Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-24-21-RAPPROVAL OF AGENDA PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL This is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council ’s attention any items not currently on the agenda which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting to allow a more timely presentation. Speakers should not use obscene, profane, or threatening language, or make personal attacks. Matters of litigation involving the City shall not be discussed during Public Inquiry by citizens or Council. The Council may not respond to speaker comments, engage in a debate, or take any action on the issues raised by citizens, but may direct City staff to research or follow up on an issue, if desired by Council. If Council directs further review by staff, the results of that review will be presented at a following regular Council meeting. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES Public Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Water Bill Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDF Public Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Snelling Avenue Project David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS 2020 Financial Statements Aaron Nielsen, MMKR MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF STAFF COMMENTS COVID -19 Update Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF Transportation Update David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 3, 2021 Special City Council 05 -03 -21 -SR.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. Motion To Approve Claims And Payroll Gayle Bauman, Finance Director Pang Silseth, Accounting Analyst MEMO.PDF Motion To Approve 2020 City Financial Statements And Audit Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDF Motion To Approve Payment No. 5 –Air Express, Inc. –City Hall HVAC Replacement Project Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Motion To Approve Construction Contract For 2021 Concrete Improvement Project With Pember Companies David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Authorize Purchase Of Public Works Equipment (Ford F -350, Plow And Hitch, Ford F -250) David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -004 –Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development And Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development –Lexington Station Phase III Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -001 –16th Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development –Boston Scientific Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Watershed Maintenance Agreement With AHSL Partners LLC (Trident Development) And Stormwater Maintenance Agreement With Rice Creek Watershed –Arden Hills Senior Living David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Approve Resolution 2021 -028 Appointing Kurtis Weber To The Planning Commission Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.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 Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant 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 Planning Case 21 -005 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 2021 -029), Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -005 –Ordinance 2021 -003 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Ordinance 2021 -004 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -006 –Resolution 2021 -030 –Variance At 4073 Valentine Court Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 UNFINISHED BUSINESS COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURN Mayor: David Grant Councilmembers: Brenda Holden Fran Holmes Dave McClung Steve Scott Regular City Council Agenda May 24, 2021 7:00 p.m. City Hall Address: 1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone: 651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City Vision Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via Zoom T o join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83560895593 This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website. CALL TO ORDER 1. 2. 3. 3.A. Documents: 3.B. Documents: 4. 4.A. Documents: 5. 5.A. Documents: 5.B. Documents: 6. 6.A. Documents: 7. 7.A. Documents: 7.B. Documents: 7.C. Documents: 7.D. Documents: 7.E. Documents: 7.F. Documents: 7.G. Documents: 7.H. Documents: 7.I. Documents: 8. 9. 9.A. Documents: 9.B. Documents: 9.C. Documents: 10. 10.A. Documents: 10.B. Documents: 10.C. Documents: 10.D. Documents: 11. 12. APPROVAL OF AGENDAPUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONALThis is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council ’s attention any items not currently on the agenda which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting to allow a more timely presentation. Speakers should not use obscene, profane, or threatening language, or make personal attacks. Matters of litigation involving the City shall not be discussed during Public Inquiry by citizens or Council. The Council may not respond to speaker comments, engage in a debate, or take any action on the issues raised by citizens, but may direct City staff to research or follow up on an issue, if desired by Council. If Council directs further review by staff, the results of that review will be presented at a following regular Council meeting.RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIESPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Water Bill Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Snelling Avenue Project David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS 2020 Financial Statements Aaron Nielsen, MMKR MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF STAFF COMMENTS COVID -19 Update Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF Transportation Update David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 3, 2021 Special City Council 05 -03 -21 -SR.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. Motion To Approve Claims And Payroll Gayle Bauman, Finance Director Pang Silseth, Accounting Analyst MEMO.PDF Motion To Approve 2020 City Financial Statements And Audit Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDF Motion To Approve Payment No. 5 –Air Express, Inc. –City Hall HVAC Replacement Project Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Motion To Approve Construction Contract For 2021 Concrete Improvement Project With Pember Companies David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Authorize Purchase Of Public Works Equipment (Ford F -350, Plow And Hitch, Ford F -250) David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -004 –Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development And Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development –Lexington Station Phase III Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -001 –16th Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development –Boston Scientific Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Watershed Maintenance Agreement With AHSL Partners LLC (Trident Development) And Stormwater Maintenance Agreement With Rice Creek Watershed –Arden Hills Senior Living David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Approve Resolution 2021 -028 Appointing Kurtis Weber To The Planning Commission Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.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 Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant 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 Planning Case 21 -005 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 2021 -029), Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -005 –Ordinance 2021 -003 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Ordinance 2021 -004 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -006 –Resolution 2021 -030 –Variance At 4073 Valentine Court Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 UNFINISHED BUSINESS COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURN Mayor:David Grant Councilmembers:Brenda Holden Fran HolmesDave McClungSteve Scott Regular City Council AgendaMay 24, 20217:00 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone:651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play.This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via ZoomTo join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83560895593This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website.CALL TO ORDER1.2.3.3.A.Documents:3.B. Documents: 4. 4.A. Documents: 5. 5.A. Documents: 5.B. Documents: 6. 6.A. Documents: 7. 7.A. Documents: 7.B. Documents: 7.C. Documents: 7.D. Documents: 7.E. Documents: 7.F. Documents: 7.G. Documents: 7.H. Documents: 7.I. Documents: 8. 9. 9.A. Documents: 9.B. Documents: 9.C. Documents: 10. 10.A. Documents: 10.B. Documents: 10.C. Documents: 10.D. Documents: 11. 12. APPROVAL OF AGENDAPUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONALThis is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council ’s attention any items not currently on the agenda which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting to allow a more timely presentation. Speakers should not use obscene, profane, or threatening language, or make personal attacks. Matters of litigation involving the City shall not be discussed during Public Inquiry by citizens or Council. The Council may not respond to speaker comments, engage in a debate, or take any action on the issues raised by citizens, but may direct City staff to research or follow up on an issue, if desired by Council. If Council directs further review by staff, the results of that review will be presented at a following regular Council meeting.RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIESPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Water Bill Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Snelling Avenue ProjectDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFPUBLIC PRESENTATIONS2020 Financial StatementsAaron Nielsen, MMKR MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFSTAFF COMMENTSCOVID-19 UpdateDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFTransportation UpdateDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFAPPROVAL OF MINUTESMay 3, 2021 Special City Council05-03 -21 -SR.PDFCONSENT CALENDARThose 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. Motion To Approve Claims And Payroll Gayle Bauman, Finance Director Pang Silseth, Accounting Analyst MEMO.PDF Motion To Approve 2020 City Financial Statements And Audit Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDF Motion To Approve Payment No. 5 –Air Express, Inc. –City Hall HVAC Replacement Project Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Motion To Approve Construction Contract For 2021 Concrete Improvement Project With Pember Companies David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Authorize Purchase Of Public Works Equipment (Ford F -350, Plow And Hitch, Ford F -250) David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -004 –Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development And Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development –Lexington Station Phase III Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -001 –16th Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development –Boston Scientific Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Watershed Maintenance Agreement With AHSL Partners LLC (Trident Development) And Stormwater Maintenance Agreement With Rice Creek Watershed –Arden Hills Senior Living David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Approve Resolution 2021 -028 Appointing Kurtis Weber To The Planning Commission Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.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 Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant 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 Planning Case 21 -005 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 2021 -029), Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -005 –Ordinance 2021 -003 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Ordinance 2021 -004 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -006 –Resolution 2021 -030 –Variance At 4073 Valentine Court Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 UNFINISHED BUSINESS COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURN Mayor:David Grant Councilmembers:Brenda Holden Fran HolmesDave McClungSteve Scott Regular City Council AgendaMay 24, 20217:00 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone:651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play.This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via ZoomTo join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83560895593This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website.CALL TO ORDER1.2.3.3.A.Documents:3.B.Documents:4.4.A.Documents:5.5.A.Documents:5.B.Documents:6.6.A.Documents:7. 7.A. Documents: 7.B. Documents: 7.C. Documents: 7.D. Documents: 7.E. Documents: 7.F. Documents: 7.G. Documents: 7.H. Documents: 7.I. Documents: 8. 9. 9.A. Documents: 9.B. Documents: 9.C. Documents: 10. 10.A. Documents: 10.B. Documents: 10.C. Documents: 10.D. Documents: 11. 12. APPROVAL OF AGENDAPUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONALThis is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council ’s attention any items not currently on the agenda which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting to allow a more timely presentation. Speakers should not use obscene, profane, or threatening language, or make personal attacks. Matters of litigation involving the City shall not be discussed during Public Inquiry by citizens or Council. The Council may not respond to speaker comments, engage in a debate, or take any action on the issues raised by citizens, but may direct City staff to research or follow up on an issue, if desired by Council. If Council directs further review by staff, the results of that review will be presented at a following regular Council meeting.RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIESPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Water Bill Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Snelling Avenue ProjectDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFPUBLIC PRESENTATIONS2020 Financial StatementsAaron Nielsen, MMKR MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFSTAFF COMMENTSCOVID-19 UpdateDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFTransportation UpdateDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFAPPROVAL OF MINUTESMay 3, 2021 Special City Council05-03 -21 -SR.PDFCONSENT CALENDARThose 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.Motion To Approve Claims And PayrollGayle Bauman, Finance DirectorPang Silseth, Accounting Analyst MEMO.PDFMotion To Approve 2020 City Financial Statements And AuditGayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFMotion To Approve Payment No. 5 –Air Express, Inc. –City Hall HVAC Replacement ProjectDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFMotion To Approve Construction Contract For 2021 Concrete Improvement Project With Pember Companies David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFMotion To Authorize Purchase Of Public Works Equipment (Ford F -350, Plow And Hitch, Ford F -250)David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFMotion To Approve Planning Case 21 -004 –Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development And Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development –Lexington Station Phase III Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Planning Case 21 -001 –16th Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development –Boston Scientific Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF Motion To Approve Watershed Maintenance Agreement With AHSL Partners LLC (Trident Development) And Stormwater Maintenance Agreement With Rice Creek Watershed –Arden Hills Senior Living David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF Motion To Approve Resolution 2021 -028 Appointing Kurtis Weber To The Planning Commission Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.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 Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant 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 Planning Case 21 -005 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 2021 -029), Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -005 –Ordinance 2021 -003 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Ordinance 2021 -004 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -006 –Resolution 2021 -030 –Variance At 4073 Valentine Court Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 UNFINISHED BUSINESS COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURN Mayor:David Grant Councilmembers:Brenda Holden Fran HolmesDave McClungSteve Scott Regular City Council AgendaMay 24, 20217:00 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone:651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play.This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via ZoomTo join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83560895593This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website.CALL TO ORDER1.2.3.3.A.Documents:3.B.Documents:4.4.A.Documents:5.5.A.Documents:5.B.Documents:6.6.A.Documents:7.7.A.Documents:7.B.Documents:7.C.Documents:7.D.Documents:7.E.Documents:7.F. Documents: 7.G. Documents: 7.H. Documents: 7.I. Documents: 8. 9. 9.A. Documents: 9.B. Documents: 9.C. Documents: 10. 10.A. Documents: 10.B. Documents: 10.C. Documents: 10.D. Documents: 11. 12. APPROVAL OF AGENDAPUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONALThis is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council ’s attention any items not currently on the agenda which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting to allow a more timely presentation. Speakers should not use obscene, profane, or threatening language, or make personal attacks. Matters of litigation involving the City shall not be discussed during Public Inquiry by citizens or Council. The Council may not respond to speaker comments, engage in a debate, or take any action on the issues raised by citizens, but may direct City staff to research or follow up on an issue, if desired by Council. If Council directs further review by staff, the results of that review will be presented at a following regular Council meeting.RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIESPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Water Bill Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Snelling Avenue ProjectDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFPUBLIC PRESENTATIONS2020 Financial StatementsAaron Nielsen, MMKR MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFSTAFF COMMENTSCOVID-19 UpdateDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFTransportation UpdateDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFAPPROVAL OF MINUTESMay 3, 2021 Special City Council05-03 -21 -SR.PDFCONSENT CALENDARThose 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.Motion To Approve Claims And PayrollGayle Bauman, Finance DirectorPang Silseth, Accounting Analyst MEMO.PDFMotion To Approve 2020 City Financial Statements And AuditGayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFMotion To Approve Payment No. 5 –Air Express, Inc. –City Hall HVAC Replacement ProjectDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFMotion To Approve Construction Contract For 2021 Concrete Improvement Project With Pember Companies David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFMotion To Authorize Purchase Of Public Works Equipment (Ford F -350, Plow And Hitch, Ford F -250)David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFMotion To Approve Planning Case 21 -004 –Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development And Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development –Lexington Station Phase IIIJane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFMotion To Approve Planning Case 21 -001 –16th Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development –Boston ScientificJane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFMotion To Approve Watershed Maintenance Agreement With AHSL Partners LLC (Trident Development) And Stormwater Maintenance Agreement With Rice Creek Watershed –Arden Hills Senior LivingDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFMotion To Approve Resolution 2021 -028 Appointing Kurtis Weber To The Planning Commission Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFPULLED CONSENT ITEMSThose 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 HEARINGSPlanning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant 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 Planning Case 21 -005 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 NEW BUSINESS Planning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 2021 -029), Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -005 –Ordinance 2021 -003 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Ordinance 2021 -004 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -006 –Resolution 2021 -030 –Variance At 4073 Valentine Court Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 UNFINISHED BUSINESS COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURN Mayor:David Grant Councilmembers:Brenda Holden Fran HolmesDave McClungSteve Scott Regular City Council AgendaMay 24, 20217:00 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone:651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play.This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via ZoomTo join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83560895593This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website.CALL TO ORDER1.2.3.3.A.Documents:3.B.Documents:4.4.A.Documents:5.5.A.Documents:5.B.Documents:6.6.A.Documents:7.7.A.Documents:7.B.Documents:7.C.Documents:7.D.Documents:7.E.Documents:7.F.Documents:7.G.Documents:7.H.Documents:7.I.Documents:8.9.9.A.Documents: 9.B. Documents: 9.C. Documents: 10. 10.A. Documents: 10.B. Documents: 10.C. Documents: 10.D. Documents: 11. 12. APPROVAL OF AGENDAPUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONALThis is an opportunity for citizens to bring to the Council ’s attention any items not currently on the agenda which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. To allow adequate time for each person wishing to address the Council, speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting to allow a more timely presentation. Speakers should not use obscene, profane, or threatening language, or make personal attacks. Matters of litigation involving the City shall not be discussed during Public Inquiry by citizens or Council. The Council may not respond to speaker comments, engage in a debate, or take any action on the issues raised by citizens, but may direct City staff to research or follow up on an issue, if desired by Council. If Council directs further review by staff, the results of that review will be presented at a following regular Council meeting.RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIESPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Water Bill Gayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFPublic Inquiry Response From May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting –Snelling Avenue ProjectDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFPUBLIC PRESENTATIONS2020 Financial StatementsAaron Nielsen, MMKR MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFSTAFF COMMENTSCOVID-19 UpdateDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFTransportation UpdateDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFAPPROVAL OF MINUTESMay 3, 2021 Special City Council05-03 -21 -SR.PDFCONSENT CALENDARThose 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.Motion To Approve Claims And PayrollGayle Bauman, Finance DirectorPang Silseth, Accounting Analyst MEMO.PDFMotion To Approve 2020 City Financial Statements And AuditGayle Bauman, Finance Director MEMO.PDFMotion To Approve Payment No. 5 –Air Express, Inc. –City Hall HVAC Replacement ProjectDave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFMotion To Approve Construction Contract For 2021 Concrete Improvement Project With Pember Companies David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFMotion To Authorize Purchase Of Public Works Equipment (Ford F -350, Plow And Hitch, Ford F -250)David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFMotion To Approve Planning Case 21 -004 –Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development And Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development –Lexington Station Phase IIIJane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFMotion To Approve Planning Case 21 -001 –16th Amendment To Master Planned Unit Development –Boston ScientificJane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFMotion To Approve Watershed Maintenance Agreement With AHSL Partners LLC (Trident Development) And Stormwater Maintenance Agreement With Rice Creek Watershed –Arden Hills Senior LivingDavid Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFMotion To Approve Resolution 2021 -028 Appointing Kurtis Weber To The Planning Commission Dave Perrault, City Administrator MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFPULLED CONSENT ITEMSThose 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 HEARINGSPlanning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A) Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFATTACHMENT F.PDFATTACHMENT G.PDFATTACHMENT H.PDFATTACHMENT I.PDFATTACHMENT J.PDFATTACHMENT K.PDFATTACHMENT L.PDFPlanning Case 21 -005 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use ChartJane Kansier, AICP, Planning ConsultantCorrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFATTACHMENT F.PDFPlanning Case 21 -008 –Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure SetbackJane Kansier, AICP, Planning ConsultantCorrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDFATTACHMENT A.PDFATTACHMENT B.PDFATTACHMENT C.PDFATTACHMENT D.PDFATTACHMENT E.PDFATTACHMENT F.PDFATTACHMENT G.PDFATTACHMENT H.PDFATTACHMENT I.PDFATTACHMENT J.PDFATTACHMENT K.PDFNEW BUSINESSPlanning Case 21 -011 –Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 2021 -029), Master Plan Planned Unit Development And Final Planned Unit Development –3855 Lexington Avenue (Chick -Fil -A)Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -005 –Ordinance 2021 -003 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1320, Subsection 1320.05 -Land Use Chart Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -008 –Ordinance 2021 -004 Zoning Code Amendment –Chapter 13, Section 1330, Subsection 1330.03, Subd. 5, E –Shoreland Structure Setback Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF Planning Case 21 -006 –Resolution 2021 -030 –Variance At 4073 Valentine Court Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, Planning Consultant 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 UNFINISHED BUSINESS COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJOURN Mayor:David Grant Councilmembers:Brenda Holden Fran HolmesDave McClungSteve Scott Regular City Council AgendaMay 24, 20217:00 p.m. City Hall Address:1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills MN 55112 Phone:651 -792 -7800 Website : www.cityofardenhills.org City VisionArden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long -standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play.This meeting can be accessed remotely by joining via ZoomTo join the Zoom Meeting via your computer, click this link (or copy and paste it into a new browser): https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83560895593This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website.CALL TO ORDER1.2.3.3.A.Documents:3.B.Documents:4.4.A.Documents:5.5.A.Documents:5.B.Documents:6.6.A.Documents:7.7.A.Documents:7.B.Documents:7.C.Documents:7.D.Documents:7.E.Documents:7.F.Documents:7.G.Documents:7.H.Documents:7.I.Documents:8.9.9.A.Documents:9.B.Documents:9.C.Documents:10.10.A. Documents: 10.B. Documents: 10.C. Documents: 10.D. Documents: 11. 