$$@>39G
$=7>@5$J "&)2$@>39G
$@>39G
E.I."1"G 577J -K 'L7"/,J1<,"6*,' "<,*)4=
EMID"1"G',1< NO";- ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@75565@67859
A!B==8@=>
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867967859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$9>?3;7
A!B$==8@=>$J "&)$$9>?3;7
$=7>@7$J "&)2$9>?3;7
$9>?3;7
EMID"1"G',1< NO";- "<,*)4=
+#P#"1" )-,-"Q5-)- 5)4"6 '95 7":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@95565@67859
A!B5975=@G8
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5568567859C B*E(*1$7859$+ !"1& "$+,&1M*77?:=5G>8:==5@8$5@@35?
5568567859C B*E(*1$7859$+ !"1& "$+,&1M*585:=5@88:==5@8$?;G39@
A!B$5975=@G8$J "&)$$5P89=3@9
$=7>@9$J "&)2$5P89=3@9
$5P89=3@9
+#P#"1" )-,-"Q5-)- 5)4"6 '95 7"<,*)4=
?AFD"1" 5*2"R-K5- '7"+77, 5)*5,-",S"T5-- 7,*)":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@=5565@67859
A!B555@7859
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565@67859+/"'$Q!M/!**1#$ !! &)$. *#: !4*1# !;7;:=G;88:==998$>8388
A!B$555@7859$J "&)$$>8388
$=7>@=$J "&)2$>8388
?AFD"1" 5*2"R-K5- '7"+77, 5)*5,-",S"T5-- 7,*)"<,*)4=$>8388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$7
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
EI.@"1" 5*2",S"B,7 9544 ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@@5565@67859
A!B875;57;
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
8565;678597859$J* ,! ) M'$ M1**E*!";7?:=GG88:=98?5$@7=3;>
A!B$875;57;$J "&)$$@7=3;>
$=7>@@$J "&)2$@7=3;>
$@7=3;>
EI.@"1" 5*2",S"B,7 9544 "<,*)4=
EIIA"1"(1B, !" -* '":)-37 )U "6$UU42":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@>5565@67859
A!B5557
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865>67859%&1-$I FF)/*#585:=@788:=7758$=385
A!B$5557$J "&)$$=385
$=7>@>$J "&)2$=385
$=385
EIIA"1"(1B, !" -* '":)-37 )U "6$UU42"<,*)4=
E.@>"1"H')5-K 'O";- ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@;5565@67859
A!BG7;7>75@>;
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865?67859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$7@>3G@
A!B$G7;7>75@>;$J "&)$$7@>3G@
A!BG7;7>75@;@
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865?67859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$5>3G8
A!B$G7;7>75@;@$J "&)$$5>3G8
$=7>@;$J "&)2$7;93?@
E.@>"1"H')5-K 'O";- "<,*)4=$7;93?@
EFFA"1";VWVPVR":, )4"F@"G - S5*"Q$-31;-7$')- ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*".E.1EEEEE1>.AI>
$=7>@?5565@67859
A!B5535@37859
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$9
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
5565@67859.* *E(*1$7859$%H$R*!*S/"#585:88888:75;97$;P>G>388
A!B$5535@37859$J "&)$$;P>G>388
A!B555@7859
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565@67859.* *E(*1$7859$%H$R*!*S/"#585:88888:75;97$5P8?;388
A!B$555@7859$J "&)$$5P8?;388
$=7>@?$J "&)2$?P;?9388
$?P;?9388
EFFA"1";VWVPVR":, )4"F@"G - S5*"Q$-31;-7$')- "<,*)4=
EF@A"1"; T+"T %& '7 5U"B - J)47":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>@G5565@67859
A!B555@7859:A+<
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565@67859785=$<*E(*1#,/F$K*!*T&)585:=5988:==998$G@G379
A!B$555@7859:A+< $J "&)$$G@G379
$=7>@G$J "&)2$G@G379
$G@G379
EF@A"1"; T+"T %& '7 5U"B - J)47"<,*)4=
>>FI"1"X4) '7O"C)*'5 !":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$85565@67859
A!B55597859:%U
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565967859 M #":I*F"*E(*1$7859$QVF*!#*$K*/E( 1#*E*!"585:=5588:==97@$G3G?
5565967859 M #":I*F"*E(*1$7859$QVF*!#*$K*/E( 1#*E*!"585:=5>88:==97@$=8388
5565967859 M #":I*F"*E(*1$7859$QVF*!#*$K*/E( 1#*E*!"585:=5>88:==97@$9>3>?
A!B$55597859:%U$J "&)$$?>3>>
$8$J "&)2$?>3>>
$?>3>>
>>FI"1"X4) '7O"C)*'5 !"<,*)4=
>>F@"1"T)$' 'O"< ''2":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$85565@67859
A!B555=7859:J<
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565=67859W "6C B$QVF*!#*$K*F 1";7;:=G;88:=9958$G38=
5565=67859W "6C B$QVF*!#*$K*F 1";7;:=G;88:==97@$79@388
A!B$555=7859:J<$J "&)$$7==38=
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$=
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$8$J "&)2$7==38=
$7==38=
>>F@"1"T)$' 'O"< ''2"<,*)4=
?FFI"1"T *',"C',3$ *7O";- V":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>85565@67859
A!BG@5>?
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867567859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$9=535;
A!B$G@5>?$J "&)$$9=535;
$=7>>8$J "&)2$9=535;
$9=535;
?FFI"1"T *',"C',3$ *7O";- V"<,*)4=
.E?D"1"T;( "R-* 'U'57 7":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>55565@67859
A!BA8899;=8
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865;67859X&Y*)! "$%&1-$I FF)/*#585:=@788:=77=@$G53>8
A!B$A8899;=8$J "&)$$G53>8
$=7>>5$J "&)2$G53>8
$G53>8
.E?D"1"T;( "R-* 'U'57 7"<,*)4=
PT<"1"T5-- 7,*)"( U)'*% -*",S"<')-7U,'*)*5,-":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>75565@67859
A!B%888877>5
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867967859C 1",$I!*))/!M$J*#"/!M$Z$A!#F* "/ !#=55:=?@8;:=9898$=;@397
A!B$%888877>5$J "&)$$=;@397
$=7>>7$J "&)2$=;@397
$=;@397
PT<"1"T5-- 7,*)"( U)'*% -*",S"<')-7U,'*)*5,-"<,*)4=
E@IE"1"T5') 4 "B ' )*5,-"RY$5UV" ,V":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>95565@67859
A!B;=7G77
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867567859%&1-$I FF)/*#585:=@788:=77@5$59;3;7
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$@
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
A!B$;=7G77$J "&)$$59;3;7
$=7>>9$J "&)2$59;3;7
$59;3;7
E@IE"1"T5') 4 "B ' )*5,-"RY$5UV" ,V"<,*)4=
TW6X+"1"T$7!)":5K *5-KO";- V":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>=5565@67859
A!B5;?888
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865@67859%H$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=7758$>93>5
A!B$5;?888$J "&)$$>93>5
$=7>>=$J "&)2$>93>5
$>93>5
TW6X+"1"T$7!)":5K *5-KO";- V"<,*)4=
MEAF"1"#,'7!" ,- ' * " ,-7*'$ *5,-O";- V":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>@5565@67859
A!B585;7859
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865;678597859$+ 1($K*F&/1>8=:=G@@8:==899$>G8388
A!B$585;7859$J "&)$$>G8388
$=7>>@$J "&)2$>G8388
$>G8388
MEAF"1"#,'7!" ,- ' * " ,-7*'$ *5,-O";- V"<,*)4=
M>?>"1"PSS5 "( U,*":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>>5565@67859
A!B5>79;7>?5?
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865>67859WSS/ *$I FF)/*#585:=5@88:=7858$5538;
A!B$5>79;7>?5?$J "&)$$5538;
$=7>>>$J "&)2$5538;
$5538;
M>?>"1"PSS5 "( U,*"<,*)4=
ED.."1"B)%7 2" ,$-*2":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>;5565@67859
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$>
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
A!BQ<+W<:887?>5
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867767859W " (*1$7859$G55$./#F&" ,585:=75@8:=9575$=P99?3G5
A!B$Q<+W<:887?>5$J "&)$$=P99?3G5
A!BQ<+W<:887?;5
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867767859W " (*1$7859$L)**"$I FF 1"$L**585:=7988:==998$7=3G>
A!B$Q<+W<:887?;5$J "&)$$7=3G>
A!B%KKD[:8858>;
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
58695678597859$IF* /&)$ ##*##E*!"$R/))/!M=55:=?@85:==9G8$5P998388
A!B$%KKD[:8858>;$J "&)$$5P998388
A!B%KK\ :888787
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5568@67859]9$7859$Q)* "/ !$+ !"1& "$%&'E*!"585:=5=58:=9588$9P?;@388
A!B$%KK\ :888787$J "&)$$9P?;@388
$=7>>;$J "&)2$GP@>?3?;
$GP@>?3?;
ED.."1"B)%7 2" ,$-*2"<,*)4=
AEMF"1"B,*)'2" 4$&",S"+'3 -"/5447Z6 ,' 95 J":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>?5565@67859
A!B55>=
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565567859]=$7859$. *#7@8:=;988:==998$5>G358
A!B$55>=$J "&)$$5>G358
$=7>>?$J "&)2$5>G358
$5>G358
AEMF"1"B,*)'2" 4$&",S"+'3 -"/5447Z6 ,' 95 J"<,*)4=
.EE."1"6U'5-*Z# N* 4" ,%%$-5 )*5,-7":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>>G5565@67859
A!B5G>558;9?:88@
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865?67859I*F"*E(*1$7859$+*))$%, !*$R/));7?:=GG88:=9758$5P5?=3G5
A!B$5G>558;9?:88@$J "&)$$5P5?=3G5
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$;
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$=7>>G$J "&)2$5P5?=3G5
.EE."1"6U'5-*Z# N* 4" ,%%$-5 )*5,-7"<,*)4=$5P5?=3G5
IE?F"1"6*V"C)$4":5-,4 $%"8" )'U *" ,%U)-2":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;85565@67859
A!B88>?9;5
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865?67859R&",1 E$J/)*$K*F&/1585:=5G=8:==858$9P5?G388
A!B$88>?9;5$J "&)$$9P5?G388
$=7>;8$J "&)2$9P5?G388
IE?F"1"6*V"C)$4":5-,4 $%"8" )'U *" ,%U)-2"<,*)4=$9P5?G388
EI>A"1"6*)U4 7"G$75- 77"+39)-*)K ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*".E.1F.?EE1F>E.E
$=7>;55565@67859
A!B97577?9>87
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865>67859WSS/ *$I FF)/*#585:=5@88:=7858$5;83G?
A!B$97577?9>87$J "&)$$5;83G?
$=7>;5$J "&)2$5;83G?
$5;83G?
EI>A"1"6*)U4 7"G$75- 77"+39)-*)K "<,*)4=
?.DE"1"< 77%)-"6 3" ,V":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;75565@67859
A!BI5?@58>:AC
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865@67859%&1-$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=77=@$7=?3=G
A!B$I5?@58>:AC$J "&)$$7=?3=G
A!BI5?@58;:AC
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865@67859%&1-$I FF)/*#;7;:=G;88:=77=@$7P85@387
A!B$I5?@58;:AC$J "&)$$7P85@387
$=7>;7$J "&)2$7P7>93@5
$7P7>93@5
?.DE"1"< 77%)-"6 3" ,V"<,*)4=
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$?
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
<P;;"1"<,!4 ";-7U *5,-7O";- ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;95565@67859
A!B55857859
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5568567859W " (*1$7859$A!#F* "/ !#585:=7=88:=9587$5P>7G3>8
A!B$55857859$J "&)$$5P>7G3>8
$=7>;9$J "&)2$5P>7G3>8
$5P>7G3>8
<P;;"1"<,!4 ";-7U *5,-7O";- "<,*)4=
D?>F"1"<J5-" 5*2"/)%7O":: ":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;=5565@67859
A!B99?8>377
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865>67859<C[LW $J1&/!/!M$QVF*!#*585:=5@88:==97@$@?93=>
A!B$99?8>377$J "&)$$@?93=>
$=7>;=$J "&)2$@?93=>
$@?93=>
D?>F"1"<J5-" 5*2"/)%7O":: "<,*)4=
.IEE"1"W-5Q5'7*" ,'U,')*5,-":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;@5565@67859
A!B8G8$85;G?59
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5867@67859C B*E(*1$7859$<&"$I*1B/ *585:=5G=8:=9?=8$;5377
A!B$8G8$85;G?59$J "&)$$;5377
$=7>;@$J "&)2$;5377
$;5377
.IEE"1"W-5Q5'7*" ,'U,')*5,-"<,*)4=
WPQT"1"W-59 '75*2",S"T5-- 7,*)":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;>5565@67859
A!B555@7859:^
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565@67859+/"'$Q!M/!**1#$ !! &)$<**"/!M: !4*1# !;7;:=G;88:==97@$7G@388
A!B$555@7859:^ $J "&)$$7G@388
A!B555@7859:J<
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5565@67859+/"'$Q!M/!**1#$ !! &)$<**"/!M:<& 1*1;7;:=G;88:==97@$7G@388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$G
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
A!B$555@7859:J<$J "&)$$7G@388
$=7>;>$J "&)2$@G8388
$@G8388
WPQT"1"W-59 '75*2",S"T5-- 7,*)"<,*)4=
E>D?"1"[ 4"R- 'K2":5- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;;5565@67859
A!B9?;;>G7;G
D/!*$A"*E$.&"*D/!*$A"*E$.*# 1/F"/ !D/!*$A"*E$ !"
5865?67859W " (*1$7859$0"/)/"'$R/))585:=5G=8:=9?58$5P@>>3>5
A!B$9?;;>G7;G$J "&)$$5P@>>3>5
$=7>;;$J "&)2$5P@>>3>5
$5P@>>3>5
E>D?"1"[ 4"R- 'K2"<,*)4=
J "&)2$9@P=?@3G8
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;295$ <O%&M*$58
!"#$%&'&()*
+,* -$.*"&/)
0#*12&#,)*'3(*1"1&!4
%1/!"*425567767859$:$$;298 <
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
./01"2"+&3 "4,5 "6"7$&& '"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;?5567767859
@!A5:?B9?;;
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859%G$H EE)/*#;7;:=F;88:=7758$5FB3B8
@!A$5:?B9?;;$I "&)$$5FB3B8
$=7>;?$I "&)2$5FB3B8
$5FB3B8
./01"2"+&3 "4,5 "6"7$&& '";,*)3<
.=>="2"+339 ?"@)5* "A 'B9 5"C>11"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>;F5567767859
@!A8?FF:8879>;=88
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867B67859J A*D(*1$7859$I1&#,$H*1A/ *585:=5F=8:=9?=8$79=3;8
5867B67859J A*D(*1$7859$I1&#,$H*1A/ *585:=B788:=9?=8$=?53>B
@!A$8?FF:8879>;=88$I "&)$$;5>39B
$=7>;F$I "&)2$;5>39B
.=>="2"+339 ?"@)5* "A 'B9 5"C>11";,*)3<$;5>39B
//1D"2"+% '9 )-"8 E)3"F$&395 9-E" ,'GH"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?85567767859
@!AFB=5>
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869867859<J$+ 4*$ K$L14/!&! *#585:=5F58:=9B98$=3B8
@!A$FB=5>$I "&)$$=3B8
$=7>?8$I "&)2$=3B8
//1D"2"+% '9 )-"8 E)3"F$&395 9-E" ,'GH";,*)3<$=3B8
+#(IJ"2"+-? '5,-K"J, -"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$85567767859
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A555B7859:P
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565B67859L " (*1$7859$</)*&M*$Q*/D( 1#*D*!"=55:=?=88:=9958$?539>
5565B67859L " (*1$7859$</)*&M*$Q*/D( 1#*D*!"=55:=?B8;:=9958$737>
5565B67859L " (*1$7859$</)*&M*$Q*/D( 1#*D*!"=55:=?B55:=9958$>3;?
5565B67859L " (*1$7859$</)*&M*$Q*/D( 1#*D*!"585:=9588:=9958$7F39?
@!A$555B7859:P $I "&)$$55F3;?
$8$I "&)2$55F3;?
$55F3;?
+#(IJ"2"+-? '5,-K"J, -";,*)3<
L=../L+M"2"+$*,%)* ?"(,,'"A 'B9 K":- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?55567767859
@!A5F;99
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867967859G&"*1$Q*E&/1>85:=F==8:==8=8$5R98;3=B
@!A$5F;99$I "&)$$5R98;3=B
$=7>?5$I "&)2$5R98;3=B
L=../L+M"2"+$*,%)* ?"(,,'"A 'B9 K":- ";,*)3<$5R98;3=B
N.N."2"O)** '9 5"F3$5"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?75567767859
@!A87F:B8;78?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867B67859%G$%&1"#;7;:=F;88:=7758$5F35F
@!A$87F:B8;78?$I "&)$$5F35F
@!A87F:B8;=B;
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867?67859+/"'$S&))$%&1"#585:=5F=8:=7858$5F35F
@!A$87F:B8;=B;$I "&)$$5F35F
$=7>?7$I "&)2$9?39?
$9?39?
N.N."2"O)** '9 5"F3$5";,*)3<
LL>D"2"O)$ '"O$93*":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?95567767859
@!A5?855?>F8
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859%G$Q*E&/1;7;:=F;88:==8=8$5R>F;3?8
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$7
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A$5?855?>F8$I "&)$$5R>F;3?8
@!A5?855?;58
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859%G$Q*E&/1$T95?;7;:=F;88:==8=8$9R8=938?
@!A$5?855?;58$I "&)$$9R8=938?
@!A5?855F8>;
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859%G$Q*E&/1;7;:=F;88:==8=8$>=B3BF
@!A$5?855F8>;$I "&)$$>=B3BF
$=7>?9$I "&)2$BR9?>3=;
LL>D"2"O)$ '"O$93*":- H";,*)3<$BR9?>3=;
.LDL"2"O 955P -E 'Q5"4,P2;,"A*,' "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?=5567767859
@!A9;9=98
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867=67859%G$%&1"#;7;:=F;88:=7758$5>388
@!A$9;9=98$I "&)$$5>388
@!A9;B7F?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859%G$%&1"#;7;:=F;88:=7758$53?5
@!A$9;B7F?$I "&)$$53?5
$=7>?=$I "&)2$5;3?5
$5;3?5
.LDL"2"O 955P -E 'Q5"4,P2;,"A*,' ";,*)3<
0L/N"2"O3$% K"O)'*3 R"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?B5567767859
@!A555?7859:UU
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565?67859%+$57:85B$V# 1 W$Q*)*&#*585:88888:77888$=>?388
@!A$555?7859:UU$I "&)$$=>?388
$=7>?B$I "&)2$=>?388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$9
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$=>?388
0L/N"2"O3$% K"O)'*3 R";,*)3<
LL=/"2"O,3*,-"6"S -!K":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?>5567767859
@!A85>577;
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859L " (*1$7859$G&"*1$I W*1$Q*,&($+,&1M*#=55:=?B5=:=9898$5R=9?3B8
@!A$85>577;$I "&)$$5R=9?3B8
$=7>?>$I "&)2$5R=9?3B8
$5R=9?3B8
LL=/"2"O,3*,-"6"S -!K":- H";,*)3<
.N/0"2"O')! "6"IT$9G% -*"@)' ,$5 K":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?;5567767859
@!A5::7;57F5
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869867859%G$%&1"#;7;:=F;88:=7758$7F93?7
@!A$5::7;57F5$I "&)$$7F93?7
$=7>?;$I "&)2$7F93?7
$7F93?7
.N/0"2"O')! "6"IT$9G% -*"@)' ,$5 K":- H";,*)3<
L=/="2" )%G& 33"U-$*5,-"2"+**,'- R5")*"8)P"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>??5567767859
@!A9795:587859
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:%YZ585:=5F=8:=98=8$7F=388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:%YZ585:=5F58:=98=8$;8388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:%YZ585:=5F58:=98=8$98?388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:+&()*77?:=5F>8:=98=8$;8388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:+ !"'$Q &4$V=55:=?98B:=98=8$B>388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:%+$59:859585:88888:77888$;8388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:%+$59:859585:88888:77888$=F8388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:%+$59:889585:88888:77888$;8388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:G&"*1>85:=F==8:=98=8$=>3>?
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:G&"*1>85:=F==8:=98=8$7?388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#: 4D/!585:=5988:=98=8$F939=
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#: 4D/!585:=5988:=98=8$?>?388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:H*W*1>87:=F=F8:=98=8$=>3>>
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:H*W*1>87:=F=F8:=98=8$7?388
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:Q* ' )/!M>89:=FB78:=98=8$79397
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C*M&)$X**#:Q* ' )/!M>89:=FB78:=98=8$7?388
@!A$9795:587859$I "&)$$7RBF8388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$=
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$=7>??$I "&)2$7RBF8388
L=/="2" )%G& 33"U-$*5,-"2"+**,'- R5")*"8)P";,*)3<$7RBF8388
+#V"2" )-,-"A,3$*9,-5"+% '9 )"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>?F5567767859
@!A=85559>5BF
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867?67859P )':L " (*1$7859$+ E/*1$+,&1M*#585:=5B88:=7858$;BB35?
@!A$=85559>5BF$I "&)$$;BB35?
$=7>?F$I "&)2$;BB35?
+#V"2" )-,-"A,3$*9,-5"+% '9 )";,*)3<$;BB35?
//>W"2" IA":%)E9-E"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F85567767859
@!A7F9;;?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859%) ""*1$Q*!"&)$+,&1M*#$L " (*1$7859;7?:=FF88:==5B8$>=359
@!A$7F9;;?$I "&)$$>=359
$=7>F8$I "&)2$>=359
$>=359
//>W"2" IA":%)E9-E";,*)3<
MOX...W/"2" 9*9 5";9*3 "A 'B9 K"88 "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F55567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$5>?3>>
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->87:88888:78788$758389
@!A$$I "&)$$9;?3>F
$=7>F5$I "&)2$9;?3>F
$9;?3>F
MOX...W/"2" 9*9 5";9*3 "A 'B9 K"88 ";,*)3<
.=1N"2" 9*R",Y"+'? -"49335"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F75567767859
@!A555?7859:%+
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565?67859L " (*1$7859$%*""'$+&#,585:=5988:==97B$=837=
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$B
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
5565?67859L " (*1$7859$%*""'$+&#,585:=5988:==97B$>F39;
@!A$555?7859:%+$I "&)$$58F3>5
$=7>F7$I "&)2$58F3>5
$58F3>5
.=1N"2" 9*R",Y"+'? -"49335";,*)3<
.DL1"2" 9*R",Y"7,5 B933 "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F95567767859
@!A875;F7>
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859J A*D(*1$7859$@I$U@));7?:=FF88:=98?5$7R?5?3F7
@!A$875;F7>$I "&)$$7R?5?3F7
@!A875;F;8
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859J A*D(*1$7859$%, !*$U/));7?:=FF88:=9758$=;73B8
@!A$875;F;8$I "&)$$=;73B8
$=7>F9$I "&)2$9R7F53=7
$9R7F53=7
.DL1"2" 9*R",Y"7,5 B933 ";,*)3<
.D0="2" 9*R",Y"A ,' B9 P"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F=5567767859
@!A555?7859:+H
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565?67859.&!M*1 #$. M$Q*/D( 1#*D*!"585:=5988:977=8$5?3;8
@!A$555?7859:+H$I "&)$$5?3;8
$=7>F=$I "&)2$5?3;8
.D0="2" 9*R",Y"A ,' B9 P";,*)3<$5?3;8
L.D="2" ,%% ' 9)3"+5G )3*" ,H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>FB5567767859
@!A59555B
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565B67859H"1**"$<&/!"*!&! *$<&"*1/&)#585:=9588:=77=B$>B93=7
@!A$59555B$I "&)$$>B93=7
$=7>FB$I "&)2$>B93=7
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$>
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
L.D="2" ,%% ' 9)3"+5G )3*" ,H";,*)3<$>B93=7
MOX...>D"2" ')- K"I'9 "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F>5567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$;;3>9
@!A$$I "&)$$;;3>9
$=7>F>$I "&)2$;;3>9
MOX...>D"2" ')- K"I'9 ";,*)3<$;;3>9
4ZS;"2"()!,*)"A$GG3R"[',$GK":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F;5567767859
@!A?5B?9??
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867967859%G$G&"*1$H EE)/*#>85:=F==8:=7758$75F39;
@!A$?5B?9??$I "&)$$75F39;
$=7>F;$I "&)2$75F39;
$75F39;
4ZS;"2"()!,*)"A$GG3R"[',$GK":- H";,*)3<
(II("2"( G*",Y"I%G3,R% -*"6"I ,-"( B"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>F?5567767859
@!A??9>>>5
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5868?67859[9$7859$0!*DE) 'D*!"$U*!*K/"#$%&/477?:=5F>8:=5=58$7?93>=
5868?67859[9$7859$0!*DE) 'D*!"$U*!*K/"#$%&/4>85:=F==8:=5=58$7?93>=
5868?67859[9$7859$0!*DE) 'D*!"$U*!*K/"#$%&/4585:=5988:=5=58$5R;853?5
5868?67859[9$7859$0!*DE) 'D*!"$U*!*K/"#$%&/4>87:=F=F8:=5=58$7?93>9
5868?67859[9$7859$0!*DE) 'D*!"$U*!*K/"#$%&/4>8=:=FBB8:=5=58$7?93>9
@!A$??9>>>5$I "&)$$7R?9>39B
$=7>F?$I "&)2$7R?9>39B
(II("2"( G*",Y"I%G3,R% -*"6"I ,-"( B";,*)3<$7R?9>39B
.L//"2"( G*H",Y"+?%9-95*')*9,-"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7>FF5567767859
@!AG59588>;5
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$;
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
5567867859L " (*1$7859$%, !*$U/));7?:=FF88:=9758$;5>3=7
@!A$G59588>;5$I "&)$$;5>3=7
$=7>FF$I "&)2$;5>3=7
$;5>3=7
.L//"2"( G*H",Y"+?%9-95*')*9,-";,*)3<
>.0W"2"I S"F$&395 '5K":- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;885567767859
@!A9F9BB
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867;67859I+J$Q*# 1 *$\ /4*$78597B8:=;988:=9B58$7;8388
@!A$9F9BB$I "&)$$7;8388
$=7;88$I "&)2$7;8388
$7;8388
>.0W"2"I S"F$&395 '5K":- ";,*)3<
=L=1"2"I3Y '9-E"6"+55, 9)* 5"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;855567767859
@!A5?;?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:%+$57:85F$+ !#"1 "/ !585:88888:77888$5;B388
5568567859H*E"*D(*1:L " (*1$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:%G;7;:=F;88:=9898$;58388
@!A$5?;?$I "&)$$??B388
@!A5?;F
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:7855$%<%=55:=?B58:=9898$>B8388
@!A$5?;F$I "&)$$>B8388
@!A5??8
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:]&)*!"/!*$%&1->8=:=?95B:=9898$5R9FB388
@!A$5??8$I "&)$$5R9FB388
@!A5??5
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:7859$%<%=55:=?B55:=9898$BR==B388
@!A$5??5$I "&)$$BR==B388
@!A5??7
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$?
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:SW'$586F>=55:=?=88:=9898$7R9?8388
@!A$5??7$I "&)$$7R9?8388
@!A5??=
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:Q !4$C&-*$Q &4=55:=?B78:=9898$9R?;B388
@!A$5??=$I "&)$$9R?;B388
@!A5??B
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:H&!/"&1'$H*W*1$C/!/!M>87:=?B5F:=9898$7RF=8388
@!A$5??B$I "&)$$7RF=8388
@!A5??>
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:H!*))/!M$ A*=55:=?B8;:=9898$5R=88388
@!A$5??>$I "&)$$5R=88388
@!A5??;
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:H"1**"#=55:=9588:=9898$9RBB8388
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:%&1-#=55:=B788:=9898$9RBB8388
@!A$5??;$I "&)$$;R588388
@!A5???
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:7855$%<%=55:=?B58:=9898$9R;58388
@!A$5???$I "&)$$9R;58388
@!A5??F
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859H*E":L "$7859$V!M/!**1/!M$+,&1M*#:%+$59:889585:88888:77888$5R>=B388
@!A$5??F$I "&)$$5R>=B388
$=7;85$I "&)2$95R=7B388
$95R=7B388
=L=1"2"I3Y '9-E"6"+55, 9)* 5";,*)3<
I#[I"2"I-E &' *5,-K"()-"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;875567767859
@!A555F7859:.V
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565F678597859$G1*#")/!M$ K"*1$H , )$C*&M *585:=B578:=98;8$=B>388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$F
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A$555F7859:.V$I "&)$$=B>388
$=7;87$I "&)2$=B>388
$=B>388
I#[I"2"I-E &' *5,-K"()-";,*)3<
MOX...>L"2"I-E5*',%K"+39 "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;895567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$773>8
@!A$$I "&)$$773>8
$=7;89$I "&)2$773>8
$773>8
MOX...>L"2"I-E5*',%K"+39 ";,*)3<
.DD1"2"\ 'E$5,-"@)* 'P,'!5"=/LN"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;8=5567767859
@!A88>8;>9
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568B67859%G$G&"*1$H EE)/*#>85:=F==8:=7758$5R75F3F>
@!A$88>8;>9$I "&)$$5R75F3F>
$=7;8=$I "&)2$5R75F3F>
$5R75F3F>
.DD1"2"\ 'E$5,-"@)* 'P,'!5"=/LN";,*)3<
/N0N"2"\,' 5*"8)! " ,-*') *9-EK":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;8B5567767859
@!AB==?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867967859+@%$H"1**"6I1&/)$<&/!"*!&! *585:=B788:==899$9R=B?37B
5867967859+@%$H"1**"6I1&/)$<&/!"*!&! *585:=9588:==899$9R=B?37B
@!A$B==?$I "&)$$>RF5>3B8
$=7;8B$I "&)2$>RF5>3B8
$>RF5>3B8
/N0N"2"\,' 5*"8)! " ,-*') *9-EK":- H";,*)3<
.L>1"2"[,G '"A*)* "V- 2 )33K":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;8>5567767859
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$58
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A;?>=9
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
8F69867859H*E"*D(*1$7859$C &"*#>85:=F==8:==9F;$5>F359
8F69867859H*E"*D(*1$7859$C &"*#>87:=F=F8:==9F;$5>F357
@!A$;?>=9$I "&)$$99?37B
@!A?59FB
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C &"*#>85:=F==8:==9F;$5;93B9
5869567859L " (*1$7859$C &"*#>87:=F=F8:==9F;$5;93B7
@!A$?59FB$I "&)$$9=;38B
$=7;8>$I "&)2$>?B398
.L>1"2"[,G '"A*)* "V- 2 )33K":- H";,*)3<$>?B398
.L1="2"[')9-E 'K":- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;8;5567767859
@!AF7;?F5=;9B
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867B67859%G$H EE)/*#;7;:=F;88:=7758$B>3B>
@!A$F7;?F5=;9B$I "&)$$B>3B>
$=7;8;$I "&)2$B>3B>
.L1="2"[')9-E 'K":- ";,*)3<$B>3B>
/.//"2"[' -"S933"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;8?5567767859
@!A5B9?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
586796785958375359$++$G 1-$H*##/ !585:=5988:==97B$5>B3?7
@!A$5B9?$I "&)$$5>B3?7
$=7;8?$I "&)2$5>B3?7
$5>B3?7
/.//"2"[' -"S933";,*)3<
.L1L"2"[;A"][,B '-% -*";')9-9-E"A 'B9 5^"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;8F5567767859
@!A59=87?>>7>?5;5=
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565F678595738B359$^)&*1#$I1&/!/!M585:=5988:==97B$7B388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$55
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A$59=87?>>7>?5;5=$I "&)$$7B388
$=7;8F$I "&)2$7B388
$7B388
.L1L"2"[;A"][,B '-% -*";')9-9-E"A 'B9 5^";,*)3<
.D=."2"4 )3* "F)'*- '5"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"L.L2.....2=LWD>
$=7;585567767859
@!A==F>????
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568;67859.* *D(*1$7859$.*!"&)$@!# 1&! *585:88888:75;9?$FF;3?7
@!A$==F>????$I "&)$$FF;3?7
$=7;58$I "&)2$FF;3?7
$FF;3?7
.D=."2"4 )3* "F)'*- '5";,*)3<
LDW="2"4933 ' 5*"+-9%)3"4,5G9*)3"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;555567767859
@!A5555>:557859
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568767859L " (*1$7859$ !/D&)$+ !"1 )$+,&1M*#585:=7588:=95B8$BF?39>
@!A$5555>:557859$I "&)$$BF?39>
$=7;55$I "&)2$BF?39>
$BF?39>
LDW="2"4933 ' 5*"+-9%)3"4,5G9*)3";,*)3<
MOX...>="2"4M("89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;575567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$>7387
@!A$$I "&)$$>7387
$=7;57$I "&)2$>7387
$>7387
MOX...>="2"4M(";,*)3<
.D>="2": S+"7 *9' % -*";'$5*"2"L.N100"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"L.L2.....2=LW0.
$85567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$57
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
5565F67859%Q$U&" ,$8878835537859$@+< $VDE) '**$%*1 *!"$=85585:88888:75;=8$7??37B
5565F67859%Q$U&" ,$8878835537859$@+< $VDE) '*1$%*1 *!"$=85585:88888:75;=8$99=39;
@!A$$I "&)$$>773>7
$8$I "&)2$>773>7
$>773>7
.D>="2": S+"7 *9' % -*";'$5*"2"L.N100";,*)3<
.D>W"2": S+"7 *9' % -*";'$5*2"CD.=0>="89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"L.L2.....2=LW0=
$85567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565F67859%Q$U&" ,$8878835537859$@+< $VDE) '**$.*4 "/ !585:88888:75;=7$9R57938?
5565F67859%Q$U&" ,$8878835537859$@+< $VDE) '**$%*1 *!"585:88888:75;=7$B9;3=8
@!A$$I "&)$$9R>>83=?
$8$I "&)2$9R>>83=?
$9R>>83=?
.D>W"2": S+"7 *9' % -*";'$5*2"CD.=0>=";,*)3<
MOX...W1"2"J, -5,-K"[)'R"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;595567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$7=7359
@!A$$I "&)$$7=7359
$=7;59$I "&)2$7=7359
MOX...W1"2"J, -5,-K"[)'R";,*)3<$7=7359
W/.L"2"U 33R"6"8 %%,-5K"FH+H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;5=5567767859
@!A9F7?F
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859L " (*1$7859$%1 #* "/ !585:=5988:=98=B$7RBB;3>F
@!A$9F7?F$I "&)$$7RBB;3>F
$=7;5=$I "&)2$7RBB;3>F
W/.L"2"U 33R"6"8 %%,-5K"FH+H";,*)3<$7RBB;3>F
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$59
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
.1LN"2"8)! 5" ,$-*'R"A 'B9 " ,,G"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"L.L2.....2=LWD.
$=7;5B5567767859
@!A+@8;9S F:577859
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859.* *D(*1$7859$S*&)",$@!# 1&! *585:88888:75;98$9R??93B8
@!A$+@8;9S F:577859$I "&)$$9R??93B8
@!A+@8;9SU;:577859
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859.* *D(*1$7859$S*&)",$@!# 1&! *585:88888:75;98$F7B3B8
@!A$+@8;9SU;:577859$I "&)$$F7B3B8
@!A+@8;9SV5:577859
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859.* *D(*1$7859$S*&)",$@!# 1&! *585:88888:75;98$7R>=F3B8
@!A$+@8;9SV5:577859$I "&)$$7R>=F3B8
$=7;5B$I "&)2$;R=B?3B8
.1LN"2"8)! 5" ,$-*'R"A 'B9 " ,,G";,*)3<$;R=B?3B8
.==/"2"89339 "A$&$'&)-"# P5G)G '5"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;5>5567767859
@!A58957859:CHJ
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859L14$7859:88F6%+$59:88;585:=5F58:=9B58$7?3B8
5869567859L14$7859:88F6%+$59:88;585:=5B88:=9B58$5>3>9
@!A$58957859:CHJ$I "&)$$=B359
$=7;5>$I "&)2$=B359
$=B359
.==/"2"89339 "A$&$'&)-"# P5G)G '5";,*)3<
LL1W"2"S \)'3)-?"4)-5,-":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;5;5567767859
@!A7955F8
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5865B67859+/"'$S&))$H EE)/*#585:=5F=8:=7858$5BB3=>
@!A$7955F8$I "&)$$5BB3=>
$=7;5;$I "&)2$5BB3=>
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5=
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$5BB3=>
LL1W"2"S \)'3)-?"4)-5,-":- H";,*)3<
.WDL"2"S:(@+Z"\V7("89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;5?5567767859
@!A5;F9?7
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867?67859%G$%&1"#;7;:=F;88:=7758$?;37=
@!A$5;F9?7$I "&)$$?;37=
$=7;5?$I "&)2$?;37=
$?;37=
.WDL"2"S:(@+Z"\V7(";,*)3<
S@+ "2"S9?P 5*"+5G )3*" ,'G,')*9,-"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;5F5567767859
@!A57B=F;<U
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568=67859H"1**"$Q*E&/1#585:=9588:==899$?;?3=>
@!A$57B=F;<U$I "&)$$?;?3=>
$=7;5F$I "&)2$?;?3=>
$?;?3=>
S@+ "2"S9?P 5*"+5G )3*" ,'G,')*9,-";,*)3<
.LNW"2"S#" -* '"Y,'"\95 )3"I_ 33 - "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;785567767859
@!A58957859:<+XV
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859785=$<*D(*1#,/E$. *#585:=5B88:==998$5>5388
@!A$58957859:<+XV$I "&)$$5>5388
$=7;78$I "&)2$5>5388
$5>5388
.LNW"2"S#" -* '"Y,'"\95 )3"I_ 33 - ";,*)3<
.0LD"2"# P%)-";')YY9 "A9E-5"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;755567767859
@!AI@:87>;?F8
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867F67859H"1**"$H/M!#585:=9588:=7858$7B53FB
@!A$I@:87>;?F8$I "&)$$7B53FB
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5B
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$=7;75$I "&)2$7B53FB
.0LD"2"# P%)-";')YY9 "A9E-5";,*)3<$7B53FB
==W1"2"#,'%5";9' "A)3 5K":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;775567767859
@!A7;F5=9
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869867859]*,/ )*$T=87$Q*E&/1;7;:=F;88:==8=8$?8388
@!A$7;F5=9$I "&)$$?8388
$=7;77$I "&)2$?8388
==W1"2"#,'%5";9' "A)3 5K":- H";,*)3<$?8388
ND01"2"#,5 !K"S)'R"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;795567767859
@!A859:88?