12. Page 1 of 1 RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES – 3A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Gayle Bauman, Finance Director SUBJECT: Public Inquiry Response from May 10, 2021 City Council meeting Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $ $ $ Background At the May 10, 2021, City Council meeting, a resident inquired about her property’s water bill. A verbal response will be provided at the May 24, 2021 City Council meeting. Page 1 of 1 RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES – 3B MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director SUBJECT: Public Inquiry Response from May 10, 2021 City Council meeting Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $ $ $ Background At the May 10, 2021, City Council meeting, a resident inquired about the Snelling Avenue project. A verbal response will be provided at the May 24, 2021 City Council meeting. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS – 4A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Gayle Bauman, Finance Director SUBJECT: 2020 City Financial Statements Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Background/Discussion The City’s auditor, Aaron Nielsen from MMKR, will be present at the May 24, 2021, City Council meeting to give an overview and answer questions. The auditors have issued an unmodified (“clean”) opinion on our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020. The total general fund balance at December 31, 2020 was $3,380,506 with $3,155,257 of unassigned balance; the new balance equates to an increase in the General Fund balance of $164,923. The ending unassigned General Fund balance makes up approximately 60.5 percent of next year’s budgeted expenditures. The City’s total net position increased by $1,705,576. The combined ending fund balances for governmental funds was $10,673,430; the combined ending unrestricted net position for the enterprise funds was $3,000,493, and internal service funds was $219,173. We have completed the report in the form prescribed by the Government Finance Officers Association of United States and Canada (GFOA) for their Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. In order to qualify for this, the report has to be published in an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report that satisfies both accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and applicable legal requirements. As a note of information, the Auditing Standards are constantly increasing and changing. With these changes, you may see increased findings. This does not mean that the City has done anything wrong compared to previous years, only that the reporting requirements have become much stricter. One finding was noted in the report related to Segregation of Duties. This finding was downgraded from the prior year, from a material weakness to a significant deficiency, due to improvements made in the internal controls over financial reporting implemented in the current year. We are pleased with the outcome of the audit. Attachments A. Powerpoint presentation B. Management Report C. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report D. Special Purpose Audit Report CITY OF ARDEN HILLS AUDIT REPORT YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2020 Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA 1 Opinion on Financial Statements Financial statements are fairly presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America Internal Controls and Compliance Financial Statement Audit MN Legal Compliance Audit AUDITOR’S ROLE 2 Basic Financial Statements Unmodified or clean opinion Internal Control over Financial Reporting Limited Segregation of Duties (comment downgradedwith changes implemented in the current year) Compliance –Financial Statement Audit No Findings Reported for 2020 Minnesota Legal Compliance No Findings Reported for 2020 AUDIT OPINIONS AND FINDINGS 3 GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 2020 2019 Change Fund balances of governmental funds Total by classification Nonspendable 32,462$ 22,652$ 9,810$ Restricted 1,137,740 1,096,484 41,256 Committed 619,013 580,243 38,770 Assigned 5,959,059 4,263,009 1,696,050 Unassigned 2,925,156 2,759,291 165,865 Total governmental funds 10,673,430$ 8,721,679$ 1,951,751$ Total by fund General 3,380,506$ 3,215,583$ 164,923$ Permanent Improvement Revolving 4,928,470 3,762,602 1,165,868 Other governmental funds 2,364,454 1,743,494 620,960 Total governmental funds 10,673,430$ 8,721,679$ 1,951,751$ as of December 31, Governmental Fund Change in Fund Balance Fund Balance 4 GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL POSITION 5 GENERAL FUND REVENUES 6 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 7 ENTERPRISE FUNDS 2020 2019 Change Net position of enterprise funds Total by classification Net investment in capital assets 17,248,962$ 17,452,137$ (203,175)$ Unrestricted 3,000,493 2,025,812 974,681 Total enterprise funds 20,249,455$ 19,477,949$ 771,506$ Total by fund Water 8,524,928$ 8,228,211$ 296,717$ Sewer 6,598,119 6,412,749 185,370 Surface Water Management 4,984,413 4,718,789 265,624 Nonmajor Recycling 141,995 118,200 23,795 Total enterprise funds 20,249,455$ 19,477,949$ 771,506$ Enterprise Funds Change in Financial Position Net Position as of December 31, 8 WATER FUND 9 SEWER FUND 10 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FUND 11 RECYCLING FUND 12 GOVERNMENT-WIDE NET POSITION 2020 2019 Change Net position Governmental activities Net investment in capital assets 26,418,066$ 26,988,912$ (570,846)$ Restricted 1,137,740 1,096,698 41,042 Unrestricted 10,534,206 9,070,332 1,463,874 Total governmental activities 38,090,012 37,155,942 934,070 Business-type activities Net investment in capital assets 17,248,962 17,452,137 (203,175) Unrestricted 3,000,493 2,025,812 974,681 Total business-type activities 20,249,455 19,477,949 771,506 Total net position 58,339,467$ 56,633,891$ 1,705,576$ As of December 31, 13 Management Report for City of Arden Hills, Minnesota December 31, 2020 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK To the City Council and Management City of Arden Hills, Minnesota We have prepared this management report in conjunction with our audit of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota’s (the City) financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020. We have organized this report into the following sections: • Audit Summary • Governmental Funds Overview • Enterprise Funds Overview • Government-Wide Financial Statements • Legislative Updates • Accounting and Auditing Updates We would be pleased to further discuss any of the information contained in this report or any other concerns that you would like us to address. We would also like to express our thanks for the courtesy and assistance extended to us during the course of our audit. The purpose of this report is solely to provide those charged with governance of the City, management, and those who have responsibility for oversight of the financial reporting process comments resulting from our audit process and information relevant to city finances in Minnesota . Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other purpose. Minneapolis, Minnesota May 3, 2021 C E R T I F I E D A C C O U N T A N T S P UBLIC PRINCIPALS Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA Paul A. Radosevich, CPA William J. Lauer, CPA James H. Eichten, CPA Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA Victoria L. Holinka, CPA/CMA Jaclyn M. Huegel, CPA Kalen T. Karnowski, CPA Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard • Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 • Phone: 952-545-0424 • Fax: 952-545-0569 • www.mmkr.com Standard Letterhead-r2.qxp_167639 Letterhead-RV1 9/7/18 6:34 PM Page 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -1- AUDIT SUMMARY The following is a summary of our audit work, key conclusions, and other information that we consider important or that is required to be communicated to the City Council, administration, or those charged with governance of the City. OUR RESPONSIBILITY UNDER AUDITING STANDARDS GENERALLY ACCEPTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as of and for the year ended December 31, 2020. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and Government Auditing Standards, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information to you verbally and in our audit engagement letter. Professional standards also require that we communicate the following information related to our audit. PLANNED SCOPE AND TIMING OF THE AUDIT We performed the audit according to the planned scope and timing previously discussed and coordinated in order to obtain sufficient audit evidence and complete an effective audit. AUDIT OPINION AND FINDINGS Based on our audit of the City’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020: • We have issued an unmodified opinion on the City’s basic financial statements. • We reported one matter involving the City’s internal control over financial reporti ng that we consider to be a significant deficiency as detailed in the Special Purpose Audit Reports. Due to the limited size of the City’s office staff, the City has limited segregation of duties in certain areas. • The results of our testing disclosed no instances of noncompliance required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. • We reported no findings based on our testing of the City’s compliance with Minnesota laws and regulations. FUND BALANCE/NET POSITION DEFICITS As reported in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, the EDA TIF District No. 5, Karth Lake Improvement District Fund, and TCAAP Fund, had year-end deficit equity balances of $22,000, $13,222, and $194,879, respectively. Management has disclosed that these deficits will be eliminated with future contributions, grants, and internal fund transfers, if needed. -2- OTHER OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Electronic Funds Transfers Fraud As the use of electronic funds transfers and payment methods has become more prevalent, we have seen increases in both the incidences of fraud related to these transactions and the dollar amounts involved. Operational changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including greater reliance on technology and more employees working remotely, have tended to increase risk in this area. We urge cities to carefully review controls over these transactions, and consider best practices to address these risks, such as: • Ensuring segregation of duties over these transactions by involving more than one employee in the process. • Requiring multi-factor authentication of requests for electronic payments from new vendors or for changes in wiring instructions for existing vendors. It is recommended that changes for existing vendors be verified through trusted contact information used previously for that vendor, not as provided in the change request, to verify the accuracy of the change. • Educate employees on the controls in place to protect the organization’s financial assets and ensure management is supportive and accepting of the processes in place. Attempted fraudulent transactions are often initiated using the profile of a supervisor. Employees must be comfortable questioning unusual transactions or requests, and instructed not to circumvent internal control procedures regardless of whom they believe initiated the transaction. • Recommended cyber security measures, such as limiting network access and requiring robust passwords that are changed regularly, should be implemented and followed by all city employees, not just those directly involved with financial transactions. • Review insurance policies to understand the coverage provided for financial losses due to cybersecurity risks and evaluate whether they provide adequate coverage based on management’s assessment of these risks. Uniform Guidance Written Controls and Federal Micro-Purchase Threshold Federal Uniform Guidance (UG) requires that nonfederal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures consistent with 2CFR § 200.317-320 for the acquisition of property or services required under a federal award or sub-award. Effective August 31, 2020, the federal micro-purchase threshold, which is the threshold that allows for procurements without soliciting competitive price or rate quotations given certain conditions, was increased from $3,500 to $10,000 in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR). Effective November 12, 2020, the UG was also revised to allow nonfederal entities to establish a micro-purchase threshold higher than the $10,000 threshold established in the FAR under certain circumstances. The nonfederal entity may self-certify a micro-purchase threshold up to $50,000 if the requirements in 2CFR § 200.320(a)(1)(iv) are followed. Requirements include an annual self-certification and clear documentation of the justification to support the increase in the threshold. Acceptable reasons for justification must meet one of the following criteria: • A qualification as a low-risk auditee, in accordance with the criteria in §200.520 for the most recent audit, • An annual internal institutional risk assessment to identify, mitigate, and manage financial risks, or, • A higher threshold consistent with state law. This flexibility would allow Minnesota local governments to increase and align their federal procurement procedures, specifically the micro-purchase threshold, with state law, which allows for procurements below $25,000 to be made without competitive price or rate quotations. -3- We recommend that the City review its current federal procurement policy. If the micro-purchase threshold in your currently adopted policy is below the allowable FAR limit of $10,000, you would need to make a one-time amendment to the policy to adopt the $10,000 FAR limit before using it. If you prefer to increase your federal micro-purchase threshold to $25,000 to align it with state law, in addition to amending your federal procurement policy, you would need to annually certify the higher threshold and the justification for using the higher threshold. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 of the notes to basic financial statements. No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing policies was not changed during the year ended December 31, 2020. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES AND MANAGEMENT JUDGMENTS Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:  Depreciation – Management’s estimates of depreciation expense are based on the estimated useful lives of the assets.  Compensated Absences – Management’s estimate is based on current rates of pay and unused compensated absences balances estimated to be paid out as termination pay.  Pension Benefits – The City has recorded amounts and activities for pension benefits. Actuarial estimates of the net pension balances are calculated using actuarial methodologies described in Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 68. The actuarial calculations include significant assumptions, including projected changes, investment returns, retirement ages, proportionate share, and employee turnover. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used by management to develop these estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The disclosures included in the notes to the basic financial statements related to pension benefits are particularly sensitive, due to the materiality of the liabilities, and the large and complex estimates involved in determining the disclosures. The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.   DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED IN PERFORMING THE AUDIT We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit. -4- CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED MISSTATEMENTS Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. There were no misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures that were material, either individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole. DISAGREEMENTS WITH MANAGEMENT For purposes of this report, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIONS We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated May 3, 2021. MANAGEMENT CONSULTATIONS WITH OTHER INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the City’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consult ant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. OTHER AUDIT FINDINGS OR ISSUES We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards with management each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. OTHER MATTERS We applied certain limited procedures to the management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A) and the required supplementary information (RSI) that supplements the basic financial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI. We were engaged to report on the supplemental information accompanying the financial statements, which is not RSI. With respect to this supplemental information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplemental information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves. We were not engaged to report on the introductory or statistical sections, which accompany the financial statements, but are not RSI. Such information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. -5- GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS OVERVIEW This section of the report provides you with an overview of the financial trends and activities of the City’s governmental funds, which includes the General, special revenue, debt service, and capital project funds. These funds are used to account for the basic services the City provides to all of its citizens, which are financed primarily with property taxes. The governmental fund information in the City’s financial statements focuses on budgetary compliance and the sufficiency of each governmental fund’s current assets to finance its current liabilities. PROPERTY TAXES Minnesota cities rely heavily on local property tax levies to support their governmental fund activities. For the 2019 fiscal year, local ad valorem property tax levies provided 40.8 percent of the total governmental fund revenues for cities over 2,500 in population, and 37.6 percent for cities under 2,500 in population. Total property taxes levied by all Minnesota cities for taxes payable in 2020 increased 6.1 percent from the prior year. The total tax capacity value of property in Minnesota cities increased about 6.5 percent for the 2020 levy year. The tax capacity values used for levying property taxes are based on the assessed market values for the previous fiscal year (e.g., tax capacity values for taxes levied in 2020 were based on assessed market values as of January 1, 2019), so the trend of change in these tax capacity values lags somewhat behind the housing market and economy in general. The City’s estimated market value increased 4.2 percent for taxes payable in 2019 and increased 7.1 percent for taxes payable in 2020. The following graph shows the City’s changes in estimated market value over the past 10 years: $– $200,000,000 $400,000,000 $600,000,000 $800,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,400,000,000 $1,600,000,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Estimated Market Value -6- Tax capacity is considered the actual base available for taxation. It is calculated by applying the state’s property classification system to each property’s market value. Each property classification, such as commercial or residential, has a different calculation and uses different rates. Consequently, a city’s total tax capacity will change at a different rate than its total market value, as tax capacity is affected by the proportion of its tax base that is in each property classification from year-to-year, as well as legislative changes to tax rates. The City’s tax capacity increased 4.3 percent for taxes payable in 2019, and increased 6.9 percent for taxes payable in 2020. The following graph shows the City’s change in tax capacities over the past 10 years: $– $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 $18,000,000 $20,000,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Local Tax Capacity The following table presents the average tax rates applied to city residents for each of the last three levy years: 2018 2019 2020 Average tax rate City 25.5 25.5 25.4 County 54.0 52.9 52.3 School 28.5 26.3 25.0 Special taxing 8.2 8.3 8.2 Total 116.2 113.0 110.9 Rates Expressed as a Percentage of Net Tax Capacity City of Arden Hills As presented in the table above, the city portion of the average tax rate has remained consistent with prior years. A slight decrease in the county and school portions contributed to the overall decrease in the average tax rate. -7- GOVERNMENTAL FUND BALANCES The following table summarizes the changes in the fund balances of the City’s governmental funds during the year ended December 31, 2020, presented both by fund balance classification and by fund: 2020 2019 Change Fund balances of governmental funds Total by classification Nonspendable 32,462$ 22,652$ 9,810$ Restricted 1,137,740 1,096,484 41,256 Committed 619,013 580,243 38,770 Assigned 5,959,059 4,263,009 1,696,050 Unassigned 2,925,156 2,759,291 165,865 Total governmental funds 10,673,430$ 8,721,679$ 1,951,751$ Total by fund General 3,380,506$ 3,215,583$ 164,923$ Permanent Improvement Revolving 4,928,470 3,762,602 1,165,868 Other governmental funds 2,364,454 1,743,494 620,960 Total governmental funds 10,673,430$ 8,721,679$ 1,951,751$ as of December 31, Governmental Fund Change in Fund Balance Fund Balance In total, the fund balances of the City’s governmental funds increased by $1,951,751 during the year ended December 31, 2020. The majority of the increase was in assigned fund balance in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund, due to revenues and transfers from other funds exceeding current year spending for street and trail projects. -8- GOVERNMENTAL FUND REVENUES The following table presents the per capita revenue of the City’s governmental funds for the past three years, along with state-wide averages. We have included the most recent comparative state-wide averages available from the Office of the State Auditor to provide a benchmark for interpreting the City’s data. The amounts received from the typical major sources of governmental fund revenue will naturally vary between cities based on factors such as a city’s stage of development, location, size and density of its population, property