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5565F67859J A*D(*1$7859$ S$J "*#585:=5588:=9B=8$578388
@!A$859:88?$I "&)$$578388
$=7;79$I "&)2$578388
$578388
ND01"2"#,5 !K"S)'R";,*)3<
>.D="2"F) "+-)3R*9 )3"\9 3?"AB "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;7=5567767859
@!A57598;=9
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867?67859L " (*1$7859$G&"*1$I*#"/!M$X**#>85:=F==8:=9?75$>5=3B8
@!A$57598;=9$I "&)$$>5=3B8
$=7;7=$I "&)2$>5=3B8
$>5=3B8
>.D="2"F) "+-)3R*9 )3"\9 3?"AB ";,*)3<
MOX...>."2"F * '5,-K"O'$ "6"J$?R"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;7B5567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$59F3F=
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5>
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A$$I "&)$$59F3F=
$=7;7B$I "&)2$59F3F=
$59F3F=
MOX...>."2"F * '5,-K"O'$ "6"J$?R";,*)3<
000/"2"F9,- '"79%")-?"@ 3" ,H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;7>5567767859
@!A5:77557=
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867B67859%G$%&1"#;7;:=F;88:=7758$=73?B
@!A$5:77557=$I "&)$$=73?B
$=7;7>$I "&)2$=73?B
$=73?B
000/"2"F9,- '"79%")-?"@ 3" ,H";,*)3<
L=.>"2"F' %9$%"@)* '5K":- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;7;5567767859
@!A>5878;:58:59
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859L " (*1$7859$+/"'$S&))$H EE)/*#585:=5F=8:=7858$993>9
@!A$>5878;:58:59$I "&)$$993>9
@!A>5995;:58:59
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859L " (*1$7859$+/"'$S&))$H EE)/*#585:=5F=8:=7858$>F3=>
@!A$>5995;:58:59$I "&)$$>F3=>
$=7;7;$I "&)2$58938F
L=.>"2"F' %9$%"@)* '5K":- ";,*)3<$58938F
MOX...WN"2"F'9 K"S9 ) 3"6"A$`)-- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;7?5567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$739B
@!A$$I "&)$$739B
$=7;7?$I "&)2$739B
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5;
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$739B
MOX...WN"2"F'9 K"S9 ) 3"6"A$`)-- ";,*)3<
.0L0"2"a$9 !"A93B '"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;7F5567767859
@!A>=?>7F;
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
58695678597859$Q* $\ /4*$.*)/A*1'585:=B578:=9B=8$7=38B
@!A$>=?>7F;$I "&)$$7=38B
$=7;7F$I "&)2$7=38B
$7=38B
.0L0"2"a$9 !"A93B '";,*)3<
.>LL"2"7)%5 R" ,$-*R"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;985567767859
@!A%QQC\:8858>9
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
58695678597859$Q* ' )/!M$+,&1M*#>89:=FB78:==9;8$5R7;?388
@!A$%QQC\:8858>9$I "&)$$5R7;?388
$=7;98$I "&)2$5R7;?388
$5R7;?388
.>LL"2"7)%5 R" ,$-*R";,*)3<
LL1D"2"A 3 *+ ,$-*"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"L.L20LD..200DW.
$=7;955567767859
@!AF>>F>5
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568767859J A*D(*1$7859$%&1"/ /E&!"$X**#585:=5988:==9;8$9=3;;
@!A$F>>F>5$I "&)$$9=3;;
$=7;95$I "&)2$9=3;;
$9=3;;
LL1D"2"A 3 *+ ,$-*";,*)3<
>LD/"2"A, 9 *R"Y,'"4$%)-"7 5,$' "S-E*"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;975567767859
@!A55987859:HSQ<
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5569867859785=$<*D(*1#,/E$Q*!*W&)585:=5B88:==998$5?8388
@!A$55987859:HSQ<$I "&)$$5?8388
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5?
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$=7;97$I "&)2$5?8388
>LD/"2"A, 9 *R"Y,'"4$%)-"7 5,$' "S-E*";,*)3<$5?8388
>.0/"2"AG'9-E5* ?":- ,'G,')* ?"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;995567767859
@!A5
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859H&)&1'$H" 4'$+,&1M*#$I,1 $L " (*1$7859585:=5B88:=9588$5R9>93B7
@!A$5$I "&)$$5R9>93B7
$=7;99$I "&)2$5R9>93B7
>.0/"2"AG'9-E5* ?":- ,'G,')* ?";,*)3<$5R9>93B7
A;::"2"A*')* E9 ":-59E *5K":- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;9=5567767859
@!A59%)&!:@":5B9
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5568567859785=$C/ *!#*$Q*!*W&)>85:=F==8:=98?8$7;83B9
5568567859785=$C/ *!#*$Q*!*W&)585:=5B88:=98?8$7;83B9
5568567859785=$C/ *!#*$Q*!*W&)>87:=F=F8:=98?8$7;83B9
5568567859785=$C/ *!#*$Q*!*W&)>8=:=FBB8:=98?8$7;83B7
@!A$59%)&!:@":5B9$I "&)$$5R8?7355
$=7;9=$I "&)2$5R8?7355
$5R8?7355
A;::"2"A*')* E9 ":-59E *5K":- ";,*)3<
MOX...W>"2"AP,B '3)-?K"[)'R"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;9B5567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$;37?
@!A$$I "&)$$;37?
$=7;9B$I "&)2$;37?
$;37?
MOX...W>"2"AP,B '3)-?K"[)'R";,*)3<
./WN"2";9% A)B '"VYY"A9* "A ' *)'9)3"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;9;5567767859
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$5F
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
@!A<78559
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
58698678595838F359$%)&!!/!M$+ DD/##/ !65835=359$++$<"M#585:=5F58:=9558$95>3=B
58698678595838F359$%)&!!/!M$+ DD/##/ !65835=359$++$<"M#585:=5588:=9558$9>=3>8
@!A$<78559$I "&)$$>?538B
$=7;9;$I "&)2$>?538B
$>?538B
./WN"2";9% A)B '"VYY"A9* "A ' *)'9)3";,*)3<
.1=/"2";2S,&93 "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;9>5567767859
@!A55777859
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567767859J A*D(*1$7859$+*))$%, !*$+,&1M*#;7?:=FF88:=9758$9B7388
@!A$55777859$I "&)$$9B7388
$=7;9>$I "&)2$9B7388
$9B7388
.1=/"2";2S,&93 ";,*)3<
.=.>"2"M-9A 3 *"MA+"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;9?5567767859
@!A89F5F=9=>
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5869567859%G$H EE)/*#;7;:=F;88:=7758$>>3?8
@!A$89F5F=9=>$I "&)$$>>3?8
$=7;9?$I "&)2$>>3?8
$>>3?8
.=.>"2"M-9A 3 *"MA+";,*)3<
LLNL"2"b)33 R279 " ,HK":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;9F5567767859
@!A5F99B
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5868767859G&"*1D&/!$U1*&-$Q*E&/1>85:=F==8:==8=8$9R8=B395
@!A$5F99B$I "&)$$9R8=B395
$=7;9F$I "&)2$9R8=B395
LLNL"2"b)33 R279 " ,HK":- H";,*)3<$9R8=B395
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$78
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
LDND"2"@)* '" ,-5 'B)*9,-"A 'B9 K":- H"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=85567767859
@!A=9;8
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867B67859L " (*1$7859$C*&-$C &"*#>85:=F==8:==878$7883F=
@!A$=9;8$I "&)$$7883F=
$=7;=8$I "&)2$7883F=
$7883F=
LDND"2"@)* '" ,-5 'B)*9,-"A 'B9 K":- H";,*)3<
MOX...WW"2"@ 5*&R"J'K" )'3"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=55567767859
@!A
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5567567859Q*K !4$+,* ->85:88888:78788$5B93FB
@!A$$I "&)$$5B93FB
$=7;=5$I "&)2$5B93FB
$5B93FB
MOX...WW"2"@ 5*&R"J'K" )'3";,*)3<
.=>/"2"c 3"I- 'ER"89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=75567767859
@!A9???7?F9B
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867?67859L " (*1$7859$0"/)/"'$U/))>85:=F==8:=9?58$5R558378
5867?67859L " (*1$7859$0"/)/"'$U/))585:=B788:=9?58$B7=39=
5867?67859L " (*1$7859$0"/)/"'$U/))585:=9588:=9?55$7R8593=5
5867?67859L " (*1$7859$0"/)/"'$U/))>87:=F=F8:=9?5B$5R==>3F=
@!A$9???7?F9B$I "&)$$BR8F=3?F
$=7;=7$I "&)2$BR8F=3?F
.=>/"2"c 3"I- 'ER";,*)3<$BR8F=3?F
d+7#"2"d)'-,* "O'$5 "@,'!5K":- "89- ":* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=95567767859
@!A85=>==5:@J
C/!*$@"*D$.&"*C/!*$@"*D$.*# 1/E"/ !C/!*$@"*D$ !"
5867767859%G$H EE)/*#585:=9588:=75B8$=;>3>>
@!A$85=>==5:@J$I "&)$$=;>3>>
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$75
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
$=7;=9$I "&)2$=;>3>>
d+7#"2"d)'-,* "O'$5 "@,'!5K":- ";,*)3<$=;>3>>
I "&)2$FBR?>935=
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$N5567767859$:$$;298$ <O%&M*$77
!"#$%&'&()*
+,* -$.*"&/)
0#*12&#,)*'3(*1"1&!4
%1/!"*425567767859$:$$;298 <
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
./01"2" 3*4",5"6,7 8399 ":3- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;==5567767859
>!?875;@A=
B/!*$>"*C$.&"*B/!*$>"*C$.*# 1/D"/ !B/!*$>"*C$ !"
5568A67859H9$7859$I&"*1$J/))G85:=@==8:=9A78$=5@E@5;37F
>!?$875;@A=$K "&)$$=5@E@5;37F
$=7;==$K "&)2$=5@E@5;37F
$=5@E@5;37F
./01"2" 3*4",5"6,7 8399 "<,*)9=
.>?0"2"@9 *'3 "A$%BC";- ":3- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=F5567767859
>!?88F57@F:+<
B/!*$>"*C$.&"*B/!*$>"*C$.*# 1/D"/ !B/!*$>"*C$ !"
5867@67859+>%$>"*C2$J #"*1$L"&"/ !$< !/" 1/!M$0DM1&4*G85:=@==8:=F988:7E;9;3F8
>!?$88F57@F:+<$K "&)$:7E;9;3F8
>!?88F597;:>N
B/!*$>"*C$.&"*B/!*$>"*C$.*# 1/D"/ !B/!*$>"*C$ !"
5869567859+>%$>"*C2$J #"*1$L"&"/ !$< !/" 1/!M$0DM1&4*G85:=@==8:=F988$7FE@AF3AG
>!?$88F597;:>N$K "&)$$7FE@AF3AG
$=7;=F$K "&)2$79E7=A39G
.>?0"2"@9 *'3 "A$%BC";- "<,*)9=$79E7=A39G
.DED"2"F *" ,$- 39"@-83',-G"H '83 2H+ ":3- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=G5567767859
>!?555@7859:L +
B/!*$>"*C$.&"*B/!*$>"*C$.*# 1/D"/ !B/!*$>"*C$ !"
5565@67859O " (*1$7859$L +$+,&1M*#G87:=@=@8:=9AF5$95E99A3=F
>!?$555@7859:L +$K "&)$$95E99A3=F
$=7;=G$K "&)2$95E99A3=F
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$P5567767859$:$$;298$ <Q%&M*$5
!"#$%& ' !"()* +%,$-*
.DED"2"F *" ,$- 39"@-83',-G"H '83 2H+ "<,*)9=$95E99A3=F
.DE/"2"F *',B,93*)-" ,$- 392I)7* "I)* '":3- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=;5567767859
>!?888587;8FF
B/!*$>"*C$.&"*B/!*$>"*C$.*# 1/D"/ !B/!*$>"*C$ !"
5568=67859.* *C(*1$7859$I&#"*R&"*1$L*1?/ *$+,&1M*#G87:=@=@8:=9AF8$F7EAA@37G
>!?$888587;8FF$K "&)$$F7EAA@37G
$=7;=;$K "&)2$F7EAA@37G
.DE/"2"F *',B,93*)-" ,$- 392I)7* "I)* '"<,*)9=$F7EAA@37G
.J00"2"6)%7 4" ,$-*4":3- ";* %"+ ,$-*"
$=7;=A5567767859
>!?%S<T:8875FG
B/!*$>"*C$.&"*B/!*$>"*C$.*# 1/D"/ !B/!*$>"*C$ !"
5565=67859H=$7859$%I$S*!"585:=5@=8:==578$7=EGF=37F
>!?$%S<T:8875FG$K "&)$$7=EGF=37F
$=7;=A$K "&)2$7=EGF=37F
$7=EGF=37F
.J00"2"6)%7 4" ,$-*4"<,*)9=
K "&)2$FF7E8=;3F;
%:+,* -$.*"&/)$P5567767859$:$$;298$ <Q%&M*$7
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 25, 2013
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM: Amy Dietl, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Cancellation of the December 30, 2013, City Council Meeting
Background
In prior years, the City Council has cancelled the second regular meeting in December if there
are no items requiring timely action by the Council. At this time, all necessary items for
discussion and Council action have been placed on the agendas for the December 9, 2013,
meeting or the December 16, 2013, work session.
This year, the last Monday in December falls on December 30, 2013.
Council Action Requested
Motion to approve the cancellation of the December 30, 2013, regular City Council meeting.
11
Page of
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Sue Iverson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services
SUBJECT:
Resolution 2013-042: Resolution Accepting the Liability Coverage Limits
from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) for 2014
Background
Each year the City Council is required to decide whether or not to waive the statutory tort
liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. In past history, the City has not
waived the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes
466.04. (This would mean that the City accepts liability coverage limits of $2,500,000.)
Council Action
A motion to approve Resolution 2013-042, regarding no-waiver of the statutory liability
limits and accepting the liability coverage limits from the League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust (LMCIT) for 2014.
City Council Meeting
P:\Admin\Council\Agendas & Packet Information\2013\11-25-13-
R\Sue\2014_Liability_Coverage_Limits.doc
Page 1 of 1
Attachment A
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION No. 2013-042
Accepting the Liability Coverage Limits from the
League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT)
WHEREAS,
the City of Arden Hills DOES NOT WAIVE the monetary limits on
municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The City of Arden Hills accepts liability coverage
limits of two million, five hundred thousand dollars and zero cents ($2,500,000.00) from the
League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) for calendar year 2014.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS
25th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013.
_________________________________________
David Grant, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
Amy Dietl, City Clerk
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT: Planning Case #13-004:
Zoning Code Amendment Parks and Open Space
District and Conservation District
Requested Action
1.Motion to approve Ordinance 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning Code
related to the proposed Conservation District as presented in the November 25, 2013, Report
to the City Council.
2.Motion to approve publishing a Summary of Ordinance 2013-010.
3.Motion to approve Ordinance 2013-011 for amendments to Section 1305.04 and Section
1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space District as presented
in the November 25, 2013, Report to the City Council.
4.Motion to approve publishing a Summary of Ordinance 2013-011.
Background
The Future Land Use Map in the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan designates 529 acres of land
as This land use is defined
City owns and maintains 19 of these parcels as public parks, which cover 153 acres. The Ramsey
County Parks and Recreation Department manages 11 parcels totaling 338 acres. The remaining
land is owned by several entities, including the City, Ramsey County, the State of Minnesota,
and private property owners/homeowners associations. Existing uses on these lands include
trails, stormwater easement ponds, and single family homes.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)\CC Packet_(11-25-13)_13-004
Page 1 of 6
a second land use designation applied to open space areas in the City. Park
park preserve, all of which are located on the Arden Hills Army Training Site.
Currently there are no districts designated for parks or open space areas in the Zoning Code. Park
facilities are integrated into residential or business zoning districts. Minnesota State law requires
that local zoning codes be consistent with adopted comprehensive plans. Establishing a Parks
and Open Space District and a Conservation District would help the City meet this requirement.
Further, the new districts will assist in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan by
solidifying the P
Staff has prepared Ordinance 2013-010 for a Conservation District and Ordinance 2013-011 for
a Parks and Open Space District. The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 13-004at
the October 9, 2013, meeting and recommended approval of both Ordinances. Staff reviewed
Ordinance 2013-010 and Ordinance 2013-011 with the City Council at the Work Session on
November 18, 2013. The City Council directed staff to include the Ordinances on the Consent
Calendar for the next City Council meeting.
Summary of Proposed Ordinance Amendments and Additions
The Parks and Open Space District would be applied to City and County Parks. This district
could also be appropriate for City owned parcels that are being used as public open space or that
corresponds with the Park Preserve District in the Comprehensive Plan and would only be
applied to the Arden Hills Army Training Site (AHATS). It should be noted that Planning Case
13-004 only includes text amendments to the Zoning Code. No rezoning of any property is
proposed at this time.
If adopted, Ordinance 2013-010 and Ordinance 2013-011 would amend or add regulations to two
chapters of the Zoning Code:
A.1305.04 Definitions (new definition)
B.1320 District Provisions (new regulations)
A general discussion on the changes to each chapter is outlined in the sections below. The
ordinances are included in Attachments A and B.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)\CC Packet_(11-25-13)_13-004
Page 2 of 6
1305.04 Definitions
While there is currently a land use category s
that the specific uses associated with City and County-owned parks should be distinguished from
the broader category of public uses.
The Zoning Code provides the following existing definition for a public use:
The use of any lot, parcel of land and any structure or building thereon exclusively for
public purposes by any department or branch of government, federal, state, county or
city, excluding independent school districts, without reference to the ownership of said
lot, parcel of land, building or structure.
Staff is proposing to add a definition to the Zto differentiate
these uses from other types of public uses. Park facilities are listed as a permitted use in the
Parks and Open Space District. All other public uses are permitted as conditional uses.
The use of any lots or parcel of land and any structure or building thereon for public
active and passive recreation purposes by the Arden Hills Parks and Recreation
Department or the Ramsey County Parks and Recreation Department.
No new or revised definitions have been proposed for the Conservation District.
1320 District Provisions
1320.04 Purpose
The District purpose statement is meant to outline the specific reasons for why the City is
adopting a set of land use regulations. Cities are granted considerable leeway in establishing land
use regulations as long as their intent is to address public health, safety, and/or welfare concerns.
The primary purpose of the Parks and Open Space District is to create land use regulations that
support the parks and open spaces managed by Arden Hills or Ramsey County. Setting aside
land for recreational uses addresses public health and welfare concerns through supporting
community health, promoting ecological stewardship, and conserving environmental resources.
The Conservation District would only apply to AHATS, which is owned by the federal
government. Recognizing that portions of the site could be transferred to private parties in the
future, the purpose of the Conservation District is to ensure that any future development on the
property is staged and that a sustainable level of public expenditures for utilities and services is
maintained.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)\CC Packet_(11-25-13)_13-004
Page 3 of 6
1320.05 Land Use Chart
The land use chart lists the permitted and conditional uses in all zoning districts. If a use is not
listed, it is automatically prohibited.
The chart below lists permitted and conditional uses in the Parks and Open Space District:
Permitted Use Conditional Use Conditional Use (Accessory)
Park Facilities Public Uses Telecommunication
antennas, dishes, or
Utility Distribution Utility Transmission
towers
Lines Lines
The chart below lists permitted and conditional uses in the Conservation District:
Permitted Use Conditional Use Conditional Use (Accessory)
(Accessory)
Utility Distribution Public Uses Telecommunication
Lines antennas, dishes, or
towers
Utility Transmission
Lines
Given the size of the AHATS property, the City Attorney advised listing utility distribution lines
as a permitted accessory use so that the City can better manage the placement of distribution
lines which may impact future uses or development on the property.
1320.06 District Requirements Chart
The district requirement chart lists the basic requirements for the development of a lot, such as
minimum lot area, setbacks, and lot coverage. No minimum lot area has been set for the Parks
and Open Space District or the Conservation District. The lot coverage and setback requirements
City and County owned parks are currently zoned either R-1 (Single Family Residential) or R-2
(Single and Two Family Residential) and are therefore already subject to the district
requirements being proposed for the Parks and Open Space District.
1320.145 Special Requirements for the Parks and Open Space District
Some zoning districts have additional special requirements that need to be met. These
requirements may include standards on development, design, or permitted uses. For the Parks
and Open Space District, two provisions are included in the special requirement section, one on
conditional uses in the district and the other on development standards. The first directs the City
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)\CC Packet_(11-25-13)_13-004
Page 4 of 6
Council to evaluate conditional use applications on the compatibility of the proposed use with
the natural features and recreational amenities found on the site, along with the conditional use
evaluation criteria established in Section 1355.04 Subd. 3.
The second provision would allow the City to require certain performance standards if in its
review of development plans it concludes that potential impacts on natural features will require
mitigation.
1320.15 Special Requirements for the Conservation District
The special requirements section for the Conservation District includes one provision regarding
permitted uses. It states that in addition to the permitted uses specified in the land use chart, any
facility, building, use, or activity controlled by the Minnesota National Guard or the Army
Reserve on AHATS is permitted. Municipal governments do not have the authority to regulate
land use or development on federally owned lands. While the City may zone AHATS as it sees
fit, those land use regulations are not enforceable. The purpose of including this provision is to
acknowledge that these land uses will be present on AHATS regardless of the other requirements
for the Conservation District found in the Zoning Code.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 13-004 at the October 9, 2013, regular
meeting, and offers the following findings of fact:
1.The City Council approved the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan on September 28,
2009.
2.The proposed Parks and Open Space District is in substantial conformance with the Parks
and Open Space District defined in the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future
Land Use Map.
3.The proposed Conservation District is in substantial conformance with the Parks Preserve
District defined in the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map.
4.The proposed Parks and Open Space District and Conservation District would work
toward implementing goals and recommended policies in the Arden Hills 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
5.The proposed Parks and Open Space District and Conservation District would work
toward bringing the City in compliance with Minnesota State law, which mandates that
local zoning codes are consistent with adopted comprehensive plans.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 13-004 at the October 9, 2013, regular
meeting, and unanimously recommended approval of Ordinance 2013-010 for amendments to
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)\CC Packet_(11-25-13)_13-004
Page 5 of 6
Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Conservation District as presented in
the November 25, 2013, Report to the City Council.
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 13-004 at the October 9, 2013, regular
meeting, and unanimously recommended approval of Ordinance 2013-011 for amendments to
Section 1305.04 and Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open
Space District, a as presented in the November 25, 2013, Report to the City Council.
Requested Action
1.Motion to approve Ordinance 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning Code
related to the proposed Conservation District as presented in the November 25, 2013, Report
to the City Council.
2.Motion to approve publishing a Summary of Ordinance 2013-010.
3.Motion to approve Ordinance 2013-011 for amendments to Section 1305.04 and Section 1320
of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space District as presented in the
November 25, 2013, Report to the City Council.
4.Motion to approve publishing a Summary of Ordinance 2013-011.
Attachments
A.Ordinance Number 13-010 and Publication Summary
B.Ordinance Number 13-011 and Publication Summary
C.Draft Planning Commission Minutes, October 9, 2013
D.Report to the Planning Commission, October 9, 2013
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)\CC Packet_(11-25-13)_13-004
Page 6 of 6
AttachmentA
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
AN ORDINANCE ADDING THE PURPOSE, LAND USE CHART, DISTRICT
REQUIREMENTS CHART, AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
CD CONSERVATION DISTRICT
The Arden Hills City Council hereby ordains that Section 1320.04 Subd 19 shall be added;
Sections 1320.05 and 1320.06 and its subdivisions are hereby amended; and Section 1320.15
shall be added to the Arden Hills City Code to read as follows:
1320.04Purpose of Districts.
Subd. 19
CD Conservation District
A.federally owned lands on the Arden Hills Army
Training Site to ensure that future development is staged, maintains a sustainable
level of public expenditures for utilities and services, and protects those areas
generally determined to be unsuitable for development due to the presence of
wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, certain drainage and soil conditions, and
critical wildlife habitat.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
1320.05Land Use Chart.
Zoning Districts:
R1R2R3R4NBB1B2B3B4CCGBI1I-2I-FLEXMRCD
MB
Uses:
Antenna, Dish or Tower
CACACACACACACACACACACACACACACACACA
Boarding house
CCCC======C====
Brewpub
CCCC
Business service
========APPPCPPPPP
Clinic, medical office
========PPPPPCPPPPP
Club or lodge
(nonprofit)
========PPP==C====P
Club, sports & fitness
========APPPCPPPP
Commercial recreation - indoor
========PPP==PP
Daycare Facility, over 10
PPPPPPPPPP
Daycare, family - 10 or less
AAAAAAA
Daycare, group family - 14 or less
CACACACACACACA
Dog kennel
========CC======
Dog run
AAA============A
Drive-up windows
========CCCA==CA
Dry cleaning & laundry, pick-up station
========CAA==A==P
Dry cleaning & laundry, self-service laundry
C==CC==========
Dwelling: density zoning
DDDD========P==
Dwelling: multiple family
====CCCC====CC==P==
Dwelling: single-family attached
CCDDP====
Dwelling: singlefamily detached
PPPP==========P====
Dwelling: twofamily
CCPPC==========P====
Dwelling: live-work unit
========CC====
Financial institution & service
========PPPPPCPPPP==P
Garage, truck
================CC====
Home occupation: Class I
AAAAAAA==
Home occupation: Class II
CACACACACA======C====CA==
Hospital
D
Hotel/motel
========CPCCC==CP
House of worship
CCCCCCCCCCCP
Manufactured home park
====C====================
Manufacturing & processing: Class I
AAAPPPP==C
Manufacturing & processing: Class II
================P====
Microbrewery
CCCCCC
Microdistillery
CCCCCC
Mortuary, funeral home
========PP==C======C
Multiple occupancy building
========CCCCCCCCCC==P
Nursery
CCCC============CA
Nursing home and assisted living
CCCCDC========CP
2
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
CD
R1R2R3R4NBB1B2B3B4CCGBI1I-2I-FLEXMRMB
Uses:
Office
========PPPPPPPPPPP
Pawn shop
Personal services
CAPPPCPAP
Public use
C
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCPP
Research and development facility
CPCCCPPPPP
Research animals
CCCP
Residence Hall, dormitory
======CCD==============CP
Residential facility, state licensed, serving 1-6
PPPPPP==========P
Residential facility, state licensed, serving 7-16
CCCCCCC
Restaurant and restaurant-fast food
========CAPPPCPCCP
Retail sales & service
========PAPPPCAAAAP
School, general education
CCCC======C====CP
School, higher education
D======CC==CC====CP
School, specialized education
========CCCCC====CP
Service station
========CC==CCCC
Storage, exterior
==================CA
Studio
========CCPPPC====P
Theater, indoor
========ACP==C====P
Utility distribution line
A
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Utility substation
================CCCC
Utility transmission
C
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
========CC======C
Vehicle - motorized, service
========CC======C
Warehousing
========AAAACPPCA
3
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
1320.15 Special Requirements for the Conservation District.
Subd. 1 Procedure. The application and the administrative and review procedure
established in Section 1355.04 Subd 3, Conditional Use Permits shall be followed for all
development that requires a Conditional Use Permit.
Subd. 2 Permitted Uses. Permitted uses are allowed as specified on the Land Use Chart,
Section 1320.05. The following uses are also permitted:
A.Any facility, building, or structure controlled by either the Minnesota
National Guard or Army Reserve located on the Arden Hills Army
Training Site.
B.Any use or activity carried out by either the Minnesota National Guard
or the Army Reserve on the Arden Hills Army Training Site.
5
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
Effective Date
. This Ordinance shall become effective the day following its publication.
th
Adoption Date.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills the 25 day of
November, 2013.
DAVID GRANT, MAYOR
ATTEST:
PATRICK KLAERS
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Publication Date: December 11, 2013
6
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SUMMARY OF
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-010
th
On the 25 day of November, 2013, the Arden Hills City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2013-
010, and by the four affirmative votes pursuant to Minn. Stat. §412.191, Subd. 4, directed that a
summary of Ordinance 2013-010 be published.
Ordinance 2013-
Requirements Chart, and Spec
Ordinance amends Section 1320 of the City Code.
A full copy of Ordinance 2013-010 is available for inspection by any person during regular
business hours at the office of the City Administrator, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills,
Minnesota 55112. The Ordinance is also available online at http://www.cityofardenhills.org.
AttachmentB
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
AN ORDINANCE ADDING THE DEFINITION, PURPOSE, LAND USE CHART,
DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS CHART, AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
POS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
The Arden Hills City Council hereby ordains that Section 1305.04 Subd 140 shall be added and
subsequent subdivisions renumbered accordingly; Section 1320.04 Subd 18 shall be added;
Sections 1320.05 and 1320.06 and its subdivisions are hereby amended; and Section 1320.145
shall be added to the Arden Hills City Code to read as follows:
1305.04Definitions.
Subd. 140
Park Facilities. The use of any lots or parcel of land and any structure or
building thereon for public active and passive recreation purposes by the Arden Hills
Parks and Recreation Department or the Ramsey County Parks and Recreation
Department.
1320.04Purpose of Districts.
Subd. 18
POS Parks and Open Space District.
A.To support the Arden Hills Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan and the
Ramsey County Parks and Recreation System Plan.
B.To provide an area for publicly owned lands that have recognized outdoor
recreational or open space resources.
C.To support community health through the provision of active and passive
outdoor recreational opportunities.
D.To promote natural and ecological stewardship.
E.To conserve vital environmental resources.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
1320.05Land Use Chart.
Zoning Districts:
R1R2R3R4NBB1B2B3B4CCGBI1I-2I-FLEXMRPOS
MB
Uses:
Antenna, Dish or Tower
CACACACACACACACACACACACACACACACACA
Boarding house
CCCC======C====
Brewpub
CCCC
Business service
========APPPCPPPPP
Clinic, medical office
========PPPPPCPPPPP
Club or lodge
(nonprofit)
========PPP==C====P
Club, sports & fitness
========APPPCPPPP
Commercial recreation - indoor
========PPP==PP
Daycare Facility, over 10
PPPPPPPPPP
Daycare, family - 10 or less
AAAAAAA
Daycare, group family - 14 or less
CACACACACACACA
Dog kennel
========CC======
Dog run
AAA============A
Drive-up windows
========CCCA==CA
Dry cleaning & laundry, pick-up station
========CAA==A==P
Dry cleaning & laundry, self-service laundry
C==CC==========
Dwelling: density zoning
DDDD========P==
Dwelling: multiple family
====CCCC====CC==P==
Dwelling: single-family attached
CCDDP====
Dwelling: singlefamily detached
PPPP==========P====
Dwelling: twofamily
CCPPC==========P====
Dwelling: live-work unit
========CC====
Financial institution & service
========PPPPPCPPPP==P
Garage, truck
================CC====
Home occupation: Class I
AAAAAAA==
Home occupation: Class II
CACACACACA======C====CA==
Hospital
D
Hotel/motel
========CPCCC==CP
House of worship
CCCCCCCCCCCP
Manufactured home park
====C====================
Manufacturing & processing: Class I
AAAPPPP==C
Manufacturing & processing: Class II
================P====
Microbrewery
CCCCCC
Microdistillery
CCCCCC
Mortuary, funeral home
========PP==C======C
Multiple occupancy building
========CCCCCCCCCC==P
Nursery
CCCC============CA
Nursing home and assisted living
CCCCDC========CP
2
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
POS
R1R2R3R4NBB1B2B3B4CCGBI1I-2I-FLEXMRMB
Uses:
Office
========PPPPPPPPPPP
Park Facilities
P
Pawn shop
Personal services
CAPPPCPAP
Public use
C
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCPP
Research and development facility
CPCCCPPPPP
Research animals
CCCP
Residence Hall, dormitory
======CCD==============CP
Residential facility, state licensed, serving 1-6
PPPPPP==========P
Residential facility, state licensed, serving 7-16
CCCCCCC
Restaurant and restaurant-fast food
========CAPPPCPCCP
Retail sales & service
========PAPPPCAAAAP
School, general education
CCCC======C====CP
School, higher education
D======CC==CC====CP
School, specialized education
========CCCCC====CP
Service station
========CC==CCCC
Storage, exterior
==================CA
Studio
========CCPPPC====P
Theater, indoor
========ACP==C====P
Utility distribution line
P
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Utility substation
================CCCC
Utility transmission
C
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
========CC======C
Vehicle - motorized, service
========CC======C
Warehousing
========AAAACPPCA
3
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
1320.145 Special Requirements for the Parks and Open Space District.
Subd. 1 Procedure. The application and the administrative and review procedure
established in Section 1355.04 Subd 3, Conditional Use Permits shall be followed for all
development that requires a Conditional Use Permit. This provision is subject to any
modifications or additions set forth in this Section.
Subd. 2 Conditional Uses. In addition to the evaluation criteria established in Section
1355.04 Subd. 3, applications for conditional uses within the POS District will be
evaluated by the City Council based on the following consideration:
A. The compatibility of the proposed use with the natural features and
recreational amenities of the Parks and Open Space District area.
Subd. 3 Development Standards. If the City determines in its review of site and
building plans for developments within the District that the protection of natural features
requires certain performance standards, the City may require additional development
standards to protect those features.
5
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
Effective Date
. This Ordinance shall become effective the day following its publication.
th
Adoption Date.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills the 25 day of
November, 2013.
DAVID GRANT, MAYOR
ATTEST:
PATRICK KLAERS
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Publication Date: December 11, 2013
6
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SUMMARY OF
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-011
th
On the 25 day of November, 2013, the Arden Hills City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2013-
011, and by the four affirmative votes pursuant to Minn. Stat. §412.191, Subd. 4, directed that a
summary of Ordinance 2013-011 be published.
Ordinance 2013-
District Requirements Chart, and Special Requirements for the POS Parks and Open Space
Di1305.04 and 1320 of the City Code.
A full copy of Ordinance 2013-011 is available for inspection by any person during regular
business hours at the office of the City Administrator, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills,
Minnesota 55112. The Ordinance is also available online at http://www.cityofardenhills.org.
AttachmentC
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION October 9, 2013 1
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2013
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
PLANNING CASES
A.Planning Case 13-004; Zoning Code Amendment; Parks & Open Space Public
Hearing
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that in September of 2009, the City Council
cies and
goals contained in the plan address protecting and developing open space and recreational
amenities:
Chapter 6 - Land Use:
Evaluate and amend the land use regulations to achieve the highest possible
development standards, enhance the natural environment, protect public health,
support a vital mix of land uses, and promote flexible approaches to implement
the Comprehensive Plan.
Provide a balanced mix of residential, park, open space, and commercial land
uses.
Chapter 9 Parks and Recreation:
Develop, maintain, and encourage the use of a system of neighborhood parks and
pathways that are safe and engaging.
Protect and maintain access to lakes, marshes, and wooded areas for active and
passive recreation.
Chapter 10 Protected Resources:
trees, lakes, wetlands, and other unique or significant natural resources.
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that in the Comprehensive Plan, the Future
Land Use Map designates a total of 65 parcels covering 529 acres of land
The plan defines this land use
City owns and maintains 19 of these parcels as public parks, which cover 153 acres. Ramsey
County Parks and Recreation manages an additional 11 parcels of land totaling 338 acres. The
remaining parcels are owned by several entities, including the City, Ramsey County, the State of
Minnesota, and private property owners/homeowners associations. Existing uses on these lands
include trails, municipal utilities, stormwater easement ponds, and single-family homes.
Preserve is
defined in the that are to be
park preserve in
the plan, all of which are located on the Arden Hills Army Training Site (AHATS) on the eastern
portion of the former TCAAP property. Currently there are not districts specifically designated
for parks or open space areas within the Zoning Code. These facilities are integrated into
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION October 9, 2013 2
residential or business-oriented zoning districts as permitted or conditional uses. Minnesota State
law mandates that local zoning codes are consistent with adopted comprehensive plans.
Establishing a Parks and Open Space District and a Conservation District would help the City
meet this requirement. Further, the new districts will assist in the implementation of the
land use objectives within the Zoning Code.
Community Development Intern Bachler
commented that staff has prepared a draft of
Ordinance Number 2013-009 for a Parks and Open Spaces (POS) District and Ordinance
Number 2013-010 for a Conservation (CD) District. Preliminary versions of the drafts were
presented at the April 3, 2013, Planning Commission regular meeting; the April 15, 2013, Parks,
Trails, and Recreation Committee meeting; and the May 28, 2013, City Council work session.
The discussion at each meeting focused on what types of uses should be allowed in the districts,
special regulations that should be adopted, and how to address privately owned parks and open
spaces. Staff has attempted to incorporate the concerns raised at these meetings into the current
drafts of the ordinances. The proposed POS district would reflect the goals for the Parks and
Open Space District identified in the Comprehensive Plan and could be applied to City and
County Parks in Arden Hills. Additionally, this district could be appropriate for City-owned
parcels that are either being used as public open space or that might be incorporated into the
in the future. The Conservation District would correspond with the Park
Preserve District in the Comprehensive Plan, and in its current draft could only be applied to the
Arden Hills Army Training Site. It was noted that no rezoning of any property is being proposed
at this time.
1305.04 Definitions
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that staff is proposing to add a definition
Space District. Whi
believes that the uses specifically associated with City and County-owned parks should be
distinguished from the broader category of public uses. The Zoning Code provides the following
definition for public use:
The use of any lot, parcel of land and any structure or building thereon exclusively for
public purposes by any department or branch of government, federal, state, county or
city, excluding independent school districts, without reference to the ownership of said
lot, parcel of land, building or structure.
No new or revised definitions have been proposed for the Conservation District.
1320 District Provisions
1320.04 Purpose
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that the District purpose statement is
meant to outline the specific reasons for why the City is adopting a particular set of land use
regulations. Cities are granted considerable leeway in establishing land use regulations as long as
there is a clear intent in the regulations to address public health, safety, and/or welfare concerns.
The primary purpose of the Parks and Open Space District is to create land use regulations that
support and are specific to the parks and open spaces managed by Arden Hills or Ramsey
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION October 9, 2013 3
County. Setting aside land for active and passive recreational uses addresses public health and
welfare concerns through supporting community health, promoting ecological stewardship, and
conserving environmental resources.
The Conservation District would apply only to AHATS, which is owned by the federal
government. Recognizing that portions of the site could be transferred to private entities in the
future, the purpose of creating the Conservation District is to ensure that any future development
on the property is staged and that a sustainable level of public expenditures for utilities and
services is maintained.
1320.05 Land Use Chart
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that the land use chart lists the permitted
and conditional uses in all zoning districts. If a use is not listed, it is automatically prohibited. In
the Parks and Open Space District, permitted uses would include park facilities and utility
distribution lines. Conditional uses in this district would include public uses, utility transmission,
and antenna, dish, or tower uses. In the Conservation District, utility distribution lines would be
the only permitted use. Conditional uses in the district would include public uses, utility
transmission and antenna, dish, or tower uses.
1320.06 District Requirements Chart
Community Development Intern Bachler
explained that the district requirement chart lists the
basic requirements for the development of a lot, such as minimum lot area, setbacks, and lot
coverage. No minimum lot area or lot size has been set for either the Parks and Open Space or
Conservation Districts. The lot coverage and setback requirements reflect the existing
ently zoned
either R-1 (Single Family Residential) or R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) and are
therefore already subject to the district requirements being proposed for the Parks and Open
Space District.
1320.145 Special Requirements for the Parks and Open Space District
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that some zoning districts have additional
special requirements that need to be met. These requirements may include standards on
development, design, or permitted uses. For the Parks and Open Space District, two provisions
are proposed for the special requirement section, one on conditional uses in the district and the
other on development standards. The first would direct the City Council to evaluate conditional
use applications on the compatibility of the proposed use with the natural features and
recreational amenities found on the site, along with the conditional use evaluation criteria
established in Section 1355.04 Subd. 3. The second would allow the City to require certain
development standards if in its review of development plans it concludes that potential impacts
on natural features will require mitigation.
1320.15 Special Requirements for the Conservation District
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that the special requirements section for the
Conservation District includes one provision regarding permitted uses. It states that in addition to
the permitted uses specified in the land use chart, any facility, building, use, or activity controlled
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION October 9, 2013 4
by the Minnesota National Guard or the Army Reserve on AHATS is permitted. Municipal
governments do not have the authority to regulate land use or development on federally-owned
lands. While the City may zone AHATS as they see fit, those land use regulations are not
enforceable. The purpose of including this provision is to acknowledge that these land uses will
be present on AHATS regardless of the other requirements for the Conservation District found in
the Zoning Code.
Community Development Intern Bachler
offered the following five (5) findings of fact for
consideration:
1. The City Council approved the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan on September 28,
2009.
2. The proposed Parks and Open Space District is in substantial conformance with the Parks
and Open Space District defined in the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future
Land Use Map.
3. The proposed Conservation District is in substantial conformance with the Parks Preserve
District defined in the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map.
4. The proposed Parks and Open Space District and Conservation District would work
toward implementing goals and recommended policies in the Arden Hills 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
5. The proposed Parks and Open Space District and Conservation District would work
toward bringing the City in compliance with Minnesota State law, which mandates that
local zoning codes are consistent with adopted comprehensive plans.
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that staff is recommending approval of
Ordinance Number 2013-009 in Planning Case 13-004 for amendments to 1305.04 and Section
1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space District as presented in
the October 9, 2013 planning case report.
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that staff is recommending approval of
Ordinance Number 2013-010 in Planning Case 13-004 for amendments to Section 1320 of the
Zoning Code related to the Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013 planning
case report. If the Planning Commission would like to make changes to the ordinances, those
changes can be included with a motion to approve. If the Planning Commission makes a
recommendation on this planning case, it will likely go before the City Council at their October
28, 2013 regular meeting.
Community Development Intern Bachler
reviewed the options available to the Planning
Commission on this matter:
1.Recommend Approval as Submitted.
2.Recommend Approval with Changes.
3.Recommend Denial.
4.Table.
Chair Larson
opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION October 9, 2013 5
Commissioner Holewa
requested further information on the differences between a conditional
use permit and a conditional accessory use permit.
Community Development Intern Bachler
indicated that a conditional accessory use was seen
as an accessory to the principle use on the property.
Chair Larson
opened the public hearing for Ordinance 2013-009 at 6:58 p.m.
Chair Larson
invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no comment Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Ordinance Number 2013-009 for amendments to Section 1305.04
and Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space
District as presented in the October 9, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. The
motion carried unanimously (6-0).
Chair Larson
opened the public hearing for Ordinance 2013-010 at 7:02 p.m.
Chair Larson
invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no comment Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 7:03 p.m.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Hames seconded a motion to recommend
approval of Ordinance Number 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning
Code related to the proposed Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013,
report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AttachmentD
MEMORANDUM
4.A
DATE:
October 9, 2013
PC Agenda Item
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT: Planning Case #13-004 - This application requires a PUBLIC HEARING
Request:
Zoning Code AmendmentParks and Open Space District and
Conservation District
Action Requested
Approve Ordinance Number 2013-009 for amendments to Section 1305.04 and Section 1320 of
the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space District. Approve Ordinance
Number 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed
Conservation District.
Background
In September of 2009, the City Council adopted the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The
and priorities. Several policies and goals contained in the plan address protecting and developing
open space and recreational amenities:
Chapter 6 - Land Use:
Evaluate and amend the land use regulations to achieve the highest possible development
standards, enhance the natural environment, protect public health, support a vital mix of
land uses, and promote flexible approaches to implement the Comprehensive Plan.
Provide a balanced mix of residential, park, open space, and commercial land uses.
Chapter 9 Parks and Recreation:
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 1 of 7
Develop, maintain, and encourage the use of a system of neighborhood parks and
pathways that are safe and engaging.
Protect and maintain access to lakes, marshes, and wooded areas for active and passive
recreation.
Chapter 10 Protected Resources:
Develop or enhance
lakes, wetlands, and other unique or significant natural resources.
In the Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use Map designates a total of 65 parcels covering
529 acres of land for use (Attachment C). The plan defines this land use
category as The City owns and maintains 19 of these parcels
as public parks, which cover 153 acres. Ramsey County Parks and Recreation manages an
additional 11 parcels of land totaling 338 acres. The remaining parcels are owned by several
entities, including the City, Ramsey County, the State of Minnesota, and private property
owners/homeowners associations (Attachment D). Existing uses on these lands include trails,
municipal utilities, stormwater easement ponds, and single family homes.
Park Preserve is also a land use designation applied to open space areas in the City. Park
Preserve is defined reas designated as natural or scenic areas
1,449 acres are categorized as
park preserve in the plan, all of which are located on the Arden Hills Army Training Site
(AHATS) on the eastern portion of the former TCAAP property (Attachment C).
Currently there are not districts specifically designated for parks or open space areas within the
Zoning Code (Attachment E). These facilities are integrated into residential or business-oriented
zoning districts as permitted or conditional uses. Minnesota State law mandates that local zoning
codes are consistent with adopted comprehensive plans. Establishing a Parks and Open Space
District and a Conservation District would help the City meet this requirement. Further, the new
districts will assist in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan by solidifying
land use objectives within the Zoning Code.
Summary of Proposed Ordinance Amendments and Additions
Staff has prepared a draft of Ordinance Number 2013-009 for a Parks and Open Spaces (POS)
District and Ordinance Number 2013-010 for a Conservation (CD) District. Preliminary versions
of the drafts were presented at the April 3, 2013, Planning Commission regular meeting, the
April 15, 2013, Parks, Trails, and Recreation Committee meeting, and the May 28, 2013, City
Council work session. The discussion at each meeting focused on what types of uses should be
allowed in the districts, special regulations that should be adopted, and how to address privately
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 2 of 7
owned parks and open spaces (Attachments G, H, and I). Staff has attempted to incorporate the
concerns raised at these meetings into the current drafts of the ordinances.
The proposed POS District would reflect the goals for the Parks and Open Space District
identified in the Comprehensive Plan and could be applied to City and County Parks in Arden
Hills. Additionally, this district could be appropriate for City-owned parcels that are either being
used as public open space or that might be incorporat
The Conservation District would correspond with the Park Preserve District in the
Comprehensive Plan, and in its current draft could only be applied to the Arden Hills Army
Training Site. It should be noted that no rezoning of any property is being proposed at this time.
Staff has provided a hypothetical illustration of the Zoning Map if the new districts were to be
applied (Attachment F).
If adopted, Ordinance Number 2013-009 and Ordinance Number 2013-010 would amend or add
regulations to two chapters of the Zoning Code:
A.1305.04 Definitions (new definition)
B.1320 District Provisions (new regulations)
A general discussion on the changes to each chapter is outlined in the sections below. The
ordinances are included in their entirety in Attachments A and B.
1305.04 Definitions
would be a
permitted use in the Parks and Open Space District. While there is currently a definition for
pecifically associated with City
and County-owned parks should be distinguished from the broader category of public uses. The
Zoning Code provides the following definition for public use:
The use of any lot, parcel of land and any structure or building thereon exclusively for
public purposes by any department or branch of government, federal, state, county or
city, excluding independent school districts, without reference to the ownership of said
lot, parcel of land, building or structure.
No new or revised definitions have been proposed for the Conservation District.
1320 District Provisions
1320.04 Purpose
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 3 of 7
The District purpose statement is meant to outline the specific reasons for why the City is
adopting a particular set of land use regulations. Cities are granted considerable leeway in
establishing land use regulations as long as there is a clear intent in the regulations to address
public health, safety, and/or welfare concerns.
The primary purpose of the Parks and Open Space District is to create land use regulations that
support and are specific to the parks and open spaces managed by Arden Hills or Ramsey
County. Setting aside land for active and passive recreational uses addresses public health and
welfare concerns through supporting community health, promoting ecological stewardship, and
conserving environmental resources.
The Conservation District would apply only to AHATS, which is owned by the federal
government. Recognizing that portions of the site could be transferred to private entities in the
future, the purpose of creating the Conservation District is to ensure that any future development
on the property is staged and that a sustainable level of public expenditures for utilities and
services is maintained.
1320.05 Land Use Chart
The land use chart lists the permitted and conditional uses in all zoning districts. If a use is not
listed, it is automatically prohibited. In the Parks and Open Space District, permitted uses would
include park facilities and utility distribution lines. Conditional uses in this district would include
public uses, utility transmission, and antenna, dish, or tower uses. In the Conservation District,
utility distribution lines would be the only permitted use. Conditional uses in the district would
include public uses, utility transmission and antenna, dish, or tower uses.
1320.06 District Requirements Chart
The district requirement chart lists the basic requirements for the development of a lot, such as
minimum lot area, setbacks, and lot coverage. No minimum lot area or lot size has been set for
either the Parks and Open Space or Conservation Districts. The lot coverage and setback
requirements reflect the existing requirements for the Citresidential districts. City and County
owned parks are currently zoned either R-1 (Single Family Residential) or R-2 (Single and Two
Family Residential) and are therefore already subject to the district requirements being proposed
for the Parks and Open Space District.
1320.145 Special Requirements for the Parks and Open Space District
Some zoning districts have additional special requirements that need to be met. These
requirements may include standards on development, design, or permitted uses. For the Parks
and Open Space District, two provisions are proposed for the special requirement section, one on
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 4 of 7
conditional uses in the district and the other on development standards. The first would direct the
City Council to evaluate conditional use applications on the compatibility of the proposed use
with the natural features and recreational amenities found on the site, along with the conditional
use evaluation criteria established in Section 1355.04 Subd. 3. The second would allow the City
to require certain development standards if in its review of development plans it concludes that
potential impacts on natural features will require mitigation.
1320.15 Special Requirements for the Conservation District
The special requirements section for the Conservation District includes one provision regarding
permitted uses. It states that in addition to the permitted uses specified in the land use chart, any
facility, building, use, or activity controlled by the Minnesota National Guard or the Army
Reserve on AHATS is permitted. Municipal governments do not have the authority to regulate
land use or development on federally-owned lands. While the City may zone AHATS as they see
fit, those land use regulations are not enforceable. The purpose of including this provision is to
acknowledge that these land uses will be present on AHATS regardless of the other requirements
for the Conservation District found in the Zoning Code.
Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following five (5) findings of fact for consideration:
1.The City Council approved the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan on September 28,
2009.
2.The proposed Parks and Open Space District is in substantial conformance with the Parks
and Open Space District defined in the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future
Land Use Map.
3.The proposed Conservation District is in substantial conformance with the Parks Preserve
District defined in the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map.
4.The proposed Parks and Open Space District and Conservation District would work
toward implementing goals and recommended policies in the Arden Hills 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
5.The proposed Parks and Open Space District and Conservation District would work
toward bringing the City in compliance with Minnesota State law, which mandates that
local zoning codes are consistent with adopted comprehensive plans.
Notice
Notice on this planning case was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 5 of 7
Public Comments
The City has not received any public comments regarding this planning case.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of Ordinance Number 2013-009 and Ordinance Number 2013-010.
If the Planning Commission would like to make changes to the ordinance, those changes can be
included with a motion to approve.
Options & Proposed Motion Language
1.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Ordinance Number
2013-009 for amendments to Section 1305.04 and Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related
to the proposed Parks and Open Space District, and motion to recommend approval of
Ordinance Number 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to
the proposed Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013, planning case report.
2.Recommend Approval with Changes: Motion to recommend approval of Ordinance Number
2013-009 for amendments to Section 1305.04 and Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related
to the proposed Parks and Open Space District, and motion to recommend approval of
Ordinance Number 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to
the proposed Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013, planning case report
with the following changes.
3.Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Ordinance Number 2013-009 for
amendments to Section 1305.04 and Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed
Parks and Open Space District, and motion to recommend denial of Ordinance Number
2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed
Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013, planning case report: findings to
deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be
mitigated.
4.Table: Motion to table Ordinance Number 2013-009 for amendments to Section 1305.04 and
Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space District, and
motion to table Ordinance Number 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning
Code related to the proposed Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013,
planning case report: a specific reason and information request should be included with a
motion to table.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 6 of 7
Attachments
A.Ordinance Number 13-009 (Proposed Sections 1305.04 Subd. 140, 1320.04 Subd.18,
1320.06, 1320.07, and 1320.145)
B.Ordinance Number 13-010 (Proposed Sections 1320.04 Subd. 19, 1320.06, 1320.07, and
1320.15)
C.Arden Hills 2030 Future Land Use Map
D.Arden Hills 2030 Future Land Use Map, Parks and Open Space District Parcel
Ownership and Use Map
E.City of Arden Hills Official Zoning Map
F.Arden Hills Zoning Map including proposed Parks and Open Space District and
Conservation District
G.Planning Commission Minutes, April 3, 2013
H.Parks, Trails, and Recreation Committee Minutes, April 15, 2013
I.City Council Work Session Minutes, May 28, 2013
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-004 - Zoning Code Amendment - Parks and Open Space and Park
Preserve District (Pending)
Page 7 of 7
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT: Planning Case #13-014
Property Owner:
Lexington Station, LLC and Roberts Commercial Properties
Property Location:
3833 Lexington Avenue North
Subject:
First Amendment to the Lexington Station Phase I Final Plan and Master
PUD Agreement
Requested Action
Motion to approve the First Amendment to the Lexington Station Phase I Final Plan and Master
Planned Unit Development Agreement based on the September 30, 2013, City Council approval
of Planning Case 13-014.
Background
On September 30, 2013, the City Council approved Planning Case 13-014 for a PUD
Amendment for a sign plan for Phase I of the Lexington Station redevelopment project at 3833
Lexington Avenue. The Council approved amendments to the proposal that modified the amount
of wall signage and the height and sign area of the Lexington Avenue monument sign. The
following is a summary of the amendments:
The retail bay at the northern end of the building was allowed a total of 140 square feet of
wall signage. The permitted signage was divided between 40 square feet on the west
façade, 60 square feet on the north façade, and 40 square feet on the east façade.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-014 - Lexington Station PUD Amendment - Phase 1 Sign Plan\CC
Packet_(11-25-13)_13-014
Page 1 of 2
The retail bay at the southern end of the building was allowed a total of 140 square feet of
wall signage. The permitted signage was divided between 40 square feet on the west
façade, 60 square feet on the south façade, and 40 square feet on the east façade.
Each of the eight central retail bays were allowed 80 square feet of wall signage to be
divided between 40 square feet on the west façade and 40 square feet on the east façade.
The permitted height of the monument sign on Lexington Avenue was reduced to 20 feet
and the allowed sign copy area was set at 120 square feet.
The applicant was required to revise the sign plan and remove the proposed non-branded
window banner coatings prior to approval of the PUD Amendment Agreement.
The applicant has submitted a revised sign plan for Phase I that addresses the conditions of
approval (Attachment B).
The City Attorney has prepared an amendment to the Phase I Final Plan and Master PUD
Agreement (Attachment A). The document has been reviewed and signed by Lexington Station,
LLC and Roberts Commercial Properties.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the First Amendment to the Lexington Station Phase I Final Plan
and Master Planned Unit Development Agreement based on the September 30, 2013, City
Council approval of Planning Case 13-014.
Requested Action
Motion to approve the First Amendment to the Lexington Station Phase I Final Plan and Master
Planned Unit Development Agreement based on the September 30, 2013, City Council approval
of Planning Case 13-014.
Attachments
A.First Amendment to the Lexington Station Phase I Final Plan and Master PUD
Agreement Development Agreement
B.Revised Phase I Sign Plan
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-014 - Lexington Station PUD Amendment - Phase 1 Sign Plan\CC
Packet_(11-25-13)_13-014
Page 2 of 2
AttachmentA
(reserved for recording information)
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
PHASE I FINAL PLAN AND
MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
LEXINGTONSTATION
(Planning Case #13-014)
FIRST AMENDMENT PHASE I FINAL PLAN AND MASTER PLANNED UNIT
TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
First Amendmentis dated effective November _____, 2013, and
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
is entered into by and between the
LEXINGTON STATION, LLC
and
ROBERTS COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC
1.RECITALS.
th
A.On the 29 day of July, 2013, the City and Developer entered into a Development Contract and
Master Planned Unit Development Agreement for the redevelopment plan to be known as
LEXINGTON STATION; for the property at 3771 and 3833 Lexington Avenue North, and 1120 Red Fox
Road, situated in the City of Arden Hills, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, and legally described as
:
Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Roberts Addition to Arden Hills
1.Roberts is the fee owner of Lot 1 and 3, Block 1.
2.Lexington Station is the fee owner of Lot 2, Block 1.
B.The of Master Planned Unit Development Plan and
Phase I Final Plan specified that the Site shall be developed in accordance with the Application and
Supporting Materials, as amended by the terms and conditions accompanying Council approval. A Sign
Plan was not submitted along with the Phase I Final Plan. The Agreement specifies that any significant
changes to the Plans, as reasonably determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by
the Planning Commission and City Council.
th
C. On the 5 day of August, 2013, the Developer submitted an application requesting the approval
of a PUD Amendment to include a Sign Plan for Phase I of the Lexington Station redevelopment plan.
The Site shall be improved and maintained consistent with the Phase I Sign Plan, which is illustrated and
described on the Building Elevations Phase One document, dated 7/19/2013, as revised on 11/08/2013.
2. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION.
On the
th
4 day of September, 2013, the City Planning Commission reviewed the application at a public hearing
comments of the Developer, and other public comments; and subject to conditions, recommended
approval of the PUD Amendment for the Phase I Sign Plan.
th
3. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW.
On the 30 day of September, 2013, the City Council
nd requests of
the Developer; and the recommendations of the City Planning Commission; and has approved the PUD
Amendment for the Phase I Sign Plan; all subject to the terms and conditions contained herein.
4. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
A.The signage plan shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by
the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the
City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
B.The retail bay at the northern end of the Phase I building shall be permitted no more than
140 square feet of wall signage. The total wall signage shall be divided between 40 square
feet on the west façade, 60 square feet on the north façade, and 40 square feet on the east
façade.
C.The retail bay at the southern end of the Phase I building shall be permitted no more than
140 square feet of wall signage. The total wall signage shall be divided between 40 square
feet on the west façade, 60 square feet on the south façade, and 40 square feet on the east
façade.
D.Each of the eight central retail bays in the Phase I building shall be permitted no more than
80 square feet of wall signage. The total wall signage shall be divided between 40 square
feet on the west façade and 40 square feet on the east façade.
E.In the event that a tenant occupies multiple retail bays in the Phase I building, the tenant
shall be allowed up to 30 square feet of wall signage per additional bay occupied. This
amount shall be divided between up to 15 square feet of signage on the west façade and up
to 15 square feet of signage on the east façade.
F.Wall signs shall be comprised of channel sign letters and shall not extend more than 12
inches from the wall they are attached to. Wall signs shall be consistent in appearance and
the spacing between signs shall be balanced.
G.Blade signs shall not extend beyond the front edge of the canopies on the west façade and
shall have an area of no more than four (4) square feet. Blade signs shall have a minimum
vertical clearance of eight (8) feet from the sidewalk to the bottom of the sign.
H.The sign copy area on the blade signs shall not be included when calculating the permitted
area for wall signage per tenant.
I.The monument sign on Lexington Avenue shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height and
shall have a sign copy area of no more than 120 square feet. The monument sign shall be
setback a minimum of five (5) feet from the property line.
J.Sign permits shall be applied for prior to the installation of any signage on the property.
5. RECORDING OF DOCUMENT.
This First Amendment to the Agreement may be
recorded against all lots, blocks, and outlots in the PUD site and shall be recorded in the office of the
Ramsey County Recorder or Registrar of Titles with proof thereof shown to the City prior to the issuance
of any permits thereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF
this First Amendment was executed by the parties the day and year
first above written.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.
Signatures on next page.]
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
BY: _____________________________________
David Grant, Mayor
(SEAL)
BY: _____________________________________
Pat Klaers, City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of November, 2013, by
David GrantPat KlaersCity of Arden
and by , respectively the Mayor and City Administrator of the
Hills
, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority
granted by its City Council.
_______________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
LEXINGTON STATION, LLC
A Minnesota Limited Liability Company
By: ______________________________________
Nicholas S. Roberts, Chief Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of November, 2013, by
Nicholas S. Roberts,Lexington Station, LLC
the Chief Manager of , a Minnesota limited liability
company, on behalf of the limited liability company.
__________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
ROBERTS COMMERICAL PROPERTIES, LLC
A Minnesota Limited Liability Company
By: ______________________________________
Nicholas S. Roberts, Chief Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of November, 2013, by
Nicholas S. Roberts,Roberts Commercial Properties, LLC
the Chief Manager of , a Minnesota limited
liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company.
__________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
C,K
AMPBELL NUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, MN 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
JJJ
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor & City Council
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Resolution Authorizing the Application for Recycling SCORE Grant Funds
from Ramsey County
Requested Council Action
Motion to Approve Resolution 2013-040:Authorizing the Application for Recycling SCORE
Grant Funds for 2014in the Amount of $19,611.
Background
For 2014,the City of Arden Hills is eligible to applyfor $19,611in grant money from Ramsey
County’s recycling SCORE grant program. The grant can be used to offset the cost of the City’s
recycling program, including administration, equipment, and collection costs. In the past, the
City has primarilyused the grant moneyto offset collection costsand the annual spring and fall
community Cleanup Day costs. The County requires a resolution from the City Council to
authorize the application for the SCORE grant. The only requirement of the grant is that the
money onlybeused for the City’s recycling program.
The budget for the City’s recycling program in 2013was $146,570.The Cityreceived $19,694
in SCORE grant money in 2013, which offset approximately 13.5%of the base cost of the
residential recycling program.Revenue share from Eureka Recycling also plays a role in
reducing the base cost of the recycling program.Recycling fees, which are assessed to each
participating residential property, cover the remaining portion of the recycling budget.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Recycling & Garbage\2014\SCORE Grant
Page 1of 2
CONSENT ITEM
Theproposed recycling budget for 2014is $149,583. The maximum SCORE Grant funds would
be in the amount of $19,611. This wouldaccount for approximately 13%ofthe total budget.
The 2014budgetalso includes $10,000 in expected revenuesharing for 2014.In the 2013
budget $20,000 was budgetedfor revenue sharing and less than $10,000 is expected to be
collected due to declining recycling commodity prices.
SCORE originally stood for the Governor’s “Select Committee on Recycling and the
Environment.” The grant and reporting programthatis used to collect recycling information is
now generally referred to as the SCORE program or SCORE report. For more information,
please visithttp://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/data/score/recycling-in-minnesota-the-score-
report.html.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approving Resolution 2013-040authorizing the application for Recycling
SCORE Grant Funds for 2014in the amount of $19,611.
Requested Council Action
Motion to Approve Resolution 2013-040:Authorizing the Application for Recycling SCORE
Grant Funds for 2014in the Amount of $19,611.00.
Attachment
A.Resolution 2013-040
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Recycling & Garbage\2014\SCORE Grant
Page 2of 2
Attachment A
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-040
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR
RECYCLING SCORE GRANTFUNDS FOR 2014
WHEREAS,
the City of Arden Hills is eligible to apply for $19,611.00in SCORE
recycling grant funds; and
WHEREAS
,such funds would assist in continuing and improving the City’s recycling
program for the year 2014.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of Arden
Hills, Minnesota:
That the City Administrator be authorized to apply for such grant funds for the
year 2014.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN
th
HILLS THIS 25DAYOF NOVEMBER, 2013.
______________________________
ATTEST:DAVID GRANT, MAYOR
__________________________________________
AMY DIETL, CITY CLERK
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:
2014Curbside Recycling Fee
Background
The Arden Hills recycling program includes the weekly curbside recycling program and
the annual (spring and fall) community cleanup events. The curbside recycling services
are provided by Eureka Recycling. The community cleanup events are operated in
conjunction with the City of Shoreview. The recycling budget is an enterprise fund that
receives revenues from the annual household fee that is applied to the property taxes and
from the SCORE grant provided by Ramsey County. The majorityof the expenses are
forthe services provided by Eureka. Since there are no other dedicated funding sources,
the revenue must be balanced with the expenses.
For 2014, theper household fee charged by Eureka Recycling for curbside recycling
services is expected to increase by 3percent based on the anticipated change in the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve for the Upper
Midwest.
In part because of the increase in the base fee for curbside recycling per household, the
annual fee to single family households in the City is proposed to increase from $42.60 to
$46.00.The majority ofthe fee increase is related to revenue sharefrom Eureka, which
has decreasedsignificantly over the past year. In 2013, the budget reflected an amount of
$20,000that would be collected from the revenue share and as of November of this year
it is estimated that less than 50% of this amount will actually be collected.The proposed
2014 budget reflects this decrease in revenueand budgets$10,000 for revenue share from
Eureka.
Staff is not proposing an increase to theannual feefor each housing unit that is not part
of the curbside recycling program, which includes Cottage Villas, Hunter’s Park Condos,
Parkshore Apartments, Arden Manor, and E Street Flats. Thefee for non-curbside
residential units is proposed to stay at $2.00per unit.Although these properties contract
separately for regular recycling services, they still have access to the community cleanup
event. This fee coverstheir portionof the community cleanup event.
The proposed recycling fee of $46.00for the households that receive curbside service
includes the cost of the community cleanup events.
The City Council has authorized staff to collaborate with the City of Shoreview on a pilot
program to test the effects of a free Cleanup Day on participation and costs. If the pilot
program is successful and the City chooses to continue offering the free Cleanup Day
events, staff will review the costs and may suggest adjustments to both the curbside and
non-curbside recycling fees for 2015.
Recommendation
Motion to Approve Resolution2013-041setting the 2014Curbside Recycling Fee
Attachment
A.Resolution 2013-041
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25,2013
P:\Planning\Recycling & Garbage\2014\Recycling Fees\CC Memo_2014 Recycling Fee Resolution_(11-25-13).doc
Page 2of 2
Attachment A
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-041
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SERVICE FEE CHARGE FOR
2014RESIDENTIAL CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM
WHEREAS,
the City of Arden Hills has an established curbside recyclingprogram in
place for Arden Hills residents; and
WHEREAS
, the City will continue the program into the year 2014, and
WHEREA
S, the City Council of Arden Hills has entered into a Joint Powers Agreement
(JPA) with Ramsey County to assess residential property owners fees to support the recycling
program; and
WHEREAS
, the City of Arden Hills wishes to continue this funding mechanism.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills,
Minnesota:
That the funding rate for residential recycling for the year 2014is hereby established at
$46.00per residential unit that is offered curbside recycling services, and $2.00per
residential unit that is not offered curbside recycling services.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OFTHECITY OF ARDEN HILLS
th
THIS 25DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013.
______________________________
ATTEST:DAVID GRANT, MAYOR
__________________________________________
AMY DIETL, CITY CLERK
Certification:
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF RAMSEY)
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS)
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2013-041is a true and correct copy presented to and adopted
by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills at a meeting thereof held in the City of Arden
th
Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota, on the 25day of November, 2013.
______________________________
AMY DIETL, CITY CLERK
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:November 25, 2013
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation Manager
SUBJECT:2014 Tree Removal Contract
Requested Action
Motion to award the 2014 Tree Removal Services to Precision Landscape and Tree at the
attached rate schedule.
Background/Discussion
This item was tabled from the November 12, 2013 Council Meeting. The original memo from
that meeting is attached (Attachment A). The City Council asked staff to contact Precision
Landscape and Tree and negotiate a private EAB treatment price. Staff contacted Precision
Landscaping and was able to negotiate a lower treatment price for Arden Hills’ residents in 2014.
Precision is committedto workingwith the City on EABmanagement options.They are
including in the proposed 2014 contract, a $6.00-$8.00 per DBH” price for treatment of public
trees and have also agreed to offer a $7.00-$9.00 per DBH” price for treatment of private trees
for Arden Hills’residents. This will eliminate the need for administration on the City’s partfor
private trees. The City will refer all residents to Precision for EAB treatment at the special rate.
Staff recommends extending the tree removal service agreement with Precision Landscape and
Tree through 2014. The proposed 2014tree contract and rate schedule (Attachment B) are
included for Council review.
Attachments
Attachment A: Memo from 11/12/2013 Council Meeting
Attachment B: Proposed 2014 Tree Contract and Rate Schedule
11
Page of
Attachment A
MEMORANDUM
DATE:November 12, 2013
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation Manager
SUBJECT:2014 Tree Removal Contract
Requested Action
Motion to award the 2014 Tree Removal Services to Precision Landscape and Tree at the
attached rate schedule.
Background/Discussion
In January of 2010, quotes were solicited for the City tree removal services. Four companies
submitted quotes. Precision Landscape and Tree, located in Little Canada submitted the lowest
overall quote. Within the 2010 agreement, it stated if the City is satisfied with the performance
of the contractor, the agreement maybe extended to future calendar years with no more than a3
percent increase in the proposed costs each year.Precision agreed to extend the contract with no
increase for 2011. In 2012 and 2013, the City approved an extension of the contract with a three
percent increase. Precision is interested in extending the contract through 2014 with a 3 percent
increase. Insurance, fuel, maintenance costs and wages have all gone up since the contract was
originally bid. The City continues to be very satisfied with the service we receive from Precision
Landscape and Tree. Included in the contract price is providing a certified arborist to meet on
site for all potential tree services. This was something lacking in previous years with other tree
vendors who were awarded the City contract. This will be crucial moving forward now that
Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) has been discovered nearby. Precision Landscaping is committedto
workingwith the City on EABmanagement options.The municipality EAB trunk injection
pricing is included in the proposed 2014 contract, in case Council decides in the future to either
treat public trees or work with residents on private trees.Staff recommends extending the
agreement through 2014. The proposed 2014tree contract (Attachment A) and proposed 2014
rate schedule (Attachment B) are included for Council review.
12
Page of
Budget
The 2014 Tree Removal Budget is listed at $32,000.
Attachments
Attachment A: Proposed 2014 Tree Contract
Attachment B: Proposed 2014 Rate Schedule
22
Page of
TREE REMOVAL SERVICESAGREEMENT
1.In accordance with Arden Hills City Code Chapter 7(Section 710.12),
homeowners are given an opportunity to remove diseased trees from their
property.Trees remaining can be assigned to the contractor for removal.
Thereafter, the contractor agrees to remove all trees on a given list within 20 days
after notification.All accessible stumps must be removed and properly backfilled
within 30 days of the notification date.
2.The contractor could be called upon at short notice to remove non-diseased storm
-damaged, "nuisance" or hazardous trees at the agreementprice from both public
and private property.
3.The City of Arden Hillsexpects its contractors to conduct themselves with respect
and proper behavior regarding all interactions with residents, other contractors
and City employees.
4.The successful Contractor may be required to perform emergency work, with
twenty four hour, seven day weekavailability. Emergency telephone number(s)
will be required. A telephone answering service willnot be acceptable. Upon
Notification, the Contractor shall report to the designated site within two hours.
5.It is understood that all prices listed onthe proposal form should be firm for the
January 1, 2014thru December 31, 2014
period of .If the City is satisfied with
the performance of the contractor, the agreement maybe extended to future
calendar years with no more than a 3% increase in the proposed costs each year.
6.Acceptance of this agreementmust be accompanied by a certificate of insurance
evidencing that the Contractor's equipment and employees are covered by liability
and property damage insurance and should be kept current throughout the
duration of the agreement. If insurance is canceled or expired and not renewed
during the agreement period, the contractor must notify the City of Arden Hills.
7.By signing this agreement, the Contractorcertifiesto the City that they, their
operators and equipment are in complete compliance with all applicable state and
All work crews assigned to work
federal D.O.T. requirements and regulations.
in the City are required tohave at a minimum one ISA Certified Arborist on
the crew
. It is preferred that the successful contractor also be Accredited by the
Tree Care Industry Association.
16
Page of
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
1.Disposal of Trees
All logs and branches shall be removed from the property on which they are cut
and disposed of by the Contractor in accordance with the rules and regulations of
the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. Logs or brush stored safely on site
must be removed the following day. No material shall ever be stored in the street
or at a location that might impair safety of driving or walking.
2.Chipping
a.City streets may be used for the Contractor's chipping operation.
The Contractor will be required to clean-up the street and
boulevard after the chipping operation.
b.Chips may be deposited upon a pre-selected site in the City
providing the Contractor has permission from the City specifying
the dumping site and the amount allowed.
3.Stump Removal
a.All stumps and roots will be removed to a distance of not less than
twelve inches (12") below established grade between the curb and
sidewalk. If no sidewalk exists, grade is considered below the
curb, or as determined by the Public WorksDirector.
b.The Contractor will remove all chips and other debris caused by
the stump removal operation.
c.The Contractor will furnish and spread soil of a quality equal to or
better than soil of abutting areas, over the areas of the removed
stump and all other areas disturbed by theiroperation, to a level
equal to or greater than the adjacent area. No brush, chips, stumps,
etc., shall be used as filler in such holes. No holes are to be left
open overnight.
d.The Contractor will spread grass seed onall disturbed soil areas.
Thegrass seed will be provided by the tree Contractor.
e.If, in the event the Public WorksDepartment deems it impractical
and/or unnecessary to remove the stump, it may direct the
Contractor to debark the stump to a point two inches (2") above
ground level.
26
Page of
4.Tree Measurement
Trees will be measured at 4 feet off ground level.Those trees forking below the 4
foot mark will be measured directly below the union and can be considered one
tree.
5.Delay Penalty
If the removal work is not completed within the given deadline of 20 days; 30
days for stumps, (allowing for excusable delays), a sum of $25.00 per day per list
may be deducted from the payment.
6.Protection and Restoration of Property
The Contractor shall not enter upon private property without having previously
obtained permission from the Owner. The Contractor shall be responsible for the
preservation of, and shall use every precaution to prevent damage to all trees,
shrubbery, plants, lawns, fences, culverts, bridges, driveways, sidewalks, etc.; all
water, sewer, gas lines; all conduits; all overhead pole lines or appurtenance
thereof; and all other public or private property along or adjacent to the work. Any
adjacent shrubs, trees or other growth receiving or sustaining breakage, injury or
other damage during the removal project shall be given remedial or corrective
treatment, and cleanup.
The Contractor shall notify the proper representative of any public utility
forty-eight (48) hours
corporation and company or individual, not less than in
advance of any work which might damage or interfere with the operation of their
Gopher State One Call
utilitiesor property along or adjacent to the workzone.
telephone number 1-800-252-1166.
The Contractor shall be responsible for all damages or injury to property of any
character resulting from any act, omission, neglect, or misconduct in the manner or
method of executing the work, or due to non-execution of the work, or at any time
due to defective work or materials.
The Contractor shall restore, or have restored at his/her own cost and expense, such
property to a condition similar or equal to that existing before such damage or
injury was done, by repairing, rebuilding, or otherwise restoring as may be
directed, or shall make good such damage, or injury in a manner acceptable to the
Owner and the City.
The City shall be indemnified and held harmless from any suit, or expense claim
brought for or on account of any damage, maintenance, removal and/or
replacement or relocation of mains, conduits, pipes, poles, wires, cables or such
other structures of private utility firms, or corporation, whether underground or
overhead, that may be caused or required by the Contractor during the time the
work is in progress.
36
Page of
CITY OF ARDEN HILLSTREE REMOVAL
PRICINGFORM 2014
I.Tree Removal (Accessible Trees)
$14.20
Cost per diameter* inch:
$22.95
Cost per diameter inch over 35”:
*Trees over 40”diameter or with unusual removal circumstances (as determined
by forester),to be specially quoted.
Tree and Stump Removal (Accessible Trees)
$16.39
Cost per diameter* inch:
$25.13
Cost per diameter inch over 35”:
*Trees over 40” diameter or with unusual removal circumstances (as determined
by forester),to be speciallyquoted.
Note: Some larger trees in this category may warrant cost adjustment due to excessive
stump flare removal.
II.Tree Removal (No Driving Access to Trees)
$30.60_
Cost per diameter* inch:
$41.52
Cost per diameter inch over 28”:
*Trees over 40” diameter or with unusual removal circumstances (as determined
by City Forester), to be speciallyquoted.
Tree and Stump Removal (No Driving Access to Trees)
$33.88
Cost per diameter* inch:
$45.90
Cost per diameter inch over 28”:
*Trees over 40” diameter or with unusual removal circumstances (as determined
by City Forester), to be speciallyquoted.
Note:Some trees in this category may have extreme access or difficulty factors
(structures, wires, water) that might warrant adjustment of removal cost).
46
Page of
$3.83
III.Excess stump removalper diameter inch
$21.86
Woodpile removalper cubic yard
$273.19
Brush removalper 20 yard load
$196.69
Tree Pruningper hour
*Diameter as measured at 4' off ground level.
IV.Chemical Treatment of Ash Trees (Trunk Injections)
(TreeAge from Arbor Jet)
$6.00
Public Trees (12-24”) per diameter inch
$8.00
Public Trees ( > than 24”)per diameter inch
Private Trees (exclusively for Arden Hills’ residents)
$7.00
Private Trees (12-24”)per diameter inch
$9.00
Private Trees ( > than 24”)per diameter inch
PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE
Signed________________________________________Date:___________________
Contact Name:___________________________________________________________
Address:________________________________________________________________
Office Phone:____________________________________________
Cell Phone:______________________________________________
Fax:____________________________________________________
Email:__________________________________________________
56
Page of
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
Signed_________________________________________ Date:____________________
Contact Name:___________________________________________________________
Address:________________________________________________________________
Office Phone:_________________________________________
Cell Phone:___________________________________________
Fax:_________________________________________________
Email:_______________________________________________
66
Page of
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Mayor and Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Amy Dietl, City Clerk
SUBJECT:
Acknowledgment for Catholic United Financial to Hold a Raffle
Background:
The City has received a request from Catholic United Financial for authorization to hold a raffle
to benefit Catholic education in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota. According to
nowledgment from the
City they are located in. This does not require a permit or license from the City as it is not a
premise permit.
As part of the requirement of LG220 Application for Exempt Permit, the City must acknowledge
the application with no waiting period, with a 30 day waiting period, or deny the application. The
date of the drawing for this raffle is March 13, 2014.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff does not see any reason to impose a 30 day waiting period on this application. Staff
recommends the City Council approve a motion acknowledging the application of Catholic
United Financial for an Exempt Permit to conduct a raffle with a drawing date of March 13,
2014, with no waiting period.
Attachment A
CONSENT ITEM
MEMORANDUM
DATE:November 25, 2013
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:PC#12-019
1201 County Road E/E Street Flats
Certificate of Completion
Budgeted Amount:Actual Amount:Funding Sources:
NANANA
Requested Action
Approve the Certificate of Completion for E Street Flats located at 1201 County Road E.
Discussion
The Development Agreement and Planned Unit Development Agreement for 1201 County Road
Erequires the City to issue a Certificate of Completion upon the completion of certain
improvements listed in the Agreement:
Private Sanitary Sewer Connections
Private Water Connections
Private StormSewer Connections
Private Drive Aisles and Parking Lots
Concrete Curb and Gutter
Site Grading, Ponding and Erosion Control
Landscaping
Underground Utilities
The improvements listed above have been completed to the City’s satisfaction. The City issued a
Certificate of Occupancy for E Street Flats on October 16, 2013.
The Certificate of Completion makes an exception for covenants related to the shared access on
the western edge of the property. The Certificate of Completion applies only to improvements
listed aboveand does not release the developer from compliance with on-goingterms and
12
Page of
conditions of the Agreement such as participation in the Crime-Free Multi-Family Housing
Program, compliance with Chapter 14 of the City Code regarding property maintenance, and
approval of temporary construction easements.
The City Attorney has reviewed the Certificate of Completion and recommends its approval.
Recommendation
Approve the Certificate of Completion for 1201 County Road E.
Attachment
Certificate of Completion
22
Page of
Attachment A
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
WHEREAS, the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, a municipal corporation (the City ) and TAT
Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company and 1201 County Road E, LLC, a Minnesota limited
liability company (collectively the Developer ), are parties to that certain Redevelopment Contract and
Planned Unit Development Contract ( Redevelopment Agreement ) cothe following described
land in County of Ramsey and State of Minnesota, to-wit:
All that part of the South ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼, Section 27
Township 30, Range 23, lying between the Northerly right of way
No. 10, and the Southerly right of way limits of the Minneapolis
Marie Railroads, and the Westerly right of way limits of Lexington Avenue an
of the West 250 feet of said Southeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of S
Range 23, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in
Recorder, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, said Redevelopment Agreement contained certain covenants and restrictions, the
breach of which by Developer, its successors and assigns, would result in rights and claims by the City, its
successors and assigns, said covenants and restrictions being set forth in said Redevelopment Agreement;
and
WHEREAS, said Developer has performed said covenants and conditions insofar as it is abl
manner deemed sufficient by the City to permit the execution and recording of this certification;
NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that construction of the Improvements specifi
and made by the Developer in Paragraph 7 of the Agreement have been completed and the above
covenants and conditions in said Redevelopment Agreement have been performed by the Developer
therein and that the provisions regarding entry and claim of breach by the Citytherein is hereby released
absolutely and forever, and the County of Ramsey and State of Mirized to accept
for recording and to record this instrument, and the filing of t
determination of the satisfactory termination of the covenants aRedevelopment
Agreement (with the exception of covenants related to shared access on the Western edge of said property
and other conditions of approval in Paragraph 6 of the Agreement).
Dated: ______________, 2013
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
BY: ________________________________________
David Grant, Mayor
BY: ________________________________________
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______
________________, 2013, by David Grant and by Patrick Klaers, to me personally known and who by me
duly sworn did say that they are the Mayor and City Administrator, respectively, of the City of Arden
Hills, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument on behalf of said
City.
_______________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
This instrument was drafted by:
DRAFTED BY:
,K
C
AMPBELLNUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, MN 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
JJJ
NEW BUSINESS –8A
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-018
Applicant:
Gradient Financial
Property Location:
4105 Lexington Ave N
Request:
Site Plan Review –Sign Standard Adjustment
Requested Action
Motion to Approve Planning Case #13-018for a Site Plan Review and Sign Standard
Adjustment at 4105 Lexington Avenue North,based on the findings of fact and the submitted
plans as amended by the four (4)conditions in the November 25, 2013, Report to the City
Council.
Overview of Request
This request would allow for a deviation from the Sign Code to increasethe amount of wall
signage on theGradient Financial Building from sixty (60) square feet to one hundred and
twenty-six (126)square feet.
Background
Gradient Financial has expressed concerns about the visibility of their corporateheadquarters
locatedat the corner ofLexington Avenue and County Road F. The applicant has stated that the
sixty (60)square feet of wall signagethat is allowed by the Code for Sign District 6 is not
proportionately adequate for a structure of thissize and corner lot location along two main
roadways.By increasing the amount of wall signage the applicant is hoping to improve the
overall appearance of the building while increasing their visibilityto the traveling public.
In order toaddress this concern,Gradient Financial is proposing to increase the amount of
permitted wall signage by sixty-six (66)square feet for a total of one hundred and twenty-six
(126)square feet. At this time the applicant is proposing one (1) wall sign that would measure
approximatelytwenty-one (21) feet by six (6) feet, an area of one hundred and twenty-six (126)
square feet. The proposedsign would bepositioned on the northeast side of the building,being
primarily visiblebytraffic traveling north on Lexington Avenue.
The proposed non-illuminated wall sign would be designed with reverse channel letters
constructed with aluminumand painted dark bronze. Fourteen (14) individual letters,each being
two (2) feet in height,forming the name “Gradient Center” would be installed and individually
fastened to the exterior of the building. In addition to the letteringstated above, asign
measuring six (6) feet wide by six (6) feet in height would createGradient’s logoandwould be
installed adjacent to the text for “GradientCenter”.
Plan Evaluation
1.Site Plan Review –Section 1260: Sign Standard Adjustment
Section 1260.01 of the Sign Code permits adjustments to sign height, number, type, lighting,
area, and/or location through the site plan review process if criteria number 1 or2 is met and the
required criteria number 3 is met.In this case, criteria 1 and3 are most applicable. The criteria
are as follows:
1.There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be
reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site; or,
2.The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will
enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of the
site; and
3.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose
of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use.
Site conditions onthe property justify a sign adjustment to allow the proposedsign to be
reasonably visible from the roadways adjacent to the site. The building is approximately 210
feet from Lexington Avenue and approximately 185 feet from CountyRoad F.The proposed
sign would be located on the northeast corner of the building making it primarily visible from
northbound traffic alongLexington Avenue.Given the distance the buildingis from its
respective right-of-ways,the proposed sign adjustment is practicableso that the building and its
use is visible from the adjacent roadways.
The proposed design and materials used to construct the sign are of exceptional quality and are
comparableto other signs that been approved through the Sign Standard Adjustmentprocess.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-018 -Gradient Financial -Signage Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-018
25
Page of
The proposed non-illuminated wall sign would be designed with individual reverse channel
letters constructed with aluminum and painted dark bronze.The use of high quality materials for
the proposed sign will enhancethe appearance ofthe building.
Allowing signage flexibility at this property will not result in any inconsistencies with the
purpose or intent of the Zoning or Sign Code. Sign Standard Adjustments are allowed by a Site
Plan Review and Council approval for properties located within the I-1 Limited Industrial
Districts.
2. Existing Signage
Wall Signage
At this time the structure has no existing wall signage on its façade.The previous Arden Woods
sign was removed whenthe façade on the building was being updatedearlier this year.The
applicant indicated that the lettering on the original sign that was removed from the building was
similar to the proposed signage in terms of the height of each letter.
Freestanding Signage
There is one (1) existing freestanding signon the property. A multi-tenant freestanding sign that
iseight (8)feet four (4) inches in height by ten (10) feetwide with an overall height of twelve
(12) feet ten (10) inches islocated at the corner of Lexington Avenue and County Road F.
Auxiliary Signage
There is one (1) freestanding entrance sign located along County Road F that is two (2) feet in
height by three (3) feetwidewith total height of three (3) feet seven (7) inches.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission reviewed thisapplication at their November 6, 2013, meeting and
have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration:
1.The property is located in theI-1Limited Industrial District.
2.The property is located in Sign District 6.
3.In Sign District 6,wall signage up to sixty (60) square feet and freestandingsignage up to
forty-five (45) square feet is permitted.
4.Gradient Financial is proposing one (1) wall sign on the northeast corner of the building.
5.The proposed signs would measure approximately twenty-one (21)feet by six (6) feet, an
area of 126 square feet.
6.The proposed sign would display the Gradient logo and the text for Gradient Centerwith
non-illuminated reverse channel letters.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-018 -Gradient Financial -Signage Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-018
35
Page of
7.The proposed sign is made from high quality materials that will accent the existing
building façade.
8.Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviation from the Sign Code through the Site
Plan Review process.
9.The proposed sign at 126 square feet is proportionate to the size of the principlestructure.
10.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose I-1
Limited Industrial District.
11.Increasing the amount of wall signage would not have a negative impact on adjacent
properties or the City as a whole.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #13-018 and unanimously recommends
approval of the Site Plan Review and Sign Standard Adjustment at 4105 Lexington Avenue
North,based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as presented in the November 25,
2013, Report to the City Council, as amended by the following four (4)conditions:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission andCity
Council.
2.That one (1) wall sign up to 126 square feet in size shall be permitted.No additional wall
signage shall be allowed.
3.That the wall sign shall be comprised of individual cut letters and shall not extend more
than twelve (12) inches from the wall they are attached to.
4.That the applicant shall apply for a sign permit prior to the installation of the sign.
Requested Action
Motion to Approve Planning Case #13-018for a Site Plan Review and Sign Standard
Adjustment at 4105 Lexington Avenue North,based on the findings of fact and the submitted
plans as amended by the four (4)conditions in the November 25, 2013, Report to the City
Council.
Options
1.Approve the proposal as submitted.
2.Approve the proposal with conditions (Recommended Action).
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-018 -Gradient Financial -Signage Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-018
45
Page of
3.Deny the application with reasons for denial.
4.Table for additional information.
The findings in this report currently support approval of this Site Plan Review and Sign Standard
Adjustment. With a motion to deny Planning Case #13-018, the findings must be amendedto
reflect the reasons for the denial.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on October 7, 2013.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by December 5, 2013 (60
days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day
review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond
the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.Narrativeand Land Use Application
B.Staff Report, November 6, 2013
C.Draft Planning Commission Minutes, November 6, 2013
D.Signage Planand Site Plan
E.Aerial Photo
F.Photos of the Property
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-018 -Gradient Financial -Signage Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-018
55
Page of
Attachment A
October 8, 2013
th
Mr. Ryan Streff
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Re: Gradient Financial, Arden Hills, MN Exterior Replacement Signage
Dear Mr. Streff
I am submitting a site plan review on a replacement sign for the exterior of 4105 Lexington Ave N
previously called ArdenWoods. The purpose of this is to request is to wave the 60 sqft requirement for
what we are presenting on the attached sheets. It is the intent of our replacement sign to provide a new
and updated look to the complex as well as closely matching the original conditions.
The sign and logo as proposed is to be a set of non-illuminated reverse channel letters and maintain a
comparable lettering size to the original building signage er and while adding a
.125 aluminum faces, flush mounted, and painted dark bronze. The sign is to be comprised of 14
individual letters independently fastened to the building exterior.
We hope that this request be considered as the sign and logo would improve the overall appearance of
Regards,
COBECK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC
Nate Cote Vice President
612.849.1982 Mobile
Nathaniel.cote@cobeckconstruction.com
CoBeck Construction Company, LLC
th
218 13 Avenue South, Suite 300
South St. Paul, MN 55075
651 756.7521
MEMORANDUM
3.A
DATE:
November 6, 2013
PC Agenda Item
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-018No public hearing required
–
Applicant:
Gradient Financial
Property Location:
4105 Lexington Ave N
Request:
Site Plan Review –Sign Standard Adjustment
Requested Action
The applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for a Sign Standard Adjustment that would allow
for a deviation from the SignCode to increase the amount of wall signage on theGradient
Financial Building to one hundred and twenty-six (126)square feet.
Background
1.Overview of Request:
Gradient Financial has expressed concerns about the visibility of their corporateheadquarters
located at the corner ofLexington Avenue and County Road F. The applicant has stated that the
sixty (60)square feet of wall signagethat is allowed by the Code for Sign District 6 is not
proportionately adequate for a structure of its size and corner lot location along two main
roadways.By increasing the amount of wall signage the applicant is hoping to improve the
overall appearance of the building while increasing their visibilityto the traveling public.
In order toaddress this concern,Gradient Financial is proposing to increase the amount of
permitted wall signage by sixty-six (66)square feet for a total of one hundred and twenty-six
(126)square feet. At this time the applicant is proposing one (1) wall sign that would measure
approximatelytwenty-one (21) feet by six (6) feet, an area of one hundred and twenty-six (126)
square feet. The proposedsign would bepositioned on the northeast side of the buildingbeing
primarily visiblefrom traffic traveling north on Lexington Avenue.
The proposed non-illuminated wall sign would be designed with reverse channel letters
constructed with aluminumand painted dark bronze. Fourteen (14) individual letters each being
two (2) feet in height forming the name “Gradient Center” would be installed and individually
fastened to the exterior of the building. In addition to the letteringstated above, asign
measuring six (6) feet wide by six (6) feet in height would createGradient’s logoandwould be
installed adjacent to the text for “Gradient Center”.
2.Surrounding Area:
DirectionFuture Land Use PlanZoningExisting Land Use
I/O -Light Industrial and I-1–Limited Industrial
NorthOfficeDistrictLight Industrial/Office
I/O -Light Industrial and I-1–Limited Industrial Light
SouthOfficeDistrictIndustrial/Office/Commercial
City of ShoreviewCity of Shoreview
EastResidential (8-20R3 –Multi-Dwelling City of Shoreview
(Shoreview)units/acre)ResidentialMulti-Family Residential
I/O -Light Industrial and I-1–LimitedIndustrial
WestOfficeDistrictLight Industrial/Office
3.Site Data:
Future Land Use Plan:
I/O -Light Industrial and Office
Existing Land Use:
Office
Zoning:
I-1–Limited Industrial District
Size:
5.17acres
Topography:
Fairly Flat
Plan Evaluation
1.Site Plan Review –Section 1260: Sign Standard Adjustment
Section 1260.01 of the Sign Code permits adjustments to sign height, number, type, lighting,
area, and/or location through the site plan review process if criteria number 1 or2 is met and the
required criteria number 3 is met.In this case, criteria 1 and 3 are most applicable. The criteria
are as follows:
1.There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be
reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site; or,
2.The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will
enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of the
site; and
3.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose
of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use.
Site conditions onthe property justify a sign adjustment to allow the proposedsign to be
reasonably visible from the roadways adjacent to the site. The building is approximately 210
feet from Lexington Avenue and approximately 185 feet from Count Road F.The proposed sign
would be located on the northeast corner of the building making it primarily visible from
northbound traffic alongLexington Avenue.Given the distance the buildingis from its
respective right-of-ways,the proposed sign adjustment is practicableso that the building and its
use is visible from the adjacent roadways.
The proposed design and materials used to construct the sign are of exceptional quality and are
comparableto other signs that been approved through the Sign Standard Adjustmentprocess.
The proposed non-illuminated wall sign would be designed with individual reverse channel
letters constructed with aluminum and painted dark bronze.The use of high quality materials for
the proposed sign will enhanceappearance ofthe building.
Allowing signage flexibility at this property will not result in any inconsistencies with the
purpose or intent of the zoning or sign district. Sign Standard Adjustments are allowed by a Site
Plan Review and Council approval for properties located within the I-1 Limited Industrial
Districts.
2. Existing Signage
Wall Signage
At this time the structure has no existing wall signage on its façade.The previous Arden Woods
sign was removed whenthe façade on the building was being updatedearlier this year.The
applicant indicated that the lettering on the original sign that was removed from the building was
similar to the proposed signage in terms of the height of each letter.
Freestanding Signage
There is one (1) existing freestanding signthat exist on the property. A multi-tenant freestanding
sign that iseight (8)feet four (4) inches in height by ten (10) feetwide with an overall height of
twelve (12) feet ten (10) inches islocated at the corner of Lexington Avenue and County Road F.
Auxiliary Signage
There is one (1) freestanding entrance sign located alongCounty Road F that is two (2) feet in
height by three (3) feetwidewith total height of three (3) feet seven (7) inches.
Resident Comments
Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants
in regards tothis planning case.
Notice
Although a Site Plan Reviewdoes not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was
prepared by the City and mailed to properties within three-hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject
property.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed sign standard
adjustment at 4105 Lexington Avenue North meets the criteria in the Sign Code to deviate from
the sign regulations and if the proposed increase in wall signagewould adversely affect the
surrounding neighborhood and the community as a whole. Staff offers the following findings for
consideration:
1.The property is located in theI-1 Limited Industrial District.
2.The property is located in Sign District 6.
3.In Sign District 6,wall signage up to sixty (60) square feet and freestandingsignage up to
forty-five (45) square feet is permitted.
4.Gradient Financial is proposing one (1) wall sign on the northeast corner of the building.
5.The proposed signs would measure approximately twenty-one (21)feet by six (6) feet, an
area of 126 square feet.
6.The proposed sign would display the Gradient logo and the text for Gradient Centerwith
non-illuminated reverse channel letters.
7.The proposed sign is made from high quality materials that will accent the existing
building façade.
8.Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviation from the Sign Code through the Site
Plan Review process.
9.The proposed sign at 126 square feet is proportionate to the size of the principlestructure.
10.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose I-1
Limited Industrial District.
11.Increasing the amount of wall signage would not have a negative impact on adjacent
properties or the City as a whole.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Planning Case
13-018for a Sign Standard Adjustment under the Site Plan Review process.Staff recommends
the following four (4)conditions be included with the approval:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2.That one (1) wall sign up to 126 square feet in size shall be permitted.No additional wall
signage shall be allowed.
3.That the wall sign shall be comprised of individual cut letters and shall not extend more
than twelve(12) inches from the wall they are attached to.
4.That the applicant shall apply for a sign permit prior to the installation of the sign.
Options and Proposed Motion Language
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions:Motion to recommend approvalof Planning Case
#13-018for a Site Plan Review and Sign Standard Adjustmentat 4105 Lexington Avenue
Northbased on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the four (4)
conditions in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission.
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approvalof Planning Case #13-
018for a Site Plan Review and Sign Standard Adjustmentat 4105 Lexington Avenue North
based on the findings of fact and the submitted plansin the November 6, 2013, report to the
Planning Commission.
3.Recommend Denial:Motion to recommend denialof Planning Case #13-018for a Site Plan
Review and Sign Standard Adjustmentat 4105 Lexington Avenue Northbased on the
findings of fact:findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and
why those reasons cannot be mitigated.
4.Table:Motion to tablePlanning Case #13-018for a Site Plan Review and Sign Standard
Adjustmentat 4105 Lexington Avenue Northin order to gather the following information: a
specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on October 7, 2013.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by December 5, 2013 (60
days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day
review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond
the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.Narrativeand Land Use Application
B.Signage Planand Site Plan
C.Aerial Photo
D.Photos of the Property
Attachment C
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2013
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Clayton Larson called to order the regular Planning
Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Chair Clayton Larson, Commissioners Brent Bartel, Angela Hames, Andrew
Holewa, Roberta Thompson, and Clayton Zimmerman.
Absent: Commissioners Sam Scott and Janet Stodola (Alternate).
Also present were: City Planner Ryan Streff; Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler;
Councilmember Dave McClung; and Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA – NOVEMBER 6, 2013
Chair Larson stated the agenda will stand as published.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None.
PLANNING CASES
A.Planning Case 13-018; Site Plan Review; Sign Standard Adjustment; 4105
Lexington Avenue North – Not a Public Hearing
City Planner Streff stated the applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for a Sign Standard
Adjustment that would allow for a deviation from the Sign Code to increase the amount of wall
signage on the Gradient Financial Building to one hundred and twenty-six (126) square feet.
City Planner Streff explained Gradient Financial has expressed concerns about the visibility of
their corporate headquarters located at the corner of Lexington Avenue and County Road F. The
applicant has stated that the sixty (60) square feet of wall signage that is allowed by the Code for
Sign District 6 is not proportionately adequate for a structure of this size and corner lot location
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 6, 2013 2
improve the overall appearance of the building while increasing their visibility to the traveling
public.
In order to address this concern, Gradient Financial is proposing to increase the amount of
permitted wall signage by sixty-six (66) square feet for a total of one hundred and twenty-six
(126) square feet. At this time the applicant is proposing one (1) wall sign that would measure
approximately twenty-one (21) feet by six (6) feet, an area of one hundred and twenty-six (126)
square feet. The proposed sign would be positioned on the northeast side of the building being
primarily visible by traffic traveling north on Lexington Avenue.
City Planner Streff stated the proposed non-illuminated wall sign would be designed with
reverse channel letters constructed with aluminum and painted dark bronze. Fourteen (14)
individual letters, each being two (2) feet in height, forming the name “Gradient Center” would
be installed and individuallyfastened to the exterior of the building. In addition to the lettering
stated above, a sign measuring six (6) feet wide by six (6) feet in height would create Gradient’s
logo and would be installed adjacent to the text for “Gradient Center”.
Site Data
Future Land Use Plan: I/O – Light Industrial and Office
Existing Land Use: Office
Zoning: I-1 – Limited Industrial District
Size: 5.17 acres
Topography: Fairly Flat
City Planner Streff reviewed the surrounding area, the plan evaluation and the existing signage.
City Planner Streff provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1.The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District.
2.The property is located in Sign District 6
3.In Sign District 6, wall signage up to sixty (60) square feet and freestanding signage up to
forty-five (45) square feet is permitted.
4.Gradient Financial is proposing one (1) wall sign on the northeast corner of the building.
5.The proposed signs would measure approximately twenty-one (21) feet by six (6) feet, an
area of 126 square feet.
6.The proposed sign would display the Gradient logo and the text for Gradient Center with
non-illuminated reverse channel letters.
7.The proposed sign is made from high quality materials that will accent the existing
building façade.
8.Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviation from the Sign Code through the Site
Plan Review process.
9.The proposed sign at 126 square feet is proportionate to the size of the principle structure.
10.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose I-1
Limited Industrial District.
11.Increasing the amount of wall signage would not have a negative impact on adjacent
properties or the City as a whole.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 6, 2013 3
City Planner Streff stated based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, staff recommends
approval of Planning Case 13-018 for a Sign Standard Adjustment under the Site Plan Review
process. Staff recommends the following four (4) conditions be included with the approval:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2.That one (1) wall sign up to 126 square feet in size shall be permitted. No additional wall
signage shall be allowed.
3.That the wall sign shall be comprised of individual cut letters and shall not extend more
than twelve (12) inches from the wall they are attached to.
4.That the applicant shall apply for a sign permit prior to the installation of the sign.
City Planner Streff reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter:
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions.
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted.
3.Recommend Denial.
4.Table.
Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Chuck Lucius, Gradient Financial building owner, explained the County was widening
Lexington Avenue and County Road F. He discussed how these improvements would impact his
property. He explained that the two existing freestanding signs would need to be relocated.
Commissioner Thompson questioned where the address numbers for this building would be
located.
Mr. Lucius pointed out the location of the address numbers for the building.
Commissioner Hames commented she drove through the property and approved of the modern
design and proposed sign improvements. She recommended the sign code be reviewed by the
Commission.
Commissioner Zimmerman agreed the building’s exterior had been enhanced and approved of
the proposed sign.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Thompson seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 13-018 for a Sign Standard Adjustment at 4105
Lexington Avenue N based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by
the four (4) conditions in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Thompson supported the proposed sign design and size given the location of the
building with respect to Lexington Avenue and County Road F.
The motion carried unanimously (6-0).
Lake Josephine
The zoning district designations represented on this map
correspond to the City of Arden Hills official Zoning Map.
¯
Questions concerning the Zoning Map should be directed
to City Hall. Zoning designations are subject to change.
Property Boundary
Please refer to the Zoning Code for complete information.
Map Date: November 1, 2013
P:\GIS_Data\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-018
NEW BUSINESS –8B
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-019
Applicant:
Gradient Financial
Property Location:
4105 Lexington Ave N
Request:
Site Plan Review –Accessory Structure
Requested Action
Motion to Approve Planning Case #13-019 for a Site Plan Review and Permanent Accessory
Structure at 4105 Lexington Avenue North, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans
as amended by the four (4)conditions in the November 25, 2013, Report to the City Council.
Background
Gradient Financialowns the property located at 4105 Lexington Avenue, which is zoned I-1
Limited Industrial District. The property is generally positioned north of County Road F, south
of Boston Scientific, eastof Hamline Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue.The applicant is
proposing a1,800 square foot (36’x50’)accessory structureto be located on the propertyand
positioned in the northwest corner of the lot. The purpose of the buildingis for storage ofthe
equipment necessary for the maintenanceof the property.
The applicant has indicated that the proposed structure would be constructed on a floating slab
and builtwith a woodenframe. The building would contain two (2) 10’x10’ garage doors, one
(1) 10’x12’ garage door and one (1) 3’x7’ service door. The proposed structure would have
fourteen (14) foot tall sidewalls. A flat rubber roof system is being proposed on the accessory
structure to mimic the roof of the principle building. (Attachment C)
Discussion
At the November 6, 2013, Planning Commission meeting the applicant proposed to construct the
exterior of the accessory structure with a product that is made from fiber cement and has the
texture and finished appearance of brick. The dimensions of each panel are eighteen (18) inches
wide by six (6) feet in length with a thickness of 5/8 of an inch. Each panel has coverage of nine
(9) square feet.
After reviewing the proposed materialthe Planning Commission determined that itwas not
compatible in appearance or quality of that used for the principle structure on the property.It
was found that the material may resemble brick or achieve the look of brick but is still inferior to
the product used on the principle structure. The Planning Commission directed the applicant to
work with staff to select an exterior material for the accessory structure that will meet the
regulations stated inthe Zoning Code. The selectedexteriorfinish of the accessory structure
would need to be compatible in appearance and quality of material used onthe principal
structure.
Since the Planning Commissionmeeting, staff has been in contact with the applicant’s contractor
regarding the exterior of the accessory structure. Nathan Cote from CoBeck Construction stated
that research is being done on other exterior materials and that they hope to have a few additional
options available for review by theCity Councilon November 25, 2013.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their November 9, 2013, meeting and
have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration:
1.Permanent accessory structureswithin this district are subject to a Site Plan Review and
Council approval.
2.The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District.
3.The proposed accessory structure would be locatedin the northwest corner of the lot.
4.The proposed accessory building is 36’x50’, an area of 1,800 square feet.
5.A flat rubberroof is being proposed to mimic the principle buildingon the property.
6.The purpose of the building is for storage of the equipment necessary for the maintenance
of the property.
7.The applicant has proposed an exterior finish that is constructed with fiber cement to
replicate a brick appearance.
8.Thestructure will not result in a usethat is inconsistent with the purposeor intent of the
Zoning Code or theI-1 Limited Industrial District.
9.The placement of an accessory structure in the proposed location should nothave a
negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-019 -Gradient Financial -Accessory Building Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-019
24
Page of
Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #13-019 and unanimously recommends
approval of the Site Plan Review and Permanent Accessory Structure at 4105 Lexington Avenue
North,based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as presented in the November 25,
2013, Report to the City Council, as amended by the following four (4)conditions:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2.That the exterior of the accessory structure be constructed with a material that is
compatible to the principle buildingand approved by the CityPlannerbefore a building
permit is issued.
3.That a Grading and Erosion Control Permit shall be obtained by the applicant and
approved by the City before a Building Permit is issued.
4.That the applicant shall apply for a building permit prior to any construction.
Requested Action
Motion to Approve Planning Case #13-019 for a Site Plan Review and Permanent Accessory
Structure at 4105 Lexington Avenue North, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans
as amended by the four (4)conditions in the November 25, 2013, Report tothe City Council.
Options
1.Approve the proposal as submitted.
2.Approve the proposal with conditions (Recommended Action).
3.Deny the application with reasons for denial.
4.Table for additional information.
The findings in this report currently supportapproval of this Site Plan Review and Permanent
Accessory Structure. With a motion to deny the Planning Case #13-019, the findings must be
amendedto reflect the reasons for the denial.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-019 -Gradient Financial -Accessory Building Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-019
34
Page of
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on October 7, 2013.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by December 5, 2013 (60
days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day
review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond
the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.Narrativeand Land Use Application
B.Staff Report, November 6, 2013
C.Draft Planning CommissionMinutes, November 6, 2013
D.Site Plan
E.Building Plans
F.Exterior Finish
G.Aerial Photo
H.Photos of the Property
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-019 -Gradient Financial -Accessory Building Site Plan Review\Memos_Reports_13-019
44
Page of
Attachment A
October 8, 2013
th
Mr. Ryan Streff
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Re: Gradient Financial, Arden Hills, MN Exterior Improvements
Dear Mr. Streff
I am submitting a site plan review on adding a new maintenance garage beside the 4105 Lexington Ave
N complex previously called ArdenWoods. The purpose of this is to allow an 1800sqft building to be
added for equipment necessary for the maintenance of the premises. The location is represented on the
attached sheets showing the overall location in respect to the property.
The new structure is to be comprised of a floating slab with a wood structure. The exterior is proposed
to be comprised of (2) 10x10 garage doors, (1) 12x10 garage door, and (1) 3x7 service door. The
exterior skin is proposed to be sided using fiber cement siding that replicates a brick appearance of the
current building. There is no lighting proposed to be added to the exterior of the building. The roof
system is to be a flat rubber roof to mimic the current building conditions.
The trash enclosure is to be comprised of masonry units with a rock face and metal gates with screening
to conceal dumpsters inside. Size of trash enclosure is to match existing size moving location from east
(Lexington) side of building to west side near wooded area.
The use of the maintenance garage is for snowplow and lawn equipment necessary to the maintenance of
the property. As well as, allowing for additional green spaces by relocating the trash enclosure.
By allowing the maintenance garage and relocation of the trash enclosure additional green space may be
improved by reducing improvable surfaces by approximately 5%. While allowing for 255 regular
parking and 7 handicap stalls after improvements from county are made to Lexington Ave and County
Rd F.
We hope that this request be considered for the maintenance garage and trash enclosure relocation
allowing the functionality required to maintain and improve the overall appearance of the premises.
Regards,
COBECK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC
Nate Cote Vice President
612.849.1982 Mobile
Nathaniel.cote@cobeckconstruction.com
CoBeck Construction Company, LLC
th
218 13 Avenue South, Suite 300
South St. Paul, MN 55075
651 756.7521
MEMORANDUM
3.B
DATE:
November 6, 2013
PC Agenda Item
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-019No public hearing required
–
Applicant:
Gradient Financial
Property Location:
4105 Lexington Ave N
Request:
Site Plan Review –Accessory Structure
Requested Action
The applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for a Permanent Accessory Structure in order to
construct a 1,800 square foot accessory structure at the property located at 4105 Lexington
Avenue.
Background
1.Overview of Request:
Gradient Financialowns the property located at 4105 Lexington Avenue, which is zoned I-1
Limited Industrial District. The property is generally positioned north of County Road F, south
of Boston Scientific, east of Hamline Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue.The applicant is
proposing a1,800 square foot (36’x50’)accessory structureto be located on the propertyand
positioned in the northwest corner of the lot. The purpose of the buildingis for storage ofthe
equipment necessary for the maintenanceof the property.
The applicant has indicated that the proposed structure would be constructed on a floating slab
and builtwith a woodenframe. The building would contain two (2) 10’x10’ garage doors, one
(1) 10’x12’ garage door and one (1) 3’x7’ service door. The proposed structure would have
fourteen (14) foot sidewalls. A flat rubber roof system is being proposed on the accessory
structure to mimic the roof on principle building. (Attachment C)
A product that has the texture and finished appearance of real brick is being proposed as the
exterior finish of the structure. This exterior productis madeusing a fiber cement cladding
solution and constructed in panels thatare eighteen (18) inches wide by six (6) feet in length.
(Attachment D)
Gradient Financial is alsoproposing to build a new trash enclosure adjacent to the proposed
accessory structure. The enclosure would beapproximately 180 square feet (12’x15’)
constructedofmasonry units with a rock face and metal gates to conceal the dumpsters. The
existing trash enclosurewould then beremoved from the east side of the principle building.
2.Surrounding Area:
DirectionFuture Land Use PlanZoningExisting Land Use
I/O -Light Industrial and I-1–Limited Industrial
NorthOfficeDistrictLight Industrial/Office
I/O -Light Industrial and I-1–Limited Industrial Light
SouthOfficeDistrictIndustrial/Office/Commercial
City of ShoreviewCity of Shoreview
EastResidential (8-20R3 –Multi-Dwelling City of Shoreview
(Shoreview)units/acre)ResidentialMulti-Family Residential
I/O -Light Industrial and I-1–Limited Industrial
WestOfficeDistrictLight Industrial/Office
3.Site Data:
Future Land Use Plan:I/O -Light Industrial and Office
Existing Land Use:Office
Zoning:I-1–Limited Industrial District
Size:5.17acres
Topography:Fairly Flat
Plan Evaluation
1.Site Plan Review –Permanent Accessory Structures(Section 1325.01 Subd. 5)
A.Site Plan Review –Permanent accessory structures in the I-1 Limited Industrial District
are subject to a Site Plan Review and Council approval.
B.Exterior Finish –Does Not Meet Requirement
Section 1325.01 Subd 5 B-The exterior finish of accessory structures shall be
compatible in appearance and material used with the principal structure served by the
accessory structure.
The applicant is proposing to construct the exterior of the accessory structurewith a
product that has the texture and finished appearanceof brick. The proposed product is
made by Nichiha USA, Inc. and is constructed with a fiber cement cladding solution.
The brick panel product is from a line of CanyonBrick styles called Shale Brown. The
dimensions of each panel are eighteen (18) inches wide by six (6) feetin lengthwith a
thickness of 5/8 of an inch. Each panel has coverageof nine (9) square feet.
Staff has examined the proposed brick panel (exterior product)that has been supplied by
the applicant. After reviewing the proposed product,staff has determined that the
material is not compatible to the principle structure. The brick panel material may
resemble a brick finish,but in fact it is made up of fiber cement that functions as a brick
siding. This proposed product may achieve the look of brick siding; however, this
material is far inferior to the product used on the principle structure. Based on exterior
material used on the principle structure staff would propose that the exterior of accessory
structure be constructed with compatible real brick material.
2.I-1 Regulations, Existing Conditions, and Proposed Development
Applicable R-1 Lot Requirements
A.Lot Size & Dimensions –Meets
1.Minimum Lot Area (sf)30,000
Requirements
2. Minimum Lot Size (ft, 100/13
The lot is 225,205square feet, with
width/depth)0
approximate dimensions of 350 feet by
3. Height (ft.)35
640 feet.
4. Lot Covered by Structure30%
5. Min. Landscape Lot Area35%
B.Structure Setbacks –Meets
Requirements
6. Minimum Building Setbacks (ft)
The proposed structure will conform to
Front yard55
theminimumsetback requirements for
Rear Yard (Principle)20
accessory structures.
Rear Yard (Accessory)10
Side Yard Interior -Principal
C.Structure Height –Meets Requirements
(Min/total both yards on lot)20/40
The structure as proposed is
Side Yard Interior -Accessory10
approximately 14 feet in height.
Side Yard Corner50
D.Lot Coverage –Meets Requirements
The proposed impervious lot coverage is 57% leaving 43% as landscaping area or
pervious surfaces. The Zoning Code setsa maximum of 30% of the land area to be
covered byprinciple and accessory structures and a minimum landscaping lot area of
35%.
ExistingProposed
Type/Total
Square Feet%Square Feet%
Principle Building24,00011%24,00011%
Accessory Structure1,8000.8%
Decks/Patios2,4401.0%2,4401.0%
Parking Lot110,00049%97,00043%
Sidewalk2,7001.2%3,5001.5%
Total Coverage139,14062%128,74057%
Landscape Coverage43%
Lot Size225,205
3.Tree Preservation
The site plan shows that a few trees will be impacted due to the construction of the accessory
building. Staff has determined that fewer than ten (10) percent of the caliper inches of the
significant trees on the property will be removed. If additional trees are removed as a result
of the project, the applicant may be required to meet the City’s tree preservation standards,
and mitigation may be necessary.
4.Lighting
No lighting is being proposed on the accessory structure.
5.Flood Plain, Wetlands, andEasements
Based on the informationobtained by staff the proposed additions are outside of any flood
plains, wetlands, or easements areas.
6.Additional Review
A.The Building Official has reviewed the plansand has no additional comments.
B.The City Engineer reviewed the proposal and has determined that a Grading and Erosion
Control Permit is required for this project.
C.The applicant has submitted their plans to the Rice Creek Watershed District for review.
Resident Comments
Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants
in regards to this planning case.
Notice
Although a Site Plan Reviewdoes not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was
prepared by the City and mailed to properties within three-hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject
property.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed accessory
structure meets thecriteria stated in Zoning Code for accessory structures and if the proposed
construction would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood and the community as a
whole. Staff offers the following findings for consideration:
1.Permanent accessory structureswithin this district are subject to a Site Plan Review and
Council approval.
2.The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District.
3.The proposed accessory structure would be locatedin the northwest corner of the lot.
4.The proposed accessory building is 36’x50’, an area of 1,800 square feet.
5.A flat rubber roof is being proposed to mimic the principle buildingon the property.
6.The purpose of the building is for storage of the equipment necessary for the maintenance
of the property.
7.The applicant has proposed an exterior finish that is constructed with fiber cement to
replicate a brick appearance.
8.Thestructure will not result in a usethat is inconsistent with the purposeor intent of the
Zoning Code or theI-1 Limited Industrial District.
9.The placement of an accessory structurein the proposed location should nothave a
negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Planning Case
13-019 for a Permanent Accessory Structureunder the Site Plan Review process.Staff
recommends the following four (4) conditions be included with the approval:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval.Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2.That the exterior of the accessory structure be constructed with a material that is
compatible to the principle buildingand approved by the CityPlannerbefore a building
permit is issued.
3.That a Grading and Erosion Control Permit shall be obtained by the applicant and
approved by the City before a Building Permit is issued.
4.That the applicant shall apply for a building permit prior to any construction.
Options and Proposed Motion Language
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions:Motion to recommend approvalof Planning Case
#13-019for a Site Plan Review and Permanent Accessory Structureat 4105 Lexington
Avenue Northbased on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the four
(4) conditions in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission.
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approvalof Planning Case #13-
019for a Site Plan Review and Permanent Accessory Structureat 4105 Lexington Avenue
Northbased on the findings of fact and the submitted plansin the November 6, 2013, report
to the Planning Commission.
3.Recommend Denial:Motion to recommend denialof Planning Case #13-019for a Site Plan
Review and Permanent Accessory Structureat 4105 Lexington Avenue Northbased on the
findings of fact:findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and
why those reasons cannot be mitigated.
4.Table:Motion to tablePlanning Case #13-019for a Site Plan Review and Permanent
Accessory Structureat 4105 Lexington Avenue Northin order to gather the following
information: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion
to table.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on October 7, 2013.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by December 5, 2013 (60
days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day
review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond
the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.Narrativeand Land Use Application
B.Site Plan
C.Building Plans
D.Exterior Finish
E.Aerial Photo
F.Photos of Site
Attachment C
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 6, 2013 4
B.Planning Case 13-019; Site Plan Review; Accessory Structure; 4105 Lexington
Avenue N – Not a Public Hearing
City Planner Streff stated the applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for a Permanent
Accessory Structure in order to construct a 1,800 square foot accessory structure at the property
located at 4105 Lexington Avenue.
Gradient Financial owns the property located at 4105 Lexington Avenue, which is zoned I-1
Limited Industrial District. The property is generally positioned north of County Road F, south
of Boston Scientific, east of Hamline Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue. The applicant is
proposing a 1,800 square foot (36’x50’) accessory structure to be located on the property and
positioned in the northwest corner of the lot. The purpose of the building is for storage of the
equipment necessary for the maintenance of the property.
City Planner Streff stated the applicant has indicated the proposed structure would be
constructed on a floating slab and built with a wooden frame. The building would contain two
(2) 10’x10’ garage doors, one (1) 10’x12’ garage door and one (1) 3’x7’ service door. The
proposed structure would have fourteen (14) foot side walls. A flat rubber roof system is being
proposed on the accessory structure to mimic the roof of the principle building.
City Planner Streff explained a product that has the texture and finished appearance of real brick
is being proposed as the exterior finish of the structure. This exterior product is made using a
fiber cement cladding solution and constructed in panels that are eighteen (18) inches wide by
six (6) feet in length.
City Planner Streff noted Gradient Financial is also proposing to build a new trash enclosure
adjacent to the proposed accessory structure. The enclosure would be approximately 180 square
feet (12’x15’) constructed of masonry units with a rock face and metal gates to conceal the
dumpsters. The existing trash enclosure would then be removed from the east side of the
principle building.
Site Data
Future Land Use Plan: I/O – Light Industrial and Office
Existing Land Use: Office
Zoning: I-1 – Limited Industrial District
Size: 5.17 acres
Topography: Fairly Flat
City Planner Streff reviewed the surrounding area and Plan Evaluation.
City Planner Streff provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1.Permanent accessory structures within this district are subject to a Site Plan Review and
Council approval.
2. The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District.
3. The proposed accessory structure would be located in the northwest corner of the lot.
4. The proposed accessory building is 36’x50’, an area of 1,800 square feet.
5. A flat rubber roof is being proposed to mimic the principle building on the property.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 6, 2013 5
6. The purpose of the building is for storage of the equipment necessary for the maintenance
of the property.
7. The applicant has proposed an exterior finish that is constructed with fiber cement to
replicate a brick appearance.
8. The structure will not result in a use that is inconsistent with the purpose or intent of the
Zoning Code or the I-1 Limited Industrial District.
9. The placement of an accessory structure in the proposed location should not have a
negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole.
City Planner Streff stated based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff recommends
approval of Planning Case 13-019 for a Permanent Accessory Structure under the Site Plan
Review process. Staff recommends the following four (4) conditions be included with the
approval:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2.That the exterior of the accessory structure be constructed with a material that is
compatible to the principle building and approved by the City Planner before a building
permit is issued.
3.That a Grading and Erosion Control Permit shall be obtained by the applicant and
approved by the City before a Building Permit is issued.
4.That the applicant shall apply for a building permit prior to any construction.
City Planner Streff reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter:
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions.
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted.
3.Recommend Denial.
4.Table.
Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Zimmerman anticipated the proposed building would not be visible from County
Road F. He questioned if the siding material had to be adjusted if the building would not be
seen except by those in the building.
Chair Larson discussed the location of the accessory structure and noted the proposed building
materials would not match the existing building.
Nate Cote, CoBeck Construction, explained that the proposed exterior brick would be painted to
match the principle structure. He stated the proposed brick material was superior in design when
compared to other products. He reported the brick on the main building was non-standard in size
and was proving difficult to find.
Chair Larson questioned if staff objected to the proposed brick color or the brick material.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 6, 2013 6
City Planner Streff stated the brick material was a cement board and the appearance was not
compatible with the existing structure.
Commissioner Hames suggested the accessory structure building materials be adapted and be
trimmed in bronze to more closely match the principle structure.
Chair Larson was comfortable with the condition recommended by staff requiring the exterior of
the accessory structure be constructed with a material that is compatible to the principle building
and be approved by the City Planner before a building permit was issued. The Commission was
in agreement.
Chuck Lucius, Gradient Financial building owner, questioned if the accessory structure could be
painted brown as this would allow it to blend in with the surroundings.
Chair Larson indicated the structure would have to more closely match the main building and its
color scheme. He encouraged Mr. Lucius to speak further with staff regarding the exterior
building materials.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 13-019 for a Accessory Structure at 4105 Lexington
Avenue N based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the four (4)
conditions in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. The motion
carried unanimously (6-0).
C.Planning Case 13-007; Zoning Code Amendment; B-2 & B-3 Design Standards –
Public Hearing
Community Development Intern Bachler stated in October 2008, the City Council accepted the
Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. The plan included design guidelines for development in the B-
2 District and proposed standards for building and site design, façade treatment, pedestrian
circulation, and parking. The City Council subsequently approved ordinance amendments that
adapted the design guidelines for the Zoning Code. The guidelines now apply to all properties in
both the B-2 and B-3 Districts. Since their adoption, four development projects have been
evaluated based on these design standards:
Planning Case 11-01: McDonald’s, USA LLC Master PUD
Planning Case 11-16: Arden Plaza PUD Amendment (Walgreens Pharmacy)
Planning Case 12-19: 1201 County Road E Master PUD
Planning Case 13-04: Lexington Station Master PUD
Community Development Intern Bachler commented that through the process of reviewing these
developments, the City has had the opportunity to identify sections in the design standards that
need adjustments or additions. It is important to strike a balance between having design
standards that are either too prescriptive or too permissive. When cities put in place strict
standards, it can have the effect of deterring development. On the other hand, relaxed standards
can result in development that is not in line with a City’s vision and goals for their community.
Staff has completed revisions to help clarify certain design requirements and to provide
developers with more flexibility in the development review process. The updated standards also
ensure that future development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts will continue to be well designed.
Attachment F
Lake Josephine
The zoning district designations represented on this map
correspond to the City of Arden Hills official Zoning Map.
¯
Questions concerning the Zoning Map should be directed
to City Hall. Zoning designations are subject to change.
Property Boundary
Please refer to the Zoning Code for complete information.
Map Date: November 1, 2013
P:\GIS_Data\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-019
UNFINISHED BUSINESS –9A
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-013(Continued from October 28, 2013)
Applicant:
Bethel University
Property Location:
2 Pine Tree Drive
Request:
Conditional Use Permit–Higher Education
Requested Action
1.Approve Planning Case 13-013 for a conditional use permit (CUP) at 2 Pine Tree Drive
to allow a higher education use in up to 189,804 square feet in the existing office building
located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, as
amended by the conditions of approval as presented in the October 28, 2013, report to the
City Council.
2.Approve the Conditional Use Permit and Development Contract. (Revised in accordance
with amendments approved on October 28, 2013)
Background
Planning Case #13-013 was continued from the October 28, 2013, City Council meeting. The
City Council memo (Attachment A) and draft minutes (Attachment B) from October 28, 2013,
are included in the packet.The Conditional Use Permit and Development Contract has been
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
13
Page of
revised to reflect the amendments to the conditions approved on October 28, 2013 (Attachment
C)
During the meeting on October 28, 2013, the City Council reviewed a proposal from Bethel
University to obtain a conditional use permit to allow higher education as the principal use of the
property at 2 Pine Tree Drive. If approved this site would function as the east Campus for Bethel
University allowing the entire facility to be used for higher education and other general
administrative uses.
Motion and Amendments
MOTION:
Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to Approve
Planning Case 13-013 for a conditional use permit (CUP) at 2 Pine Tree Drive to
allow a higher education use in up to 189,804 square feet in the existing office
building located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, based on the findings of fact and submitted
plans, as amended by the conditions of approval as presented in the October 28,
2013, report to the City Council.
AMENDMENT:
Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motionto
The amendment carried (5-0).
add Attachment K as Condition 14.
AMENDMENT:
Councilmember Holden moved a motion to add Condition 15stating there
would be no overnight parking (from 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.) on the
(Councilmember Holden withdrew her amendment).
property.
AMENDMENT:
Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion
adding Condition 15which would require the applicant to submit to the
The amendment carried (5-
City a parking plan annually for approval.
0).
AMENDMENT:
Councilmember Holmes moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion
adding Condition 16, stating the staging of the Pine Tree Drive property
will be Phase I which will take place in 2013-2014 as indicated; and Phase
The amendment carried (3-2)
II which will take place in 2015-2018.
(Holden and McClung opposed).
AMENDMENT:
Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a
motion amending Condition 5 to read that no undergraduate programs
shall be implemented on the site until a trail connection is completed
(Councilmember McClung withdrew his
between the two campuses.
amendment).
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 2of 3
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 9,
2013.Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City was required toact on this request by
November 5, 2013(60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an
additional 60-day review period.
The petitioner was notified by November5, 2013, of the City’s request for an additional 60-day
review period. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must now act on this request by
January 4, 2014(120 days).The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review
period beyond the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.City Council Memo, October 28, 2013
B.Draft City Council Minutes, October 28, 2013
C.Conditional Use Permit and Development Contract (Revised), November 25, 2013
D.Planning Commission Memo, October 9, 2013
E.Draft Planning Commission Minutes, October 9, 2013
F.Land Use Application
G.Narrative of Proposed Use
H.Scenario 1 –Likely Use Plan
I.Scenario 2 –Maximum Use Plan
J.Maximum Use –Class Scheduling Analysis
K.Traffic Study–SRF Consulting
L.Bicycle Pathway &Pedestrian Easement
M.Memo from Matthew Bachler dated October 22, 2013
N.Site Plan Review/Building Permit Report August 31, 1977
O.Resident Comments
P.Aerial Site Map
Q.Photos of the Site
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 3of 3
Attachment A
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
October 28, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-013
Applicant:
Bethel University
Property Location:
2 Pine Tree Drive
Request:
Conditional Use Permit–Higher Education
Requested Action
1.Approve Planning Case 13-013 for a conditional use permit (CUP) at 2 Pine Tree Drive
to allow a higher education use in up to 189,804 square feet in the existing office building
located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, as
amended by the conditions of approval as presented in the October 28, 2013, report to the
City Council.
2.Approve the Conditional Use Permit and Development Contract.
Background
1.Overview of Request
The City has received a proposal from Bethel University to obtain a conditional use permit to
allow higher education as the principal use of the property at 2 Pine Tree Drive. TheUniversity
has negotiated a purchase agreement in order toacquirethe property from Country Financial,
contingent on the approval of a conditional use permit that would allow the entire facility to be
used for higher education and other general administrative uses. If approved this site would
function as the east Campus for Bethel University.
2.Background
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 1of 9
The applicant has applied to expand the higher educational use at 2 Pine Tree Drive to
encompass the entire 189,804 square foot facility. Their objective is to purchase the building,
and as leases expire, fully occupy the structure within 5 to 15 years. Bethel University has a plan
to slowly expand their higher education uses, including administrative offices, general and
specialized classrooms, meeting rooms and other general educational uses into the space. Bethel
University previously obtained a conditional use permit (Planning Case#13-008) from the City
to occupy approximately 26,000 square feet of the County Financial building for higher
education. The approval was granted for higher education but requires the University to seek
additional approval for any expansion or intensification of the use.
Theproperty located at 2 Pine Tree Driveiscurrently owned by Mutual Services Life Insurance
Company (c/o Country Life Insurance Company)alsoknown as Country Financial.The
property is generallypositioned north of Lake Josephine, south of County Road E, east of
Highway 51/Snelling Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue. The property consists of three (3)
parcels that total approximately forty-three (43) acres. Of the three (3) contiguous parcels only
the northern two have associated functions that currently relate to the proposed principle useof
the property.The northern parcel which is 21.52 acres in size contains the access road off of
Pine Tree Drive and the majority of the surface parking.The center parcel which is 19.16 acres
in size contains the one (1) existing building and a small fraction of the surface parking. The
remaining undeveloped parcel to the south is 2.43 acres in size and is made up of mainly
woodlands and wetlands.
The property is located within the B-2 General Business District, where higher educational uses
are permitted by conditional use permit.The property includes a five (5) story, 189,804square
foot multi-tenant office building, of which 181,432 is rentable.At this timeapproximately
75,000 square feet of the building is occupied by Country Financial and other tenants of the
building.Approximately sixty percent (60%)of the building is currently vacant.
According to the information provided by Bethel University the property would have a diverse
mixture of normaldaytime office uses along with both daytime and evening classes. The
University is planning for a mix of transportation modes to be used between the two campuses,
including shuttle service, carpooling, personal vehicles, walking and biking. Shuttle services to
and from the main campus would be provided to the students, guests, faculty and administration
staff.A pedestrianand bicycletrail connecting the two campuses is also a desire of the
University in order to provide safe routes for theirentire student body.
Classes at the Pine Tree location would be held primarily between the hours of 7:00 am and 5:00
pm, Monday through Friday. Evening classeswould also be offeredand would generally be
between the hours of 5:00 pm and 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday.Peak classroom usage,
Monday through Friday,is between 350 and 500 students during daytime hours and peaks
between 240 and 375 students during the evening hours,Monday through Thursday. As shown
by the applicant,two scenarios have been developed to understand the use of the Pine Tree
Campus in terms of its student, faculty and administrative populations. Scenario 1 indicates the
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 2of 9
likely useof the facility at full capacitywould be 797 people/seats.Thisscenarioaccounts for
237 staff or faculty and 560 classroom seats. Scenario 2 suggests the maximum capacityof the
facility would be873 people/seats. This scenario indicates that 203 staff or faculty and 670
classroom seatswouldutilize the facility.(See Attachment C & D)
The current surface parking lot on the property consists of approximately 777 parking spaces, or
roughly one (1) space per 260 square feet of gross building area. The zoning ordinance states
that one (1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area is required for businessand professional
office uses. Bethel has prepared a class scheduling analysisindicating how their staggered
classroom usage mitigates the parking concernon the property.(Attachment E)
The applicant has provided a detailed narrative(Attachment B) of the proposed use along with
preliminary plans for the layout of the facility. (Attachment C & D).
Private On-Site Trails and Buffer Area
Aland title survey was completed for the Pine Tree property that identified easements and other
documents filed against the property. In addition to several highway and utility easements, the
title surveyidentified a Conditional Use Permit in Planning Case 09-020 that permitted a
telecommunicationsantenna and a 100-foot wide bicycle pathway and public pedestrian
easement along the eastern side of the property(Attachment J).Based on review of planning
documents and memos related to the original development of the Country Financial property, it
appears that the bicycle pathway and public pedestrian easement was intended to serve as a
buffer between Country Financial and the residential neighborhood to the east.
Staff has researched the City’sfiles of the proposedsite, including past staff reports, memos, and
approved minutes,and has found no evidence that the trails that exist within the boundaries of
the property are in any way dedicated to the public or were required to be available to the public
as part of the development’s approval.
Bethel University has provided a letter to the City(Attachment K) stating its intention to
continue to allow public use of the private trail systemon the Pine Tree property. In the same
letter, Bethel has responded to Cityrequests for additional information as follows:
Bethel does not intend to develop the southernmost parcel.
Bethel has no plans for additional development on the site.
If this request for a conditional use permit is approved, Bethel intends to sell property
located on County Road F and County Road E2.
The results of additional research regarding the original approval of the Country Financial
development are included in Attachments L and M.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 3of 9
B-2 General Business District
The B-2General Business District allows higher education uses by conditional use permit.
Higher education is defined in theZoning Code as “junior colleges, colleges and universities
approved by the Minnesota Higher Education Coordinating Board for the Minnesota Department
of Education”.
According to Section 1320.04 Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance, the stated purpose of the B-2
District is as follows:
1.To be a place in which people can live, work and play.
2.To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian-and bicycle-friendly community
with a distinct identity.
3.To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and socialize.
4.To implement design standards to promote an attractive environment with lasting and
sustainable value.
5.To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that is
naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity.
6.To provide an adequate supply of business and professional service areas to meet the
needs of residents.
7.To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare and similar safety
problems.
8.To implement the Plan known as the “Guiding Plan for the B2 District,” which was
adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2008.
TrafficStudy Summary
A traffic study and parkinganalysis has been completed by SRF Consulting to determine what
changes may beneeded in order for the site to operate effectively for a higher education use. For
additional details regarding the Traffic Study and Parking Analysis,please seeAttachment F.
Summary of Conclusions & Recommendations -
Results of the existing capacity analysis indicate that all study intersections currently operate
at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. No significant
side-street delays were observed.
Results of the year 2018 (Phase 2) build operations analysis indicates that all study
intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOSC or better, except the
County Road E/Old Snelling intersection during the p.m. peak hour. The 95th percentile
queues in both the eastbound and southbound directionsare expected to extend up to
approximately 500 feet.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 4of 9
This intersection is expected to be approaching capacity by year 2018, regardless of the
o
proposed expansion.
To address the poor operations at the County Road E/Old Snelling intersection under year
2018(Phase 2) build conditions, construction/installation of a roundabout or traffic signal
should be considered.
However, since the poor operations would likely occur for only a short period each day
o
(i.e. one or two hours), the City/County may deem this acceptable given the relatively
high costs associated with these improvements.
Results of the year 2025 (Phase 3) build operations analysis indicate similar operations to the
year 2018 Phase 2 build conditions are expected. Therefore, the potential mitigation
identified under year 2018 is considered adequate.
Based on the review of the existing parking supply/demand and the ITE calculations for
future conditions, the current 777 parking spaces are more than adequate to meet the future
demand of the facility.
Given that the travel times would be relatively similar between the two potential shuttle
service routes and the desire to keep “local” trips away from “regional” type of facilities, it is
recommended that the proposed shuttle service utilize a route along Old Snelling, County
Road E, and Pine Tree Drive.
When planning the loading/unloading zones for the shuttle service, the location/size of the
zones and pedestrian waiting areas should be designed to ensure there is sufficient space for
passengers to safely wait, while limiting any sight distance impacts or conflicts with
driveway aisles.
There are multiple gaps (i.e. a lack of connectivity) within the existing pedestrian/bicyclist
system which likely limits activity in the area, particularly along Old Snelling. If these areas
were to be improved, more pedestrians/bicyclists would be expected to utilize these facilities.
The type of improvements that could be implemented to improve connectivity include multi-
use trails, sidewalks, and/or shoulderexpansion.
Alternative pedestrian/bicyclist connections were developed to provide a more direct route
between the two campuses and increase the potential for pedestrian/bicyclist activity.
However, further discussion with impacted stakeholders would be necessary since several of
these routes travel through and/or cross areas owned privately, by MnDOT, or the railroad.
Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Criteria –Section 1355.04 Subd 3
The following CUP criteria would apply to schools for higher education in the B-2 District:
Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code liststhe criteria for evaluating a
Conditional Use Permit Amendment. The Planning Commission and City Council should
consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 5of 9
of the owners and occupants of the surroundingland, in particular, and the community as a
whole, in general, including but not limited to the following factors:
1.Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions;
2.Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and
other nuisance characteristics;
3.Drainage;
4.Population density;
5.Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land;
6.Adjoining land values;
7.Park dedications where applicable; and the
8.Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and
intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their October 9, 2013, meeting and have
offered the following findings of fact for your consideration:
General Findings:
1.The applicant is proposing ause ofhigher education for thefacility located at 2 Pine Tree
Drive.
2.The proposed use within 5-15 years will encompass the entire building which is 189,804
square feet.
3.Higher education uses are permittedby conditional use permit within the B-2 General
Business District.
4.No additional buildings or facilities are being planned for this property at this time.
5.In order to provide safe pedestrian movements between campuses a trail will need to be
constructed.
6.The property consists of three (3) parcels of land totaling 43.11 acres.
7.That approximately 777 surface parking spaces exist on the property.
8.The proposed use will not increase the occupancy beyond the original design of the
building.
9.That no changes in lot coverage, landscaping, setbacks or height are being proposed.
Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings:
1.The proposed use will occupy theexistingbuilding and parking areas during both
daytime and evening hours for students, administrationstaffand faculty. Shared parking
on the site will be used for other weekday officeusers.
2.The proposal will have minimal impacts on noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air
pollution, heat,liquid andsolid waste.
3.The proposal will not affect drainage on the property.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 6of 9
4.The proposed usewill not affect the population density on the propertybeyond the
original occupancy design of the building.
5.The proposed land use complies with the intent of the zoning ordinance and is compatible
with uses and structures on surrounding property.
6.The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect land values on the subject property or on
neighboring properties.
7.The park dedication requirement does not apply in this application.
Notice
Notice was published in the Arden Hills/ShoreviewBulletinand notice was prepared by the City
and mailed toallproperty ownerswithin five hundred(500) feet of the subject property.
Resident Comments
Threeletters were received in regards to Planning Case #13-013. Please see Attachment Ifor
their comments.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #13-013on October 9, 2013, and
unanimously recommendedapprovaloftheConditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Driveto allow
higher education, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as presented in the
October 28, 2013,Report to the City Council, as amended by the following thirteen (13)
conditions:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval.Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commissionand City
Council.
2.That the permitted use shall exclusively pertain to the existing building that is 189,804
square feet in size. Thatany additionalbuildings, facilities, recreational fields or
structures shall require City Approval.
3.That a trail connection shall be provided to address pedestrian movements between the
University’s east and west campuses.That the applicant shall work with the City to
determine the best route to ensure safe pedestrian and bicycle movements.
4.That bus transit between the two campuses shall beprovided to accommodate class
schedules at the University.
5.That no traditional undergraduate programs shall be implemented on the site until a
shuttle service is operationalbetween the two campuses.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 7of 9
6.That bicycle parkingshall be provided at a minimum of one (1)space per ten (10)vehicle
parking spaces.
7.That vehicle parking on the site shall be provided at a minimum of (1) space per 250
square feet of gross floor area.
8.That a lighting plan shall be submitted and approved by the Cityand the Ramsey County
Sheriff.
9.That loading/unloading zones and shuttle service routes shall be consistent with the
recommendations made by SRF Consulting during the Traffic Study and Parking
Analysis.
10.That the applicant will apply for City approval for any changes to exterior signage.
11.That the applicant will request an amendment to the conditional use permit for any
increase in intensity of the higher education use.
12.That all Building Code and Fire Marshal requirements shall be met prior to occupancy of
each areabeingremodeled.
Based on the agreement reached between Bethel and the City of Arden Hillsin regards to the
trail connection between the two campuses, staff is recommending the addition of the following
condition:
13.That Bethel shallcontribute up to $800,000over a period of years toward a City
constructed trail between the main campus and the new off-campus site as described in
the Conditional Use Permit and Development Contractattached as Attachment N to this
report.
Requested Action
1)Motion to approve Planning Case 13-013 for a conditional use permit (CUP) at 2
Pine Tree Drive to allow a higher education use in up to 189,804 square feet in
the existing office building located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, based on the findings of
fact and submitted plans, asamended by the conditions of approval as presented
in the October 28, 2013, report to the City Council.
2)Motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit and Development Contract.
Options
1.Approve the proposal as submitted.
2.Approve the proposal with conditions (Recommended Action).
3.Deny the application with reasons for denial.
4.Table for additional information.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 8of 9
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 9,
2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by November 5,
2013(60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-
day review period. The City may, with the consent ofthe applicant, extend the review period
beyond the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.Land Use Application
B.Narrative of Proposed Use
C.Scenario 1 –Likely Use Plan
D.Scenario 2 –Maximum Use Plan
E.Maximum Use –Class Scheduling Analysis
F.Traffic Study–SRF Consulting
G.Aerial Site Map
H.Photos of the Site
I.Resident Comments
J.Bicycle Pathway & Pedestrian Easement
K.Letter from Bethel University dated October 24, 2013
L.Memo from Matthew Bachler dated October 22, 2013
M.Site Plan Review/Building Permit Report 8-31-77
N.Conditional Use Permit and Development Contract
O.Draft Planning Commission Minutes, October 9, 2013
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for October 28, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use\Memos_Reports_13-013
Page 9of 9
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 7
1)The first variance is being requested to exceed the Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) by 313 square feet.
2)The second variance is being requested to allow flexibility in the
setback regulations to expand the existing deck, construct a front
entrance overhang and add sunshades to the south facing
elevations of the home.
The motion carried (3-2) (Holden and Holmes opposed).
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Planning Case #13-013 Bethel University – 2 Pine Tree Drive – CUP – Higher
Education (Public Comments will be accepted)
City Planner Streff
indicated the City has received a proposal from Bethel University to obtain a
conditional use permit to allow higher education as the principal use of the property at 2 Pine
Tree Drive. The University has negotiated a purchase agreement in order to acquire the property
from Country Financial, contingent on the approval of a conditional use permit that would allow
the entire facility to be used for higher education and other general administrative uses. If
approved this site would function as the east Campus for Bethel University.
City Planner Streff
explained the applicant has applied to expand the higher educational use at 2
Pine Tree Drive to encompass the entire 189,804 square foot facility. Their objective is to
purchase the building, and as leases expire, fully occupy the structure within 5 to 15 years. Bethel
University has a plan to slowly expand their higher education uses, including administrative
offices, general and specialized classrooms, meeting rooms and other general educational uses
into the space. Bethel University previously obtained a conditional use permit (Planning Case
#13-008) from the City to occupy approximately 26,000 square feet of the County Financial
building for higher education. The approval was granted for higher education but requires the
University to seek additional approval for any expansion or intensification of the use.
City Planner Streff
stated the property located at 2 Pine Tree Drive is currently owned by
Mutual Services Life Insurance Company (c/o Country Life Insurance Company) also known as
Country Financial. The property is generally positioned north of Lake Josephine, south of County
Road E, east of Highway 51/Snelling Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue. The property
consists of three (3) parcels that total approximately forty-three (43) acres. Of the three (3)
continuous parcels only the northern two have associated functions that currently relate to the
proposed principle use of the property. The northern parcel which is 21.52 acres in size contains
the access road off of Pine Tree Drive and the majority of the surface parking. The center parcel
which is 19.16 acres in size contains the one (1) existing building and a small fraction of the
surface parking. The remaining undeveloped parcel to the south is 2.43 acres in size and is made
up of mainly woodlands and wetlands.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 8
City Planner Streff
commented the property is located within the B-2 General Business District,
where higher educational uses are permitted by conditional use permit. The property includes a
five (5) story, 189,804 square foot multi-tenant office building, of which 181,432 is rentable. At
this time approximately 75,000 square feet of the building is occupied by Country Financial and
other tenants of the building. Approximately sixty percent (60%) of the building is currently
vacant.
According to the information provided by Bethel University the property would have a mixture of
normal daytime office uses along with both daytime and evening classes. The University is
planning for a mix of transportation modes to be used between the two campuses, including
shuttle service, carpooling, personal vehicles, walking and biking. Shuttle services to and from
the main campus would be provided to the students, guests, faculty and administration staff on a
daily basis. A pedestrian and bicycle trail connecting the two campuses is also a desire of the
University in order to provide safe routes for their entire student body.
City Planner Streff
reported daytime classes at the Pine Tree location would be held between the
hours of 7:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday. Evening classes would also be offered
and would generally be between the hours of 5:00 pm and 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday.
Peak classroom usage, Monday through Friday, is between 350 and 500 students during daytime
hours and peaks between 240 and 375 students during the evening hours, Monday through
Thursday. As shown by the applicant, two scenarios have been developed to understand the use of
the Pine Tree Campus in terms of its student, faculty and administrative populations. Scenario 1
indicates the likely use of the facility at full capacity would be 797 people/seats. This scenario
accounts for 237 staff or faculty and 560 classroom seats. Scenario 2 suggests the maximum
capacity of the facility would be 873 people/seats. This scenario indicates that 203 staff or faculty
and 670 classroom seats would utilize the facility.
City Planner Streff
commented the current surface parking lot on the property consists of
approximately 777 parking spaces, or roughly one (1) space per 260 square feet of gross building
area. The zoning ordinance states that one (1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area is
required for business and professional office uses. Bethel has prepared a class scheduling analysis
indicating how their staggered classroom usage mitigates the parking concern on the property.
Site Data
Future Land Use Plan: CMU: Commercial Mixed Use
Existing Land Use: Commercial
Zoning: B-2: General Business District
Current Lot Sizes: 43.11 acres (3 Parcels - 2 Pine Tree Drive, 12 Pine Tree Drive, and
4300 Dunlap Street N) with an 189,804 square foot office building
Topography: Relatively flat
City Planner Streff
reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and the Conditional Use
Permit Evaluation Criteria. He provided the following Findings of Fact for review:
General Findings:
1. The applicant is proposing a use of higher education for the facility located at 2 Pine Tree
Drive.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 9
2. The proposed use within 5-15 years will encompass the entire building which is 189,804
square feet.
3. Higher education uses are permitted by conditional use permit within the B-2 General
Business District.
4. No additional buildings or facilities are being planned for this property at this time.
5. In order to provide safe pedestrian movements between campuses a trail will need to be
constructed.
6. The property consists of three (3) parcels of land totaling 43.11 acres.
7. Approximately 777 surface parking spaces exist on the property.
8. The proposed use will not increase the occupancy beyond the original design of the
building.
9. No changes in lot coverage, landscaping, setbacks or height are being proposed.
Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings:
1. The proposed use will occupy the existing building and parking areas during both daytime
and evening hours for students, administration staff and faculty. Shared parking on the site
will be used for other weekday office users.
2. The proposal will have minimal impacts on noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air
pollution, heat, liquid and solid waste.
3. The proposal will not affect drainage on the property.
4. The proposed use will not affect the population density on the property beyond the
original occupancy design of the building.
5. The proposed land use complies with the intent of the zoning ordinance and is compatible
with uses and structures on surrounding property.
6. The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect land values on the subject property or on
neighboring properties.
7. The park dedication requirement does not apply in this application.
City Planner Streff
stated the findings of fact for this conditional use permit request support a
recommendation for approval. It was noted the Planning Commission discussed this item at their
October 9, 2013, meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the conditional use permit
with the following twelve (12) conditions:
1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by
the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the
City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2. That the permitted use shall exclusively pertain to the existing building that is 189,804
square feet in size. That any additional buildings, facilities, recreational fields or structures
shall require City Approval.
3. That a trail connection shall be provided to address pedestrian movements between the
University’s east and west campuses. That the applicant shall work with the City to
determine the best route to ensure safe pedestrian and bicycle movements.
4. That bus transit between the two campuses shall be provided to accommodate class
schedules at the University.
5. That no undergraduate programs shall be implemented on the site until a shuttle service is
operational between the two campuses.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 10
6. That bicycle parking shall be provided at a minimum of one (1) space per ten (10) vehicle
parking spaces.
7. That vehicle parking on the site shall be provided at a minimum of (1) space per 250
square feet of gross floor area.
8. That a lighting plan shall be submitted and approved by the City and the Ramsey County
Sheriff.
9. That loading/unloading zones and shuttle service routes shall be consistent with the
recommendations made by SRF Consulting in the Traffic Study and Parking Analysis.
10. That the applicant will apply for City approval for any changes to exterior signage.
11. That the applicant will request an amendment to the conditional use permit for any
increase in intensity of the higher education use.
12. That all Building Code and Fire Marshal requirements shall be met prior to occupancy of
each area being remodeled.
Based on the agreement reached between Bethel and the City in regards to the trail connection
between the two campuses, staff is recommending the addition of the following condition:
13. That Bethel shall contribute up to $800,000 over a period of years towards a City
constructed trail between the main campus and the new off-campus site as described in the CUP
and Development Contract attached as Attachment N to this report.
Matthew Pacyna
, SRF Consulting Group, Inc., One Carlson Parkway in Plymouth, reviewed the
traffic study completed by SRF on behalf of the City. He explained that each phase of the project
was considered within the traffic study, along with parking and shuttle services. He indicated the
study area focused mainly on County Road E. He focused on the number of total daily trips that
were forecasted through the three phases of Bethel’s proposal. The peak demands for parking
were then reviewed, along with the proposed shuttle routes.
Mr. Pacyna
discussed the existing pedestrian and bike routes available from the main campus to
the Pine Tree Drive property. The gaps within the route were noted. He reviewed the route that
would improve connectivity between the two properties.
Mayor Grant
requested comment from the City Attorney regarding the tax implications of
Bethel University locating a second campus at the 2 Pine Tree Drive property.
City Attorney Jamnik
indicated the City is legally precluded from making a decision regarding a
land use application based on the tax exempt status of the applicant. This status is provided to the
University by the constitution. He cautioned members of the public and City Council from
engaging in conversations regarding the taxable status of the applicant and to confine
conversation to that which would be relevant to the conditional use permit.
Mayor Grant
opened the meeting for public comments at 8:49 p.m.
Rebecca Pederson
, 3484 Glen Arden Road, reviewed a letter she sent to the City Council. She
expressed concern with the proposed land use and trails. She reported she received a letter in
response to her concerns from Bethel and thanked them for addressing her concerns.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 11
Patrick Mazorol
, Senior Vice President for University Relations at Bethel University, thanked
staff for their time in preparing tonight’s presentation. He indicated Bethel wanted to continue to
be a valuable asset to Arden Hills. He reported the University was 150 years old and was
continuing to grow and expand its programs. He reviewed the recent national awards Bethel had
received for Science and Business/Economics.
Mr. Mazorol
discussed how the 2 Pine Tree Drive property would allow Bethel to expand while
remaining within the City of Arden Hills. He explained the trails on the property would remain
open to the public. Bethel has agreed to provide the City $800,000 toward a connection trail from
Bethel’s main campus to the Pine Tree property. He reviewed the proposed phasing of the Pine
Tree property by Bethel. It was noted Bethel had no intention of building new facilities on the
Pine Tree property in the foreseeable future.
Mr. Mazorol
addressed one of the concerns raised by the Planning Commission concerning when
undergraduate classes could begin at the Pine Tree location and the need for a shuttle service to
be in place. He thanked the Council for their time this evening and for considering Bethel’s
conditional use permit request.
Jeremy Morris
, Country Financial, explained that Country Financial has had a presence in Arden
Hills for a number of years and has greatly contributed to the community. He stated he was
extremely grateful to staff and the City Council for considering the request from Bethel.
Gregg Larson
, 3377 North Snelling Avenue, expressed concern that while Bethel has no plans
for further developing the Pine Tree Drive property, this issue should be further addressed by the
Council. He stated it was likely that at some point in the future Bethel would be back before the
City requesting approval for additional buildings or other facilities on the property. He
encouraged the Council to keep its eyes open regarding this matter. He described a discrepancy
between Bethel’s recently completed master plan, noting it did not align with the proposed
expansion onto the Pine Tree Drive property. He questioned why this proposal was not brought
to the residents for discussion on how the campus expansion would affect the general public. He
encouraged the Council to increase communication efforts with their constituents.
Mark Arend
, 1301 Canon Avenue, explained his home bordered the 2 Pine Tree Drive property.
He reported four months ago, while walking the paths, he was notified that the building would be
put up for sale. He was pleased when he learned that Bethel University may purchase the
property. He supported the request for higher education at the Pine Tree property.
John Wicklund
, 4510 Keithson Drive, commented he has lived in Arden Hills for 35 years and
grew up on Chatham Avenue near Bethel. He fully supported Bethel University expanding to the
Pine Tree Drive property. He stated this would increase jobs in Arden Hills while improving the
City’s economy.
Rod Larson
, 1566 Royal Hills Drive, indicated he sent an email to the Council last week and
appreciated the responses he received from several Councilmembers. He explained he attended
Bethel and was a proud alum. He encouraged the Council to support the conditional use permit.
Mayor Grant
closed the public comment portion of the meeting at 9:12 p.m.
Councilmember Holmes
questioned where the bicycle and trail easement was located.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 12
City Planner Streff
reviewed the location of the easement with the Council.
Councilmember Holden
asked if the undeveloped lot on the southern end of the Pine Tree
property was zoned R-1.
City Planner Streff
commented this parcel was zoned R-1 as part of the original approval.
Councilmember McClung
inquired if the site had an approved landscaping or lighting plan.
City Planner Streff
explained the landscaping plan would have been developed between the
years of 1977 and 1980. This plan would have been reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission and Council. He noted the applicant has not submitted a lighting plan. This would
be required by the applicant through the conditions for approval, and would be reviewed by the
Sheriff’s Department.
Councilmember McClung
discussed the recent campus master plan completed by Bethel
University reiterating that the expansion to the Pine Tree Drive property was not included. He
questioned how the main campus would be altered in the future if the school were to expand to
the Pine Tree property.
City Planner Streff
referred this question to the applicant. He explained the City has not
received a revised master plan for the main campus.
Mayor Grant
commented that the master plan took over a year to complete and the revisions to
the plan would take time given the new opportunity offered to Bethel through the Pine Tree Drive
property.
Councilmember Holden
stated Bethel had reviewed how the master plan would be altered if the
property was purchased at a work session meeting.
Councilmember Holmes
asked if the master plan was a governing document.
City Planner Streff
commented that the master plan document the Council is referring to is
actually an internal planning document for Bethel and has not been approved by the Council.
Mayor Grant
proposed adding Attachment K as Condition 14 for approval of the conditional use
permit. He asked if Bethel had plans to develop the Pine Tree site with athletic facilities.
Mr. Mazorol
stated there were no plans to add athletic facilities to the Pine Tree site. He
commented that it would take Bethel approximately 15-20 years to fully occupy the Pine Tree
building. He indicated Bethel was currently focused on building a health and wellness center on
the main campus. He discussed how the additional square footage available at the Pine Tree site
would allow Bethel to expand.
Councilmember Holden
inquired if staff had considered how the additional higher education
square footage would affect the number of single-family residential rental properties in Arden
Hills.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 13
Community Development Director Hutmacher
stated this had not been evaluated by staff. She
reported the rental registration information had been passed along to Bethel to be distributed to its
students.
Kathleen Nelson
, Senior Vice President for Finance at Bethel University, commented the rental
registration information was posted on Bethel’s webpage and was available in the Student Life
office.
Mayor Grant
commented the Council may not have time to get through all of the information
this evening. He asked if Bethel had provided the City with a signage plan.
City Planner Streff
indicated the current signage on the property would be updated to reflect
Bethel University and that no further changes were proposed at this time.
Mayor Grant
inquired if the proposed phasing was made a part of the conditions for approval.
City Planner Streff
stated that the Phasing Plan was not part of the conditions for approval.
Councilmember Holmes
discussed the phasing plan in further detail noting the timeframe was
quite vague.
Councilmember Holden
suggested the classroom use not exceed the numbers and dates as stated
in Phase I. She recommended Phase II be split into two sections allowing for 3,500 square feet of
classroom space in 2015-2016 with another 3,500 square feet of classroom space in 2017-2018.
She indicated these numbers closely aligned with the projections from Bethel in Attachment C.
She reported Phase III would then come in from 2018-2025 as written.
Councilmember McClung
discussed how Condition 5 was amended by the Planning
Commission so that undergraduate classes could begin only after a shuttle service was put in
place between the two campuses.
Councilmember Holden
expressed concern that students could be fully occupying the space in
2014 as the request was written and for this reason, she suggested Phase II be split into two
separate phases.
Councilmember Holmes
requested comment from the applicant on the proposed phasing.
Mr. Mazorol
indicated movement to the Pine Tree property would be by program and not by a
single classroom. He stated the 3,500 square feet of classroom space per phase could limit
Bethel’s ability to move entire programs into the facility in the coming years.
Ms. Nelson
added that Bethel has worked with staff extensively on the phasing. She anticipated
the earliest possible beginning date for Phase II would be the fall of 2016. She stated it was
difficult for Bethel to provide comment on how the phasing would work as suggested by the
Council as Bethel was proposing to move entire departments to the new facility and space needs
may be higher than 3,500 square feet.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 14
Councilmember Holmes
asked if the Council could reach an agreement with Bethel that Phase II
would not begin until the fall of 2015 or 2016.
Mr. Mazorol
stated this was correct.
Ms. Nelson
reported that Bethel had no plan to occupy the Pine Tree space with undergraduate
programs during the 2013-2014 or 2014-2015 school years. Classroom space would be used in
Phase I for the Physician’s Assistant program as of January 2014.
MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to
extend the Council meeting 30 minutes. The motion carried (5-0).
Mayor Grant
inquired if Councilmember Holden would support Phase II as presented if it was
pushed back to 2015, as this would allow them more flexibility.
Councilmember Holden
did not support this recommendation.
Councilmember Holmes
commented another concern with Bethel relocating to this location is
that in 2015 the County Road E bridge across Highway 51 would be closed. She indicated it did
not seem fair to require the applicant to provide more specifics than the plans already provided.
Councilmember Holden
agreed but felt the phasing should be completed slowly to reduce the
impact on the community and the adjacent property owners.
MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to
Approve Planning Case 13-013 for a conditional use permit (CUP) at 2 Pine
Tree Drive to allow a higher education use in up to 189,804 square feet in the
existing office building located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, based on the findings of
fact and submitted plans, as amended by the conditions of approval as
presented in the October 28, 2013, report to the City Council.
AMENDMENT: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion
to add Attachment K as Condition 14. The amendment carried (5-0).
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Holden moved a motion to add Condition 15 stating
there would be no overnight parking (from 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.) on
the property.
Ms. Nelson
indicated the Country Financial building was currently a multi-tenant building and
those employees may work late hours.
Councilmember Holden
understood the main campus had a parking shortage. She did not want
to see the Pine Tree property become an overnight parking lot for students living on the main
campus. She recommended employees of the building be given an employee sticker to avoid this
concern. She did not want to see the site become an off-site or overflow parking lot when it was a
commercial business.
Mayor Grant
questioned if cars parked in a private lot could be given a ticket.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 15
City Attorney Jamnik
commented this would be a violation of the CUP and not a ticketable
offense. He indicated the long term operations of the building were somewhat unknown and the
applicant could be required to provide the Council with a parking plan for approval that would
address the concerns of satellite parking.
Councilmember Holmes
did not feel it was necessary to restrict overnight parking at this time.
She recommended that Bethel manage this issue.
Councilmember Werner
asked how many cars were parked on the main campus overnight.
Mr. Mazorol
discussed the parking situation on the main campus noting bottlenecks occur during
the daytime hours.
Councilmember Holden
withdrew her overnight parking amendment.
AMENDMENT: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion
adding Condition 15 which would require the applicant to submit to
the City a parking plan annually for approval.
Bob Revoir
, Cushman and Wakefield, recommended the Council keep in mind that several of the
tenants would remain in the building for the next seven years. These businesses may have
overnight parking or company cars on site for several years.
Mayor Grant
reported the City would not ticket or tow cars parked overnight, this would instead
be a violation of the CUP, which would have to be addressed by the parking plan.
Mayor Grant
called the question.
The amendment carried (5-0).
Councilmember Holmes
requested another Condition be added stating the staging of the
property will be Phase I – 2013-2014 as indicated in Attachment C, Phase II – 2015-2018, and
Phase III would remain as written.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Holmes moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion
adding Condition 16, stating the staging of the Pine Tree Drive
property will be Phase I which will take place in 2013-2014 as
indicated; and Phase II which will take place in 2015-2018.
Councilmember Werner
asked if the square footage would be addressed.
Councilmember Holmes
recommended the proposed square footage within the phasing remain
as is.
Councilmember McClungCouncilmember Holden
and did not support this amendment.
The amendment carried (3-2) (Holden and McClung opposed).
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – OCTOBER 28, 2013 16
AMENDMENT: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden
seconded a motion amending Condition 5 to read that no
undergraduate programs shall be implemented on the site until a trail
connection is completed between the two campuses.
Councilmember Holmes
commented the trail may not be completed until 2018 given the
roadway improvements planned by MnDOT. She felt this amendment was over burdensome and
unfair to Bethel.
Councilmember McClung
indicated he was concerned with the safety of the students moving
from one campus to the other. He stated Bethel would have two years to complete the necessary
trail connections before undergraduate programs were offered on the new campus.
Councilmember Holden
requested comment from SRF regarding the gaps within the trail
connection.
Mr. Pacyna
discussed the gaps within the system noting students would still be able to travel
from the main campus to the Pine Tree campus at this time. However, additional connections
would increase pedestrian safety.
Mayor Grant
explained the $800,000 payment from Bethel for the trail connection would be
phased over the next several years. He questioned if the Council wanted to extend the Council
meeting an additional 30 minutes to finish discussing this item.
Councilmember McClung
was in favor of not finishing this item, but rather continuing it to the
Council’s next meeting.
Councilmember Holden
recommended the Council take action on the motion on the floor.
Mayor Grant
requested the Council extend the meeting another 15 minutes to allow for Council
Comments.
Councilmember McClung
withdrew his motion regarding the proposed amendments to
Condition 5.
Councilmember Holden
withdrew her second.
MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a
motion to extend the Council meeting an additional 10 minutes for Council
Comments. The motion carried (5-0).
MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a
motion to table action on Planning Case #13-013 Bethel University -
Conditional Use Permit due to time and that it be reviewed at the November
12, 2013 Council meeting. The motion carried (5-0).
B. Planning Case #13-004 – Zoning Code Amendment – Parks and Open Space
District and Conservation District
Attachment C
(reserved for recording information)
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITAND DEVELOPMENT
CONTRACT
1.Permit.
Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Arden Hills
hereby grants a conditional use permit to Bethel University for the following use:
Higher education use of up to 189,804 square feet at the existing office building located at 2
Pine Tree Drive in Arden Hills. The higher education use may include administrative offices,
general and specialized classrooms, meeting rooms, common spaces, and other general educational
and related purposes.
2.Property.
The permit is for the following described property ("subject property") in
the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota:
Legal Descriptions and land survey as attached as Exhibit A.
1
3.Conditions.
A. The Permit for the proposed use is issued subject to full compliance by Bethel University of the
following terms and conditions:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2.That the permitted use shall exclusively pertain to the existing building that is 189,804
square feet in size. Any additional buildings, facilities, recreational fields or structures
shall require City Approval.
3.That a trail connection shall be provided to address pedestrian movements between the
University’s east and west campuses. That the applicant shall work with the City to
determine the best route to ensure safe pedestrian and bicycle movements.
4.That bus transit between the two campuses shall beprovided to accommodate class
schedules at the University.
5.That no traditional undergraduate programs shall be implemented on the site until a
shuttle service is operational between the two campuses.
6.That bicycle parking shall be provided at a minimum of one (1) space per ten (10) vehicle
parking spaces.
7.That vehicle parking on the site shall be provided at a minimum of (1) space per 250
square feet of gross floor area.
8.That a lighting plan shall be submitted and approved by the City and the Ramsey County
Sheriff.
9.That loading/unloading zones and shuttle service routes shall be consistent with the
recommendations made by SRF Consulting during the Traffic Study and Parking
Analysis.
10.That the applicant will apply for City approval for any changes to exterior signage.
11.That the applicant will request an amendment to the conditional use permit for any
increase in intensity of the higher education use.
12.That all Building Code and Fire Marshal requirements shall be met prior to occupancy of
each area being remodeled
13.That Bethel shall contribute up to $800,000 over a period of years toward a City
constructed trail between the main campus and the new off-campus siteas required above
and detailed below.
14.That the letter dated October 24, 2013, from BethelUniversity to the City of Arden Hills
responding to questions regarding public access to the on-site trail system, the buffer
zone to the south of the property, further plans for site development, and Bethel-owned
property on County Road E2 and County Road F, be attached to this document(Exhibit
B).
15.That the applicant annually submit aparking plan for City approval.
16.That the submitted phasing plan be adjusted so that Phase I may occur 2013 –2014;
Phase II may occur 2015 –2018; and Phase III may occur 2018–2025.
2
B. Trail improvement conditions and agreement. The City approves the conditional use for
institutional or educational use of the Property on the condition that Bethel University enter into a
development contract committing to financially contribute to the construction by the City of a
pedestrian trail connecting its main campus to the Property approved by this Conditional Use
Permit. The Parties hereby agree that:
The City will complete construction ofa six to eight-foot, off-road bike/pedestrian trail
no later than 2018.
The trail will be built from west entrance to Bethel, south along the west side of Old
Snelling to County Road E, and then either on the north or south side of County Road E.
Final placement is dependent on MnDOT decision regarding placement of the trail on the
County Road E bridge over Highway 51.
Bethel will be responsible for any trail connections on their properties.
Bethelwill contribute up to $800,000 towards the cost of the trail to be paid beginning in
2016 as follows:
2016-$50,000
o
2017-$50,000
o
2018-$100,000
o
2019-$100,000
o
2020-$100,000
o
2021-$100,000
o
2022-$150,000
o
2023-$150,000
o
3
Payment shall be made no later than January 31 of each year, and Bethel may prepay any
or all scheduled payments.
If the cost of the trail is less than $800,000, the last payment above will be reduced
accordingly.
The City will provide to Bethel any pertinent construction or financing documents related
to the trail construction in the City’s possession upon request of Bethel.
4.Termination of Permit.
The City may revoke the permit following a public
hearing for violation of the terms of this permit, including any failure by Bethel to make the agreed
upon payments for the trail construction as specified in paragraph 3, above.
5.Lapse.
If within one year of the issuance of this permit Bethel has not commenced
the allowed use, this permit shall lapse.Bethel’s use of at least 20,000 square feet for higher
education, expected to commence in January 2014, will satisfy this condition.
6.Criminal Penalty, other Enforcement.
Both the owner and any occupant of the
subject property are responsible for compliance with this conditional use permit. Violation of the
terms of this conditional use permit is a criminal misdemeanor. The City may suspend or revoke
building or occupancy permits or seek other civil remedies for any violations of this Permit and
Contract.
4
Dated ____________________, 2013.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
BY: _______________________________
David Grant, Mayor
(SEAL)
AND_______________________________
Amy Dietl, City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
( ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of
_______________, 2013, by ____________________ and by ____________________,
respectively the Mayor and CityAdministratorof the City of Arden Hills, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
__________________________________
5
Dated ____________________, 2013.
DEVELOPER:
BETHEL UNIVERSITY
BY: ______________________________________
Its:
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
( ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ______________,
2013, by __________________________________ the ___________________ of Bethel University, a
Minnesota _____________ , on behalf of said _____________.
______________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
CK
AMPBELL NUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
JJJ
6
Exhibit A
Legal Description
Parcel 1:
All of the Northwest one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter (NW 1/4 of NE 1/4) of Section 34,
Township 30 North, Range 23 West, except the following five (5)
A) The West one hundred twenty (W. 120) feet of the East three hundred forty-seven (E. 347) feet of the
North two hundred eighty-three (N. 283) feet thereof; and
B) The North three hundred forty-three (N. 343) feet thereof lying West of a line, being a contin
the Westerly line projected on a Southerly direction, of the West one hundred twenty
the East three hundred forty-seven (E. 347) feet of the North two hundred eighty-three (N. 283) feet of
said NW 1/4 of NE 1/4.
C) That part of the East 100 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34,
Township 30, Range 23 West, which lies South of the extended Sou-of-way line of Harriet Avenue
as said line is shown in the plat of Hunter's Park Fourth Additi
D) That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 30, Range
bounded by the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Northwest Quarter
1,395.75 feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of said Section 34, thence Westerly 70.00 feet at right angles t
with said West line to a line parallel with and distant 43.00 fene of said
Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Easterly alon
of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South
beginning.
E) The East 347 feet of the North 343 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast
of NE 1/4) of Section 34, Township 30, Range 23 according to the
thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota; excepting therefrom any part ned in the deeded
legal description to the City of Arden Hills in Warranty Deed da
Document No. 2000781 which deeded legal description is described
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 30, Range 23,
bounded by the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Northwest Quarter
1,395.75 feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of the Southwerter of the Northeast Quarter
of said Section 34; thence Westerly 70.00 feet at right angles t
with said East line to a line parallel with and distant 43.00 fe
Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Easterly along last said p
of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South
beginning.
Ramsey County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 2:
The Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, To
part taken for Josephine Hills No. 3, and also except that part
described as follows:
Beginning at the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 12, Josephine Hills No. 3,
degrees 12 minutes 00 seconds East, 30 feet; thence North 03 deg
84.83 feet; thence North 75 degrees 49 minutes 18 seconds East 6ore or less, to the East
line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and the
thereof taken for highway purposes by the State of Minnesota and
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 521161
Attachment D
MEMORANDUM
4.B
DATE:
October 9, 2013
PC Agenda Item
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-013–Public Hearing Required
Applicant:
Bethel University
Property Location:
2 Pine Tree Drive
Request:
Conditional Use Permit–Higher Education
Requested Action
The applicant is requestinga Conditional Use Permit withPlanning Case#13-013 to allow
higher education as the principal use within the facility located at 2 Pine Tree Drive(County
Financial Building).
Background
1.Overview of Request
The City has received a proposal from Bethel University to obtain a conditional use permit to
allow higher education as the principal use of the property at 2 Pine Tree Drive. TheUniversity
has negotiated a purchase agreement in order toacquirethe property from Country Financial,
contingent on the approval of a conditional use permit that would allow the entire facility to be
used for higher education and other general administrative uses. If approved this site would
function as the east Campus for Bethel University.
2.Background
The applicant has applied to expand the higher educational use at 2 Pine Tree Drive to
encompass the entire 189,804 square foot facility. Their objective is to purchase the building,
and as leases expire, fully occupy the structure within 5 to 15 years. Bethel University has a plan
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 1of 9
to slowly expand their higher education uses, including administrative offices, general and
specialized classrooms, meeting rooms and other general educational uses into the space. Bethel
University previously obtained a conditional use permit (Planning Case#13-008) from the City
to occupy approximately 26,000 square feet of the County Financial building for higher
education. The approval was granted for higher education but requires the University to seek
additional approval for any expansion or intensification of the use.
Theproperty located at 2 Pine Tree Driveiscurrently owned by Mutual Services Life Insurance
Company (c/o Country Life Insurance Company)alsoknown as Country Financial.The
property is generallypositioned north of Lake Josephine, south of County Road E, east of
Highway 51/Snelling Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue. The property consists of three (3)
parcels that total approximately forty-three (43) acres.Of the three (3) continuous parcels only
the northern two have associated functions that currently relate to the proposed principle useof
the property.The northern parcel which is 21.52 acres in size contains the access road off of
Pine Tree Drive and the majority of the surface parking. The center parcel which is 19.16 acres
in size contains the one (1) existing building and a small fraction of the surface parking. The
remaining undeveloped parcel to the south is 2.43 acres in size and is made upof mainly
woodlands and wetlands.
The property is located within the B-2 General Business District, where higher educational uses
are permitted by conditional use permit.The property includes a five (5) story, 189,804square
foot multi-tenant office building, of which 181,432 is rentable. At this timeapproximately
75,000 square feet of the building is occupied by Country Financial and other tenants of the
building.Approximately sixty percent (60%)of the building is currently vacant.
According to the information provided by Bethel University the property would have a diverse
mixture of normaldaytime office uses along with both daytime and evening classes. The
University is planning for a mix of transportation modes to be used between the two campuses,
including shuttle service, carpooling, personal vehicles, walking and biking. Shuttle services to
and from the main campus would be provided to the students, guests, faculty and administration
staff on a daily basis.A pedestrianand bicycletrail connecting the two campuses is also a desire
of the University in order to provide safe routes for theirentire student body.
Primarilyclasses at the Pine Tree location would be held between the hours of 7:00 am and 5:00
pm, Monday through Friday. Evening classeswould also be offeredand would generally be
between the hours of 5:00 pm and 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday.Peak classroom usage,
Monday through Friday,is between 350 and 500 students during daytime hoursand peaks
between 240 and 375 students during the evening hours,Monday through Thursday. As shown
by the applicant,two scenarios have been developed to understand the use of the Pine Tree
Campus in terms of its student, faculty and administrative populations. Scenario 1 indicates the
likely useof the facility at full capacitywould be 797 people/seats.Thisscenarioaccounts for
237 staff or faculty and 560 classroom seats. Scenario 2 suggests the maximum capacityof the
facility would be873 people/seats. This scenario indicates that 203 staff or faculty and 670
classroom seatswould utilize the facility.(See Attachment C & D)
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 2of 9
The current surface parking lot on the property consists of approximately 777 parking spaces, or
roughly one (1) space per 260 square feet of gross building area. The zoning ordinance states
that one (1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area is required for businessand professional
office uses. Bethel has prepared a class scheduling analysisindicating how theirstaggered
classroom usage mitigates the parking concernon the property.(Attachment E)
The applicant has provided a detailed narrative(Attachment B) of the proposed use along with
preliminary plans for the layout of the facility. (Attachment C & D).
3.Surrounding Area:
DirectionFuture Land Use PlanZoningExisting Land Use
CMU –Community B-2General Business
NorthCommercial
Mixed UseDistrict
P/OS –Park and Open
R-1 Single Family Residential and Parks/Open
SouthSpace and LDR –Low
ResidentialSpace
Density Residential
B-2 General Business
CMU –Community
District; R-4 Multiple
Mixed Use;HDR –High
Dwelling District; and R-
EastDensity Residential;and Commercialand Residential
3 Townhouse & Low
LDR –Low Density
Density Multiple
Residential
Dwelling District
LDR –Low Density R-1 Single Family
WestResidential
ResidentialResidential
4.Site Data:
Future Land Use Plan:CMU –Community Mixed Use
Existing Land Use:Commercial
Zoning:B-2General Business District
Size:43.11acres (3 Parcels -2Pine Tree Drive, 12 Pine Tree Drive, and
4300 Dunlap Street N) with a 189,804 square foot office building
Topography:Relatively Flat
Plan Evaluation
1.B-2Zoning Regulations
The B-2General Business District allows higher education usesby conditional use permit.
Higher education is defined in the Zoning Code as “junior colleges, colleges and universities
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 3of 9
approved by the Minnesota Higher Education Coordinating Board for the Minnesota Department
of Education”.
According to Section 1320.04 Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance, the stated purpose of the B-2
District is as follows:
1.To be a place in which people can live, work and play.
2.To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian-and bicycle-friendly community
with a distinct identity.
3.To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and socialize.
4.To implement design standards to promote an attractiveenvironment with lasting and
sustainable value.
5.To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that is
naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity.
6.To provide an adequate supply of business and professional service areas to meet the
needs of residents.
7.To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare and similar safety
problems.
8.To implement the Plan known as the “Guiding Plan for the B2 District,” which was
adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2008.
2.Parking–
Meets Requirements
The current surface parking lot on the property consists of approximately 777 parking spaces, or
roughly one (1) space per 260 square feet of gross building area. The zoning ordinance states
that one (1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area is required for business and professional
office uses.
SRF Consulting conducted a Parking Analysis of the site and determined that the site has more
than adequate parking to accommodate the proposed use.
3.Traffic
A traffic study and parkinganalysis has been completed by SRF Consulting to determine what
changes may beneeded in order for the site to operate effectively for a higher education use. For
additional details regarding the Traffic Study and Parking Analysis,please seeAttachment F.
Summary of Conclusions & Recommendations -
Results of the existing capacity analysis indicate that all study intersections currently operate
at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. No significant
side-street delays were observed.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 4of 9
Results of the year 2018 (Phase 2) build operations analysis indicates that all study
intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOSC or better, except the
County Road E/Old Snelling intersection during the p.m. peak hour. The 95th percentile
queues in both the eastbound and southbound directions are expected to extend up to
approximately 500 feet.
This intersection is expected to be approaching capacity by year 2018, regardless of the
o
proposed expansion.
To address the poor operations at the County Road E/Old Snelling intersection under year
2018 (Phase 2) build conditions, construction/installation of a roundabout or traffic signal
should be considered.
However, since the poor operations would likely occur for only a short period each day
o
(i.e. one or two hours), the City/County may deem this acceptable given the relatively
high costs associated with these improvements.
Results of the year 2025 (Phase 3) build operations analysis indicate similar operations to the
year 2018 Phase 2 build conditions are expected. Therefore, the potential mitigation
identified under year 2018 is considered adequate.
Based on the review of the existing parking supply/demand and the ITE calculations for
future conditions, the current 777 parking spaces are more than adequate to meet the future
demand of the facility.
Given that the travel times would be relatively similar between the two potential shuttle
service routes and the desire to keep “local” trips away from “regional” type of facilities, it is
recommended that the proposed shuttle service utilize a route along Old Snelling, County
Road E, and Pine Tree Drive.
When planning the loading/unloading zones for the shuttle service, the location/size of the
zones and pedestrian waiting areas should be designed to ensure there is sufficient space for
passengers to safely wait, while limiting any sight distance impacts or conflicts with
driveway aisles.
There are multiple gaps (i.e. a lack of connectivity) within the existing pedestrian/bicyclist
system which likely limits activity in the area, particularly along Old Snelling. If these areas
were to be improved, more pedestrians/bicyclists would be expected to utilize these facilities.
The type of improvements that could be implemented to improve connectivity include multi-
use trails, sidewalks, and/or shoulder expansion.
Alternative pedestrian/bicyclist connections were developed to provide a more direct route
between the two campuses and increase the potential for pedestrian/bicyclist activity.
However, further discussion with impacted stakeholders would be necessary since several of
these routes travel through and/or cross areas owned privately, by MnDOT, or the railroad.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 5of 9
4.Sign Code Regulations –
Meets Requirements
The property is within Sign District 7 that permits forty-five (45) square feet of wall signage and
twenty-five (25) square feet of freestanding signage. At this time theapplicant only intends to
change the existing signage to reflect the change in use. No other signage is being requested at
this time.
5.Lighting–
Lighting plan required
The Ramsey County Sheriff would like toconductan analysis of the lighting on the property to
determine if changes need occur to ensure safety onthe site.Lighting on the property may need
to be changed to reflect the change in use. However, at this time Bethel is not proposing to
change the location or arrangement of the lighting on the site as part of the proposed use.
6.Additional Review
The Building Official has reviewed this project and has determined that the following items ata
minimum need to be addresswithin the building.
The facility needs to be brought up to the current Minnesota State Accessibility Code
standards.
The main staircase and entrance/exit doors within the structure need to be updated to
meet building code.
7.Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Criteria –Section 1355.04 Subd 3
The following CUP criteria would apply to schools for higher education in the B-2District:
Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a
Conditional Use Permit Amendment. The Planning Commission and City Council should
consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general
welfare of the owners and occupants of the surrounding land, in particular, and the
community as a whole, in general, including but not limited to the following factors:
1.Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions;
2.Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid
waste, and other nuisance characteristics;
3.Drainage;
4.Population density;
5.Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land;
6.Adjoining land values;
7.Park dedications where applicable; and the
8.Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose
and intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the
City.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 6of 9
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application
would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the
aforementioned factors.Staff offers the following findings for consideration:
General Findings:
1.The applicant is proposing ause ofhigher education for thefacility located at 2 Pine Tree
Drive.
2.The proposed use within 5-15 years will encompass the entire building which is 189,804
square feet.
3.Higher education uses are permittedby conditional use permit within the B-2 General
Business District.
4.No additional buildings or facilities are being planned for this property at this time.
5.In order to provide safe pedestrian movements between campuses a trail will need to be
constructed.
6.The property consists of three (3) parcels of land totaling 43.11 acres.
7.That approximately 777 surface parking spaces exist on the property.
8.The proposed use will not increase the occupancy beyond the original design of the
building.
9.That no changes in lot coverage, landscaping, setbacks or height are being proposed.
Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings:
1.The proposed use will occupy theexistingbuilding and parking areas during both
daytime and evening hours for students, administrationstaffand faculty. Shared parking
on the site will be used for other weekday officeusers.
2.The proposal will have minimal impacts on noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air
pollution, heat, liquid andsolid waste.
3.The proposal will not affect drainage on the property.
4.The proposed usewill not affect the population density on the propertybeyond the
original occupancy design of the building.
5.The proposed land use complies with the intent of the zoning ordinance and is compatible
with uses and structures on surrounding property.
6.The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect land values on the subject property or on
neighboring properties.
7.The park dedicationrequirement does not apply in this application.
Notice
Notice was published in the Arden Hills/ShoreviewBulletinand notice was prepared by the City
and mailed toallproperty ownerswithin five hundred(500) feet of the subject property.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 7of 9
Resident Comments
Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants
in regard to this planning case.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Planning Case
#13-013for a Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Driveto allow higher education.Staff
recommends the following twelve (12)conditions be included with the approval:
1.That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval.Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commissionand City
Council.
2.That the permitted use shall exclusively pertain to the existing building that is 189,804
square feet in size. Thatany additionalbuildings, facilities, recreational fields or
structures shall require City Approval.
3.That a trail connection shall be provided to address pedestrian movements between the
University’s east and west campuses.That the applicant shall work with the City to
determine the best route to ensure safe pedestrian and bicycle movements.
4.That bus transit between the two campuses shall be provided to accommodate class
schedules at the University.
5.That no undergraduate programs shall be implemented on the site until the trail
connection between the two campuses iscomplete.
6.That bicycle parkingshall be provided at a minimum of one (1)space per ten (10)vehicle
parking spaces.
7.That vehicle parking on the site shall be provided at a minimum of (1) space per 250
square feet of gross floor area.
8.That a lighting plan shall be submitted and approved by the Cityand the Ramsey County
Sheriff.
9.That loading/unloading zones and shuttleservice routes shall be consistent with the
recommendations made by SRF Consulting during the Traffic Study and Parking
Analysis.
10.That the applicant will apply for City approval for any changes to exterior signage.
11.That the applicant will request an amendment to the conditional use permit for any
increase in intensity of the higher education use.
12.That all Building Code and Fire Marshal requirements shall be met prior to occupancy of
each are being remodeled.
Options
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions:Motion to recommend approvalof Planning Case
#13-013for a Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Drivebased on the findings of fact and
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 8of 9
the submitted plans as amended by the twelve (12)conditions in the October 9, 2013, report
to the Planning Commission.
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approvalof Planning Case #13-
013for a Conditional Use Permit at2 Pine Tree Drivebased on the findings of fact and the
submitted plans in the October 9, 2013, report to the Planning Commission.
3.Recommend Denial:Motion to recommend denialof Planning Case #13-013 for a
Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Drivebased on the following findings of fact:
findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons
cannot be mitigated.
4.Table:Motion to tablePlanning Case #13-013for a Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree
Drivein order to gather the following information: a specific reason and/or information
request should be included with a motion to table.
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 9,
2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by November 5,
2013(60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-
day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period
beyond the initial 120 days.
Attachments
A.Land Use Application
B.Narrative of Proposed Use
C.Scenario 1 –Likely Use Plan
D.Scenario 2 –Maximum Use Plan
E.Maximum Use –Class Scheduling Analysis
F.Traffic Study–SRF Consulting
G.Aerial Site Map
H.Photos of the Site
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for October 9, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013 -Bethel University CUP -Higher Education Use
Page 9of 9
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 6
1.Recommend Approval as Submitted.
2.Recommend Approval with Changes.
3.Recommend Denial.
4.Table.
Chair Larson
opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Holewa
requested further information on the differences between a conditional
use permit and a conditional accessory use permit.
Community Development Intern Bachler
indicated that a conditional accessory use was seen
as an accessory to the principle use on the property.
Chair Larson
opened the public hearing for Ordinance 2013-009 at 6:58 p.m.
Chair Larson
invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no comment Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Ordinance Number 2013-009 for amendments to Section 1305.04
and Section 1320 of the Zoning Code related to the proposed Parks and Open Space
District as presented in the October 9, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. The
motion carried unanimously (6-0).
Chair Larson
opened the public hearing for Ordinance 2013-010 at 7:02 p.m.
Chair Larson
invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no comment Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 7:03 p.m.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Hames seconded a motion to recommend
approval of Ordinance Number 2013-010 for amendments to Section 1320 of the Zoning
Code related to the proposed Conservation District as presented in the October 9, 2013,
report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried unanimously (6-0).
B.Planning Case 13-013; CUP Higher Education; Bethel University; 2 Pine Tree Drive
–Public Hearing
City Planner Streff
stated the applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit to allow higher
education as the principal use within the facility located at 2 Pine Tree Drive (Country Financial
Building).
City Planner Streff
indicated the City has received a proposal from Bethel University to obtain
a conditional use permit to allow higher education as the principal use of the property at 2 Pine
Tree Drive. The University has negotiated a purchase agreement in order to acquire the property
from Country Financial, contingent on the approval of a conditional use permit that would allow
the entire facility to be used for higher education and other general administrative uses. If
approved this site would function as the east campus for Bethel University.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 7
City Planner Streff
explained that the applicant has applied to expand the higher educational
use at 2 Pine Tree Drive to encompass the entire 189,804 square foot facility. Their objective is
to purchase the building, and as leases expire, fully occupy the structure within 5 to 15 years.
Bethel University has a plan to slowly expand their higher education uses, including
administrative offices, general and specialized classrooms, meeting rooms and other general
educational uses into the space. Bethel University previously obtained a conditional use permit
(Planning Case #13-008) from the City to occupy approximately 26,000 square feet of the
Country Financial building for higher education. The approval was granted for higher education
but requires the University to seek additional approval for any expansion or intensification of the
use.
City Planner Streff
stated the property located at 2 Pine Tree Drive is currently owned by
Mutual Services Life Insurance Company (c/o Country Life Insurance Company) also known as
Country Financial. The property is generally positioned north of Lake Josephine, south of
County Road E, east of Highway 51/Snelling Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue. The
property consists of three (3) parcels that total approximately forty-three (43) acres. Of the three
(3) continuous parcels only the northern two have associated functions that currently relate to the
proposed principle use of the property. The northern parcel which is 21.52 acres in size contains
the access road off of Pine Tree Drive and the majority of the surface parking. The center parcel
which is 19.16 acres in size contains the one (1) existing building and a small fraction of the
surface parking. The remaining undeveloped parcel to the south is 2.43 acres in size and is made
up of mainly woodlands and wetlands.
City Planner Streff
commented that the property is located within the B-2 General Business
District, where higher educational uses are permitted by conditional use permit. The property
includes a five (5) story, 189,804 square foot multi-tenant office building, of which 181,432 is
rentable. At this time approximately 75,000 square feet of the building is occupied by Country
Financial and other tenants of the building. Approximately sixty percent (60%) of the building is
currently vacant.
City Planner Streff
stated that according to the information provided by Bethel University the
property would have a diverse mixture of normal daytime office uses along with both daytime
and evening classes. The University is planning for a mix of transportation modes to be used
between the two campuses, including shuttle service, carpooling, personal vehicles, walking and
biking. Shuttle services to and from the main campus would be provided to the students, guests,
faculty and administration staff on a daily basis. A pedestrian and bicycle trail connecting the
two campuses is also a desire of the University in order to provide safe routes for their entire
student body.
City Planner Streff
reported classes at the Pine Tree location would be held between the hours
of 7:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday. Evening classes would also be offered and
would generally be between the hours of 5:00 pm and 9:00 pm, Monday through Thursday. Peak
classroom usage, Monday through Friday, is between 350 and 500 students during daytime hours
and peaks between 240 and 375 students during the evening hours, Monday through Thursday.
As shown by the applicant, two scenarios have been developed to understand the use of the Pine
Tree Campus in terms of its student, faculty and administrative populations. Scenario 1 indicates
the likely use of the facility at full capacity would be 797 people/seats. This scenario accounts
for 237 staff or faculty and 560 classroom seats. Scenario 2 suggests the maximum capacity of
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 8
the facility would be 873 people/seats. This scenario indicates that 203 staff or faculty and 670
classroom seats would utilize the facility.
City Planner Streff
commented that the current surface parking lot on the property consists of
approximately 777 parking spaces, or roughly one (1) space per 260 square feet of gross building
area. The zoning ordinance states that one (1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area is
required for business and professional office uses. Bethel has prepared a class scheduling
analysis indicating how their staggered classroom usage mitigates the parking concern on the
property.
Site Data
Future Land Use Plan: CMU: Commercial Mixed Use
Existing Land Use: Commercial
Zoning: B-2: General Business District
Current Lot Sizes: 43.11 acres (3 Parcels - 2 Pine Tree Drive, 12 Pine Tree Drive, and
4300 Dunlap Street N) with a 189,804 square foot office building
Topography: Relatively flat
City Planner Streff
reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and the Conditional Use
Permit Evaluation Criteria.
City Planner Streff
provided the Findings of Fact for review:
General Findings:
1. The applicant is proposing a use of higher education for the facility located at 2 Pine Tree
Drive.
2. The proposed use within 5-15 years will encompass the entire building which is 189,804
square feet.
3. Higher education uses are permitted by conditional use permit within the B-2 General
Business District.
4. No additional buildings or facilities are being planned for this property at this time.
5. In order to provide safe pedestrian movements between campuses a trail will need to be
constructed.
6. The property consists of three (3) parcels of land totaling 43.11 acres.
7. Approximately 777 surface parking spaces exist on the property.
8. The proposed use will not increase the occupancy beyond the original design of the
building.
9. No changes in lot coverage, landscaping, setbacks or height are being proposed.
Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings:
1. The proposed use will occupy the existing building and parking areas during both
daytime and evening hours for students, administration staff and faculty. Shared parking
on the site will be used for other weekday office users.
2. The proposal will have minimal impacts on noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air
pollution, heat, liquid and solid waste.
3. The proposal will not affect drainage on the property.
4. The proposed use will not affect the population density on the property beyond the
original occupancy design of the building.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 9
5. The proposed land use complies with the intent of the zoning ordinance and is compatible
with uses and structures on surrounding property.
6. The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect land values on the subject property or on
neighboring properties.
7. The park dedication requirement does not apply in this application.
City Planner Streff
stated the findings of fact for this conditional use permit request support a
recommendation for approval. If the Planning Commission chooses to make a recommendation
for denial, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect the reasons for the denial.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval on this conditional use permit, Staff
recommends the following twelve conditions:
1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended
by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by
the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2. That the permitted use shall exclusively pertain to the existing building that is 189,804
square feet in size. That any additional buildings, facilities, recreational fields or
structures shall require City Approval.
3. That a trail connection shall be provided to address pedestrian movements between the
University’s east and west campuses. That the applicant shall work with the City to
determine the best route to ensure safe pedestrian and bicycle movements.
4. That bus transit between the two campuses shall be provided to accommodate class
schedules at the University.
5. That no undergraduate programs shall be implemented on the site until the trail
connection between the two campuses is complete.
6. That bicycle parking shall be provided at a minimum of one (1) space per ten (10) vehicle
parking spaces.
7. That vehicle parking on the site shall be provided at a minimum of (1) space per 250
square feet of gross floor area.
8. That a lighting plan shall be submitted and approved by the City and the Ramsey County
Sheriff.
9. That loading/unloading zones and shuttle service routes shall be consistent with the
recommendations made by SRF Consulting during the Traffic Study and Parking
Analysis.
10. That the applicant will apply for City approval for any changes to exterior signage.
11. That the applicant will request an amendment to the conditional use permit for any
increase in intensity of the higher education use.
12. That all Building Code and Fire Marshal requirements shall be met prior to occupancy of
each area being remodeled.
City Planner Streff
reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter:
1.Recommend Approval with Conditions.
2.Recommend Approval as Submitted.
3.Recommend Denial.
4.Table.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 10
Chair Larson
opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Stodola
asked how a trail connection would be completed between the two
campuses.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
clarified that there was a gap in the trail at this
time. She explained the City understood the importance of safe travel for undergraduates
traveling between Bethel University and the 2 Pine Tree Drive site. She indicated staff would
continue to work with Bethel representatives on this issue. She reported this work may not be
completed until the County Road E bridge was improved. She noted it was MnDOT’s intention
to have a pedestrian trail that would cross the County Road E bridge.
Chair Larson
reiterated that staff has recommended no undergraduate students be allowed on
the 2 Pine Tree Drive property until the trail connection was complete.
Commissioner Zimmerman
questioned why this condition was suggested when Bethel was
willing to shuttle students between campuses.
City Planner Streff
explained this was Bethel’s intention and recommended by staff for safety
reasons.
Commissioner Hames
asked if Bethel had considered future building expansions on the 2 Pine
Tree Drive property.
City Planner Streff
indicated after speaking with the applicant, nothing was being planned at
this time. He commented that any future development would have to be reviewed and approved
by the City.
Commissioner Hames
inquired who would maintain the walking trails currently located on the
2 Pine Tree Drive property.
City Planner Streff
reported these trails were private and would be the responsibility of Bethel
University.
Commissioner Bartel
questioned if Bethel University had any graduate students currently living
on campus.
Chair Larson
recommended this question be directed to the applicant. He suggested the traffic
study be presented at this time.
Matt Pacyna
, SRF Consulting, discussed the traffic study with the Commission for the proposed
development by Bethel University at 2 Pine Tree Drive. He reviewed the existing traffic
conditions along with the anticipated future traffic forecasts. In addition, impacts to the adjacent
intersections were analyzed. He reported Bethel University was proposing to occupy the space
in three phases and this was taken into consideration in the traffic study.
Mr. Pacyna
reviewed how traffic would flow in and out of the site noting the majority of cars
would come from the west. He noted the County Road E bridge was planned for reconstruction
by MnDOT in 2015. He reported Phase 2 of Bethel’s plan would be completed in 2018, with
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 11
Phase 3 conditions in place by 2025. It was reported the Intersection of County Road E/Old
Snelling Avenue was the only concern.
Mr. Pacyna
provided comment on the amount of parking spaces available at the 2 Pine Tree
Drive site. He noted the current peak parking for this location was 240 spaces. The study found
that the current 777 parking spaces were more than adequate to meet the future demands for this
property. The proposed shuttle service and suggested driving route was then discussed.
Mr. Pacyna
reviewed the available pedestrian and bike facilities that would serve the property.
He pointed out the gaps within the trail system that would have to be addressed prior to the
establishment of Phase 2. It was noted that the proposed route along Old Snelling Avenue and
County Road E was approximately 1.5 miles. More direct routes were available but Bethel
would need to receive approval from the railroad.
Commissioner Hames
questioned what hours of the day were used in the traffic study for peak
traffic times.
Mr. Pacyna
explained he used peak hours of 7:15 a.m. to 8:15 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Commissioner Bartel
questioned when the traffic study was completed.
Mr. Pacyna
indicated the traffic data was collected in late September, which meant schools
were in session.
Commissioner Hames
indicated this area would be drastically impacted in 2015 when the
County Road E bridge was reconstructed.
Community Development Director Hutmacher
affirmed that the bridge was scheduled to be
reconstructed in 2015. The bridge was anticipated to be out for three to six months during one
construction season.
Mr. Pacyna
reported that MnDOT would be responsible for mitigating the traffic issues and
would establish detour routes.
Commissioner Stodola
questioned if Highway 96 would be reopened by 2015.
City Planner Streff
commented this area would be open for traffic in November of 2013.
Kathleen Nelson
, Senior Vice President for Finance and Administration for Bethel University,
thanked the Commission for considering the University’s request this evening. She addressed
several of the questions raised this evening and discussed the conversations she had with staff
regarding the importance of a trail connection. She expected this issue would receive a great
deal of attention going forward. She preferred the pedestrian route along Old Snelling and
County Road E. She suggested that Condition #5 read no “traditional” undergraduate programs
be implemented on this site until the trail connection was complete.
Ms. Nelson
stated Bethel had no plans for additional buildings on this property as it would take
10 to 15 years for the University to occupy the current buildings. She reported that the main
campus had no graduate students living on campus.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 12
Commissioner Holewa
asked if Bethel required freshmen and sophomores to live on campus.
Ms. Nelson
commented freshmen were required to live on campus unless living at home with a
parent. After that time, students could elect to stay on campus or move off campus. She
indicated 67% of students choose to live on campus.
Commissioner Holewa
questioned when Bethel University would take ownership of the Pine
Tree property.
Ms. Nelson
explained Bethel University would be closing on the property by year end if the City
approves the conditional use permit.
Commissioner Zimmerman
inquired how Bethel would manage the current leases on the
property.
Ms. Nelson
stated Bethel would honor all of the existing leases in place and would continue to
operate the property as a multi-tenant building. She reported the space was currently 60%
vacant.
Commissioner Bartel
suggested the City more closely define the term “traditional
undergraduate student” within the conditions.
Ms. Nelson
discussed the differences between traditional undergrads and non-traditional
undergrads.
Chair Larson
found this to be an operational item for Bethel that did not need to be regulated by
the City. He questioned if the office space design on the Pine Tree campus would properly suit
Bethel’s needs.
Ms. Nelson
commented this has been considered by the leadership team and the space would fit
well into Bethel’s future plans.
Chair Larson
opened the public hearing at 8:23 p.m.
Chair Larson
invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
Robert Woodburn
, 1220 Ingerson Court, discussed the history of the 2 Pine Tree Drive parcel
and the surrounding land uses. He wanted to see the surrounding residents and village protected
from increased traffic and noise, while still allowing the neighbors to use the private trails. Mr.
Woodburn also expressed concern with Bethel’s future on the Pine Tree site and if additional
buildings would be constructed.
Pauline Richards
, 3544 Glen Arden Road, stated she lived one block from Snelling Avenue and
County Road E. She found this intersection to be dangerous and thought the proposed use on the
Pine Tree property would further aggravate the traffic in this area.
There being no additional comment Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 8:35 p.m.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – October 9, 2013 13
Commissioner Holewa
asked if Condition 5 needed to be amended prior to approval this
evening.
Chair Larson
thought it would be reasonable for the Commission to amend this condition.
Commissioner Zimmerman
agreed that Condition 5 should be amended to read “traditional
undergraduate programs”.
Commissioner Hames
suggested traditional programs not be allowed on the Pine Tree campus
until the shuttle service was available.
Ms. Nelson
explained adult classes would be offered at the Pine Tree site in Phase I. She
reported a shuttle service would not be in place until Phase II of the project when traditional
student programs were located on the Pine Tree campus. She estimated that Phase II of Bethel’s
plans would not begin until 2014 or 2015.
Commissioner Zimmerman
questioned how Condition 5 should read.
Ms. Nelson
suggested this condition read that no traditional undergraduate programs shall be
implemented on this site until a shuttle service is implemented between the main campus and
Pine Tree campus.
The Commission agreed to this language and directed staff to amend Condition 5.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planning Case 13-013 for a Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree
Drive based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the 12
conditions in the October 9, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
C.Planning Case 13-016; Variance; 1226 Ingerson Road – Not aPublic Hearing
City Planner Streff
stated the applicant has requested two (2) variances for the proposed project
located at 1226 Ingerson Road.
1) The first variance is being requested to exceed the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) by 313
square feet.
2) The second variance is being requested to allow flexibility in the setback
regulations to expand the existing deck, construct a front entrance overhang and
add sunshades to the south facing elevations of the home.
City Planner Streff
indicated the applicants own the property located at 1226 Ingerson Road,
which is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential. The property is generally positioned north of
Lake Josephine, south of Ingerson Road, east of Snelling Avenue/Highway 51 and west of
Lexington Avenue. The existing structure is a two-story home on slab with no basement with its
front access positioned along Ingerson Road to the north. The topography on the site is fairly
flat, slopping approximately two (2) feet from north to south. Ingerson Court curves to the north,
wrapping around the west side of the parcel, where it intersects with Ingerson Road creating a
triangular shaped lot, which for zoning purposes has three (3) front yards along the north, south
Attachment F
Attachment K
Memorandum
SRF No. 0138264
To:
Ryan Streff, City Planner
City of Arden Hills
From:
Matthew Pacyna, PE, Associate
Emily Gross, EIT, Engineer
Date:
October 4, 2013
Subject:
Bethel University Expansion Traffic Study
Introduction
As requested, SRF has completed a traffic study for the proposed Bethel University expansion into
the existing Country Financial building located along Pine Tree Drive, south of County Road E in
the City of Arden Hills (see Figure 1: Project Location). The main objectives of this study are to
review existing operations within the study area, evaluate traffic impacts to the adjacent roadway and
pedestrian/bicyclist network, and recommend any necessary improvements to accommodate the
proposed expansion. It should be noted that Bethel University is expected to eventually occupy the
entire Country Financial building. Therefore, multiple expansion phases were included as part of
this study. The following information provides the assumptions, analysis, and recommendations
offered for consideration.
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions were reviewed to establish a baseline to compare and determine any future
impacts associated with the proposed development. The evaluation of existing conditions includes
peak hour intersection counts, field observations, and an intersection capacity analysis.
Data Collection
Intersection vehicular and pedestrian/bicyclist counts were collected by SRF during the a.m. and
p.m. peak periods on Thursday September 26, 2013 at the followin
County Road E and Old Snelling (CSAH 76)
County Road E and Snelling Avenue (TH 51) West Ramps
County Road E and Snelling Avenue (TH 51) East Ramps
County Road E and Pine Tree Drive
Pine Tree Drive and Country Financial Access
Lexington Avenue N and Harriet Avenue
It should be noted that there are several major roadway projects under construction within the
general vicinity of the proposed expansion that are impacting area travel patterns.
OCP,S150|M,MN55447|763.475.0010|..
NE ARLSON ARKWAY UITE INNEAPOLIS WWWSRFCONSULTINGCOM
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 3
To establish a baseline condition that does not include any construction impacts, historical peak
hour and daily traffic volume information, provided by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT), was reviewed. This data was compared to
intersection counts, which were then modified accordingly to reflect year 2013 non-construction
conditions within the study area.
In addition to the intersection counts, observations were completed to identify roadway
characteristics within the study area (i.e. roadway geometry, posted speed limits, and traffic controls).
Currently, County Road E is primarily a three-lane roadway west of Snelling Avenue and a five-lane
roadway to the east. The posted speed limit along County Road E within the study area is 35 miles
per hour (mph). Lexington Avenue is also a three-lane roadway, but has a 40 mph posted speed
limit, while Old Snelling is a two-lane roadway with a 45 mph posted speed limit. The remaining
study area roadways are two-lane roadways with 30 mph posted spe
Study intersections along County Road E at Pine Tree Drive, the Snelling Avenue West Ramps, and
the Snelling Avenue East Ramps are currently signalized. The County Road E/Old Snelling
intersection is unsignalized and has all-way stop control. The other study intersections are also
unsignalized, but have side-street stop control. The existing geometrics, traffic controls, and
volumes within the study area are shown in Figure 2.
Intersection Capacity Analysis
An existing intersection capacity analysis was completed to establish a baseline condition to which
future traffic operations could be compared. The existing study intersections were analyzed using a
combination of the Synchro/SimTraffic (Version 8.0) and Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
software. Capacity analysis results identify a Level of Service (LOS) which indicates how well an
intersection is operating. Intersections are ranked from LOS A through LOS F. The LOS results are
based on average delay per vehicle, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in
Table 1. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation and LOS F in
demand exceeds capacity. Overall intersection LOS A through D is generally considered acceptable
by drivers in the study area.
Table 1.Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalize
Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
LOS Designation
Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds)
A
B - -
C - -
D - -
E - -
F
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 5
For side-street stop controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate for
the level of service of the side-street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection
with side-street stop control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the overall
intersection level of service. This takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the
intersection and the capability of the intersection to support these volumes. Second, it is important
to consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority
of delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline
traffic volumes to experience high levels of delay (i.e. poor levels of service) on the side-street
approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level of serv
Results of the existing capacity analysis shown in Table 2 indicate that all study intersections
currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, with
the existing traffic control, geometric layout, and signal timing. Furthermore, no significant side-
street delays were observed. However, relatively minor queuing i
westbound left-turn movement at the County Road E/Snelling Avenue West Ramp intersection and
the southbound left-turn movement at the County Road E/Old Snelling intersection during the
peak hours. These queues occasionally (i.e. approximately 10 to 15 percent of the peak hour) extend
beyond their current turn lane storage. It should be noted that there is a planned bridge
improvement that is expected to be constructed in the year 2015 which would provide additional
turn lane storage at the County Road E/Snelling Avenue ramp terminal intersections. Additional
details of the planned bridge improvement are discussed later in this document.
Table 2.Existing Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Intersection
LOS Delay LOS Delay
County Road E and Old Snelling B 2 sec. C 22 sec.
County Road E and Snelling Avenue West Ramps B 7 sec. B sec.
County Road E and Snelling Avenue East Ramps B sec. B 8 sec.
County Road E and Pine Tree Drive A A 7 sec.
Pine Tree Drive and Country Financial Access A/A sec. A/A 6 sec.
Lexington Avenue N and Harriet Avenue A/A 7 sec. A/B 3 sec.
Indicates an unsignalized intersection with all-way stop control
Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop conoach
LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay.
Proposed Bethel University Expansion
Bethel University intends to purchase the existing Country Financial building located along Pine
Tree Drive and eventually occupy the entire 191,000 square foot facility within the next five to
15 years. Two development scenarios (i.e. Ñlikely useÒ and Ñmaximum useÒ) were identified.
However, for purposes of this study, the Ñmaximum useÒ was analyzed since it provides a
conservative estimate of the future conditions. Once fully occupied, the design capacity is expect
to support a total of 873 people, which accounts for approximately 203 staff and up to 670
students/classroom seats.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 6
Bethel University is expected to occupy the Country Financial building in three phases. A summary
of the proposed expansion and details of each phase are outlined in Table 3. Based on this
information, Bethel University is expected to fully occupy the Country Financial building by year
2025. The only access to the proposed expansion is not expected to change and will remain in its
current location along Pine Tree Drive. Shuttle service is prop
no more than four buses in circulation during peak periods. Pedestrian/bicyclist use is also expected
to occur between the two campuses. However, these facilities are relatively limited and would need
to be improved upon to increase utilization and provide a more safe connection. Additional
information regarding the existing pedestrian/bicyclist facilities is discussed later in this study.
Table 3.Maximum Use Phasing Summary
Classroom Full Design Bethel Remaining
Phase/Timeframe Staff/Faculty
Seats Capacity Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft.
-
Phase 2 -
---
Phase 3 - 873
Finally, there are approximately 777 surface parking spaces currently provided on site. No changes
to the parking configuration are planned. However, with the proposed land use change, a review of
the current parking was completed to determine if the existing p
the future demand. The detailed parking analysis is summarized later in this study.
Traffic Forecasts
Since the proposed expansion is expected to occupy the Country Financial building in multiple
phases, two specific development timeframes were selected for analysis. This approach was selected
since Phase 2 and Phase 3 are expected to generate the highest amount of traffic. Therefore, for
purposes of this study, year 2018 (i.e. Phase 2) and year 2025 (i.e. Phase 3) conditions were reviewed.
The following information provides additional details of the traffic forecast development.
Background Growth
To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half percent
was applied to the existing turning movement counts to develop year 2018 and year 2025
background traffic forecasts. This growth rate is consistent with future traffic volume projections
identified in the City of Arden Hills - 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Proposed Development
Since trip generation for universities can vary significantly ba
employees, class times, and access to amenities, specific weekday vehicular counts were reviewed at
the existing Bethel University access locations. This informatio Bethel
University Traffic Study Intersection Control Evaluation/Existing Conditions Analysis dated April 12, 2012. A
summary of the existing Bethel University trip generation is provided in Table 4.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 7
Table 4.Existing Bethel University Trip Generation (Average Week
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Daily
Hour Trips Hour Trips
Land Use Type Size
Trips
In Out In Out
Bethel University 96 27
Trip Generation Rate per Student 2.73
Note: This data is based on actual driveway counts collected and averaged over a three-day period Tuesday through Thursday.
The information presented in Table 4 was used as the basis for t
proposed expansion. As previously mentioned, Bethel University is expected to occupy the Country
Financial Building in multiple phases. Therefore, trip generation estimates were developed for each
phase to illustrate how the site generated traffic is expected to change over time. It should be not
that the Bethel University data was compared to the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 9th Edition and
found to be comparable.
Results of the proposed expansion trip generation, shown in Table 5, indicate that Phase 2 is
expected to generate the highest amount of total site trips, which includes approximately 252 a.m.
peak hour, 256 p.m. peak hour, and 2,539 daily trips. It should be noted that approximately one-
third of the trips are associated with the existing leased space within the building. Under Phase 3, the
site is expected to generate approximately 145 a.m. peak hour, 194 p.m. peak hour, and 1,957 daily
trips, which is roughly a 30 percent reduction in total site tri
Table 5.Trip Generation Estimates Ï Proposed Expansion
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Daily
Hour Trips Hour Trips
Land Use Type (ITE Code, if applicable) Size
Trips
In Out In Out
-
- Existing Leased Office (Actual Count) 2 82 827
- Existing Vacant Office -- -- -- -- --
- Bethel University (Bethel Rate)
- Bethel University Shuttle Service NA
PT 3
hase otal Site Trips7
Phase 2 -
- Existing Leased Office (Actual Count) 2 82 827
- Remaining Office (710) 7 6
- Bethel University (Bethel Rate) Seats 87
- Bethel University Shuttle Service NA 8 8 8 8
Phase 2 Total Site Trips 2 69 87 2,
Phase 3 -
- Bethel University (Bethel Rate)
- Bethel University Shuttle Service NA 8 8 8 8
Phase 3 Total Site Trips 33 78 9
The daily rate was based on the ITE Code for general office spac
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 8
Since the Phase 1 site generated trips are lower than both the P
Phase 1 was not reviewed from an operations perspective. Theref
for Phase 2 and Phase 3 were distributed throughout the study ar
shown in Figure 3, was developed based on existing area travel patterns and engineering judgmen
The resultant year 2018 (Phase 2) and year 2025 (Phase 3) traffic volumes, which include the
background traffic and trips generated by the proposed expansion, are shown in Figures 4 and 5,
respectively.
Year 2018 (Phase 2) Build Conditions
Intersection Capacity Analysis
To determine if the existing roadway network can accommodate the year 2018 Phase 2 build traffic
forecasts, a detailed traffic capacity analysis was completed. However, it should be noted that
MnDOT is currently planning to reconstruct the County Road E bridge over Snelling Avenue in the
year 2015. This improvement will likely include lengthening exis
Road E at the two Snelling Avenue ramp terminal intersections as well as a new multi-purpose trail
located along the south side of County Road E. Since this project is currently planned, it was
assumed to be constructed by year 2018 and is included as part of the traffic operations analysis.
The study intersections were once again analyzed using a combination of the Synchro/SimTraffic
and HCM software.
Results of the year 2018 (Phase 2) build operations analysis shown in Table 6 indicates that all study
intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and
p.m. peak hours, with the existing traffic controls and assumed geometric layout, except the County
Road E/Old Snelling intersection. During the p.m. peak hour, the
intersection is expected to operate at LOS E (although near the LOS D/E threshold) with the
existing all-way stop control. In addition to the poor LOS at this intersection, the 95th percentile
queues in both the eastbound and southbound directions are expected to extend up to
approximately 500 feet. No other significant delay or queuing issues are expected under the year
2018 (Phase 2) build condition.
Table 6.Year 2018 (Phase 2) Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Intersection
LOS Delay LOS Delay
County Road E and Old Snelling B E36 sec.
County Road E and Snelling Avenue West Ramps B B
County Road E and Snelling Avenue East Ramps B C 23 sec.
County Road E and Pine Tree Drive A 6 sec. A 9 sec.
Pine Tree Drive and Country Financial Access A/A A/A 6 sec.
Lexington Avenue N and Harriet Avenue A/A 7 sec. A/B
Indicates an unsignalized intersection with all-way stop control
Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop conoach
LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 12
To address the poor operations at the County Road E/Old Snelling intersection under year 2018
(Phase 2) build conditions, modification of the existing traffic control should be considered.
Potential mitigation includes installation of a roundabout or traffic signal. However, discussion with
impacted stakeholders and City/County officials would need to occur prior to any decision.
Furthermore, it is likely that the poor operations would occur for only a short period each day (i.e.
one or two hours), which the City/County may deem acceptable giv
associated with a roundabout and traffic signal. Therefore, for
was assumed moving forward to illustrate the future impact of the proposed expansion. It should
be noted that this intersection is expected to be approaching capacity by year 2018, regardless of the
proposed expansion.
Year 2025 (Phase 3) Build Conditions
Intersection Capacity Analysis
To determine if the existing roadway network with the planned Co
reconstruction project can accommodate the year 2025 Phase 3 build traffic forecasts, a detailed
traffic capacity analysis was completed. Although from a traffic volume perspective the Phase 3
condition is expected to generate less site trips than under Phase 2 conditions, it is likely that
area developments and growth will likely continue to occur (i.e. background traffic). Therefore, the
study intersections were once again analyzed using a combination of the Synchro/SimTraffic and
HCM software.
Results of the year 2025 (Phase 3) build operations analysis shown in Table 7 indicate similar
operations to the year 2018 Phase 2 build conditions are expected. Once again, all study
intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and
p.m. peak hours, with the existing traffic controls and assumed geometric layout, except the County
Road E/Old Snelling intersection. During the p.m. peak hour, the
intersection is expected to operate at LOS E (although near the LOS D/E threshold) with the
existing all-way stop control. In addition to the poor LOS at this intersection, the 95th percentile
queues in both the eastbound and southbound directions are expected to extend up to
approximately 500 feet. No other significant delay or queuing issues are expected.
Table 7.Year 2025 (Phase 3) Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Intersection
LOS Delay LOS Delay
County Road E and Old Snelling B E37sec.
County Road E and Snelling Avenue West Ramps B 3 sec. B 6 sec.
County Road E and Snelling Avenue East Ramps B 2 sec. C 2 sec.
County Road E and Pine Tree Drive A 6 sec. A 8 sec.
Pine Tree Drive and Country Financial Access A/A A/A 6 sec.
Lexington Avenue N and Harriet Avenue A/A 6 sec. A/B sec.
Indicates an unsignalized intersection with all-way stop control
Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop conoach
LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 13
As previously mentioned, modification of the existing traffic control at the County Road E/
Old Snelling intersection should be considered to address the poor operations under year 2025
(Phase 3) build conditions. Potential mitigation includes installation of a roundabout or traffic signal.
However, discussion with impacted stakeholders and City/County officials would need to occur
prior to any decision. Furthermore, it is likely that the poor operations would occur for only a short
period each day (i.e. one or two hours), which the City/County may deem acceptable given the
relatively high costs associated with a roundabout and traffic signal. It should be noted that given
the current geometric layout and all-way stop control, additional turn-lane improvements would not
be recommended due to potential conflicts/safety issues.
Other Considerations
Parking
The current parking supply includes a total of 777 surface parking spaces, which includes both
regular and handicap spaces. To determine if this supply is considered adequate to meet the future
demand, a detailed parking review was completed. The first step of the parking analysis was to
identify the existing parking demand at the Country Financial building. This was accomplished by
completing parking lot surveys during three periods (i.e. 10:00
typical weekday. Based on these surveys, approximately 240 parking spaces were occupied during
both the 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. periods, which represents approximately 30 percent utilization.
The second step was to review the parking demand based on the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 4th
Edition, which is summarized in Table 8.
Table 8.Parking Supply/Demand
Demand Parking Surplus /
Land Use Type (ITE Code, if applicable) Size
Rate Demand (Deficit)
-
3. spaces/
- Existing Office (701)* SF --
- Bethel University (550) people --
person
- 6
-97
Phase 2 -
spaces/
- Existing Office (701) 276 --
- Bethel University (550) people
276 --
person
--
Phase 3 -
- Bethel University (550) 873 people 332 --
person
Phase 3 -- 332
* Although the non-Bethel components total uare feet However,
-occupancy.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 14
The ITE parking generation demand rates use key inputs, such as facility size and travel behavior
characteristics based on utilization surveys of particular land uses, to estimate parking demand. The
ITE Parking Generation Manual, 4th Edition estimates an 85th percentile demand based on the study
survey locations. The 85th percentile is a statistical measure that represents the point at which 85
percent of the study sites had an observed peak period parking demand equal to or less than the
value. Furthermore, it is good practice for the parking supply of any facility to equal the peak
parking demand plus an additional 15 percent. This extra supply reduces the unnecessary circulation
of vehicles looking for parking and the perception of inadequate parking.
Based on the review of the existing parking supply/demand and the ITE calculations for future
conditions, the current 777 parking spaces are more than adequate to meet the future demand of the
facility. As Bethel University occupies more of the facility over time, the peak parking demand is
expected to decrease. This is primarily due to the reduction in office space, which typically requires
more parking than a university.
Shuttle Service
A shuttle service is proposed between the main Bethel University
Based on correspondence with Bethel staff, the shuttle service w
the campuses with no more than four buses in circulation during any period. Based on this
assumption, each bus is expected to make two complete round trips during each hour, which
includes dwell time for loading/unloading of passengers.
Specific loading zones and routes of the shuttle service have not been determined at the time of this
study. However, a cursory review of the area indicates there is only one logical route from the
proposed expansion to the main campus. This route, traveling from the proposed expansion, would
utilize Pine Tree Drive, County Road E, and Old Snelling. However, there are two potential routes
from the main campus to the proposed expansion that could be utilized.
The first route would follow the same path previously mentioned,
second route would exit the main campus via Snelling Avenue and utilize the County Road E West
Ramp. Although this second route would likely be slightly faster from a travel time perspective, it is
not ideal to have a ÑlocalÒ type of trip on a more ÑregionalÒ type of facility such as Snelling Avenue,
particularly for only approximately one-quarter mile. Furthermore, direct access to Snelling Avenue
from the main campus may create a potential safety issue due to the speed differential of the buses
and vehicles along Snelling Avenue. Therefore, given that the tr
it is recommended that the proposed shuttle service utilize the first route identified along Old
Snelling.
As previously mentioned, specific shuttle service loading/unloading zones have not been identified.
When planning these locations, the location/size of the loading/unloading zones and pedestrian
waiting areas should be designed to ensure there is sufficient space for users to safely wait, while
limiting any sight distance impacts or conflicts with driveway aisles. This includes zones at both the
main campus and the proposed expansion.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 15
Pedestrian/Bicyclist Facilities
Although shuttle service will be provided between the two campuses, there is the potential that
students/employees may prefer to walk or bike. Since the campuses are located approximately one
and one-half miles apart (via existing pedestrian/bicyclist faci
campuses is expected to be approximately 15 to 25 minutes and less if biking. Given this
information, review of the existing pedestrian/bicyclist facilities was completed, which is illustrated
on Figure 6.
Review of the existing pedestrian/bicyclist facilities between the two campuses indicates that there is
a variety of facilities within the area. The facilities include sidewalks, multi-use trails, and on-street
shoulder areas that are greater than six feet in width, which are considered relatively
pedestrian/bicyclist friendly. It should be noted that this assumes that bicyclists could utilize the
sidewalk, if desired. However, there are also multiple gaps (i.
pedestrian/bicyclist system which likely limits activity in the area, particularly along Old Snelling.
If these areas were to be improved, more pedestrians/bicyclists would be expected to util
facilities. The type of improvements that could be implemented to improve connectivity include
multi-use trails, sidewalks, and/or shoulder expansion.
In addition to identifying current gaps in the system, alternati
were developed. The intent of the alternatives, which are shown in Figure 6, is to provide a more
direct route between the two campuses and increase the potential for pedestrian/bicyclist activity. A
more direct route would be shorter and result in less travel tim
However, to create a more direct route would likely require furt
stakeholders, since several of these routes travel through and/or cross areas owned privately, by
MnDOT, or the railroad. In particular, crossing Snelling Avenue and the railroad appear to provide
the biggest challenge in developing a more direct route between the campuses. However, there are
multiple alternatives that would improve access to existing pede
County Road E that should be considered.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 17
Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on the analysis the following conclusions and recommendations are offered for your
consideration:
Intersection vehicular and pedestrian/bicyclist counts were collected by SRF during the a.m. and
p.m. peak periods on Thursday September 26, 2013.
Results of the existing capacity analysis indicate that all study intersections currently operate at
an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. No significant side-
street delays were observed.
Relatively minor queuing issues were identified for the westboun
o
County Road E/Snelling Avenue West Ramp intersection and the southbound left-turn
movement at the County Road E/Old Snelling intersection, where queues occasionally
extend beyond their current turn lane storage.
Bethel University is expected to occupy the Country Financial building in three phases, while
fully occupying the facility by year 2025.
Once fully occupied, the design capacity is expected to support a total of 873 people, which
o
accounts for approximately 203 staff and up to 670 students/clas
To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half
percent was applied to the existing turning movement counts to develop year 2018 and year
2025 background traffic forecasts.
Since trip generation for universities can vary significantly ba
employees, class times, and access to amenities, specific weekday vehicular counts were reviewed
at the existing Bethel University access locations and used to identify the future expansion trip
generation.
Phase 2 is expected to generate a total of approximately 252 a.m. peak hour, 256 p.m. peak
o
hour, and 2,539 daily site trips while Phase 3 is expected to generate approximately 145 a.m.
peak hour, 194 p.m. peak hour, and 1,957 daily site trips.
Results of the year 2018 (Phase 2) build operations analysis indicates that all study intersections
are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better, except the County Road E/
Old Snelling intersection during the p.m. peak hour. The 95th percentile queues in both the
eastbound and southbound directions are expected to extend up to approximately 500 feet.
This intersection is expected to be approaching capacity by year 2018, regardless of the
o
proposed expansion.
To address the poor operations at the County Road E/Old Snelling intersection under year 2018
(Phase 2) build conditions, construction/installation of a roundabout or traffic signal should be
considered.
However, since the poor operations would likely occur for only a short period each day (i.e.
o
one or two hours), the City/County may deem this acceptable given the relatively high costs
associated with these improvements.
Ryan Streff October 4, 2013
City of Arden Hills Page 18
Results of the year 2025 (Phase 3) build operations analysis indicate similar operations to the
year 2018 Phase 2 build conditions are expected. Therefore, the
under year 2018 is considered adequate.
Based on the review of the existing parking supply/demand and the ITE calculations for future
conditions, the current 777 parking spaces are more than adequate to meet the future demand of
the facility.
Given that the travel times would be relatively similar between the two potential shuttle service
routes and the desire to keep ÑlocalÒ trips away from ÑregionalÒ type of facilities, it is
recommended that the proposed shuttle service utilize a route along Old Snelling, County
Road E, and Pine Tree Drive.
When planning the loading/unloading zones for the shuttle service, the location/size of the
zones and pedestrian waiting areas should be designed to ensure there is sufficient space for
passengers to safely wait, while limiting any sight distance imp
aisles.
There are multiple gaps (i.e. a lack of connectivity) within the existing pedestrian/bicyclist
system which likely limits activity in the area, particularly along Old Snelling. If these areas were
to be improved, more pedestrians/bicyclists would be expected to utilize these facilities. The
type of improvements that could be implemented to improve connectivity include multi-use
trails, sidewalks, and/or shoulder expansion.
Alternative pedestrian/bicyclist connections were developed to provide a more direct route
between the two campuses and increase the potential for pedestrian/bicyclist activity. However,
further discussion with impacted stakeholders would be necessary
travel through and/or cross areas owned privately, by MnDOT, or the railroad.
H:\Proects\8264\TS\Report\8264_ArdenHills_BethelExpansionTraffic
Attachment M
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
October 22, 2013
TO:
Ryan Streff
FROM:
Matthew Bachler
SUBJECT:Country Financial Property –2 Pine Tree Drive
Background
The Country Financial office building at 2 Pine Tree Drive was approved in Planning Case 77-
027.At the time, Mutual Service Life Insurance Company (MSLI)was seeking to purchase 54
acres of land to locate theircorporate headquarters. MSLI requested arezoning ofapproximately
42 acresfrom the existing R-1 classification to R-B.Of the remaining 12 acres on the site, MSLI
dedicated7.5 acres to the City as parkland (now a portion of the Crepeau Nature Preserve), and
the other 4.5 acres wereleft in a natural state retainingthe R-1 zoning classification.
The City initially required MSLI to apply for a rezoning and Special Use Permit for a Planned
Unit Development.Atthe time the rezoning was requested, the company was considering
developing four residential properties at the southwest corner of the site. Intheir review of PC
77-027, thePlanning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning, with the
recommendation that the Council not give final approval until MSLI had submitted the
development plans required for the Special Use Permit.The Council elected not to wait to review
the development plans and approved the rezoning request with the exception that an easterly
border, 100 feet in width, retain theR-1classification.
Subsequently,MSLI didnot to move forward withthe proposal for residential units on southern
end of the property. Since the proposed use forthe site was a single office building, which was a
permitted use in the R-B zoning district, the development plans werereviewed through the Site
Plan Review process rather than as a Special Use Permit. No formal development agreements
related to this case between the City and MSLI have been found in the City’s recordsor are filed
against the property.
There have been three planning cases pertaining to the property since the approval ofPC 77-027:
Planning Case 87-025: a site plan amendment was granted allowing for the expansion of
the existing parking lot on the site.
Planning Case 04-004: a sign standard adjustment was approved allowing for additional
wall signage on the office building.
Planning Case 09-020: a conditional use permit was approved allowing for the placement
of a telecommunication antenna on the property.
Discussion
Residential Buffers
One of the major issues raised bythe Planning Commission and City Council in their review of
PC 77-027 was the provision of an adequate buffer between the proposed commercial office use
and existing residential areas.MSLIdedicated the 7.5 acres of parklandspecifically to act as a
bufferfor the residential neighborhoods located south andeast of the property.This parcel along
with an Outlot located in the Hunters Park development formed the Crepeau Nature Preserve. In
addition to the park dedication, a 100 foot wide public easementon the property’s eastern edge
was granted to the City for pedestrian and bicycle purposes. This strip of land, whichruns south
from the end of Pine Tree Drive to the Crepeau Nature Preserve, also acts as a buffer between
the Hunters Park development and the Country Financial property.
The intent for the4.5acre parcel in the southwest cornerof the site was toeitherplat the
property for residential development or to keep it in its natural state. On the preliminary site plan,
MSLI showed four residential parcels around a cul-de-sac at the end of Dunlap Street. Thelayout
of the parcels and street was meant to ensure that Dunlap Street would not be extended north
through the property.To date, this property has not been platted and due to the presence of
numerous wetlands, the site may be largely undevelopable.
Conditions of Approval
The main concerns raised by the Planning Commission in their review of PC 77-027pertained to
residential buffer areas and landscaping. The City Council approved the rezoning of the property
to R-B, with the exception that an easterly border, 100 feet in width, remainR-1.Through
negotiations between the City and MSLI, in the end this area was zoned R-Band the company
put in place a permanent public easement along the eastern border.
No additional conditions related to the development of the site were approved by the Councilin
1977.One concern brought up during the public hearing for the case was that MSLI could
develop the site further. It was noted by a Planning Commissioner that the property owner would
need to apply fora Special Use Permit Amendment in order to expand on the site. This
requirement still applies today; the current property owner would need to go through the
applicable city review process, either a Planned Unit Development or Site Plan Review.
Attachment N
Attachment O
Felix Hoover Concerns/Questions from Arden Hills Resident
Bethel Proposal - Planning Case 13-013
1)No apparent changes are currently being planned to handle increased traffic over
Co. Rd. E and Snelling/MN-51. There is already some congestion, car noise and
pollution (idling cars) during peak rush hours...esp at the bridge stoplight by
McDonald's...andat the intersection of Co. Rd. E and Old Snelling. We have been a part
of the congestion. Do you have a sense about how long will it take for the planned 2015
expansion of the bridge to be completed?
City Response: MnDOT is planning to reconstruct theCR E bridge over Snelling
in 2015. Although the specific design has not been finalized, the design will
likely includea three-lane design (one lane each direction and a center turn lane)
and pedestrian facilities on at least one side. In general, a project of this
magnitude would be constructed in one construction season (i.e. 3 to 6 months).
Also, please be aware that some of the congestion on CR E the last couple of
years has probably been because of the MnDOT projects on 694 and Hwy 10/96.
Once all that is open this Fall we will likely see traffic changes again.
2)Start times for classes at the proposed East campus will be staggered. What
proportion of staff and students do you anticipate will use bus transit to get to the East
campus? What proportion are expected to travel by car?
Bethel Response: The City did commission an independent traffic study which is
attached as Attachment F to the staff report.Since this is a new business model
for Bethel, exact numbers are not known, but the consultant did use actual Bethel
traffic counts for their modeling.Faculty and staff who work in the Pine Tree
building will be “assigned” to that building, significantly limiting the transit
between campuses.
3)We noted the possible walking/bike path suggestions. Is any consideration being
given to a pedestrian bridge over MN-51 (perhaps nearer to the east entrance of current
Bethel campus) so to avoid having pedestrians/bicyclists cross over the Co. Rd. E bridge?
CityResponse: The cost of a pedestrian bridgeover Highway 51 would likely
exceed $2.0 million due to the length of the span. Because there is no public
property on the east side of Highway 51, property would need to be acquired for
the bridge to touch down. In addition, it is very unlikely that the railroad would
ever allow an at-grade pedestrian crossing. At this point, no options for a crossing
have been eliminated, but given that pedestrian facilities will be included in the
reconstructed County Road E bridge, that route may be the safest and most cost-
effective.
4)Under staff recommendations #5 "no undergraduate programs shall be
implemented on the site until the trail is complete". Is there any more news about when
the trail will be complete? Why just"undergraduate"?
Felix Hoover Concerns/Questions from Arden Hills Resident
Bethel Proposal - Planning Case 13-013
Bethel Response: This comment was meant to ensure that a safe
pedestrian/bicycle system be in place prior to any students being scheduled across
the 2 campuses (undergraduates are essentially the only students who might be
scheduled to transit between campuses).Earlier this summer Bethel did receive
separate approval to begin teaching limited daytime graduate and evening adult
programs in the Pine Tree building.That traffic is in large part a “transfer” of
traffic from Bethel’s current adult teaching facility on Red Fox Road in Arden
Hills and thus (i) is not new traffic to Arden Hills and (ii) is not traffic that will
transit between the 2 campuses.
5)How did you determine that adjoining land values would not be measurably
impacted?
CityResponse: Staff based this determination on the current use of the property
and its similar use for educational purposes. Office uses and educational uses are
very similar in terms of how the property functions as a whole.
6)Is there an option for nearby landowners to have a noise barrier placed along
Snelling/MN-51...at least for those w/i 350 feet of the proposed campus?
CityResponse: No plans for a noise barrier are being consideredat this time.
Because Bethel is proposing to occupy an existing office building, the City
expects minimal changes to noise levels beyond the current use.
7)Does a non-profit institution provide for the best use of this land in terms of the
City finances and supporting our tax base?
City Response: The Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City
Council based on land use matters. The City is legally prohibited from making a
land use decision based on taxable status. The City Council may request
information on the impact of the proposal on City revenue, but they may not use
this information asa basis for their land use decision.
8)Does this request from Bethel offer an opportunity for a broader discussion about
options for the local community more generally, e.g., increased public transportation
along Snelling/MN-51?
City Response: Metro Transit makes decisionsregarding transit service. The
City has requested additional transit service, howeveraccording to Metro Transit,
the relatively low population density of Arden Hills cannot economically support
additional transit routes or frequency. Discussions resulting in additional transit
service to Arden Hills are more likely to occurwith TCAAP developmentthan
with Bethel’s use of the Country Financial building.
Attachment P
Property Boundary
The zoning district designations represented on this map
correspond to the City of Arden Hills official Zoning Map.
¯
Questions concerning the Zoning Map should be directed
to City Hall. Zoning designations are subject to change.
Please refer to the Zoning Code for complete information.
Map Date: October 4, 2013
P:\GIS_Data\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-013
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 25, 2013
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM:
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-007:
Zoning Code Amendment B-2 and B-3 District
Design Standards Amendments
Requested Action
1. Motion to approve Ordinance 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 of the
Zoning Code regarding Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment,
and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts.
2. Motion to approve publishing a Summary of Ordinance 2013-012.
Background
In October 2008, the City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. The plan
included design guidelines for development in the B-2 District and proposed standards for
building and site design, façade treatment, pedestrian circulation, and parking areas. The City
Council subsequently approved ordinance amendments that adapted the design guidelines for the
Zoning Code. The guidelines now apply to all properties within the B-2 and B-3 Zoning
Districts. Since their adoption, four development projects have been evaluated based on these
design standards:
Planning Case 11-PUD
Planning Case 11-16: Arden Plaza PUD Amendment (Walgreens Pharmacy)
Planning Case 12-19: 1201 County Road E Master PUD
Planning Case 13-04: Lexington Station Master PUD
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\CC Packet (11-25-
13)_PC-13-007
15
Page of
Through the process of reviewing these projects, the City has had the opportunity to identify
sections in the design standards that need adjustments or additions. Staff has completed revisions
to help clarify certain design requirements and to provide applicants with more flexibility in the
development review process. The updated standards also ensure that future development in the
B-2 and B-3 Districts will continue to be well designed. The City Council previously discussed
the proposed ordinance at the October 21, 2013, Work Session (Attachment C). Staff has
attempted to incorporate comments from this meeting into the revised ordinance.
Summary of Proposed Ordinance Amendments
Ordinance 2013-012 amends Chapter 1325 (General Regulations) of the Zoning Code. The
ordinance includes revisions to the following sections of the design standards: building materials,
building design, commercial facade transparency, and bicycle parking. Other minor changes
include removing provisions that are either redundant or subjective, or that do not directly
address design or land use issues. In preparing the amendments, staff reviewed similar design
guidelines that have been adopted by eight cities in the metropolitan area.
Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development,
Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B2 and B3 Districts
Section D: Building Materials
Section D specifies acceptable and undesirable exterior building materials. Research was
conducted on materials that are currently not on the acceptable materials list and meet the Zoning
Code requirement that building materials be enduring, timeless, and well detailed. Tile masonry
and synthetic stone were added to the acceptable principal materials list. A specification was
included to clarify that brick building walls should be of masonry construction and not precast.
Split faced block and stucco were added as acceptable building trim and accent materials. A
provision was included to limit the use of EIFS to 12 feet above the ground line. EIFS can be
easily damaged and prohibiting its use within 12 feet of the ground floor can help prevent the
material from being impaired.
A revision was made to provide staff with more flexibility in the development review process.
Given the pace at which building material technology evolves, a provision was added to Section
D allowing the Community Development Department to approve new materials of equal or
better quality other than those listed.
Section E: Building Design
Section E provides guidelines for the overall design of buildings, including façade articulation
and building placement in relation to lot lines. Currently, the design standards require awnings or
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\CC Packet (11-25-
13)_PC-13-007
25
Page of
overhangs above every entryway in order to provide protection for pedestrians. Under the
existing wording, awnings must be included above service entrances as well. Staff has made a
revision to only require awnings above the primary entryway and entrances that front a public
street.
Section F: Window and Door Openings
Section F includes requirements on transparent window coverage for commercial properties.
Currently, each ground floor façade that fronts a public street or that includes the primary
building entrance must have 50 percent window transparency coverage. For building walls that
are reasonably visible to the public, windows must cover 20 percent of façades, and up to half of
these windows can be simulated.
The revisions attempt to accommodate businessesto have non-transparent building walls
for service areas within stores while still providing adequate window transparency. These
updates would also bring the Arden Hills design standards more in line with regulations that
have been adopted by other municipalities in the metropolitan region. The new standards would
require 50 percent window transparency coverage only on those building walls that front a public
street. Building façades that are reasonably visible from the public right-of-way would be
required to have 20 percent window coverage and for these façades simulated windows could be
used for service areas. The use of simulated windows along public street façades would be at the
Window transparency for multi-family residential uses, which are permitted in the B-2 District as
a conditional use, is not currently addressed in Section F. Staff has made revisions to include
window transparency requirements that are consistent with the existing design standards while
recognizing that the standards for commercial properties are not necessarily appropriate for
residential buildings.
Guidelines for window and door arrangement on a building wall are also included in the
revisions. These guidelines are meant to ensure consistency between the overall design of the
building and the placement of window and door openings. The list of acceptable materials for
windows and doors complements the acceptable exterior building wall materials.
Section Q: Bicycle Parking
Section P of the design standards addresses pedestrian and bicycle circulation improvements.
The section states that projects must comBike racks shall be
guidelines are given on the
design, dimensions, or location of bicycle parking, and a minimum number of bicycle parking
spaces is not specified.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\CC Packet (11-25-
13)_PC-13-007
35
Page of
Staff has made revisions to provide greater specification on bicycle parking requirements and has
included these standards in a new section (Section Q: Bicycle Parking). The changes specify
bicycle parking design and dimension standards; that bicycle parking should be located in a safe
and visible area on the site; and the total number of bicycle parking spaces required for
commercial properties in the B-2 and B-3 Districts.
Findings of Fact
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 13-007 at their November 6, 2013, regular
meeting. Draft minutes from the meeting are included in Attachment D. The Planning
Commission offers the following six (6) findings of fact:
1.The City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District on October 27, 2008.
2.The City Council adopted design standards in Section 1325.05 of the Zoning Code on
November 24, 2008, that was in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for the B-
2 District.
3.The City Council amended Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code on December 8,
2008 to apply the B-2 Design Standards to the B-3 Service Business District.
4.The proposed amendments would provide developers with more clarity in the
development review process and ensure that development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts
continues to be well-designed.
5.The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for the
B-2 District.
6.The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Purpose and Intent of
Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code, Additional Design Standards for New
Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Site in the B-2 and B-3
Districts.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 13-007 at the November 6, 2013, regular
meeting, and recommended approval (6-0) of Ordinance 2013-012 for amendments to Section
1325.05, Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code regarding Additional Design Standards for New
Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts,
as presented in the November 25, 2013, Report to the City Council.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\CC Packet (11-25-
13)_PC-13-007
45
Page of
Requested Action
1. Motion to approve Ordinance 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 of the
Zoning Code regarding Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment,
and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts.
2. Motion to approve publishing a Summary of Ordinance 2013-012.
Attachments
A.Ordinance Number 2013-012 and Publication Summary
B.Working Draft: Section 1325.05, Subd 8., Additional Design Standards for New
Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3
Districts Black-lined Version
C.Draft City Council Work Session Minutes, October 21, 2013
D.Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2013
E.Planning Commission Report, November 6, 2013
City of Arden Hills
City Council Meeting for November 25, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\CC Packet (11-25-
13)_PC-13-007
55
Page of
AttachmentA
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS AND DESIGN
STANDARDS FOR THE B-2 GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND THE B-3
SERVICE BUSINESS DISTRICT
The Arden Hills City Council hereby ordains that Section 1325.05 Subd.8 of the Arden Hills
City Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and
Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts. Unless preempted by the standards
in this section, all other zoning provisions shall apply:
C. Architectural Style and Building Character. Evaluation of a project shall be based on the
quality of its design and on its relationship to its surroundings. Site characteristics to be
evaluated for this purpose include, but are not limited to, building and landscaping materials,
colors, textures, shapes, massing, building components, height, roof-line, and setback.
Monotony of design, both within projects and between projects and its surrounding, is
prohibited. Variation in detail, form, and arrangement shall provide visual interest.
D. Building Materials. Buildings shall be constructed of materials that are enduring, timeless,
and well-detailed. Other new materials of equal or better quality to those listed may be approved
by the Community Development Department.
1. At least seventy-five percent (75%) of the exterior building materials shall be of brick
masonry, tile masonry, natural stone (or synthetic equivalent), decorative concrete plank
siding, transparent glass, or any combination thereof.
2. Trim and other accent or decorative features may be metal, wood, split faced block,
EIFS, or stucco. Metals shall have a matte finish and have visible corner moldings and
trim when used on exterior walls. EIFS shall be located at least twelve (12) feet above the
ground line.
3. Undesirable materials shall include simulated brick; vinyl or aluminum siding; sheet
or corrugated metal siding; plain concrete blocks or panels; brightly colored metal
roofing or canopies; pre-cast tilt-up walls; mirrored or reflective glass; and materials that
represent corporate colors or logos not in conformance with approved building materials.
E. Building Design. The arrangement, massing, materials and colors shall work to create a high
quality development that is responsive to existing buildings, site features, and site design on
adjoining sites in the district.
4. Awnings or overhangs shall be provided at the primary entryway and at all entrances
fronting a public street to provide protection for pedestrians. Awnings shall be opaque so
as not to create a glowing effect with lights under the awnings. Awnings shall be
1
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
constructed of durable and protective material, and shall be properly maintained. Plastic
or fiberglass awnings shall not be permitted.
6. Standardized corporate or franchise architecture identified with a particular chain shall
be discouraged unless it is compatible with surrounding architecture and conforms to
these design standards.
F. Window and Door Openings.
1. Commercial Façade Transparency.
a) Fifty percent (50%) of the first level building façade that fronts a public street
shall be made of transparent windows or doors.
b) Twenty percent (20%) of all other first level building façades that are
reasonably visible from the public right of way shall be comprised of window or
door openings. Simulated or opaque windows may be used on service areas.
c) If the building is a one story design and the first floor elevation exceeds
twelve (12) feet, then only the first twelve (12) feet shall be included in
calculating the façade area.
d) The City may consider a proportional reduction in the transparent window and
door requirement on the public street façade if additional transparent glass is used
on the remaining sides.
2.Residential Façade Transparency. At least twenty percent (20%) of all residential
facades shall be comprised of transparent windows or balcony/door openings. Opaque
or tinted windows may be used to provide privacy.
3.Configurations. The shape, size, and placement of windows and doors shall
emphasize the intended organization and articulation of the façade. Windows and
doors shall be recessed at least one inch rather than being flush with the building
façade.
4.Materials. Acceptable materials for window trim include anodized aluminum, steel,
wood, and clad wood. Door trim shall be made of steel, wood, or clad wood.
5.For buildings with a use or function that does not readily allow windows (e.g. cooler
or freezer areas, mechanical rooms, security areas, storage areas) the transparent
window standards may be reduced at the discretion of the City Council. However,
aesthetic interest must be provided by the use of upper level windows or architectural
detailing that provides arches, patterning, recesses, and shadowing. Architectural
detailing may include such things as change in materials, change in color and other
significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size,
mass, and scale of the wall.
G. Building Color. Building colors shall be muted. Recommended colors include browns,
grays, tans, beiges, and dark or muted green, blues, and reds. Bright or brilliant colors and
2
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
sharply contrasting colors may be used for only accent purposes occupying a maximum of five
percent (5%) of building façades.
I. Signs.
1.Business signs shall be architecturally compatible with the style, materials, colors and
details of the building. Signs shall be incorporated into the façades of the buildings
rather than extending past the roof line and should not project more than twelve (12)
inches beyond the plane of the façades. Retail business wall signs shall be located in
a position above the front window that is located consistently among stores.
J. Site Furnishings and Seating Areas.
3.Restaurants shall include a functional outdoor seating area with tables, chairs,
plantings, and access to the restaurant.
b)The outdoor seating area shall not be used for exterior storage when the area
is not in use.
c)These areas shall be distinguished with decorative fencing and/or plantings.
L. Landscaping. A minimum of one tree shall be placed along the right-of-way every forty (40)
feet. The tree shall not interfere with the roadway and shall be on private property.
M. Parking.
4.Plantings shall be used to soften and shade parking lots and parking structures.
Parking adjacent to streets should be screened from view with landscaping, including
but not limited to trees, hedges, flowers and other bushes and/or decorative masonry
walls. Berms shall be discouraged.
5.Parking lot islands shall be used to distribute large parking lots into separate areas.
Parking lot islands shall be planted with trees or include infiltration basins and
plantings. Entry drives shall be defined by trees and shrubs.
7. Parking structures that are visible from off the site shall display an integration of
building materials, form, and colors with the principal building. No signs other than
directional signs shall be permitted on parking ramp facades.
P. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation. Pedestrian and bicycle improvements shall be installed in
accordance with the City of Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan and the local guiding plan and
shall be in conformance with the following:
1.Site design shall facilitate pedestrian connections and mobility within and between
buildings, sites, and uses by providing clear visual indicators through door placement,
signage, striping, raised pathways, and integrating landscaping components.
2.An internal sidewalk system shall link the primary entrance of each building on site
with the public sidewalk or trail network. In the event a building is subdivided into
3
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
multiple separated tenant spaces, a sidewalk must link the primary entrance of each
separated tenant space with the public sidewalk network.
3.Where there is new building construction or renovation where the renovation value is
thirty percent (30%) or more of the pre-renovation value of the structure, a minimum
six foot concrete sidewalk adjacent to or in all rights-of-way shall be provided. The
location of the sidewalk shall be prescribed by the Public Works Director. The new
sidewalks shall connect to sidewalks on adjacent properties if they exist. At the
discretion of the City Council, the property owner may, in lieu of constructing the
sidewalk, pay the City an amount equal to the cost of constructing the sidewalk to
satisfy the obligations of this section. Said payment shall be used by the City to
further maintain and construct the pathway system within the City.
Q.Bicycle Parking.
1.General Requirements.
a)Bicycle parking may be provided using the following approaches: bicycle racks,
bicycle lockers, or bicycle parking stations.
b)Bicycle racks must support a bicycle frame at two locations and enable the frame
and one or both wheels to be secured. The City requires that bicycle racks meet
-and-post, or comparable design standards.
c)Bicycle racks or lockers must be securely anchored to a level, concrete or
pavement surface.
2.Location Criteria. Bicycle parking shall be located in a safe, designated area and
should be within fifty (50) feet of the primary building entrance. Bicycle racks shall
be visible either from within the building or the public right-of-way.
3.Dimension Criteria.
a)At least two (2) feet of clearance shall be provided from the centerline of each
adjacent bicycle rack.
b)An access aisle of at least five (5) feet shall be provided in each bicycle parking
facility.
c)Bicycle racks shall be at least twenty-four (24) inches from a wall to which they
are parallel and thirty (30) inches from a wall which they are perpendicular.
4.Number of Required Bicycle Parking Spaces. For commercial uses, one bicycle
parking space shall be provided for every twenty (20) automobile parking spaces. A
minimum of two (2) parking spaces is required.
R. Drainage/Water Management Plan: A plan must be submitted with each project or lot
4
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
development in the Districts. The plan must be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District,
other agencies as required, and the engineer assigned by the City. Two or more lots or projects
may coordinate their plans for their mutual benefit.
S.Environmental Conservation and Sustainability. The City encourages the use of green
materials and environmentally friendly construction and site design such as the use of pervious
surfaces, green rooftops, energy efficient materials, LEED standards, and other green building
techniques.
5
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
Effective Date
. This Ordinance shall become effective the day following its publication.
th
Adoption Date.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills the 25 day of
November, 2013.
DAVID GRANT, MAYOR
ATTEST:
PATRICK KLAERS
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Publication Date: December 11, 2013
6
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SUMMARY OF
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
th
On the 25 day of November, 2013, the Arden Hills City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2013-
012, and by the four affirmative votes pursuant to Minn. Stat. §412.191, Subd. 4, directed that a
summary of Ordinance 2013-012 be published.
Ordinance 2013-012 An Ordinance Amending the Special Requirements and Design
Standards for the B-2 General Business District and the B- The
Ordinance amends Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Arden Hills City Code.
A full copy of Ordinance 2013-012 is available for inspection by any person during regular
business hours at the office of the City Administrator, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills,
Minnesota 55112. The Ordinance is also available online at http://www.cityofardenhills.org.
AttachmentB
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and
Modifications to Existing Sites in the B2 and B3 Districts. Unless
(revised 12/17/08)
preempted by the standards in this section, all other zoning provisions shall apply:
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of these additional design
standards is to promote a high level of architectural, landscaping, and site
design in the business districts of Arden Hills. The City seeks to create a
unified, harmonious, and high-quality environment to foster a distinct,
positive, and successful image for the City. The criteria by which new
development, redevelopment, and site modifications in the Districts shall
be judged are as follows:
1. Consistency with provisions of the comprehensive plan and other
guiding plans as amended from time to time; provisions of the zoning
ordinance and subdivision ordinance; and all other applicable
regulations.
2. Use of appropriate materials, lighting, textures, colors, and
architectural and landscape forms to create a unified, high-quality
design concept for each site that is compatible with adjacent and
neighboring structures and functions.
3. Creation of unified site designs, each with a sense of internal
order, that provide desirable environments for site users and visitors
and the community as a whole and that consider all site elements.
4. Provision of safe and adequate access from public streets to sites
giving ample consideration to the location and number of access
points, the safety and convenience of merging and turning
movements, and traffic management and mitigation.
5. Provision of on-site vehicular, bicycling, and pedestrian circulation
by way of interior drives, parking areas, pathways, and walkways
adequate to handle anticipated needs and to safelty buffer
pedestrians and cyclists from motor vehicles. Ample consideration
shall be given to the width of interior drives, internal traffic movement
and flow, separation of pedestrian, cycling, automobile; and delivery
traffic, and the safe, convenient, and practical arrangement of parking
spaces.
B. Application. The standards in this Section should apply only to the
building or site elements being developed or altered (i.e. a proposal for
changes to a building would be required to meet only those standards
that pertain to buildings while changes to a parking area would be
required to meet the standards for parking areas but not for buildings).
The design standards shall be applied proportionately to the degree of
change proposed. Upon recommendation from the Planning
Commission, the City Council may waive specific design standards based
on the scale of the project. The City Council shall make the final
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 1 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
determination on the compatibility and consistency with the design
standards.
C. Architectural Style and Building Character. Evaluation of the
appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and on
its relationship to its surroundings. Site characteristics to be evaluated for
this purpose include, but are not limited to, building and landscaping
materials, colors, textures, shapes, massing, building components,
height, roof-line, and setback. Monotony of design, both within projects
and between projects and its surrounding, is prohibited. Variation in
detail, form, and arrangement shall provide visual interest. Architectural
style should not be restricted.
D. Building Materials. Buildings shall be constructed of materials that are
enduring, timeless, and well-detailed. Other new materials of equal or
better quality to those listed may be approved by the Community
Development Department.
1. At least seventy-five percent (75%) of the exterior building
materials shall be of brick masonry, tile masonry, natural stone (or
synthetic equivalent), decorative concrete plank siding, transparent
glass, or any combination thereof. brick, stone, decorative concrete
plank, transparent glass or any combination thereof.
2. Trim and other accent or decorative features may be metal, wood,
split faced block, EIFS, or stucco. Metals shall have a matte finish and
have visible corner moldings and trim when used on exterior walls.
EIFS shall be located at least twelve (12) feet above the ground line.
Trim and other accent or decorative features may be metal, wood, or
EIFS. Other high-quality materials that increase the variety and
appeal of buildings may be considered as accents. Metals shall have
a matte finish and neutral or earth tone colors. Metals that are used
on exterior walls shall have visible corner moldings and trim.
3. Undesirable materials shall include simulated brick or
stone;, vinyl or aluminum siding;, sheet or metal, corrugated metal
siding;, plain concrete blocks or panels;, materials that have no
pattern or relief when applied to large walls, brightly colored metal
roofing or canopies;, and pre-cast tilt-up walls; mirrored or reflective
glass; and materials that represent corporate colors or logos not in
conformance with approved building materials. Extensive use of
mirrored or tinted glass on the first floor and materials that represent
corporate colors or trademarks that are not in conformance with
approved building materials are also undesirable.
E. Building Design. The arrangement, geometry, massing, materials and
colors shall work to create a high quality development that is responsive
to existing buildings, site features, and site design on adjoining sites in
the district.
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 2 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
1. At least fifty percent (50%) of the largest building on each site shall
be constructed at the front setback line.
2. Façade treatment shall be carried around all sides. Architectural
elements such as, but not limited to, windows, shutters, awnings,
doors, masonry exterior veneers, cornice detailing, window casings,
and other architectural details should demonstrate consistency on all
sides of the structure that are reasonably visible to the general public.
Plain flat walls shall not be permitted when viewable from the public
right-of-way or public areas.
3. To avoid long unbroken expanses and to increase visual interest
from the street, buildings of more than 40 feet in width shall be divided
into smaller increments (between 20 and 40 feet) through articulation
of the facades to convey the impression of individually-constructed
small storefronts or, in the case of housing, housing units. This can
be achieved through the combination of the following techniques:
a) The use of windows and doors;
b) Façade modulationstepping backward or forward or
extending a portion of the façade;
c) Vertical divisions into storefronts with separate display
windows and entrances;
d) Recesses and projections such as porches, dormers and bays
that create shadows and add visual interest;
e) Variation in the rooflines by using multiple roof and ridge lines
perpendicular to one another, offsetting single roof lines, stepped
roofs;
f) Providing a lighting fixture, trellis, tree, or other landscape
feature with each interval.
4. Awnings or overhangs shall be provided at the primary entryways
and at all entrances fronting a public street to provide protection for
pedestriansshelter from the sun and rain. The aAwnings shall be
opaque so as not to create a glowing effect with lights under the
awnings. Awnings shall be constructed of durable, and protective,
and water repellant material, and shall be properly maintained.;
however, pPlastic or fiberglass awnings shall not be permitted.
5. Any multi-level building shall distinguish the ground floor level from
the upper floors by use of any or a combination of these techniques:
an intermediate cornice line, difference in building materials or details,
awnings trellis or arcade, special window details, or brick corbels or
quoins. A strong base and top for multi-story buildings shall be
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 3 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
established; middle layers shall be simpler. Detail shall be an integral
part of the architecture rather than a series of applied elements.
6. Standardized corporate or franchise Franchise architecture
identified with a particular chain shall be discouraged unless it is
compatible with surrounding architecture architecturally integrated into
the district and conforms to these design standards.
7. Entrances shall have convenient access to the street frontage and
to parking serving the use. For those properties along County Road
E, access to the street frontage shall be given priority where feasible.
F. Window and Door Openings. Commercial Façade Transparency.
1. Commercial Façade Transparency.
a) Fifty percent (50%) of the first level building façade that
includes the primary store entrance and/or faces fronts a public
street shall be made of transparent windows and doors that are
recessed at least one inch rather than being flush with the façade.
b) Twenty percent (20%) of all other first level building façades
that are reasonably visible from the public right of way shall be
comprised of window or door openings. Simulated or opaque
windows may be used on service areas.
c) If the building is a one story design and the first floor elevation
exceeds twelve (12) feet, then only the first twelve (12) feet shall
be included in calculating the façade area.
dc) The City may consider a proportional reduction in the
transparent window and door requirement on the public street
façade if additional transparent glass is used on the remaining
sides.
2. Residential Façade Transparency. At least twenty percent (20%)
of all residential facades shall be comprised of transparent
windows or balcony/door openings. Opaque or tinted windows may be
used to provide privacy.At least twenty percent (20%) of the remaining
sides that are reasonably visible to the public shall be window
coverage, half of which may be simulated windows (i.e. spandrel
glass). If additional transparent glass is used on the remaining sides,
the City may consider a proportional reduction in the transparent
window and door requirement on the primary store entrance and/or
public street façades:
3. Configurations. The shape, size, and placement of windows and
doors shall emphasize the intended organization and articulation
of the façade. Windows and doors shall be recessed at least one
inch rather than being flush with the building façade.
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 4 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
4. Materials. Acceptable materials for window trim include anodized
aluminum, steel, wood, and clad wood. Door trim shall be made of
steel, wood, or clad wood.
5. For buildings with a use or function that does not readily allow
windows (e.g. cooler or freezer areas, mechanical rooms, security
areas, storage areas) the transparent window standards may be
reduced at the discretion of the City Council. However, the
architectural detailing aesthetic interest must be provided by the use
of upper level windows, which may include the partial use of simulated
windows, or architectural detailing that provides arches, patterning,
recesses, and shadowing that provide aesthetic interest. Architectural
detailing may include such things as change in materials, change in
color and other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at
intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall.
G. Building Color. Colors shall be harmonious. Building colors shall be
muted.consist of muted colors with low reflectance. Recommended
colors include browns, grays, tans, beiges, and dark or muted green,
blues, and reds. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors
may be used for only accent purposes occupying a maximum of five
percent (5%) of building façades.
H. Fences. Fences shall blend into the landscape, be compatible with
other materials used on site, and be made of a material that minimizes
corrosion. Finished and treated wood, brick, stone or wrought iron is
encouraged.
I. Signs.
1. Business signs shall be architecturally compatible with the style,
composition, materials, colors and details of the building and should
be an integral part of the building. Signs shall be incorporated into the
façades of the buildings rather than extending past the roof line and
should not project more than twelve (12) inches beyond the plane of
the façades. Retail business wall signs shall be located in a position
above the front window that is located consistently among stores.
2. All other provisions in Chapter 12, Sign Code, shall apply.
J. Site Furnishings and Seating Areas.
1. Site furnishings shall be provided based on the scale of the
project. The site furnishings may be spread out on the site or
clustered to provide a more formal area. Placing site furnishings near
landscaped areas is encouraged. These areas may be shared by
multiple tenants on a property or adjacent properties and may include
tables, chairs, benches, plantings, and other outdoor amenities such
as a plaza. These areas shall be maintained for year round use.
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 5 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
Creativity is highly encouraged. These spaces shall be connected to
the sidewalk system.
2. Benches and decorative plantings shall be provided near the
primary entrance of all buildings on a site.
3. Restaurants shall include a functional outdoor seating area with
tables, chairs, plantings, and access to the restaurant.
a) No outdoor seating shall be permitted in any portion of the
public sidewalks where normal pedestrian traffic flow is
obstructed.
b) The outdoor seating area shall not be used for exterior
storage when the area is not in use. While such area is in
operation, all tables and chairs shall be kept in a clean, sanitary
condition.
c) These areas shall be distinguished with decorative fencing
and/or plantings.
d) If alcoholic beverages are served, the establishment shall
take reasonable steps to insure that alcoholic beverages are
consumed only by patrons of the establishment who are of age.
All other provisions related to the license to serve alcohol shall
apply.
K. Screening.
1. Trash and recycling equipment, materials, and containers shall be
fully enclosed and integrated into the architecture of the buildings.
2. All mechanical equipment, whether roof-mounted or ground
mounted should be integrated into the architecture of the building. It
shall be completely screened from the ground-level view of adjacent
properties and public streets. Wood screening shall not be permitted.
3. Truck docks and delivery areas shall face away from the public
street and shall be integrated into the architecture of the building.
L. Landscaping. A generous amount of plant material and landscaping
shall be used on all new development and redevelopment sites. Office
parking areas shall include a generous amount of perimeter and internal
landscaping. Parking structures shall be visually softened with plantings.
A minimum of one tree shall be placed along the right-of-way every forty
(40) feet. The tree shall not interfere with the roadway and shall be on
private property.
M. Parking.
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 6 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
1. Placing parking between the street right-of-way and a building
shall be discouraged.
2. No more than fifty percent (50%) of the parking on a site may be
between buildings or in the side yards.
3. Sufficient parking shall be provided to accommodate the
reasonable hourly peak on a given site. Shared parking is
encouraged to reduce land devoted to parking. Hourly variations
among different types of land use may be considered when estimated
parking demands.
4. Plantings shall be used to soften and shade parking lots and
parking structures. Parking and service areas shall be visually
screened from street views with plantings and architectural
treatments. Parking adjacent to streets should be screened from view
with landscaping, including but not limited to trees, hedges, flowers
and other bushes and/or decorative masonry walls. Berms shall be
discouraged.
5. Parking lot islands shall be used to distribute large parking lots
fields into separate areas. that have visual
relationship to the buildings they serve. Parking lot islands shall be
planted with trees or include infiltration basins and plantings. Entry
drives shall be defined by trees and shrubs.
6. A concrete curb shall be provided around the periphery of all
parking lots and access roads, except where the City Engineer
determines that a curb would impede drainage.
7. Parking adjacent to streets should be screened from views with
landscaping, including but not limited to trees, hedges, flowers and
other bushes and/or decorative masonry walls. Berms shall be
discouraged.
87. Parking structures that are visible from off the site shall display an
integration of building materials, building form, textures, architectural
motif, and building, and colors with the principal building. No signs
other than directional signs shall be permitted on parking ramp
facades.
N. Traffic Study. A traffic study shall be required for all new
developments, redevelopments, and significant modifications to existing
sites unless waived by the City Council.
O. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be provided for the safety and
convenience of occupants and visitors.
1. A lighting plan shall be submitted that shows location, type of
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 7 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
illumination and design. A photometric analysis of site and building
shall be submitted for City approval with all new construction or
redevelopment projects.
2. Exterior lighting shall be consistent in type, design, scale, and
color to create unity in the Districts. High-pressure sodium lighting
and other similar types of lighting color may be required by the City to
promote a unified lighting color throughout the Districts. Other
lighting colors may be considered during the City review process.
3. Exterior lighting for parking lots and buildings shall not be
excessive and shall be directed at their intended purposes.
4. Lighting under a gasoline station canopy shall not be directly visible
from the street but shall be recessed into the canopy or otherwise
shielded.
5. Light washing of buildings and accent lighting may be permitted
through the City review process provided that it does not negatively
impact residential areas or traffic safety and is complementary to the
district as a whole.
P. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation. Pedestrian and bicycle
improvements shall be installed in accordance with the City of Arden Hills
Comprehensive Plan and the local guiding plan and shall be in
conformance with the following:
1. Site design shall facilitate pedestrian connections and mobility
within and between buildings, sites, and uses by providing clear visual
indicators through door placement, signage, striping, raised pathways,
and integrating landscaping components. Other features or materials
may be considered that enhance and provide a safe pedestrian
experience.
2. An internal sidewalk system shall link the primary entrance of
each building on site with the public sidewalk or trail network. In the
event a building is subdivided into multiple separated tenant spaces, a
sidewalk must link the primary entrance of each separated tenant
space with the public sidewalk network.
3. Bike racks shall be required near a public entrance of all buildings.
4. Internal sidewalk systems shall connect with adjacent planned or
developed public sidewalks or trails.
5. The grades of all walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved
areas shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 8 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
64. Where there is new building construction or renovation where the
renovation value is thirty percent (30%) or more of the pre-renovation
value of the structure, a minimum six foot concrete sidewalk adjacent
to or in all rights-of-way shall be provided. The location of the
sidewalk shall be prescribed by the Public Works Director. The new
sidewalks shall connect to sidewalks on adjacent properties if they
exist. At the discretion of the City Council, the property owner may, in
lieu of constructing the sidewalk, pay the City an amount equal to the
cost of constructing the sidewalk to satisfy the obligations of this
section. Said payment shall be used by the City to further maintain
and construct the pathway system within the City.
7. When there is more than one building on a site, a sidewalk must
link the primary building entrances of each building to one another.
Q. Bicycle Parking.
1. General Requirements.
a. Bicycle parking may be provided using the following
approaches: bicycle racks, bicycle lockers, or bicycle parking
stations.
b. Bicycle racks must support a bicycle frame at two locations
and enable the frame and one or both wheels to be secured.
The City requires that bicycle racks -
and-post, or comparable design standards.
c. Bicycle racks or lockers must be securely anchored to a level,
concrete or pavement surface.
2. Location Criteria. Bicycle parking shall be located in a safe,
designated area and should be within fifty (50) feet of the primary
building entrance. Bicycle racks shall be visible either from within the
building or the public right-of-way.
3. Dimension Criteria.
a. At least two (2) feet of clearance shall be provided from the
centerline of each adjacent bicycle rack.
b. An access aisle of at least five (5) feet shall be provided in
each bicycle parking facility.
c. Bicycle racks shall be at least twenty-four (24) inches from a
wall to which they are parallel and thirty (30) inches from a
wall which they are perpendicular.
G.4. Number of Required Bicycle Parking Spaces. For commercial
uses, one bicycle parking space shall be provided for every twenty
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 9 of 10
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
(20) automobile parking spaces. A minimum of two (2) parking
spaces is required.
R. Drainage/Water Management Plan: A plan must be submitted with
each project or lot development in the Districts. The plan must be
approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District, other agencies as
required, and the engineer assigned by the City. Two or more lots or
projects may coordinate their plans for their mutual benefit.
S. Environmental Conservation and Sustainability. The City encourages
the use of green materials and environmentally friendly construction
and site design such as the use of pervious surfaces, green rooftops,
energy efficient materials, LEED standards, and other green building
techniques.
Section 1325 General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 10 of 10
AttachmentC
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 21, 2013
5:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
E.B-2 Design Standards
Community Development Intern Bachler
reviewed the proposed amendments to the B-2 district
design standards. He explained the guiding plan for the B-2 district was accepted in October of
2008. This plan included design guidelines for development in the B-2 district and proposed
standards for building and site design, façade treatment, pedestrian circulation, and parking. He
PUD, Walgreens PUD, 1201 County Road E Master PUD and the Lexington Station Master PUD.
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated that through the process of reviewing these
developments, the City has had the opportunity to identify aspects of the design standards that
may require adjustments or additions. Staff is currently drafting changes to requirements on
building materials, commercial façade transparency, and bicycle parking. These revisions will
expectations in the development review process and to ensure that future development in the B-2
and B-3 districts are well-designed. This draft was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their
May 3, 2013, meeting.
Community Development Intern Bachler
discussed the proposed language changes to the
sections addressing building materials, commercial façade transparency and bicycle parking in
detail with the Council. He requested further comment from the Council.
Councilmember Holden
Community Development Intern Bachler
stated this could be amended to simulated brick.
Mayor Grant
recommended that the language suggest that the brick include mortar.
Councilmember Holden
recommended the transparent window issue that arose with Walgreens
be addressed in the B-2 design standards.
Community Development Intern Bachler
agreed that this issue needed to be addressed to
ensure that the Walgreens transparency window issue would not reoccur along another major
roadway.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 21, 20132
Mayor Grant
commented on Section 4 regarding overhangs. He questioned if plastic, canvas or
fiberglass should be used on overhangs. It was his opinion that plastic and canvas materials faded
and stretched out over time.
Councilmember Holden
indicated that the language requires that overhangs remain in good
condition. She recommended that this be followed for all future developments.
Mayor Grant
reported canvas awnings were just installed at Lexington Station by Mr. Davis. He
In addition, he
recommended the language
Councilmember McClung
agreed this language needed to be addressed. He recommended the
language read awnings or overhangs shall be provided at a buildings primary entry way.
City Planner Streff
suggested staff review this language further.
Councilmember Holden
regarding the monotony of the architectural design.
Mayor Grant
questioned if the Council wanted to require outdoor seating and fencing for
restaurants in the B-2 district.
Councilmember Holden
did not oppose this requirement.
Community Development Intern Bachler
indicated that if a restaurant was looking to locate in
the B-2 district and this requirement did not fit their use, the matter could be further discussed
with the Council.
AttachmentD
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 2013 1
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2013
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
A.Planning Case 13-007; Zoning Code Amendment; B-2 & B-3 Design Standards
Public Hearing
Community Development Intern Bachler stated in October 2008, the City Council accepted the
Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. The plan included design guidelines for development in the B-
2 District and proposed standards for building and site design, façade treatment, pedestrian
circulation, and parking. The City Council subsequently approved ordinance amendments that
adapted the design guidelines for the Zoning Code. The guidelines now apply to all properties in
both the B-2 and B-3 Districts. Since their adoption, four development projects have been
evaluated based on these design standards:
Planning Case 11-
Planning Case 11-16: Arden Plaza PUD Amendment (Walgreens Pharmacy)
Planning Case 12-19: 1201 County Road E Master PUD
Planning Case 13-04: Lexington Station Master PUD
Community Development Intern Bachler commented that through the process of reviewing these
developments, the City has had the opportunity to identify sections in the design standards that
need adjustments or additions. It is important to strike a balance between having design standards
that are either too prescriptive or too permissive. When cities put in place strict standards, it can
have the effect of deterring development. On the other hand, relaxed standards can result in
develop
completed revisions to help clarify certain design requirements and to provide developers with
more flexibility in the development review process. The updated standards also ensure that future
development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts will continue to be well designed.
It was noted the Planning Commission previously discussed the proposed amendments at the
May 8, 2013, meeting. A draft was also reviewed by the City Council at a work session on
October 21, 2013. Comments from these two meetings have been incorporated into the revised
ordinance.
Community Development Intern Bachler reviewed the summary of proposed Ordinance
Amendments.
Community Development Intern Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review:
1. The City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District on October 27, 2008.
2. The City Council adopted design standards in Section 1325.05 of the Zoning Code on
November 24, 2008, that was in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for
the B-2 District.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 2013 2
3. The City Council amended Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code on December
8, 2008, to apply the B-2 Design Standards to the B-3 Service Business District.
4. The proposed amendments would provide developers with more clarity in the
development review process and ensure that development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts
continues to be well-designed.
5. The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for
the B-2 District.
6. The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Purpose and Intent
of Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code, Additional Design Standards for New
Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Site in the B-2 and B-3
Districts.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated based on the findings of fact, staff recommends
approval of Ordinance Number 2013-012. If the Planning Commission wishes to make changes
to the Ordinance, those changes can be included with a motion to approve.
Community Development Intern Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning
Commission on this matter:
1.Recommend Approval as Submitted.
2.Recommend Approval with Changes.
3.Recommend Denial.
4.Table.
Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Holewa recommended that graphic examples of the exterior building materials be
attached to the Zoning Code.
Community Development Intern Bachler indicated that staff was investigating how to create an
appendix to the Zoning Code that would include these graphics.
Commissioner Hames asked why reflective glass was an undesirable building material.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated this was done for safety purposes.
Chair Larson discussed the use of tilt up brick and concrete panels. He asked if metal awnings
were allowed.
Community Development Intern Bachler explained metal awnings would be permitted, while
fiberglass and plastic were prohibited.
section of the Ordinance.
Commissioner Hames thanked staff for the thorough report and for the making the proposed
amendments to the design standards.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION November 6, 2013 3
Chair Larson inquired if outdoor seating should be required for all restaurants in the B-2 and B-3
zoning district.
Community Development Intern Bachler stated this question was also raised by the City Council
and there was some discussion as to if this requirement should be removed.
Commissioner Holewa asked if outdoor seating areas would be designated as non-smoking areas.
Chair Larson commented these areas would have to be designated as non-smoking if within 25
feet of the main entrance. He indicated this decision would ultimately have to be decided by the
property owner.
Chair Larson opened the public hearing at 7:44 p.m.
Chair Larson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment.
There being no comment, Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Ordinance Number 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05,
Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code regarding Additional Design Standards for New Development,
Redevelopment and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts. The
motion carried unanimously (6-0).
AttachmentE
MEMORANDUM
3.C
DATE:
November 6, 2013PC Agenda Item
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT:Planning Case #13-007 This application requires a Public Hearing
Request:
Zoning Code Amendment B-2 and B-3 District Design Standards
Amendments
Action Requested
Approve Ordinance Number 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 of the
Zoning Code regarding Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment,
and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2 and B-3 Districts.
Background
In October 2008, the City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. The plan
included design guidelines for development in the B-2 District and proposed standards for
building and site design, façade treatment, pedestrian circulation, and parking. The City Council
subsequently approved ordinance amendments that adapted the design guidelines for the Zoning
Code. The guidelines now apply to all properties in both the B-2 and B-3 Districts. Since their
adoption, four development projects have been evaluated based on these design standards:
Planning Case 11-PUD
Planning Case 11-16: Arden Plaza PUD Amendment (Walgreens Pharmacy)
Planning Case 12-19: 1201 County Road E Master PUD
Planning Case 13-04: Lexington Station Master PUD
Through the process of reviewing these developments, the City has had the opportunity to
identify sections in the design standards that need adjustments or additions. It is important to
strike a balance between having design standards that are either too prescriptive or too
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for November 6, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\PC Packet (11-6-
13)_PC 13-007
15
Page of
permissive. When cities put in place strict standards, it can have the effect of deterring
development. On the other hand, relaxed standards can result in development that is not in line
d revisions to help clarify
certain design requirements and to provide developers with more flexibility in the development
review process. The updated standards also ensure that future development in the B-2 and B-3
Districts will continue to be well designed.
The Planning Commission previously discussed the proposed amendments at the May 8, 2013,
meeting (Attachment C). A draft was also reviewed by the City Council at a work session on
October 21, 2013. Comments from these two meetings have been incorporated into the revised
ordinance.
Summary of Proposed Ordinance Amendments
The ordinance includes amendments to the following sections of the design standards: building
materials, building design, commercial facade transparency, and bicycle parking. Other minor
changes included removing provisions that were either redundant or subjective, or that did not
directly address design or land use concerns. In preparing the amendments, staff reviewed
similar design guidelines adopted by eight cities in the metro area.
The proposed Ordinance 2013-012 amends Chapter 1325 (General Regulations) of the Zoning
Code. The recommend changes are outlined in the below section. Ordinance 2013-012 is
included as Attachment A.
Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development,
Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B2 and B3 Districts
Section D: Building Materials
Section D specifies acceptable and undesirable building materials. Research was conducted on
materials that are currently not on the acceptable materials list and which meet the requirement
that building materials be enduring, timeless, and well detailed. Under the acceptable principal
building material category, tile masonry and synthetic stone were added. A specification was
included to clarify that brick building walls should be of masonry construction and not precast.
Split faced block and stucco were added as acceptable building trim and accent materials. A
provision was included to limit the use of EIFS to 12 feet above the ground line. EIFS can be
easily damaged and prohibiting its use within 12 feet of the ground floor can help prevent the
material from being compromised.
A revision was made to build in more flexibility for staff in the development review process.
Given the pace at which building material technology evolves, staff included a provision in
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for November 6, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\PC Packet (11-6-
13)_PC 13-007
25
Page of
Section D that allows the Community Development Department to approve new materials of
equal or better quality other than those listed.
Section E: Building Design
Section E provides guidelines for the overall design of buildings, including façade articulation
and building placement in relation to lot lines. The design standards now require awnings or
overhangs to be provided above all entryways to provide protection for pedestrians. Under the
existing wording, awnings must be included above service entrances as well. Staff has made a
revision to only require awnings above the primary entryway and entrances that front a public
street.
Section F: Window and Door Openings
Section F includes requirements on transparent window coverage for commercial properties.
Currently, every ground floor façade that fronts a public street or that includes the primary
building entrance must have 50 percent window transparency coverage. For building walls that
are reasonably visible to the public, windows must cover 20 percent of facades and up to half of
these windows can be simulated.
The revisions attempt to accommodate businessesto have a sufficient amount of non-
transparent building walls for service areas within stores while still providing adequate window
transparency. These updates would also bring the Arden Hills design standards more in line with
the regulations that have been adopted by other municipalities in the metro area. The new
standards would require 50 percent window transparency coverage only on those building walls
that front a public street. Building façades that are reasonably visible to the public would be
required to have 20 percent window coverage, but there would be no restriction on the
percentage of simulated windows used for service areas.
Window transparency for multi-family residential uses, which are allowed in the B-2 District as
a conditional use, is not currently addressed in Section F. Staff has made revisions to include
residential façade transparency requirements that conform to the existing design standards while
recognizing that the transparency requirements for commercial properties are not necessarily
appropriate for residential buildings.
Guidelines for window and door arrangement on a building wall are included in the revisions as
well. These guidelines are meant to ensure consistency between the overall design of the
building façade and the placement of window and door openings. The list of acceptable materials
for windows and doors complements the permitted building wall materials for the districts.
Section Q: Bicycle Parking
Section P of the design standards addresses pedestrian and bicycle circulation improvements.
Bike racks shall be
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for November 6, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\PC Packet (11-6-
13)_PC 13-007
35
Page of
required near a public entrance of all bguidelines are given on the
design, dimensions, or location of bicycle parking, and a minimum number of bicycle parking
spaces is not specified.
Staff has made revisions to provide greater specification on bicycle parking requirements and has
included these standards in a new section. The changes specify bicycle parking design and
dimension standards; that bicycle parking should be located in a safe and visible area on the site;
and the total number of bicycle parking spaces required for properties in the B-2 and B-3
Districts.
Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following six (6) findings of fact for consideration:
1.The City Council accepted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District on October 27, 2008.
2.The City Council adopted design standards in Section 1325.05 of the Zoning Code on
November 24, 2008, that was in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for the B-
2 District.
3.The City Council amended Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code on December 8,
2008 to apply the B-2 Design Standards to the B-3 Service Business District.
4.The proposed amendments would provide developers with more clarity in the
development review process and ensure that development in the B-2 and B-3 Districts
continues to be well-designed.
5.The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Guiding Plan for the
B-2 District.
6.The proposed amendments are in substantial conformance with the Purpose and Intent of
Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code, Additional Design Standards for New
Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Site in the B-2 and B-3
Districts.
Notice
Notice on this planning case was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin.
Public Comments
The City has not received any public comments regarding this planning case.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for November 6, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\PC Packet (11-6-
13)_PC 13-007
45
Page of
Staff Recommendation
Based on the findings of fact, staff recommends approval of Ordinance Number 2013-012. If the
Planning Commission wishes to make changes to the Ordinance, those changes can be included
with a motion to approve.
Options and Proposed Motion Language
1.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Ordinance
Number 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code as
presented in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission.
2.Recommend Approval with Changes: Motion to recommend approval of Ordinance
Number 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code as
presented in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission, with the
following changes.
3.Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Ordinance Number 2013-012 for
amendments to Section 1325.05 Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code as presented in the
November 6, 2013, report to the Planning Commission: findings to deny should
specifically reference the reasons for denial.
4.Table: Motion to table Ordinance Number 2013-012 for amendments to Section 1325.05
Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code as presented in the November 6, 2013, report to the Planning
Commission: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion
to table.
Attachments
A. Ordinance Number 2013-012 (Proposed Section 1325.05, Subd. 8)
B. Arden Hills Zoning Code, Section 1325.05, Subd. 8, Additional Design Standards for
New Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B-2
and B-3 Districts
C. Planning Commission Minutes, May 8, 2013
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for November 6, 2013
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-007 - B-2 Design Standard Amendments (Pending)\PC Packet (11-6-
13)_PC 13-007
55
Page of