values, services it provides, and other attributes. It will also differ from year-to-year, due to the effect of inflation and changes in its operation. Also, certain data in these tables may be classified differently than how they appear in the City’s financial statements in order to be more comparable to the state-wide information, particularly in separating capital expenditures from current expenditures. We have designed this section of our management report using per capita data in order to better identify unique or unusual trends and activities of the City. We intend for this type of comparative and trend information to complement, rather than duplicate, information in the MD&A. An inherent difficulty in presenting per capita information is the accuracy of the population count, which for most years is based on estimates. Year 2018 2019 2020 Population 2,500–10,000 10,000–20,000 20,000–100,000 9,889 10,008 10,108 Property taxes 514$ 489$ 512$ 362$ 379$ 406$ Tax increments 30 28 44 36 39 27 Franchise and other taxes 45 50 50 10 10 10 Special assessments 54 38 53 74 83 33 Licenses and permits 40 35 51 53 71 43 Intergovernmental revenues 342 297 201 101 60 122 Charges for services 135 108 115 43 44 21 Other 89 78 79 50 64 91 Total revenue 1,249$ 1,123$ 1,105$ 729$ 750$ 753$ December 31, 2019 City of Arden Hills Governmental Funds Revenue per Capita With State-Wide Averages by Population Class State-Wide The City’s governmental funds have generated significantly less revenue per capita in total than other Minnesota cities in its population class. A city’s stage of development, along with the way a city finances various capital projects, will impact the mix of revenue sources it receives. The City generated $7,607,348 of total revenue in its governmental funds in 2020, an increase of $98,218 (1.3 percent) from the prior year. The City’s per capita governmental fund revenues for 2020 were $753, an increase of $3 (0.4 percent) per capita from the prior year. Intergovernmental revenues increased $62 per capita, with the recognition of federal coronavirus relief funds awarded in the current year . An increase in the approved levy contributed to the change in property taxes. The completion of several larger projects in the City and impact of the pandemic contributed to decreases in certain categories, including licenses and permits and charges for services. Special assessments were down, with no new major projects in the current year, causing a decrease in the number of prepayments, compared to the prior year. -9- GOVERNMENTAL FUND EXPENDITURES The expenditures of governmental funds will also vary from state -wide averages and from year-to-year, based on the City’s circumstances. Expenditures are classified into three types as follows: • Current – These are typically the general operating type expenditures occurring on an annual basis, and are primarily funded by general sources, such as taxes and intergovernmental revenues. • Capital Outlay and Construction – These expenditures do not occur on a consistent basis, more typically fluctuating significantly from year-to-year. Many of these expenditures are project-oriented, and are often funded by specific sources that have benefited from the expenditure, such as special assessment improvement projects. • Debt Service – Although the expenditures for debt service may be relatively consistent over the term of the respective debt, the funding source is the important factor. Some debt may be repaid through specific sources, such as special assessments or redevelopment funding, while other debt may be repaid with general property taxes. The City’s expenditures per capita of its governmental funds for the past three years, together with comparative state-wide averages, are presented in the following table: Year 2018 2019 2020 Population 2,500–10,000 10,000–20,000 20,000–100,000 9,889 10,008 10,108 Current 152$ 128$ 107$ 118$ 119$ 119$ 300 282 306 211 240 241 146 149 119 59 63 67 103 124 106 66 68 54 74 75 97 33 30 41 775 758 735 487 520 522 Capital outlay and construction 438 376 355 601 145 63 Debt service 168 182 88 – – – 43 41 28 – – – 211 223 116 – – – Total expenditures 1,424$ 1,357$ 1,206$ 1,088$ 665$ 585$ Principal December 31, 2019 Interest and fiscal General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Governmental Funds Expenditures per Capita With State-Wide Averages by Population Class City of Arden HillsState-Wide All other Total expenditures in the City’s governmental funds for 2020 were $5,910,097, a decrease of $748,564 (11.2 percent). The City’s per capita governmental funds current expenditures for 2020 were $522, a slight increase from the per capita expenditures of $520 in the prior year. Capital outlay and construction decreased by $82 per capita, with reduced activity in the City’s Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund, due to significant street and trail projects nearing completion in the prior year. -10- GENERAL FUND The City’s General Fund accounts for the financial activity of the basic services provided to the community. The primary services included within this fund are the administration of the municipal operation, police and fire protection, building inspection, street maintenance, parks and recreation, and economic development. The graph below illustrates the change in the General Fund financial position over the last five years. We have also included a line representing annual expenditures and transfers out to reflect the change in the size of the General Fund operation over the same period. 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Fund Bal $2,944,813 $3,639,317 $3,340,369 $3,215,583 $3,380,506 Cash Bal $3,506,967 $3,906,088 $3,850,270 $3,946,278 $4,032,832 Exp & Trans Out $4,940,586 $4,536,636 $5,181,629 $5,549,691 $5,064,618 $– $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000 $5,500,000 $6,000,000 General Fund Financial Position Year Ended December 31, The City’s General Fund cash and investments balance at December 31, 2020 was $4,032,832, an increase of $86,554 from the previous year. Total fund balance at December 31, 2020 was $3,380,506, an increase of $164,923 from the prior year. This fund balance level represents approximately 74 percent of the City’s annual General Fund expenditures, based on 2020 expenditure levels, which compares to a prior year fund balance level of 67 percent. The overall impact of operations on fund balance was $777,663 better than anticipated in the final budget. As the graph illustrates, the City has generally been able to maintain stable cash and fund balance levels as the volume of financial activity has fluctuated. This is an important factor because a government, like any organization, requires a certain amount of equity to operate. A healthy financial position allows the City to avoid volatility in tax rates; helps minimize the impact of state funding changes; allows for the adequate and consistent funding of services, repairs, and unexpected costs; and is a factor in determining the City’s bond rating and resulting interest costs. Maintaining an adequate fund balance has become increasingly important given the fluctuations in state funding for cities in recent years. A trend that is typical to Minnesota local governments, especially the General Fund of cities, is the unusual cash flow experienced throughout the year. The City’s General Fund cash disbursements are made fairly evenly during the year other than the impact of seasonal services, such as snowplowing, street maintenance, and park activities. Cash receipts of the General Fund are quite a different story. Property taxes comprise approximately 69 percent of the fund’s total annual revenue. Approximately half of these revenues are received by the City in July and the rest in December. Consequently, the City needs to have adequate cash reserves to finance its everyday operations between these payments. -11- GENERAL FUND REVENUES The following graph reflects the City’s General Fund revenues, budget and actual, for 2020: Other Charges for Services Intergovernmental Licenses and Permits Taxes General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual Budget Actual Total General Fund revenues for 2020 were $5,229,541, which was $332,821 (6.8 percent) over the final budget. Intergovernmental ($477,752) and other ($63,684) were over budget, due to coronavirus relief funds awarded mid-year, and conservative budgeting for the other less predictable sources. Licenses and permits, along with charges for services were under budget, due in part to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as previously mentioned. The following graph presents the City’s General Fund revenues by source for the last five years. The graph reflects the City’s reliance on property taxes: Taxes Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Other 2016 $3,260,537 $598,686 $131,914 $577,041 $234,811 2017 $3,541,705 $729,197 $151,425 $590,141 $218,672 2018 $3,578,628 $526,444 $149,097 $427,905 $200,607 2019 $3,795,624 $714,530 $162,041 $440,616 $312,094 2020 $3,629,819 $431,628 $629,432 $215,918 $322,744 $– $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 General Fund Revenue by Source Year Ended December 31, Total General Fund revenues for 2020 were $195,364 (3.6 percent) less than prior year. Taxes were down in the General Fund, due to a change to recognize certain levies directly into the fund where the resources are utilized. The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to the increase in federal funding reported within intergovernmental revenues and with the decrease in charges for services, with cancelations of parks and recreation and other programs. Licenses and permits fluctuated, with several large projects occurring in the community in recent years. -12- GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES The following graph reflects the City’s General Fund expenditures, budget and actual, for 2020: Parks and Recreation Public Works Public Safety General Government General Fund Expenditures Budget Actual Total General Fund expenditures for 2020 were $4,586,618, which was $444,842 (8.8 percent) under the final budget. As presented in the budgetary comparison schedule (within the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report), expenditure variances were both favorable and unfavorable within the various functions and departments, while overall, they remained within total appropriations approved by the City Council. The general government function was $203,261 under budget, mainly within other services and charges. The parks and recreation function was under budget by $285,433, split between park maintenance and recreation. The following graph presents the City’s General Fund expenditures by function for the last five years: General Government Public Safety Public Works Parks and Recreation 2016 $1,082,313 $1,981,506 $479,814 $621,832 2017 $1,076,352 $2,058,037 $443,633 $618,614 2018 $1,039,772 $2,088,345 $579,535 $653,977 2019 $1,058,275 $2,399,296 $632,531 $679,589 2020 $927,319 $2,435,773 $675,739 $547,787 $– $250,000 $500,000 $750,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,500,000 $1,750,000 $2,000,000 $2,250,000 $2,500,000 General Fund Expenditures by Function Year Ended December 31, Overall, General Fund expenditures decreased $183,073 (3.8 percent) from the prior year. The decrease was almost evenly split between general government and parks and recreation. Several departments within general government were down from the prior year, with the largest decreases in TCAAP and planning and zoning. Program cancellations, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, reduced spending in parks and recreation. -13- ENTERPRISE FUNDS OVERVIEW The City maintains enterprise funds to account for services the City provides that are financed primarily through fees charged to those utilizing the service. This section of the report provides you with an overview of the financial trends and activities of the City’s enterprise funds, which include the Water, Sewer, Surface Water Management, and Recycling Funds. The utility funds comprise a considerable portion of the City’s activities. We understand that the City is proactive in reviewing these activities on an ongoing basis and we want to reiterate the importance of continually monitoring these operations. Over the years, we have emphasized to our city clients the importance of these utility operations being self-sustaining, preventing additional burdens on general government funds. This would include the accumulation of net assets for future capital improvements and to provide a cushion in the event of a negative trend in operations. ENTERPRISE FUNDS FINANCIAL POSITION The following table summarizes the changes in the financial position of the City’s enterprise funds during the year ended December 31, 2020, presented both by classification and by fund: 2020 2019 Change Net position of enterprise funds Total by classification Net investment in capital assets 17,248,962$ 17,452,137$ (203,175)$ Unrestricted 3,000,493 2,025,812 974,681 Total enterprise funds 20,249,455$ 19,477,949$ 771,506$ Total by fund Water 8,524,928$ 8,228,211$ 296,717$ Sewer 6,598,119 6,412,749 185,370 Surface Water Management 4,984,413 4,718,789 265,624 Nonmajor Recycling 141,995 118,200 23,795 Total enterprise funds 20,249,455$ 19,477,949$ 771,506$ Enterprise Funds Change in Financial Position Net Position as of December 31, In total, the net position of the City’s enterprise funds increased by $771,506 during the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase in net position is primarily related to positive operating results and improved investment earnings in the current year. -14- WATER FUND The following graph presents five years of operating results for the Water Fund: 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Oper Rev $2,165,773 $2,104,639 $2,256,859 $2,286,542 $2,316,891 Oper Exp Excl Dep $1,601,171 $1,921,138 $1,812,772 $1,945,021 $1,619,171 Oper Inc Before Dep $564,602 $183,501 $444,087 $341,521 $697,720 $– $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000 $1,800,000 $2,000,000 $2,200,000 $2,400,000 Water Fund Year Ended December 31, The Water Fund ended 2020 with a net position of $8,524,928, an increase of $296,717 from the prior year. Of total net position, $6,996,016 represents the net investment in capital assets, leaving $1,528,912 of unrestricted net position. Water Fund operating revenues were $2,316,891 for 2020, an increase of $30,349, due to increased rates. Operating expenses (excluding depreciation of $318,037) were $1,619,171, which represents a decrease of $325,850. Expenses decreased, largely due to a reduction in other services and charges, with booster station improvements completed in the prior year. Consumption will fluctuate from year-to-year based on many factors, including weather patterns and number of utility customers. -15- SEWER FUND The following graph presents five years of operating results for the Sewer Fund: 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Oper Rev $1,989,066 $1,723,699 $1,769,466 $1,892,740 $1,870,850 Oper Exp Excl Dep $1,362,274 $1,615,427 $1,467,028 $1,442,919 $1,466,453 Oper Inc Before Dep $626,792 $108,272 $302,438 $449,821 $404,397 $– $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000 $1,800,000 $2,000,000 $2,200,000 Sewer Fund Year Ended December 31, The Sewer Fund ended 2020 with a net position of $6,598,119, an increase of $185,370 from the prior year. Of total net position, $5,671,491 represents the net investment in capital assets, leaving $926,628 of unrestricted net position. Sewer Fund operating revenues for 2020 were $1,870,850, a decrease of $21,890 compared to last year, due largely to a reduction in usage by businesses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, with more people working remotely. Operating expenses for 2020 (excluding depreciation of $189,459) were $1,466,453, an increase of $23,534 from the prior year, due to an increase in sewer charges. -16- SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FUND The following graph presents five years of operating results for the Surface Water Management Fund: 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Oper Rev $812,044 $834,973 $839,499 $850,971 $876,527 Oper Exp Excl Dep $390,935 $395,715 $390,882 $405,042 $439,066 Oper Inc Before Dep $421,109 $439,258 $448,617 $445,929 $437,461 $– $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 $900,000 Surface Water Management Fund Year Ended December 31, The Surface Water Management Fund ended 2020 with a net position of $4,984,413, an increase of $265,624 from the prior year. Of this, $4,581,455 represents the investment in capital assets, leaving $402,958 of unrestricted net position. Surface Water Management Fund operating revenues for 2020 were $876,527, an increase of $25,556 from last year, due to an increase in rates. Operating expenses for 2020 (excluding depreciation of $107,299) were $439,066, or $34,024 more than the prior year. Expense increases were largely in personal services and other services and charges over the prior year. -17- RECYCLING FUND The following graph presents five years of operating results for the Recycling Fund: 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Oper Rev $134,739 $151,272 $134,228 $140,149 $136,865 Oper Exp $141,190 $147,919 $168,145 $172,232 $139,840 Oper Inc (Loss)$(6,451)$3,353 $(33,917)$(32,083)$(2,975) $(50,000) $(25,000) $– $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $125,000 $150,000 $175,000 Recycling Fund Year Ended December 31, The Recycling Fund ended 2020 with an unrestricted net position of $141,995, an increase of $23,795 from the prior year. Recycling Fund operating revenues for 2020 were $136,865, a slight decrease of $3,284 from the prior year. Operating expenses for 2020 were $139,840, a decrease of $32,392 from the prior year. Recycling charges were down in the current year, due to the COVID-19 pandemic preventing the City from having its annual recycling clean up days. The Recycling Fund also received $23,842 of nonoperating intergovernmental revenues that are available for the operation of the City’s Recycling Program. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -18- GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS In addition to fund-based information, the current reporting model for governmental entities also requires the inclusion of two government-wide financial statements designed to present a clear picture of the City as a single, unified entity. These government-wide financial statements provide information on the total cost of delivering services, including capital assets and long-term liabilities. STATEMENT OF NET POSITION The Statement of Net Position essentially tells you what your city owns and owes at a given point in time, the last day of the fiscal year. Theoretically, net position represents the resources the City has leftover to use for providing services after its debts are settled. However, those resources are not always in spendable form, or there may be restrictions on how some of those resources can be used. Therefore, net position is divided into three components: investment in capital assets, restricted, and unrestricted. The following table presents the components of the City’s net position as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, for governmental activities and business-type activities (utility fund operations): 2020 2019 Change Net position Governmental activities Net investment in capital assets 26,418,066$ 26,988,912$ (570,846)$ Restricted 1,137,740 1,096,698 41,042 Unrestricted 10,534,206 9,070,332 1,463,874 Total governmental activities 38,090,012 37,155,942 934,070 Business-type activities Net investment in capital assets 17,248,962 17,452,137 (203,175) Unrestricted 3,000,493 2,025,812 974,681 Total business-type activities 20,249,455 19,477,949 771,506 Total net position 58,339,467$ 56,633,891$ 1,705,576$ As of December 31, Net position for governmental activities increased by $934,070 in 2020, as presented above. The largest change in governmental activities occurred in unrestricted net position. Positive operations, with an increase in property taxes and operating grants, improved unrestricted net position. The change in net position for business-type activities is consistent with our earlier discussion of the utility operations, which are presented under the same, full accrual basis of accounting. -19- STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES The Statement of Activities tracks the City’s yearly revenues and expenses, as well as any other transactions that increase or reduce total net position. These amounts represent the full cost of providing services. The Statement of Activities provides a more comprehensive measure than just the amount of cash that changed hands, as reflected in the fund-based financial statements. This statement includes the cost of supplies used, depreciation of long-lived capital assets, and other accrual-based expenses. The following table presents the change in the net position of the City for t he years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019: 2019 Program Expenses Revenues Net Change Net Change Governmental activities 1,460,627$ 343,992$ (1,116,635)$ (944,339)$ 2,737,348 585,646 (2,151,702) (1,511,347) 1,267,480 494,441 (773,039) (738,925) 634,195 267,245 (366,950) (689,186) 480,307 – (480,307) (369,256) Business-type activities 1,996,083 2,354,314 358,231 116,550 1,665,146 1,895,219 230,073 436,359 546,365 876,919 330,554 338,064 139,840 160,707 20,867 (8,486) Total net (expense) revenue 10,927,391$ 6,978,483$ (3,948,908) (3,370,566) General revenues Property taxes 4,100,177 3,793,754 Tax increment collections 273,043 388,697 Franchise taxes 101,057 100,464 Unrestricted grants and contributions 745,040 – Unrestricted investment earnings 417,667 376,026 Gain on sale of capital assets 17,500 – Total general revenues 5,654,484 4,658,941 Change in net position 1,705,576$ 1,288,375$ Water Recycling Economic development Sewer Surface water management 2020 Net (expense) revenue General government Public safety Parks and recreation Public works One of the goals of this statement is to provide a side-by-side comparison to illustrate the difference in the way the City’s governmental and business-type operations are financed. The table clearly illustrates the dependence of the City’s governmental operations on general revenues, such as taxes and unrestricted grants, contributions, and investment earnings. It also shows that, for the most part, the City’s business- type activities are generating sufficient program revenues (service charges and program -specific grants) to cover expenses. This is critical given the current downward pressures on the general revenue sources. -20- LEGISLATIVE UPDATES The 2020 legislative session, coming in the second half of the state’s fiscal biennium, was expected to be a typical short session focused primarily on making relatively minor modifications to the biennial budget. Given a projected budget surplus of $1.5 billion going into the session, consideration of a substantial capital investment and bonding bill was also a potential focus. The start of the legislative session in February was followed by a series of significant events that changed the course of the session, including a world-wide health pandemic, the death of George Floyd while in police custody and the ensuing protests and unrest, and a hotly contested national election. On March 13, 2020, the Governor issued an executive order declaring a peacetime emergency, giving his administration the ability to quickly impose restrictions and measures aimed at mitigating the COVID-19 outbreak. By early May, the state’s budget outlook had changed from a robust surplus to a projected deficit of $2.4 billion. The legislative session ultimately encompassed an unprecedented seven special sessions, more than double the previous state record of three, with the final special session in mid-December. In the end, a $1.87 billion omnibus bonding bill was passed that included $1.36 billion in general obligation state bonding for capital improvements, $31.0 million in supplemental General Fund budget spending, and provisions for tax relief and economic assistance. The session also yielded a new Police Accountability Act, and a $217.0 million economic relief package to help businesses negatively impacted by the pandemic. The following is a brief summary of legislative changes from the 2020 session or previous legislative sessions potentially impacting Minnesota cities. Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act – The CARES Act provided federal economic relief to protect the American people from the public health and economic impacts of COVID-19. Minnesota received approximately $2.2 billion in funding under the CARES Act. When the first legislative special session ended without an agreement on the distribution of approximately $841.5 million of federal Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) funding earmarked for Minnesota local governments, the Governor distributed the funds by executive order based on the framework of the legislative agreement debated during the first special session. This resulted in $350.4 million being distributed directly to Minnesota cities with populations equal to or greater than 200. The funds were authorized for use for unbudgeted costs related to the COVID-19 pandemic, but not to replace lost revenues. In accordance with CARES Act provisions, the CRF funding was available to cover costs that; 1) were necessary expenditures incurred due to the public health emergency related to COVID-19; 2) were not accounted for in the entity’s budget most recently approved as of March 27, 2020; and 3) were incurred during the period from March 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 (the availability period end date was revised by the state to November 15, 2020 for Minnesota cities). Emergency Small Business Assistance Program – The Legislature created a program to appropriate $60.0 million of federal CRF funding to make grants available through the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development for eligible small businesses impacted by COVID-19. Small businesses employing up to 50 full-time employees are eligible to receive grants of up to $10,000. The allocation is split between the metro area and greater Minnesota, with specific allocations for businesses owned by minorities, veterans, and women. $18.0 million of the allocation is earmarked for businesses with 6 or less employees. Workers’ Compensation Claims – COVID-19 Presumption – The Legislature adopted several new provisions to state unemployment statutes related to COVID-19, including a presumption that an employee who contracts COVID-19 has an “occupational disease” arising out of, and in the course of, employment if the employee works in one of the specified occupations and has a confirmed case of COVID-19. Covered occupations include nurses, healthcare workers, and workers required to provide childcare for first responders and healthcare workers under Executive Orders 20 -02 and 20-19. The COVID-19 presumption provision sunsets on May 1, 2021. -21- Bonding Bill – The 2020 bonding bill provided financing for approximately $1.36 billion of projects. Some of the more significant appropriations for local infrastructure included: $105 mill ion in undesignated grants for local road improvement and bridge replacement; $100 million for water infrastructure and point source implementation grants; $25 million for state match of federal grants for public facilities improvements, $20 million for natural resource asset preservation, $17 million for flood control mitigation, $15 million for the Local Government Roads Wetlands Replacement Program; $5 million for Metropolitan Council inflow and infiltration grants; and $5 million for metropolitan regional parks and trails. The bill also included funding for a number of state initiatives, including: $300 million in trunk highway bonds for the improvement of the state trunk highway system; $145 million in appropriation bonds to fund the infrastructure and capital needs of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and Minnesota Public Television; $30 million for state agency projects aimed at promoting racial equity, $29.5 million for the state Emergency Operations Center; and $16 million for the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. The bill provides authority for eligible local governments to own and operate childcare facilities, and permits local governments to enter into management agreements with licensed childcare providers to operate in publicly-owned facilities. It also makes cities, counties, school districts, and joint powers boards located outside of the seven-county metro area eligible to apply for grants through the Greater Minnesota Childcare Facility Capital Grant Program. The bill also included a provision extending the equal pay certificate of compliance requirement to contracts by any public entity, including political subdivisions, using state general obligation bond proceeds for all or part of a capital project. Local governments will be responsible for requiring that bids include proper certification on applicable projects, which applies to projects for goods or services valued at more than $1 million utilizing appropriated bond proceeds on or after January 1, 2022. Elections – A number of measures were passed to help ensure the safe and secure conduct of the 2020 state primary and general elections, including; allowing for the processing of absentee ballots to begin 14 days prior to the date of the election, extending the period during which absentee ballots could be processed for 2 days following the election, accepting electronic filings for affidavits of candidacy or nominating petitions, and specifying that municipalities were to use schools as polling plac es only when no other public or private location was reasonably available. Funds from the federal Help America Vote Act were made available for modernizing, securing, and improving election facilities, a portion of which was made available for grants to local governments to fund activities prescribed by this program. Minors Operating Lawn Care Equipment – Effective May 28, 2020, Minnesota Statutes lowered the employment age for operating lawn care equipment to age 16. Minors aged 16 and 17 must be trained in the safe operation of the equipment and wear appropriate personal protective equipment when operating the lawn care equipment. The exception under this statute applies only to minors directly employed by golf courses, resorts, rental property owners, or municipalities to perform lawn care on golf courses, resort grounds, rental property, or municipal grounds. Open Meeting Law Exception – The interactive television provision of the Minnesota Open Meeting Law was amended to allow for participation in meetings by interactive electronic means, such as Skype or Zoom, without requiring that an elected official be advised to do so by a healthcare professional for personal or family medical reasons. This allowance is available only when a national security or peacetime emergency has been declared and may be used up to 60 days after the emergency declaration has been lifted. Whenever public meetings are held via interactive electronic means of this type, votes must be conducted by roll call and be recorded in the minutes. Expanded Authority for Electronic Signatures During COVID-19 – Effective May 17, 2020, cities are allowed to accept certain documents, signatures, or filings electronically, by mail, or facsimile during the COVID-19 pandemic, including; planning and zoning applications and permits; land use documents; documents requiring the signature of licensed architects, engineers, land surveyors, geoscientists, or interior designers; applications for birth or death certificates; or recording notary commissions. This accommodation expires January 16, 2021, or 60 days following the termination of the peacetime public health emergency. -22- Solid Waste Recycling Exemption – The requirement that not more than 15 percent of mixed municipal solid waste received by recycling or composting facilities be disposed of, rather than recycled or composted, is suspended as long as the need for the exception is triggered by operational changes implemented to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Pension Changes – Effective January 1, 2021, the maximum lump-sum pension amount for volunteer firefighters is increased from $10,000 to $15,000 per year of service. Municipalities are permitted to split state fire aid received between its career firefighters and its affiliated volunteer firefighters, but only if the amount allocated to the career firefighters is approved by the membership of the volunteer firefighter relief association. Any aid allocated to career firefighters must be used to pay the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) employer contributions on their behalf within 18 months of the transfer or be returned to the relief association. Police Accountability Act – The Legislature passed the Police Accountability Act, which enacted a number of changes to laws governing police conduct, training, and oversight. Among the more significant changes adopted were: • Defined and authorized “public safety peer counseling” and “critical incident stress management,” and classifies information shared in these settings as private data. • Established an Independent Use of Force Investigations Unit within the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to investigate all officer-involved deaths in the state, as well as criminal sexual assault allegations against peace officers, effective August 1, 2020. • Authorized statutory or home rule charter cities to offer incentives to encourage a person hired as a peace officer to be a resident of the city. • Limited the use of certain restraint methods by peace officer unless the use of deadly force is authorized in a given situation. • Established and modified provisions related to law enforcement use of deadly force. • Defined and prohibited “warrior-style” training for peace officers. • Established a 15-member “Ensuring Police Excellence and Improving Community Relations Advisory Council” under the Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) Board, to assist the POST Board in maintaining policies and regulating peace officers in a manner that ensures the protection of civil and human rights. • Established a duty for peace officers to intercede when another officer is using excessive force and report incidents of excessive force to supervisors. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -23- ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING UPDATES The following is a summary of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) standards expected to be implemented in the next few years. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the GASB has delayed the original implementation dates of these and other standards as described below. GASB Statement No. 87, Leases A lease is a contract that transfers control of the right to use another entity’s nonfinancial asset as specified in the contract for a period of time in an exchange or exchange-like transaction. Examples of nonfinancial assets include buildings, land, vehicles, and equipment. Any contract that meets this definition should be accounted for under the leases guidance, unless specifically excluded in this statement. Governments enter into leases for many types of assets. Under the previous guidance, leases were classified as either capital or operating depending on whether the lease met any of the four tests. In many cases, the previous guidance resulted in reporting lease transactions differently than similar nonlease financing transactions. The goal of this statement is to better meet the information needs of users by improving accounting and financial reporting for leases by governments. It establishes a single model for lease accounting based on the principle that leases are financings of the right to use an underlying asset. This statement increases the usefulness of financial statements by requiring recognition of certain lease assets and liabilities for leases that previously were classified as operating leases and recognized as inflows of resources or outflows of resources based on the payment provisions of the contract. Under this statement, a lessee is required to recognize a lease liability and an intangible right to use lease asset, and a lessor is required to recognize a lease receivable and a deferred inflow of resources, thereby enhancing the relevance and consistency of information about governments’ leasing activities. To reduce the cost of implementation, this statement includes an exception for short-term leases, defined as a lease that, at the commencement of the lease term, has a maximum possible term under the lease contract of 12 months (or less), including any options to extend, regardless of their probability of being exercised. Lessees and lessors should recognize short-term lease payments as outflows of resources or inflows of resources, respectively, based on the payment provisions of the lease contract. The requirements of this statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2021. -24- GASB Statement No. 91, Conduit Debt Obligations The primary objectives of this statement are to provide a single method of reporting conduit debt obligations by issuers and eliminate diversity in practice associated with (1) commitments extended by issuers, (2) arrangements associated with conduit debt obligations, and (3) related note disclosures. This statement achieves those objectives by clarifying the existing definition of a conduit debt obligation; establishing that a conduit debt obligation is not a liability of the issuer; establishing standards for accounting and financial reporting of additional commitments and voluntary commitments extended by issuers and arrangements associated with conduit debt obligations; and improving required note disclosures. A conduit debt obligation is defined as a debt instrument having all of the following characteristics: • There are at least three parties involved: (1) an issuer, (2) a third party obligor, and (3) a debt holder or a debt trustee. • The issuer and the third party obligor are not within the same financial reporting entity. • The debt obligation is not a parity bond of the issuer, nor is it cross -collateralized with other debt of the issuer. • The third party obligor or its agent, not the issuer, ultimately receives the proceeds from the debt issuance. • The third party obligor, not the issuer, is primarily obligated for the payment of all amounts associated with the debt obligation (debt service payments). This statement also addresses arrangements, often characterized as leases, that are associated with conduit debt obligations. In those arrangements, capital assets are constructed or acquired with the proceeds of a conduit debt obligation and used by third party obligors in the course of their activities. This statement requires issuers to disclose general information about their conduit debt obligations, organized by type of commitment, including the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the issuers’ conduit debt obligations and a description of each type of commitment. Issuers that recognize liabilities related to supporting the debt service of conduit debt obligations also should disclose information about the amount recognized and how the liabilities changed during the reporting period. The requirements of this statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2021. Earlier application is encouraged. -25- GASB Statement No. 92, Omnibus 2020 The objectives of this statement are to enhance comparability in accounting and financial reporting and to improve the consistency of authoritative literature by addressing practice issues that have been identified during implementation and application of certain GASB Statements. This statement addresses a variety of topics and includes specific provisions about the following: • The effective date of Statement No. 87, Leases, and Implementation Guide No. 2019-3, Leases, for interim financial reports • Reporting of intra-entity transfers of assets between a primary government employer and a component unit defined benefit pension plan or defined benefit other post-employment benefit (OPEB) plan • The applicability of Statements No. 73, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions and Related Assets That Are Not within the Scope of GASB Statement 68, and Amendments to Certain Provisions of GASB Statements 67 and 68, as amended, and No. 74, Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefit Plans Other Than Pension Plans, as amended, to reporting assets accumulated for post-employment benefits • The applicability of certain requirements of Statement No. 84, Fiduciary Activities, to post-employment benefit arrangements • Measurement of liabilities (and assets, if any) related to asset retirement obligations in a government acquisition • Reporting by public entity risk pools for amounts that are recoverable from reinsurers or excess insurers • Reference to nonrecurring fair value measurements of assets or liabilities in authoritative literature • Terminology used to refer to derivative instruments The requirements of this statement are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2021. Earlier application is encouraged. GASB Statement No. 96, Subscription-Based Information Technology Arrangements This statement provides guidance on the accounting and financial reporting for subscription -based information technology arrangements (SBITAs) for government end users (governments). This statement (1) defines a SBITA; (2) establishes that a SBITA results in a right-to-use subscription asset—an intangible asset—and a corresponding subscription liability; (3) provides the capitalization criteria for outlays other than subscription payments, including implementation costs of a SBITA; and (4) requires note disclosures regarding a SBITA. To the extent relevant, the standards for SBITAs are based on the standards established in Statement No. 87, Leases, as amended. An SBITA is defined as a contract that conveys control of the right to use another party’s (an SBITA vendor’s) information technology (IT) software, alone or in combination with tangible capital assets (the underlying IT assets), as specified in the contract for a period of time in an exchange or exchange-like transaction. Under this statement, a government generally should recognize a right-to-use subscription asset—an intangible asset—and a corresponding subscription liability. This statement provides an exception for short-term SBITAs with a maximum possible term under the SBITA contract of 12 months, including any options to extend, regardless of their probability of being exercised. Subscription payments for short-term SBITAs should be recognized as outflows of resources. This statement requires a government to disclose descriptive information about its SBITAs other than short-term SBITAs, such as the amount of the subscription asset, accumulated amortization, other payments not included in the measurement of a subscription liability, principal and interest requirements for the subscription liability, and other essential information. The requirements of this statement are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2022, and all reporting periods thereafter. -26- GASB Statement No. 97, Certain Component Unit Criteria, and Accounting and Financial Reporting for Internal Revenue Code Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plans—an Amendment of GASB Statement No. 14 and No. 84, and a Supersession of GASB Statement No. 32 The primary objectives of this statement are to (1) increase consistency and comparability related to the reporting of fiduciary component units in circumstances in which a potential component unit does not have a governing board and the primary government performs the duties that a governing board typically would perform; (2) mitigate costs associated with the reporting of certain defined contribution pension plans, defined contribution OPEB plans, and employee benefit plans other than pension plans or OPEB plans (other employee benefit plans) as fiduciary component units in fiduciary fund financial statements; and (3) enhance the relevance, consistency, and comparability of the accounting and financial reporting for Internal Revenue Code Section 457 deferred compensation plans (Section 457 plans) that meet the definition of a pension plan and for benefits provided through those plans. The requirements of this statement that (1) exempt primary governments that perform the duties that a government board typically performs from treating the absence of a governing board the same as the appointment of a voting majority of a governing board in determining whether they are financially accountable for defined contribution pension plans, defined contribution OPEB plans, or other employee benefit plans, and (2) limit the applicability of the financial burden criterion in paragraph 7 of Statement 84 to defined benefit pension plans and defined benefit OPEB plans that are administered through trusts that meet the criteria in paragraph 3 of Statement 67 or paragraph 3 of Statement 74, respectively, are effective immediately. The requirements of this statement that are related to the accounting and financial reporting for Section 457 plans are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2021. For purposes of determining whether a primary government is financially accountable for a potential component unit, the requirements of this statement that provide that for all other arrangements, the absence of a governing board be treated the same as the appointment of a voting majority of a governing board if the primary government performs the duties that a governing board typically would perform, are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2021. Earlier application of those requirements is encouraged and permitted by requirement as specified within this statement. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended December 31, 2020 FINANCE DEPARTMENT THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page Letter of Transmittal i–iii GFOA Certificate of Achievement iv City Council and Appointed Officials v Organization Chart vi INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT 1–3 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 4–13 BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Government-Wide Financial Statements Statement of Net Position 14 Statement of Activities 15 Fund Financial Statements Governmental Funds Balance Sheet 16 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances 17 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances to the Statement of Activities 18 Proprietary Funds Statement of Net Position 19 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position 20 Statement of Cash Flows 21 Notes to Basic Financial Statements 22–45 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION PERA – General Employees Retirement Fund Schedule of City’s and Nonemployer Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability 46 Schedule of City Contributions 46 Budgetary Comparison Schedule General Fund 47–49 Notes to Required Supplementary Information 50–52 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Combining and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet 53 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances 54 INTRODUCTORY SECTION FINANCIAL SECTION CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Table of Contents RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Page SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (CONTINUED) Combining and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules (continued) Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet 55–56 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances 57–58 Nonmajor Capital Project Funds Combining Balance Sheet 59 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances 60 Special Revenue Funds Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances – Budget and Actual Cable Fund 61 EDA Operating Fund 62 EDA TIF District No. 3 Fund 63 EDA TIF District No. 4 Fund 64 Internal Service Funds Combining Statement of Net Position 65 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position 66 Combining Statement of Cash Flows 67 Net Position by Component 68–69 Changes in Net Position 70–73 Governmental Activities Tax Revenues by Source 74 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 75–76 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 77–78 General Governmental Tax Revenues by Source 79 Tax Capacity Value and Estimated Market Value of Taxable Property 80–81 Property Tax Rates – Direct and Overlapping Governments 82 Principal Property Taxpayers 83 Property Tax Levies and Collections 84 Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type 85 Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt 86 Legal Debt Margin Information 87–88 Pledged Revenue Coverage 89 Demographic and Economic Statistics 90 Principal Employers 91 Operating Indicators by Function 92–93 Full-Time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function 94–95 Capital Asset Statistics by Function 96–97 STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Table of Contents (continued) RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA INTRODUCTORY SECTION -i- May 3, 2021 To the Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council, and Citizens of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota State law requires that every general-purpose local government publish a complete set of audited financial statements. This report is published to fulfill that requirement for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020. Management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of the information contained in this report, based upon a comprehensive framework of internal control that it has established for this purpose. Because the cost of internal control should not exceed anticipated benefits, the objective is to provide reasonable, rather than absolute assurance that the financial statements are free of any material misstatements. Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. (MMKR), Certified Public Accountants, have issued an unmodified (“clean”) opinion on the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota’s (the City) financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020. The independent auditor’s report is located at the front of the financial section of this report. The management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditor’s report and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. The MD&A complements this letter of transmittal and should be read in conjunction with it. PROFILE OF THE GOVERNMENT The City, incorporated in 1951, is a northern suburb of the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area, situated in Ramsey County. The City occupies 9.65 square miles and serves an estimated population of 10,108. The City is empowered to levy a property tax on both real and personal property located within its boundaries. The City operates under the “Optional Plan A” form of government as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Under this plan, the government of the City is directed by a City Council composed of an elected mayor and four elected councilmembers. The City Council exercises legislative authority and determines all matters of policy. The City Council appoints personnel responsible for the proper administration of all affairs relating to the City. Councilmembers serve four-year terms, with two members elected every two years. The mayor is elected for a four-year term. The mayor and members of the City Council are elected at large. The City provides a full range of services: the construction and maintenance of streets and other infrastructure; recreational and cultural activities; water, sewer, surface water management, and recycling systems; community development, building inspection, and planning; and general government operations, including administration, finance/accounting, community information (newsletter), and general government buildings. The City contracts with Ramsey County for police services, Lake Johanna Fire Department for fire services, and Metro-INET for information services. -i- -ii- The City Council is required to adopt a final budget by late December for the subsequent year. The budget is prepared by fund, function (e.g., public safety), and department (e.g., police). Transfers of appropriations between funds require the approval of the City Council. The legal level of budgetary control is the fund level. Budgeted amounts may be amended by the City Council. Governmental funds with annually adopted budgets include the General Fund and most special revenue funds. EDA TIF District No. 5 was established in 2019, but the project has not yet moved forward; thus, there is no legally adopted budget for this fund. A budget was not legally adopted for the two special revenue funds new to the City in the current year. The City’s capital improvement program (covering five years), the pavement management plan (covering five years), and the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) development plan , along with the annual budget, serve as the foundation for the City’s financial planning, and the annual budget serves as the budget control. LOCAL ECONOMY A number of high-profile leaders in the medical, technology, and business sectors, including Boston Scientific, Land O’Lakes, Intricon, Gradient Financial, International Paper, Delkor, and Presbyterian Homes, are located within the City. These leaders of industry provide high-paying jobs to skilled employees, which in turn creates a strong base for economic diversity, quality housing, and an involved citizenry. Because of its location in a region with a varied economic base, unemployment is relatively stable. During the past 10 years, the unemployment rate has fluctuated from a high of 6.6 percent in 2011, to a recent low of 2.7 percent in 2018. The current rate of 6.5 percent is primarily due to the novel coronavirus and associated impacts of a global pandemic. During the past 10 years, property taxes have remained a stable and significant source of total General Fund and special revenue fund revenues. Intergovernmental makes up approximately 3 percent of total revenues in the General Fund and special revenue funds for the current fiscal year, excluding coronavirus relief funds. LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLANNING The unassigned General Fund balance of $3,155,257 (60.5 percent of total subsequent year General Fund expenditures budgeted) meets the 50.0 percent target set by the City Council for budgetary and planning purposes. The total General Fund balance also includes $28,782 of nonspendable equity for prepaid items, $105,747 of assigned equity for compensated absences, and $90,720 assigned equity for the subsequent year’s budget. The City’s five-year capital improvement program and pavement management plan serve as the foundation for the City’s long-term financial planning. To ensure the timely replacement of infrastructure, the City prepares long-term cost projections for the replacement of all city assets. Funding needs for capital replacements are reflected in tax levies and special assessments for capital assets, and are reflected in user fees established for the Water, Sewer, Surface Water Management, and Recycling Funds. Projections for the next 10 years indicate that property tax contributions, user fees, and investment income will need to be reevaluated to support scheduled replacements. In 2012, the City entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with Ramsey County to form a Joint Development Authority (JDA) to acquire and develop a portion of the Army property, formerly known as TCAAP. The county officially acquired this property April 15, 2013, and has cleaned it to residential standards. The City completed the TCAAP Redevelopment Code (TRC) in late 2016, which guides the land use on the site. The status of the development is on hold due to litigation brought by Ramsey County against the City, but any future development on the site is expected to add to the City’s tax base and could include commercial/industrial, residential, and civic uses. The site is approximately 430 acres. -iii- RELEVANT FINANCIAL POLICIES Trends of the past decade, changes in state tax law, and recent legislation indicate that the City will have a greater reliance on property taxes as a source of financing for city operations in the future and less reliance on intergovernmental revenues (federal and state). Changes in state tax law over the past few years have resulted in funding changes for both schools and local governments. The elimination of the homestead and agricultural credit aids program, and large cuts in both local government aid a nd the market value homestead credit programs, resulted in revenue losses to the City. MAJOR INITIATIVES The largest initiative on the City’s horizon is the TCAAP project, as previously mentioned. This project is a joint effort between the City, Ramsey County, and a master developer. When completed, this project will represent almost a 40 percent population increase to the City, as well as a significant increase to the commercial and industrial sectors, too. City representatives are working hard to ensure they capture sufficient tax revenues from the property to cover any increased costs due to the development. The TCAAP project is expected to be a destination site for the region and serve as a model for future developments. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019. This is the 14th year that the City has received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the City had to publish an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report that satisfied both accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and applicable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current Comprehensive Annual Financial Report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program’s requirements and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. The preparation of this report would not have been possible without the efficient and dedicated service of the entire staff of the finance department, and through the helpful guidance and assistance from our auditing firm, MMKR. We wish to express our appreciation to all members of the department who assisted and contributed to the preparation of this report. Credit also must be given to the mayor and City Council for their unfailing support in maintaining the highest standards of professionalism in the management of the City’s finances. Respectfully submitted, Dave Perrault Gayle Bauman City Administrator Finance Director Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Arden Hills Minnesota For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2019 Executive Director/CEO -iv- -v- Term Expires David Grant Mayor December 31, 2022 Brenda Holden Councilmember December 31, 2024 Fran Holmes Councilmember December 31, 2022 Dave McClung Councilmember December 31, 2024 Steve Scott Councilmember December 31, 2022 Dave Perrault City Administrator Gayle Bauman Finance Director Julie Hanson City Clerk Joel Jamnik City Attorney CITY COUNCIL APPOINTED OFFICIALS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA City Council and Appointed Officials December 31, 2020 -vi- FINANCIAL SECTION -1- INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT To the City Council and Management City of Arden Hills, Minnesota REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the City) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2020, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. AUDITOR’S RESPONSIBILITY Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the City ’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions. (continued) C E R T I F I E D A C C O U N T A N T S P UBLIC PRINCIPALS Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA Paul A. Radosevich, CPA William J. Lauer, CPA James H. Eichten, CPA Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA Victoria L. Holinka, CPA/CMA Jaclyn M. Huegel, CPA Kalen T. Karnowski, CPA Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard • Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 • Phone: 952-545-0424 • Fax: 952-545-0569 • www.mmkr.com Standard Letterhead-r2.qxp_167639 Letterhead-RV1 9/7/18 6:34 PM Page 1 -2- OPINIONS In our opinion, the financial statements referred to on the previous page present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as of December 31, 2020, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended, in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. OTHER MATTERS Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s discussion and analysis and the required supplementary information (RSI), as listed in the table of contents, be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the RSI in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements. The introductory section, supplemental information, and statistical section, as listed in the table of contents, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not required parts of the basic financial statements. The supplemental information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the supplemental information is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. The introductory and statistical sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on them. (continued) -3- OTHER REPORTING REQUIRED BY GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated May 3, 2021, on our consideration of the City’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements, and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Minneapolis, Minnesota May 3, 2021 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Management’s Discussion and Analysis Year Ended December 31, 2020 -4- As the management of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the City), we offer readers of the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020. We encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with additional information that we have furnished in our letter of transmittal, which is presented in the introductory section of this report. FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS • The assets and deferred outflows of resources of the City exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows of resources at the close of the most recent fiscal year by $58,339,467 (net position). Of this amount, $13,534,699 (unrestricted net position) may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. • The City’s total net position increased by $1,705,576 in 2020. • As of the close of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $10,673,430. Of this total amount, $32,462 is nonspendable and $1,137,740 is restricted, leaving an unrestricted (committed, assigned, and unassigned) balance of $9,503,228. • At the end of the current fiscal year, the General Fund has a total fund balance of $3,380,506. At December 31, 2020, the unassigned fund balance of the General Fund was $3,155,257, or 60.5 percent, of the subsequent year’s budgeted expenditures. OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City’s basic financial statements. The City’s basic financial statements include three components: 1) government-wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to basic financial statements. This report also contains other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves. Government-Wide Financial Statements – The government-wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City’s finances, in a manner similar to a private sector business. The Statement of Net Position presents information on all of the City’s assets, liabilities, and deferred inflows/outflows of resources, with the difference reported as net position. Over time, increases or decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating. The Statement of Activities presents information showing how the City’s net position changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacation leave). -5- Both of the government-wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City that are principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues (governmental activities) from other functions that are intended to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges (business-type activities). The governmental activities of the City include general government, public safety, public works, parks and recreation, and economic development. The business-type activities of the City include water, sewer, surface water management, and recycling. The government-wide financial statements can be found in the financial section following this report. Fund Financial Statements – A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. All of the funds of the City can be divided into two categories: governmental funds and proprietary funds. Governmental Funds – Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. However, unlike the government-wide financial statements, governmental funds financial statements focus on near-term inflows and outflows of spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a City’s near-term financing requirements. Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long-term impact of the government’s near-term financing decisions. Both the governmental funds Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities. The City reports two individual major governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental funds Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances for the General Fund and Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund, which are considered to be major funds. Data from all other governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation . Individual fund data for each of these nonmajor governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. The City adopts an annual appropriated budget for its General Fund and most special revenue funds. A budgetary comparison schedule has been provided for these funds to demonstrate compliance with the budget. The basic governmental funds financial statements can be found in the financial section of this report immediately following the government-wide financial statements. -6- Proprietary Funds – The City maintains two different types of proprietary funds. Proprietary funds provide the same type of information as the government-wide financial statements, only in more detail. Enterprise funds are used to report the same functions presented as business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements. The City uses enterprise funds to account for its water, sewer, surface water management, and recycling operations. Water, sewer, and surface water management are considered to be major funds of the City. Internal service funds are an accounting device used to accumulate and allocate costs internally among the City’s various functions. The City maintains internal service funds for risk management, engineering, central garage, and technology. Because these services predominately benefit governmental rather than business-type functions, they have been included within governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. The proprietary funds financial statements can be found in the financial section of this report immediately following the governmental funds statements. Notes to Basic Financial Statements – The notes to basic financial statements provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements. The notes to basic financial statements can be found following the proprietary funds statements within the financial section of this report. Other Information – In addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes, the financial section also presents required supplementary information, and the combining and individual fund statements and schedules (presented as supplemental information) referred to earlier in connection with nonmajor governmental funds and internal service funds, which are presented immediately following the basic financial statements. Further, a statistical section has been included as part of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report to facilitate additional analysis, and is the third and final section of the report. GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS An analysis of the City’s financial position begins with a review of the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities. These two statements report the City’s net position and changes in net position. It should be noted that the financial position can also be affected by nonfinancial factors, including economic conditions, population growth, and new regulations. As noted earlier, net position may serve over time as a useful indicator of the City’s financial position. As presented in the following condensed version of the Statement of Net Position, the City’s assets and deferred outflows of resources exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows of resources by $58,339,467 at December 31, 2020. The largest portion of the City’s net position, $43,667,028, or 74.8 percent, reflects its net investment in capital assets (e.g., land, construction in progress, buildings and structures, infrastructure and improvements, distribution and collection systems, machinery and equipment, office furniture and equipment, and vehicles) less any related debt used to acquire those assets that is still outstanding. The City uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. Although the City’s investment in its capital assets is reported net of related debt, it should be noted that the resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from other sources; since the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. -7- The following table provides the City’s Summary of Net Position: 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 Assets Current and other assets 15,458,034$ 12,945,479$ 3,831,773$ 3,151,779$ 19,289,807$ 16,097,258$ Capital assets 26,418,066 26,988,912 19,589,800 20,008,531 46,007,866 46,997,443 Total assets 41,876,100$ 39,934,391$ 23,421,573$ 23,160,310$ 65,297,673$ 63,094,701$ Deferred outflows of resources Pension plan deferments – PERA 125,948$ 56,374$ 81,715$ 39,435$ 207,663$ 95,809$ Liabilities Long-term liabilities outstanding 982,605$ 795,864$ 2,986,238$ 3,104,472$ 3,968,843$ 3,900,336$ Other liabilities 1,658,408 1,847,726 237,965 483,552 1,896,373 2,331,278 Total liabilities 2,641,013$ 2,643,590$ 3,224,203$ 3,588,024$ 5,865,216$ 6,231,614$ Deferred inflows of resources Pension plan deferments – PERA 45,668$ 191,233$ 29,630$ 133,772$ 75,298$ 325,005$ State aid received for subsequent years 1,225,355 – – – 1,225,355 – Total deferred inflows of resources 1,271,023$ 191,233$ 29,630$ 133,772$ 1,300,653$ 325,005$ Net position Net investment in capital assets 26,418,066$ 26,988,912$ 17,248,962$ 17,452,137$ 43,667,028$ 44,441,049$ Restricted 1,137,740 1,096,698 – – 1,137,740 1,096,698 Unrestricted 10,534,206 9,070,332 3,000,493 2,025,812 13,534,699 11,096,144 Total net position 38,090,012$ 37,155,942$ 20,249,455$ 19,477,949$ 58,339,467$ 56,633,891$ Activities Activities Total Governmental Business-Type Summary of Net Position as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 Table 1 Restricted net position of $1,137,740 comprises 2.0 percent of net position at the close of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020. These assets are subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. The balance of unrestricted net position, $13,534,699, or approximately 23.2 percent, may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. Certain balances within unrestricted net position may have internally imposed commitments or limitations, which may further limit the purpose for which such net position may be used. At the end of the current fiscal year, the City is able to report positive balances in all three categories of net position, both for the government as a whole, as well as for its separate governmental and business-type activities. The same situation held true for the prior fiscal year. Both governmental activities and business-type activities experienced changes in deferred outflows of resources, deferred inflows of resources, and long-term liabilities as a result of the City’s participation in a state-wide defined benefit pension plan. The City reported an increase in current and other assets and deferred inflows of resources with the receipt of state aid funding with an entitlement applicable to future funding periods. -8- The following table provides a condensed version of the Statement of Activities for the year ended December 31, 2020, with comparative amounts for the year ended December 31, 2019: 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 Revenues Program revenues Charges for services 647,552$ 1,179,448$ 5,201,133$ 5,170,402$ 5,848,685$ 6,349,850$ Operating grants and contributions 409,403 347,823 25,365 24,752 434,768 372,575 Capital grants and contributions 634,369 613,263 60,661 332,092 695,030 945,355 General revenues Property taxes 4,100,177 3,793,754 – – 4,100,177 3,793,754 Tax increment collections 273,043 388,697 – – 273,043 388,697 Franchise taxes 101,057 100,464 – – 101,057 100,464 Unrestricted grants and contributions 745,040 – – – 745,040 – Unrestricted investment earnings 348,886 322,346 68,781 53,680 417,667 376,026 Gain on sale of capital assets 17,500 – – – 17,500 – Total revenues 7,277,027 6,745,795 5,355,940 5,580,926 12,632,967 12,326,721 Expenses General government 1,460,627 1,337,262 – – 1,460,627 1,337,262 Public safety 2,737,348 2,471,567 – – 2,737,348 2,471,567 Public works 1,267,480 1,416,785 – – 1,267,480 1,416,785 Parks and recreation 634,195 798,717 – – 634,195 798,717 Economic development 480,307 369,256 – – 480,307 369,256 Water – – 1,996,083 2,295,820 1,996,083 2,295,820 Sewer – – 1,665,146 1,663,498 1,665,146 1,663,498 Surface water management – – 546,365 513,209 546,365 513,209 Recycling – – 139,840 172,232 139,840 172,232 Total expenses 6,579,957 6,393,587 4,347,434 4,644,759 10,927,391 11,038,346 Increase (decrease) in net position before transfers 697,070 352,208 1,008,506 936,167 1,705,576 1,288,375 Transfers 237,000 83,402 (237,000) (83,402) – – Increase in net position 934,070 435,610 771,506 852,765 1,705,576 1,288,375 Net position – beginning 37,155,942 36,720,332 19,477,949 18,625,184 56,633,891 55,345,516 Net position – ending 38,090,012$ 37,155,942$ 20,249,455$ 19,477,949$ 58,339,467$ 56,633,891$ Activities Activities Total Table 2 Changes in Net Position Years Ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 Governmental Business-Type Governmental Activities – Current year operating results of governmental activities increased net position by $934,070, compared to an increase of $435,610 in the prior year. The change from the prior year was mainly due to an increase in unrestricted grants and contributions. The City recognized more unrestricted grants and contributions with coronavirus relief funds received in the current year for COVID-19-related expenses. Business-Type Activities – Current year operating results of business-type activities increased net position by $771,506, due to positive results of the utility operations of the City. Program revenues exceeded program expenses for each of the City’s business-type activities. -9- Below are specific graphs that provide comparisons of the governmental activities’ revenue and expenses: -10- Below are specific graphs that provide comparisons of the business-type activities’ revenue and expenses: -11- FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT’S FUNDS As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. Governmental Funds – The focus of the City’s governmental funds is to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable resources. Such information is useful in assessing the City’s financing requirements. In particular, unassigned fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government’s net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year. As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds repo rted combined ending fund balances of $10,673,430, an increase of $1,951,751 in comparison with the prior year. Committed, assigned, and unassigned fund balance, which are available for spending at the government’s discretion, have a total balance of $9,503,228 at year-end. The remainder of fund balance is nonspendable or restricted to indicate that it is not available for new spending because it has already been obligated : 1) for tax increment purposes ($1,021,370), 2) for cable TV purposes ($116,370), or 3) is not in spendable form for prepaid items ($32,462). The General Fund is the chief operating fund of the City. At the end of the current fiscal year, unassigned fund balance of the General Fund was $3,155,257, while total fund balance equaled $3,380,506. As a measure of the General Fund’s liquidity, it may be useful to compare the unassigned fund balance to expenditures. Unassigned fund balance represents 60.5 percent of the total subsequent year General Fund expenditures. The City’s General Fund equity increased by $164,923 during the current fiscal year, compared to a $612,740 decrease approved in the final budget. This was due to favorable revenue and expenditure variances, with several departments spending less than amounts approved in the budget, mainly in personal services, materials and supplies, and other services and charges. Conservative budgeting for less predictable sources, such as earnings on investments and reimbursements, contributed to the favorable revenue variance. The City also recognized $419,614 in federal coronavirus relief funds that were not anticipated in the budget. Fund balance in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund increased by $1,165,868 in the current year. Total current year revenues and a transfer from the General Fund exceeded expenditures, based on the timing of street and trail projects. Proprietary Funds – The City’s proprietary funds provide the same type of information found in the government-wide financial statements, but in more detail. Unrestricted net position in the respective proprietary funds includes: $1,528,912 for water, $926,628 for sewer, $402,958 for surface water management, and $141,995 for recycling. Water net position increased $296,717, sewer net position increased $185,370, surface water management net position increased $265,624, and recycling net position increased $23,795 during the year. -12- GENERAL FUND BUDGETARY HIGHLIGHTS Total General Fund revenues were $332,821 more than estimated in the budget. Intergovernmental revenue exceeded budgeted levels by $477,752, primarily due to the receipt of federal coronavirus relief funds as previously discussed. An unfavorable variance in charges and services, largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, partially offset the variance in intergovernmental revenue sources. Expenditures within the General Fund were less than budget by $444,842 spread across several functions, but most noticeably in general government and parks and recreation, mainly in personal services, and other services and charges. During the year, the City Council approved budget amendments increasing expenditures and transfers out by $491,150. The largest change was approving $478,000 of additional transfers out, moving available resources to other funds. CAPITAL ASSETS AND LONG-TERM LIABILITIES Capital Assets – The City’s investment in capital assets for its governmental and business-type activities as of December 31, 2020 amounts to $46,007,866 (net of accumulated depreciation). This investment in capital assets includes items, such as land, construction in progress, buildings and structures, infrastructure and improvements, distribution and collection systems, machinery and equipment, office furniture and equipment, and vehicles. 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 Land 2,679,818$ 2,679,818$ –$ –$ 2,679,818$ 2,679,818$ Construction in progress 429,828 5,137,764 381,935 3,193,168 811,763 8,330,932 Buildings and structures 3,688,414 3,526,203 580,147 621,690 4,268,561 4,147,893 Infrastructure and improvements 18,198,967 14,054,209 – – 18,198,967 14,054,209 Distribution and collection systems – – 18,298,005 15,931,197 18,298,005 15,931,197 Machinery and equipment 279,004 344,129 329,713 262,476 608,717 606,605 Office furniture and equipment 20,639 31,416 – – 20,639 31,416 Vehicles 1,121,396 1,215,373 – – 1,121,396 1,215,373 Total 26,418,066$ 26,988,912$ 19,589,800$ 20,008,531$ 46,007,866$ 46,997,443$ Table 3 Capital Assets (Net of Depreciation) Total Business-Type Activities Governmental Activities Increases in the current year included ongoing projects for streets, related utility infrastructure, and trails, contributing to the changes in the table above as of year-end. The City finalized several larger projects in the current year, which reduced construction in progress , while increasing specific capital asset categories listed in the table above. Additional information on the City’s capital assets can be found in Note 3 of the notes to basic financial statements. -13- Long-Term Liabilities – At the end of the current fiscal year, the City had total bonded debt outstanding of $2,215,000, which is secured by specified revenue sources. 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 Utility revenue bonds –$ –$ 2,215,000$ 2,415,000$ 2,215,000$ 2,415,000$ Premium – – 125,838 141,394 125,838 141,394 Compensated absences 106,271 86,680 76,829 51,988 183,100 138,668 Net pension liability 876,334 709,184 568,571 496,090 1,444,905 1,205,274 Total 982,605$ 795,864$ 2,986,238$ 3,104,472$ 3,968,843$ 3,900,336$ Total Governmental Business-Type Activities Activities Table 4 Outstanding Debt Summary of Long-Term Debt State statutes limit the amount of net debt a Minnesota city may issue to 3 percent of total estimated market value. The net pension liability increased from the prior year, due to the change in the City’s proportionate share of pension obligations for the Public Employees Retirement Association – General Employees Retirement Fund state-wide pension plan. Additional information on the City’s long-term liabilities can be found in Note 4 of the notes to basic financial statements. ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEXT YEAR’S BUDGETS AND RATES • Dramatic increases in local government aids and other state sources are not anticipated based on legislation at the time of writing this report. • Property tax collection rates are expected to remain strong, at or near the 2020 level. • The COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause volatility in economic conditions and tremendous disruption in the way governments, businesses, and individuals function. The ongoing extent of the negative impact on the economy and city operations is unknown at this time. REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION This Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is designed to provide a general overview of the City’s finances for all those with an interest in the City’s finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the finance department, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112. BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Governmental Business-Type Activities Activities Total Assets Cash and investments 13,557,636$ 2,490,447$ 16,048,083$ Accrued interest receivable 36,554 6,824 43,378 Accounts receivable 449,643 1,298,664 1,748,307 Taxes receivable 93,628 – 93,628 Special assessments receivable 1,274,318 – 1,274,318 Due from other governmental units 13,793 5,523 19,316 Prepaid items 32,462 20,898 53,360 Inventory – 9,417 9,417 Capital assets Nondepreciable 3,109,646 381,935 3,491,581 Depreciable, net of accumulated depreciation 23,308,420 19,207,865 42,516,285 Total assets 41,876,100 23,421,573 65,297,673 Deferred outflows of resources Pension plan deferments – PERA 125,948 81,715 207,663 Liabilities Accounts payable 621,102 38,870 659,972 Salaries payable 75,638 – 75,638 Deposits payable 518,460 – 518,460 Due to other governmental units 385,575 164,511 550,086 Accrued interest payable – 34,584 34,584 Unearned revenue 57,633 – 57,633 Long-term liabilities (bonds and compensated absences) Due within one year 79,704 267,622 347,326 Due in more than one year 26,567 2,150,045 2,176,612 Net pension liability Due in more than one year 876,334 568,571 1,444,905 Total liabilities 2,641,013 3,224,203 5,865,216 Deferred inflows of resources Pension plan deferments – PERA 45,668 29,630 75,298 State aid received for subsequent years 1,225,355 – 1,225,355 Total deferred inflows of resources 1,271,023 29,630 1,300,653 Net position Net investment in capital assets 26,418,066 17,248,962 43,667,028 Restricted for Tax increment purposes 1,021,370 – 1,021,370 Cable TV 116,370 – 116,370 Unrestricted 10,534,206 3,000,493 13,534,699 Total net position 38,090,012$ 20,249,455$ 58,339,467$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Statement of Net Position as of December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -14- Operating Capital Charges for Grants and Grants and Governmental Business-Type Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Activities Activities Total Functions/programs Primary government Governmental activities General government 1,460,627$ 198,708$ 144,998$ 286$ (1,116,635)$ –$ (1,116,635)$ Public safety 2,737,348 431,830 135,564 18,252 (2,151,702) – (2,151,702) Public works 1,267,480 3,900 105,621 384,920 (773,039) – (773,039) Parks and recreation 634,195 13,114 23,220 230,911 (366,950) – (366,950) Economic development 480,307 – – – (480,307) – (480,307) Total governmental activities 6,579,957 647,552 409,403 634,369 (4,888,633) – (4,888,633) Business-type activities Water 1,996,083 2,316,891 528 36,895 – 358,231 358,231 Sewer 1,665,146 1,870,850 603 23,766 – 230,073 230,073 Surface water management 546,365 876,527 392 – – 330,554 330,554 Recycling 139,840 136,865 23,842 – – 20,867 20,867 Total business-type activities 4,347,434 5,201,133 25,365 60,661 – 939,725 939,725 Total primary government 10,927,391$ 5,848,685$ 434,768$ 695,030$ (4,888,633) 939,725 (3,948,908) General revenues Property taxes 4,100,177 – 4,100,177 Tax increment collections 273,043 – 273,043 Franchise taxes 101,057 – 101,057 Unrestricted grants and contributions 745,040 – 745,040 Unrestricted investment earnings 348,886 68,781 417,667 Gain on sale of capital assets 17,500 – 17,500 Transfers 237,000 (237,000) – Total general revenues and transfers 5,822,703 (168,219) 5,654,484 Change in net position 934,070 771,506 1,705,576 Net position – beginning 37,155,942 19,477,949 56,633,891 Net position – ending 38,090,012$ 20,249,455$ 58,339,467$ Program Revenues Changes in Net Position Net (Expense) Revenue and CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Statement of Activities Year Ended December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -15- Permanent Other Total Improvement Governmental Intra-Activity Governmental General Revolving Funds Eliminations Funds Cash and investments 4,032,832$ 6,399,348$ 2,672,568$ –$ 13,104,748$ Accrued interest receivable 10,757 17,415 7,224 – 35,396 Accounts receivable 10,962 400,000 30,297 – 441,259 Taxes receivable 90,406 – 3,222 – 93,628 Special assessments receivable 8,142 1,266,176 – – 1,274,318 Interfund receivable – 194,879 35,222 (230,101) – Due from other governmental units 13,793 – – – 13,793 Prepaid items 28,782 – 3,680 – 32,462 Total assets 4,195,674$ 8,277,818$ 2,752,213$ (230,101)$ 14,995,604$ Liabilities Accounts payable 78,664$ 166,366$ 144,960$ –$ 389,990$ Salaries payable 75,638 – – – 75,638 Deposits payable 518,460 – – – 518,460 Interfund payable – – 230,101 (230,101) – Due to other governmental units 46,531 317,947 9,476 – 373,954 Unearned revenue 57,633 – – – 57,633 Total liabilities 776,926 484,313 384,537 (230,101) 1,415,675 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue – taxes 30,100 – 3,222 – 33,322 Unavailable revenue – special assessments 8,142 1,239,680 – – 1,247,822 Unavailable revenue – long-term receivable – 400,000 – – 400,000 State aid received for subsequent years – 1,225,355 – – 1,225,355 Total deferred inflows of resources 38,242 2,865,035 3,222 – 2,906,499 Fund balances (deficits) Nonspendable 28,782 – 3,680 – 32,462 Restricted – – 1,137,740 – 1,137,740 Committed – – 619,013 – 619,013 Assigned 196,467 4,928,470 834,122 – 5,959,059 Unassigned 3,155,257 – (230,101) – 2,925,156 Total fund balances (deficits)3,380,506 4,928,470 2,364,454 – 10,673,430 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 4,195,674$ 8,277,818$ 2,752,213$ (230,101)$ 14,995,604$ Fund balances reported above 10,673,430$ Amounts reported for governmental activities in the Statement of Net Position are different because: Nondepreciable 3,109,646 Depreciable 23,308,420 219,173 Compensated absences (105,747) Net pension liability (876,334) Deferred outflows of resources – pension plans 125,948 Deferred inflows of resources – pension plans (45,668) Deferred inflows of resources – unavailable revenues (taxes, special assessments, and long-term receivable)1,681,144 Net position of governmental activities 38,090,012$ Assets Internal service funds are used to allocate costs to individual funds.Net position is included in governmental activities in the Statement of Net Position. Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in the funds. The recognition of certain revenues and expenses/expenditures differ between the full accrual governmental activities financial statements and the modified accrual governmental fund financial statements. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Balance Sheet Governmental Funds as of December 31, 2020 Certain long-term obligations are not payable with current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in governmental funds. See notes to basic financial statements -16- Permanent Other Total Improvement Governmental Intra-Activity Governmental General Revolving Funds Eliminations Funds Revenues Taxes General property taxes 3,629,819$ 250,000$ 220,000$ –$ 4,099,819$ Tax increments – – 273,043 – 273,043 Special assessments 4,758 325,023 – – 329,781 Licenses and permits 431,628 – – – 431,628 Intergovernmental 629,432 316,394 285,426 – 1,231,252 Charges for services 215,918 – – – 215,918 Fines and forfeits 13,581 – – – 13,581 Earnings on investments 101,743 172,701 64,000 – 338,444 Franchise taxes – – 101,057 – 101,057 Antenna rental fees 140,707 – – – 140,707 Miscellaneous reimbursements 57,630 – – – 57,630 Other 4,325 100,000 270,163 – 374,488 Total revenues 5,229,541 1,164,118 1,213,689 – 7,607,348 Expenditures Current General government 927,319 – 273,824 – 1,201,143 Public safety 2,435,773 – – – 2,435,773 Public works 675,739 – – – 675,739 Parks and recreation 547,787 – – – 547,787 Economic development – – 415,839 – 415,839 Capital outlay General government – – 107,865 – 107,865 Public safety – – 299,107 – 299,107 Public works – 112,575 91,594 – 204,169 Parks and recreation – 22,675 – – 22,675 Total expenditures 4,586,618 135,250 1,188,229 – 5,910,097 Revenues over (under) expenditures 642,923 1,028,868 25,460 – 1,697,251 Other financing sources (uses) Sale of capital assets – – 17,500 – 17,500 Transfers in – 137,000 578,000 (478,000) 237,000 Transfers out (478,000) – – 478,000 – Total other financing sources (uses)(478,000) 137,000 595,500 – 254,500 Net changes in fund balances 164,923 1,165,868 620,960 – 1,951,751 Fund balances – beginning 3,215,583 3,762,602 1,743,494 – 8,721,679 Fund balances – ending 3,380,506$ 4,928,470$ 2,364,454$ –$ 10,673,430$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Governmental Funds Year Ended December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -17- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Net changes in fund balances – total governmental funds 1,951,751$ Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures.However,in the Statement of Activities the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. Capital outlay 326,525 Depreciation expense (897,371) Adjustments are made between the governmental funds and the Statement of Activities for the long-term liability activity of the net pension liability.(167,150) The recognition of certain revenues and expenses/expenditures differ between the full accrual governmental activities financial statements and the modified accrual governmental fund financial statements. Deferred outflows of resources – pension plans 69,574 Deferred inflows of resources – pension plans 145,565 Deferred inflows of resources – unavailable revenues (360,611) Internal service funds are used to allocate costs to individual funds.The net revenue of the Internal Service Fund is reported with governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements.(112,838) Some expenses reported in the Statement of Activities do not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Compensated absences (21,375) Change in net position of governmental activities 934,070$ Amounts reported for governmental activities in the Statement of Activities are different because: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances to the Statement of Activities Governmental Funds Year Ended December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -18- Surface Internal Water Nonmajor Service Water Sewer Management Recycling Totals Funds Assets Current assets Cash and investments 1,352,952$ 667,739$ 321,802$ 147,954$ 2,490,447$ 452,888$ Accrued interest receivable 3,687 1,833 909 395 6,824 1,158 Accounts receivable Customers 522,646 478,430 223,235 – 1,224,311 8,384 Customer accounts certified to county 30,431 34,497 5,118 4,307 74,353 – Due from other governmental units 5,523 – – – 5,523 – Prepaid items 6,628 7,642 6,628 – 20,898 – Inventory 9,417 – – – 9,417 – Total current assets 1,931,284 1,190,141 557,692 152,656 3,831,773 462,430 Noncurrent assets Capital assets Buildings and structures 818,476 16,564 – – 835,040 – Distribution and collection systems 12,760,264 9,807,900 5,395,646 – 27,963,810 – Machinery and equipment 301,955 338,598 745 – 641,298 – Office furniture and equipment 5,216 3,199 – – 8,415 – Construction in progress 86,417 151,480 144,038 – 381,935 – Total capital assets 13,972,328 10,317,741 5,540,429 – 29,830,498 – Less accumulated depreciation (4,952,454) (4,329,270) (958,974) – (10,240,698) – Total capital assets (net of accumulated depreciation)9,019,874 5,988,471 4,581,455 – 19,589,800 – Total assets 10,951,158 7,178,612 5,139,147 152,656 23,421,573 462,430 Deferred outflows of resources Pension plan deferments – PERA 28,346 32,333 21,036 – 81,715 – Liabilities Current liabilities Accounts payable 20,453 8,194 1,969 8,254 38,870 231,112 Due to other governmental units 147,116 17,395 – – 164,511 11,621 Accrued interest payable 29,896 4,688 – – 34,584 – Bonds payable 180,000 30,000 – – 210,000 – Compensated absences payable 19,309 21,655 14,853 1,805 57,622 393 Total current liabilities 396,774 81,932 16,822 10,059 505,587 243,126 Noncurrent liabilities Bonds payable 1,843,858 286,980 – – 2,130,838 – Compensated absences payable 6,436 7,218 4,951 602 19,207 131 Net pension liability 197,230 224,972 146,369 – 568,571 – Total noncurrent liabilities 2,047,524 519,170 151,320 602 2,718,616 131 Total liabilities 2,444,298 601,102 168,142 10,661 3,224,203 243,257 Deferred inflows of resources Pension plan deferments – PERA 10,278 11,724 7,628 – 29,630 – Net position Net investment in capital assets 6,996,016 5,671,491 4,581,455 – 17,248,962 – Unrestricted 1,528,912 926,628 402,958 141,995 3,000,493 219,173 Total net position 8,524,928$ 6,598,119$ 4,984,413$ 141,995$ 20,249,455$ 219,173$ Business-Type Activities – Enterprise Funds CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Statement of Net Position Proprietary Funds as of December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -19- Surface Internal Water Nonmajor Service Water Sewer Management Recycling Totals Funds Operating revenues Charges for services 2,316,044$ 1,867,371$ 876,148$ 136,573$ 5,196,136$ 505,708$ Permit fees – 915 – – 915 – Miscellaneous 847 2,564 379 292 4,082 25,346 Total operating revenues 2,316,891 1,870,850 876,527 136,865 5,201,133 531,054 Operating expenses Personal services 336,739 398,951 234,579 29,965 1,000,234 5,568 Supplies and maintenance 28,437 14,781 6,567 – 49,785 101,557 Other services and charges 217,553 140,939 169,504 4,717 532,713 254,140 Rent 29,729 28,757 12,781 – 71,267 – Insurance 22,594 46,008 4,297 386 73,285 – Utilities 11,756 17,295 – – 29,051 – Purchased services 46,379 11,457 11,338 6,176 75,350 293,069 Purchased water 925,984 – – – 925,984 – Recycling charges – – – 98,596 98,596 – Sewer charges – 808,265 – – 808,265 – Depreciation 318,037 189,459 107,299 – 614,795 – Total operating expenses 1,937,208 1,655,912 546,365 139,840 4,279,325 654,334 Operating income (loss)379,683 214,938 330,162 (2,975) 921,808 (123,280) Nonoperating revenues (expenses) Intergovernmental revenue 528 603 392 23,842 25,365 – Earnings on investments 38,486 18,297 9,070 2,928 68,781 10,442 Interest and fiscal charges (58,875)(9,234)– – (68,109) – Total nonoperating revenues (expenses)(19,861) 9,666 9,462 26,770 26,037 10,442 Income (loss) before contributions and transfers 359,822 224,604 339,624 23,795 947,845 (112,838) Capital contributions – connection fees 36,895 23,766 – – 60,661 – Transfers out (100,000) (63,000) (74,000) – (237,000) – Change in net position 296,717 185,370 265,624 23,795 771,506 (112,838) Net position Beginning of year 8,228,211 6,412,749 4,718,789 118,200 19,477,949 332,011 End of year 8,524,928$ 6,598,119$ 4,984,413$ 141,995$ 20,249,455$ 219,173$ Business-Type Activities – Enterprise Funds CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position Proprietary Funds Year Ended December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -20- Surface Internal Water Nonmajor Service Water Sewer Management Recycling Totals Funds Cash flows from operating activities Receipts from customers and users 2,319,753$ 1,883,573$ 904,828$ 137,178$ 5,245,332$ 522,670$ Payments to suppliers (1,426,791) (1,030,919) (190,477) (129,537) (2,777,724) (505,884) Payments to employees (352,628) (417,484) (249,547) (29,675) (1,049,334) (7,352) Payments for interfund services used (55,019) (56,772) (35,648) (3,421) (150,860) – Net cash flows from operating activities 485,315 378,398 429,156 (25,455) 1,267,414 9,434 Cash flows from noncapital financing activities Grants received 528 603 392 23,842 25,365 – Transfers out (100,000) (63,000) (74,000) – (237,000) – Net cash flows from noncapital financing activities (99,472) (62,397) (73,608) 23,842 (211,635) – Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Acquisition and construction of capital assets (78,805) (41,745) (75,514) – (196,064) – Capital contributions – connection fees received 36,895 23,766 – – 60,661 – Principal payments on bonds (175,000) (25,000) – – (200,000) – Interest paid (75,249) (11,749) – – (86,998) – Net cash flows from capital and related financing activities (292,159) (54,728) (75,514) – (422,401) – Cash flows from investing activities Earnings on investments 38,777 17,810 8,358 3,012 67,957 10,589 Net change in cash and cash equivalents 132,461 279,083 288,392 1,399 701,335 20,023 Cash and cash equivalents – beginning 1,220,491 388,656 33,410 146,555 1,789,112 432,865 Cash and cash equivalents – ending 1,352,952$ 667,739$ 321,802$ 147,954$ 2,490,447$ 452,888$ Reconciliation of operating income (loss) to net cash flows from operating activities Operating income (loss)379,683$ 214,938$ 330,162$ (2,975)$ 921,808$ (123,280)$ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash flows from operating activities Depreciation 318,037 189,459 107,299 – 614,795 – Decrease (increase) in customer receivables 8,385 12,723 (4,659) 313 16,762 (8,384) Decrease (increase) in due from other governments (5,523) – 32,960 – 27,437 – Decrease (increase) in prepaid items (6,328) (7,342) (6,328) – (19,998) – Decrease (increase) in inventory (2,036) – – – (2,036) – Decrease (increase) in deferred outflows (14,751) (16,812) (10,717) – (42,280) – Increase (decrease) in accounts payable 1,825 3,756 (15,293) (59) (9,771) 143,704 Increase (decrease) in due to other governments (192,839) (16,603) (17) (23,024) (232,483) (822) Increase (decrease) in net pension liability 26,202 29,718 16,561 – 72,481 – Increase (decrease) in compensated absences payable 8,500 9,488 6,563 290 24,841 (1,784) Increase (decrease) in deferred inflows (35,840) (40,927) (27,375) – (104,142) – Total adjustments 105,632 163,460 98,994 (22,480) 345,606 132,714 Net cash flows from operating activities 485,315$ 378,398$ 429,156$ (25,455)$ 1,267,414$ 9,434$ Noncash investing, capital, and financing activities Due from other governmental units Amortization of bond premium (discount)13,457$ 2,099$ –$ –$ 15,556$ –$ Business-Type Activities – Enterprise Funds CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Statement of Cash Flows Proprietary Funds Year Ended December 31, 2020 See notes to basic financial statements -21- CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Notes to Basic Financial Statements December 31, 2020 -22- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES A. Organization The City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the City) was incorporated in 1951 and operates under the “Optional Plan A” form of government as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Under this plan, the government of the City is directed by a council composed of an elected mayor and four elected councilmembers. The City Council exercises legislative authority and determines all matters of policy. The City Council appoints personnel responsible for the proper administration of all affairs relating to the City. The City provides the following municipal services: public safety (police, fire, civil defense, protective inspections, and animal control), highways and streets, sanitation and health, parks and recreation, public improvements, community development, and general administrative services. The accounting policies of the City conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America as applicable to governmental units. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the accepted standard-setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. B. Reporting Entity As required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, these financial statements include the City (the primary government) and its component unit. Component units are legally separate entities for which the primary government is financially accountable, or for which the exclusion of the component unit would render the financial statements of the primary government misleading. The criteria used to determine if the primary government is financially accountable for a component unit includes whether or not the primary government appoints the voting majority of the potential component unit’s board, is able to impose its will on the potential component unit, is in a relationship of financial benefit or burden with the potential component unit, or is fiscally depended upon by the potential component unit. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, part of the City’s operations; therefore, data from these units are combined with data of the City. The City’s blended component unit has a December 31 year-end. The City has the following component unit: Arden Hills Economic Development Authority (EDA) – The EDA of the City was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 469.090–469.108 to carryout economic and industrial development and redevelopment consistent with policies established by the City Council. It is composed of the members of the City Council and the City has operational responsibility for the component unit. The EDA’s activities are blended and reported in separate special revenue funds. Separate financial statements are not issued for this component unit. -23- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) C. Government-Wide Financial Statement Presentation The government-wide financial statements (Statement of Net Position and Statement of Activities) display information about the reporting government as a whole. These statements include all of the financial activities of the City. Governmental activities, which are normally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues, are reported separately from business-type activities, which significantly rely upon sales, fees, and charges for support. The Statement of Activities demonstrates the degree to which the direct expenses of a given function or segment are offset by program revenues. Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function or segment. Program revenues include: 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use, or directly benefit from goods, services, or privileges provided by a given function or segment, 2) operating grants and contributions, and 3) capital grants and contributions, including special assessments that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a p articular function or segment. Taxes and other internally directed revenues are reported as general revenues. The government-wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes and special assessments are recognized as revenues in the fiscal year for which they are certified for levy. Grants and similar items are recognized when all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. As a general rule, the effect of interfund activity has been eliminated from the government-wide financial statements. However, charges between the City’s enterprise funds and other functions are not eliminated, as that would distort the direct costs and program revenues reported in those functions. Depreciation expense is included in the direct expenses of each function. Interest on long-term debt is considered an indirect expense and is reported separately on the Statement of Activities. D. Fund Financial Statement Presentation Separate fund financial statements are provided for governmental and proprietary funds. Major individual governmental and enterprise funds are reported as separate columns in the fund financial statements. Aggregated information for the remaining nonmajor governmental funds is reported in a single column in the fund financial statements. Governmental fund financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under this basis of accounting, transactions are recorded in the following manner: 1. Revenue Recognition – Revenue is recognized when it becomes measurable and available. “Measurable” means the amount of the transaction can be determined and “available” means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liab ilities of the current period. For this purpose, the City considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 60 days after year-end. Only the portion of special assessments receivable due within the current fiscal period is considered to be susceptible to accrual as revenue of the current period. Grants and similar items are recognized when all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Proceeds of long-term debt and acquisitions under capital leases, when applicable, are reported as other financing sources. Major revenue that is susceptible to accrual includes property taxes, special assessments, intergovernmental revenue, charges for services, and interest earned on investments. Major revenue that is not susceptible to accrual includes licenses and permits, fees, and miscellaneous revenue. Such revenue is recorded only when received because it is not measurable until collected. -24- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) 2. Recording of Expenditures – Expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred, except for principal and interest on long-term debt and other long-term obligations, which are recognized as expenditures to the extent they have matured. Capital asset acquisitions are reported as capital outlay expenditures in the governmental funds. Proprietary fund financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and accrual basis of accounting, similar to the government-wide financial statements. Proprietary funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary fund’s principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of the City’s enterprise funds and internal service funds are charges to customers for sales and services. The operating expenses for the enterprise funds and internal service funds include the cost of sales and services, administrative expenses, and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses that do not meet this definition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses. Aggregated information for the internal service funds is reported in a single column in the proprietary fund financial statements. Because the principal user of the internal services is the City’s governmental activities, the financial statements of the internal service funds are consolidated into the governmental column when presented in the government-wide financial statements. The cost of these services is reported in the appropriate functional activity. Description of Funds The City reports the following major governmental funds: General Fund – The General Fund is the City’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund – The Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund (capital project fund) accounts for the acquisition of capital assets or construction for major capital projects not being financed by proprietary funds. The City reports the following major enterprise funds: Water Fund – The Water Fund accounts for the water service charges, which are used to finance the water system operations. Sewer Fund – The Sewer Fund accounts for the sewer service charges, which are used to finance the sanitary sewer system operations. Surface Water Management Fund – The Surface Water Management Fund accounts for the surface water charges, which are used to finance the surface water system operations. The City reports the following nonmajor enterprise fund: Recycling Fund – The Recycling Fund accounts for the recycling service charges, which are used to finance the City’s recycling operations. -25- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Additionally, the City reports the following fund type: Internal Service Funds – The internal service funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the City, or to other governments on a cost-reimbursement basis. The City’s internal service funds account for risk management, engineering, central garage, and technology services. E. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting Budgets are legally adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Annual appropriated budgets are legally adopted for the General Fund and most special revenue funds. Budgeted expenditure appropriations lapse at year-end, but may be adopted in the subsequent year. The City follows these procedures in establishing the budgetary data reflected in the financial statements: 1. The city administrator submits to the City Council a proposed operating budget for the fiscal year commencing the following January 1. The operating budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. 2. Public hearings are conducted to obtain taxpayer comments. 3. The budget is legally enacted through passage of a resolution. The appropriated budget is prepared by fund, function, and department. The City’s department heads, with the approval of the city administrator, may make transfers of appropriations within a department. Transfers of appropriations between funds require the approval of the City Council. The legal level of budgetary control is the fund level. Budgeted amounts are as amended by the City Council. 4. The city administrator is authorized to transfer appropriations within any fund budget. Adjustments to appropriations between funds, and budget additions and deletions must be authorized by the City Council. 5. Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device during the year for the General Fund and special revenue funds. 6. Legal debt obligation indentures determine the appropriation level and debt service tax levies for the Debt Service Fund (if necessary). Supplementary budgets are adopted for the proprietary funds to determine and calculate user charges. These debt service and budget amounts represent general obligation bond indenture provisions and net income for operation and capital maintenance, and are not reflected in the financial statements. 7. A capital improvement program is reviewed annually by the City Council for the capital project funds. However, appropriations for major projects are not adopted until the actual bid award of the improvement. Budgetary control for capital projects funds is accomplished through the use of project controls, not legally enacted budgets. The appropriations are not reflected in the financial statements. For the year ended December 31, 2020, actual expenditures exceeded budgeted expenditures in the EDA TIF District No. 3 and EDA TIF District No. 4 Special Revenue Funds by $50 and $14,110, respectively. These variances were financed by revenues in excess of budget and available fund balance. -26- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) F. Cash and Investments Cash and investments include balances that are combined and invested to the extent available in various securities as authorized by state law. Allocations of pooled investment earnings to the respective funds is based on participation by each fund. For purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, the City considers all highly liquid debt instruments with an original maturity from the time of purchase by the City of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The proprietary funds’ portion in the government-wide cash and investment management pool is considered to be cash equivalent. The City generally reports investments at fair value. The Minnesota Municipal Money Market (4M) Fund is an external investment pool regulated by Minnesota Statutes that is not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), but follows the same regulatory rules of the SEC. The fair value of the position in the pool is the same as the value of the pool shares, which is based on an amortized cost method that approximates fair value. The 4M Fund is sponsored by the League of Minnesota Cities. For this investment pool, there are no unfunded commitments, redemption frequency is daily, and there is no redemption notice required for the Liquid Class; the redemption notice period is 14 days for the Plus Class. The City categorizes its fair value measurements within the fair value hierarchy established by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The hierarchy is based on the valuation inputs used to measure the fair value of the asset. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets; Level 2 inputs are significant other observable inputs; and Level 3 inputs are significant unobservable inputs. Debt securities classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy are valued using a matrix pricing technique. Matrix pricing is used to value securities based on the securities’ relationship to benchmark quoted prices. See Note 2 for the City’s recurring fair value measurements as of year-end. G. Interfund Receivables and Payables During the course of operations, numerous transactions occur between individual funds for goods provided or services rendered. Short-term interfund loans are classified as “interfund receivables/payables.” All short-term interfund receivables and payables at year-end are planned to be eliminated in the subsequent year. Long-term interfund loans are classified as “advances receivable/payable.” Any residual balances outstanding between the governmental activities and business-type activities are reported in the government-wide financial statements as “internal balances.” H. Receivables Property taxes and special assessments receivable have been reported net of estimated uncollectible accounts (see Note 1 I. and J.). Because utility bills are considered liens on property, no estimated uncollectible amounts are established. Uncollectible amounts are not material for other receivables and have not been reported. The only receivables not expected to be collected within one year are property taxes, special assessments, and the long-term receivable in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund. -27- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) I. Property Taxes Property tax levies are set by the City Council in December of each year, and are certified to Ramsey County for collection in the following year. In Minnesota, counties act as collection agents for all property taxes. The county spreads the levies over all taxable property. Such taxes become a lien on January 1 and are recorded as receivables by the City on that date. Real property t axes may be paid by taxpayers in two equal installments on May 15 and October 15. Personal property taxes are due in full on May 15. The county provides tax settlements to cities and other taxing districts three times a year: in July, December, and January. Property taxes are recognized as revenue in the year levied in the government -wide financial statements and proprietary fund financial statements. In the governmental fund financial statements, taxes are recognized as revenue when received in cash or within 60 days after year-end. Taxes which remain unpaid on December 31 are classified as delinquent taxes receivable, and are offset by a deferred inflow of resources in the governmental fund financial statements. J. Special Assessments Special assessments primarily represent the financing for public improvements paid for by benefiting property owners. As previously mentioned under receivables, the City is also generally able to certify delinquent amounts to the county for collection as special assessments. Special assessments are recorded as receivables upon certification to the county. Special assessments are recognized as revenue in the year levied in the government-wide financial statements and proprietary fund financial statements. In the governmental fund financial statements, special assessments are recognized as revenue when received in cash or within 60 days after year-end. Governmental fund special assessments receivable which remain unpaid on December 31 are offset by a deferred inflow of resources in the governmental fund financial statements. K. Inventories The original cost of materials and supplies has been recorded as expenses/expenditures at the time of purchase for both the governmental and proprietary funds, with the exception of water meters in the Water Fund. These funds do not maintain material amounts of materials and supplies . The water meter inventory in the Water Fund is stated at the lower of cost or market on the first-in, first-out method. L. Prepaid Items Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in both government-wide and fund financial statements. Prepaid items are reported using the consumption method and recorded as expenses/expenditures at the time of consumption. M. Capital Assets Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment, and infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, sidewalks, and similar items) are reported in the applicable governmental or business-type activities columns in the government-wide financial statements. Such assets are capitalized at historical cost, or estimated historical cost for assets where actual historical cost is not available. Donated assets are recorded as capital assets at their estimated acquisition value on the date of donation. The City defines capital assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000 and an estim ated useful life in excess of one year. The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially extend assets lives are not capitalized. -28- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) In the case of the initial capitalization of general infrastructure assets (i.e., those reported by governmental activities), the City chose to include items dating back to June 30, 1980. These assets are reported at historical cost. The City estimated historical cost for the initial reporting of these assets through back trending (estimating the current replacement cost and utilizing an appropriate price -level index to deflate the cost to the acquisition year). As the City constructs or acquires additional infrastructure assets each period, they will be capitalized and reported at historical cost. Capital assets are recorded in the government-wide and proprietary fund financial statements, but are not reported in the governmental fund financial statements. Interest incurred during the construction phase of capital assets of business-type activities is included as part of the capitalized value of the assets constructed. Property, plant, and equipment of the City are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives: Buildings and structures 7–40 years Infrastructure and improvements 15–50 years Distribution and collection systems 15–50 years Machinery and equipment 5–15 years Office furniture and equipment 5–10 years Vehicles 7–20 years Land and construction in progress are not depreciated. N. Compensated Absences It is the City’s policy to permit employees to accumulate earned, but unused annual leave and sick pay benefits called personal time off (PTO). All PTO is accrued when incurred in the government-wide and proprietary fund financial statements. PTO is payable when used or upon termination of employment. A liability for these amounts is reported in the governmental funds only if they have matured, for example, as a result of employee resignations and retirements. A liability is recognized for that portion of accumulated PTO benefits that is vested as severance pay. PTO is payable when used and, in some cases, upon termination of employment. For regular employees, PTO is payable upon retirement or involuntary termination up to the amount accrued, not to exceed 240 hours , who have served at least 12 consecutive months prior to separation, and have given the City at least two weeks’ notice prior to the effective date of such separation. The recorded portion of PTO (compensated absences) represents the estimated amount expected, based on previous years’ history and those eligible for retirement, to be paid at separation. O. Long-Term Obligations In the government-wide and proprietary fund financial statements, long-term debt and other long-term obligations are reported as liabilities. Bond premiums and discounts, if material, are deferred and amortized over the life of the bonds using the straight-line method. Bond issuance costs are expensed in the period incurred. -29- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) P. State-Wide Pension Plans For purposes of measuring the net pension liability, deferred outflows/inflows of resources, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and additions to/deductions from the PERA’s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by the PERA. For this purpose, plan contributions are recognized as of employer payroll paid dates and benefit payments, and refunds are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value. Q. Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources In addition to assets and liabilities, statements of financial position or balance sheets, will sometimes report separate sections for deferred outflows or inflows of resources. These separate financial statement elements represent a consumption or acquisition of net position that applies to a future period and so will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense/expenditure) or an inflow of financial resources (revenue) until then. The City reports deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to pensions in the government-wide and enterprise funds Statement of Net Position. These deferred outflows and inflows result from differences between expected and actual economic experience, changes in actuarial assumptions, differences between projected and actual investment earnings, changes in proportion, and contributions to the plan subsequent to the measurement date and before the end of the reporting period. These amounts are deferred and amortized as required under pension standards. Unavailable revenue, arises only under the modified accrual basis of accounting and, therefore, is reported only in the governmental funds Balance Sheet. The governmental funds report unavaila ble revenue from three sources: property taxes, special assessments, and long-term receivables. These amounts are deferred and recognized as an inflow of resources in the period that the amounts become available. Imposed nonexchange revenue transactions, state aid received for subsequent years, is deferred and recognized as an inflow of resources in the period that the resources are appropriated. This item is reported both in the governmental funds Balance Sheet and the government-wide Statement of Net Position as a deferred inflow of resources. R. Net Position Classifications and Flow Assumptions In the government-wide and proprietary fund financial statements, net position represents the difference between assets, deferred outflows of resources, liabilities, and deferred inflows of resources. Net position is displayed in three components: • Net Investment in Capital Assets – Consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, reduced by any outstanding debt attributable to acquire capital assets. • Restricted Net Position – Consists of net position restricted when there are limitations imposed on its use through external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, or laws or regulations of other governments. • Unrestricted Net Position – All other elements of net position that do not meet the definition of “restricted” or “net investment in capital assets.” When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to use restricted resources first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed. -30- NOTE 1 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) S. Fund Balance Classifications and Flow Assumptions In the fund financial statements, governmental funds report fund balance in classifications that disclose constraints for which amounts in those funds can be spent. These classifications are as follows: • Nonspendable – Consists of amounts that are not in spendable form, such as prepaid items, inventory, and other long-term assets. • Restricted – Consists of amounts related to externally imposed constraints established by creditors, grantors, or contributors; or constraints imposed by state statutory provisions. • Committed – Consists of internally imposed constraints that are established by resolution of the City Council. Those committed amounts cannot be used for any other purpose unless the City Council removes or changes the specified use by taking the same type of action it employed to previously commit those amounts. • Assigned – Consists of internally imposed constraints for amounts intended to be used by the City for specific purposes but do not meet the criteria to be classified as restricted or committed . In governmental funds, assigned amounts represent intended uses established by the governing body itself or by an official to which the governing body delegates the authority. Pursuant to City Council resolution, the finance director and/or the city administrator is authorized to establish assignments of fund balance. • Unassigned – The residual classification for the General Fund, which also reflects negative residual amounts in other funds. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to first use restricted resources, then use unrestricted resources as they are needed. When committed, assigned, or unassigned resources are available for use, it is the City ’s policy to use resources in the following order: 1) committed, 2) assigned, and 3) unassigned. T. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates. -31- NOTE 2 – DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS A. Components of Cash and Investments The City had the following cash and investments at year-end: Fair Value Measurements Less Than 1 to 5 6 to 10 Investment Type Rating Agency Using 1 Year Years Years Total Municipal bonds AAA S&P Level 2 –$ 151,356$ 239,388$ 390,744$ Municipal bonds AAA Moody’s Level 2 – – 237,250 237,250 Municipal bonds AA S&P Level 2 – 1,035,175 1,032,591 2,067,766 Municipal bonds AA Moody’s Level 2 – – 1,280,804 1,280,804 Municipal bonds A S&P Level 2 – 343,168 – 343,168 Municipal bonds A Moody’s Level 2 – – 333,092 333,092 Negotiable certificates of deposit N/R N/A Level 2 – 3,509,686 670,704 4,180,390 Investment pools/mutual funds 4M Fund N/R N/A N/A 6,804,467 – – 6,804,467 Wells Fargo Money Market Advantage AAA S&P Level 1 9,457 – – 9,457 Total investments 6,813,924$ 5,039,385$ 3,793,829$ 15,647,138 Deposits 400,445 Petty cash 500 Total cash and investments 16,048,083$ N/R – Not Rated N/A – Not Applicable Interest Risk – Maturity Duration in Years Credit Risk B. Deposits In accordance with applicable Minnesota Statutes, the City maintains deposits at depository banks authorized by the City Council, including checking accounts and certificates of deposit. The following is considered the most significant risk associated with deposits: Custodial Credit Risk – In the case of deposits, this is the risk that in the event of a failure, the City’s deposits may be lost. Minnesota Statutes require that all deposits be protected by federal deposit insurance, corporate surety bond, or collateral. The fair value of collateral pledged must equal 110 percent of the deposits not covered by federal deposit insurance or corporate surety bonds. Authorized collateral includes treasury bills, notes, and bonds; issues of U.S. government agencies; general obligations rated “A” or better; revenue obligations rated “AA” or better; irrevocable standard letters of credit issued by the Federal Home Loan Bank; and certificates of deposit. Minnesota Statutes require that securities pledged as collateral be held in safekeeping in a restricted account at the Federal Reserve Bank or in an account at a trust department of a commercial bank or other financial institution that is not owned or controlled by the financial institution furnishing the collateral. The City has no additional deposit policies addressing custodial credit risk. At year-end, the carrying amount of the City’s deposits and the bank balance was $400,445. The entire bank balance was covered by federal deposit insurance, surety bonds, or by collateral held by the City’s agent in the City’s name. -32- NOTE 2 – DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) C. Investments Investments are subject to various risks, the following of which are considered the most significant: Custodial Credit Risk – For investments, this is the risk that in the event of a failure of the counterparty to an investment transaction (typically a broker-dealer), the City would not be able to recover the value of its investments or collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. The City’s investment policies do not further address this risk, but typically limits its exposure by purchasing insured or registered investments, or by the control of who holds the securities. Credit Risk – This is the risk that an issuer or other counterparty to an investment will not fulfill its obligations. Minnesota Statutes limit the City’s investments to direct obligations or obligations guaranteed by the United States or its agencies; shares of investment companies registered under the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940 that receive the highest credit rating, are rated in one of the two highest rating categories by a statistical rating agency, and all of the investments have a final maturity of 13 months or less; general obligations rated “A” or better; revenue obligations rated “AA” or better; general obligations of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency rated “A” or better; bankers’ acceptances of United States banks eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System; commercial paper issued by United States corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries, rated of the highest quality category by at least two nationally recognized rating agencies, and maturing in 270 days or le ss; Guaranteed Investment Contracts guaranteed by a United States commercial bank, domestic branch of a foreign bank, or a United States insurance company, and with a credit quality in one of the top two highest categories; repurchase or reverse purchase agreements and securities lending agreements with financial institutions qualified as a “depository” by the government entity, with banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System with capitalization exceeding $10,000,000; that are a primary reporting dealer in U.S. government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; or certain Minnesota securities broker-dealers. The City’s investment policies do not further address credit risk. Interest Rate Risk – This is the risk of potential variability in the fair value of fixed rate investments resulting from changes in interest rates (the longer the period for which an interest rate is fixed, the greater the risk). The City’s investment policies do not mandate a limit on the duration of investments. Concentration Risk – This is the risk associated with investing a significant portion of the City’s investment (considered 5 percent or more) in the securities of a single issuer, excluding United States guaranteed investments (such as treasuries), investment pools, and mutual funds. The City’s investment policies state that no more than 5 percent of the overall portfolio may be invested in the securities of a single issuer, except for the securities of the United States government, or a maximum of 25 percent with any individual counterparty in an external investment pool. -33- NOTE 3 – CAPITAL ASSETS Capital asset activity for the year ended December 31, 2020 was as follows: A. Governmental Activities Beginning Completed Ending Balance Increases Decreases Construction Balance Primary government Governmental activities Capital assets, not being depreciated Land 2,679,818$ –$ –$ –$ 2,679,818$ Construction in progress 5,137,764 221,708 – (4,929,644) 429,828 Total capital assets, not being depreciated 7,817,582 221,708 – (4,929,644) 3,109,646 Capital assets, being depreciated Buildings and structures 6,967,774 – (70,504) 357,058 7,254,328 Infrastructure and improvements 18,337,328 – – 4,572,586 22,909,914 Machinery and equipment 938,089 13,222 – – 951,311 Office furniture and equipment 153,553 – – – 153,553 Vehicles 2,027,761 91,595 – – 2,119,356 Total capital assets, being depreciated 28,424,505 104,817 (70,504) 4,929,644 33,388,462 Less accumulated depreciation for Buildings and structures 3,441,571 194,847 (70,504) – 3,565,914 Infrastructure and improvements 4,283,119 427,828 – – 4,710,947 Machinery and equipment 593,960 78,347 – – 672,307 Office furniture and equipment 122,137 10,777 – – 132,914 Vehicles 812,388 185,572 – – 997,960 Total accumulated depreciation 9,253,175 897,371 (70,504) – 10,080,042 Total capital assets being depreciated – net 19,171,330 (792,554) – 4,929,644 23,308,420 Governmental activities capital assets – net 26,988,912$ (570,846)$ –$ –$ 26,418,066$ B. Business-Type Activities Beginning Completed Ending Balance Increases Decreases Construction Balance Primary government Business-type activities Capital assets, not being depreciated Construction in progress 3,193,168$ 196,064$ –$ (3,007,297)$ 381,935$ Capital assets, being depreciated Buildings and structures 835,040 – – – 835,040 Distribution and collection systems 25,042,583 – – 2,921,227 27,963,810 Machinery and equipment 555,228 – – 86,070 641,298 Office furniture and equipment 8,415 – – – 8,415 Total capital assets, being depreciated 26,441,266 – – 3,007,297 29,448,563 Less accumulated depreciation for Buildings and structures 213,350 41,543 – – 254,893 Distribution and collection systems 9,111,386 554,419 – – 9,665,805 Machinery and equipment 292,752 18,833 – – 311,585 Office furniture and equipment 8,415 – – – 8,415 Total accumulated depreciation 9,625,903 614,795 – – 10,240,698 Total capital assets, being depreciated – net 16,815,363 (614,795) – 3,007,297 19,207,865 Business-type activities capital assets – net 20,008,531$ (418,731)$ –$ –$ 19,589,800$ -34- NOTE 3 – CAPITAL ASSETS (CONTINUED) C. Depreciation Expense by Function Depreciation expense was charged to the following functions: Governmental activities General government 132,293$ Public safety 9,425 Public works 545,677 Parks and recreation 146,153 Economic development 63,823 897,371$ Business-type activities Water 318,037$ Sewer 189,459 Surface water management 107,299 614,795$ NOTE 4 – LONG-TERM LIABILITIES A. General Obligation Bonds Payable The City currently has the following general obligation bonds payable outstanding: Final Maturity Authorized Balance – Issue Date Date and Issued End of Year Business-type activities General Obligation Bonds Utility Revenue Bonds of 2018A 07/18/2018 02/01/2029 3.00–4.00 %2,415,000$ 2,215,000$ Interest Rate These bonds were issued to finance acquisition, construction, and/or improvements of capital facilities. Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund revenues will be used to repay this debt. The liability is recorded in the applicable enterprise fund. B. Other Long-Term Liabilities • Compensated Absences – This liability represents vested benefits earned by employees through the end of the year, which will be paid or used in future periods. The General, special revenue, enterprise, and internal service funds will be used to liquidate this liability. • Net Pension Liability – This liability represents the City’s pension benefit obligations as further described later in these notes. The General, Water, Sewer, and Surface Water Management Funds will be used to liquidate this liability. -35- NOTE 4 – LONG-TERM LIABILITIES (CONTINUED) C. Changes in General Obligation Bonds and Compensated Absences Payable Beginning Ending Due Within Balance Additions Deletions Balance One Year Governmental activities Compensated absences 86,680$ 123,937$ 104,346$ 106,271$ 79,704$ Business-type activities Utility revenue bonds 2,415,000 – 200,000 2,215,000 210,000 Premium 141,394 – 15,556 125,838 – Total bonds 2,556,394 – 215,556 2,340,838 210,000 Compensated absences 51,988 85,213 60,372 76,829 57,622 Total business-type activities 2,608,382 85,213 275,928 2,417,667 267,622 Total government-wide 2,695,062$ 209,150$ 380,274$ 2,523,938$ 347,326$ D. Minimum Debt Payments Minimum annual payments required to retire bonds are as follows: Year Ending December 31,Principal Interest 2021 210,000$ 78,800$ 2022 220,000 70,200 2023 225,000 61,300 2024 235,000 52,100 2025 245,000 42,500 2026–2029 1,080,000 71,550 2,215,000$ 376,450$ Business-Type Activities Utility Revenue Bonds E. Revenue Pledged Future revenue pledged for the payment of long-term debt is as follows: Percent of Remaining Principal Pledged Use of Total Term of Principal and Interest Revenue Debt Issue Proceeds Type Debt Service Pledge and Interest Paid Received Utility Revenue Bonds of 2018A Utility improvements Utility charges 100%2018–2029 2,591,450$ 286,998$ 4,248,402$ Revenue Pledged Current Year -36- NOTE 5 – FUND BALANCES A. Classifications At December 31, 2020, a summary of the City’s governmental fund balance classifications are as follows: Permanent Other Improvement Governmental General Revolving Funds Total Nonspendable Prepaid items 28,782$ –$ 3,680$ 32,462$ Restricted for Tax increment purposes – – 1,021,370 1,021,370 Cable TV – – 116,370 116,370 Total restricted – – 1,137,740 1,137,740 Committed for Economic development authority – – 619,013 619,013 Assigned for Compensated absences 105,747 – – 105,747 Subsequent year’s budget 90,720 – – 90,720 Capital improvements – 4,928,470 461,581 5,390,051 Park improvements – – 246,917 246,917 Public safety capital equipment – – 125,624 125,624 Total assigned 196,467 4,928,470 834,122 5,959,059 Unassigned 3,155,257 – (230,101) 2,925,156 Total 3,380,506$ 4,928,470$ 2,364,454$ 10,673,430$ B. Minimum Unassigned Fund Balance Policy The City Council has formally adopted a fund balance policy regarding the minimum unassigned fund balance for the General Fund. The policy establishes the City will strive to maintain an unassigned General Fund balance of 50.0 percent of the subsequent year’s General Fund budgeted expenditures. At December 31, 2020, the unassigned fund balance of the General Fund was 60.5 percent of the subsequent year’s budgeted expenditures. NOTE 6 – DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN – STATE-WIDE A. Plan Description The City participates in the following cost-sharing, multiple-employer defined benefit pension plan administered by the PERA of Minnesota. The PERA’s defined benefit pension plan is established and administered in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 353 and 356. The PERA’s defined benefit pension plan is a tax qualified plan under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. General Employees Retirement Fund (GERF) All full-time and certain part-time employees of the City are covered by the GERF. The GERF members belong to the Coordinated Plan. Coordinated Plan members are covered by Social Security. -37- NOTE 6 – DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN – STATE-WIDE (CONTINUED) B. Benefits Provided The PERA provides retirement, disability, and death benefits. Benefit provisions are established by state statutes and can only be modified by the State Legislature. Vested, terminated employees who are entitled to benefits but are not receiving them yet, are bound by the provisions in effect at the time they last terminated their public service. GERF Benefits Benefits are based on a member’s highest average salary for any five successive years of allowable service, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for the PERA’s Coordinated Plan members. Members hired prior to July 1, 1989, receive the higher of Method 1 or Method 2 formulas. Only Method 2 is used for members hired after June 30, 1989. Under Method 1, the accrual rate for Coordinated Plan members is 1.2 percent of average salary for each of the first 10 years of service, and 1.7 percent of average salary for each additional year. Under Method 2, the accrual rate for Coordinated Plan members is 1.7 percent of average salary for all years of service. For members hired prior to July 1, 1989, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90, and normal retirement age is 65. For members hired on or after July 1, 1989, normal retirement age is the age for unreduced Social Security benefits capped at age 66. Annuities, disability benefits, and survivor benefits are increased effective every January 1. Beginning January 1, 2019, the post-retirement increase will be equal to 50.0 percent of the cost of living adjustment (COLA) announced by the Social Security Administration, with a minimum increase of at least 1.0 percent and a maximum of 1.5 percent. Recipients that have been receiving the annuity or benefit for at least a full year as of the June 30 before the effective date of the increase, will receive the full increase. For recipients receiving the annuity or benefit for at least one month, but less than a full year as of the June 30 before the effective date of the increase, will receive a reduced prorated increase. For members retiring on January 1, 2024 or later, the increase will be delayed until normal retirement age (age 65 if hired prior to July 1, 1989, or age 66 for individuals hired on or after July 1, 1989). Members retiring under Rule of 90 are exempt from the delay to normal retirement. C. Contributions Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. Contribution rates can only be modified by the State Legislature. GERF Contributions Coordinated Plan members were required to contribute 6.5 percent of their annual covered salary in fiscal year 2020, and the City was required to contribute 7.5 percent for Coordinated Plan members. The City’s contributions to the GERF for the year ended December 31, 2020, were $134,798. The City’s contributions were equal to the required contributions as set by state statutes. -38- NOTE 6 – DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN – STATE-WIDE (CONTINUED) D. Pension Costs GERF Pension Costs At December 31, 2020, the City reported a liability of $1,444,905 for its proportionate share of the GERF’s net pension liability. The City’s net pension liability reflected a reduction, due to the state of Minnesota’s contribution of $16.0 million. The state of Minnesota is considered a nonemployer contributing entity and the state’s contribution meets the definition of a special funding situation. The net pension liability was measured as of June 30, 2020, and the total pension liability used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. The City’s proportion of the net pension liability was based on the City’s contributions received by the PERA during the measurement period for employer payroll paid dates from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, relative to the total employer contributions received from all of the PERA ’s participating employers. The City’s proportionate share was 0.0241 percent at the end of the measurement period and 0.0218 percent for the beginning of the period. The amount recognized by the City as its proportionate share of the net pension liability, the direct aid, and total portion of the net pension liability that was associated with the City were as follows: City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability 1,444,905$ State’s proportionate share of the net pension liability associated with the City 44,478$ For the year ended December 31, 2020, the City recognized pension expense of $10,949 for its proportionate share of the GERF’s pension expense. In addition, the City recognized an additional $3,871 as pension expense (and grant revenue) for its proportionate share of the state of Minnesota’s contribution of $16.0 million to the GERF. At December 31, 2020, the City reported its proportionate share of the GERF’s deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions from the following sources: Deferred Deferred Outflows Inflows of Resources of Resources Differences between expected and actual economic experience 11,917$ 5,467$ Changes in actuarial assumptions – 50,679 Difference between projected and actual investment earnings 32,655 – Changes in proportion 95,370 19,152 Contributions paid to the PERA subsequent to the measurement date 67,721 – Total 207,663$ 75,298$ -39- NOTE 6 – DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN – STATE-WIDE (CONTINUED) A total of $67,721 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to pensions resulting from city contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ending December 31, 2021. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in pension expense as follows: Pension Year Ending Expense December 31,Amount 2021 (62,307)$ 2022 32,986$ 2023 59,057$ 2024 34,908$ E. Actuarial Assumptions The total pension liability in the June 30, 2020 actuarial valuation was determined using an individual entry-age normal actuarial cost method and the following actuarial assumptions: Inflation 2.25% per year Active member payroll growth 3.00% per year Investment rate of return 7.50% Salary increases were based on a service-related table. Mortality rates for active members, retirees, survivors, and disabilitants for all plans were based on RP-2014 tables for males and females, as appropriate, with slight adjustments to fit the PERA’s experience. Cost of living benefit increases after retirement for retirees are assumed to be 1.25 percent per year for the GERF. Actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2020 valuation were based on the results of actuarial experience studies. The most recent four-year experience study in the GERF was completed in 2019. The assumption changes were adopted by the Board and become effective with the July 1, 2020 actuarial valuation. -40- NOTE 6 – DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN – STATE-WIDE (CONTINUED) The following changes in actuarial assumptions and plan provisions occurred in 2020: GERF – CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The price inflation assumption was decreased from 2.50 percent to 2.25 percent. • The payroll growth assumption was decreased from 3.25 percent to 3.00 percent. • Assumed salary increase rates were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The net effect is assumed rates that average 0.25 percent less than previous rates. • Assumed rates of retirement were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The changes result in more unreduced (normal) retirements and slightly fewer Rule of 90 and early retirements. • Assumed rates of termination were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The new rates are based on service and are generally lower than the previous rates for years two through five, and slightly higher thereafter. • Assumed rates of disability were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The change results in fewer predicted disability retirements for males and females. • The base mortality table for healthy annuitants and employees was changed from the RP-2014 Table to the Pub-2010 General Mortality Table, with adjustments. The base mortality table for disabled annuitants was changed from the RP-2014 Disabled Annuitant Mortality Table to the PUB-2010 General/Teacher Disabled Annuitant Mortality Table, with adjustments. • The mortality improvement scale was changed from MP-2018 to MP-2019. • The assumed spouse age difference was changed from two years older for females to one year older. • The assumed number of married male new retirees electing the 100.00 percent joint and survivor option changed from 35.00 percent to 45.00 percent. The assumed number of married female new retirees electing the 100.00 percent joint and survivor option changed from 15.00 percent to 30.00 percent. The corresponding number of married new retirees electing the life annuity option was adjusted accordingly. GERF – CHANGES IN PLAN PROVISIONS • Augmentation for current privatized members was reduced to 2.00 percent for the period July 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023, and zero percent thereafter. Augmentation was eliminated for privatizations occurring after June 30, 2020. -41- NOTE 6 – DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN – STATE-WIDE (CONTINUED) The Minnesota State Board of Investment, which manages the investments of the PERA, prepares an analysis of the reasonableness on a regular basis of the long-term expected rate of return using a building-block method in which best-estimate ranges of expected future rates of return are developed for each major asset class. These ranges are combined to produce an expected long-term rate of return by weighting the expected future rates of return by the target asset allocation percentages. The target allocation and best-estimates of geometric real rates of return for each major asset class are summarized in the following table: Asset Class Domestic stocks 35.50 % 5.10 % International stocks 17.50 5.30 % Bonds (fixed income)20.00 0.75 % Alternative assets (private markets)25.00 5.90 % Cash 2.00 – % Total 100.00 % Allocation Target Real Rate of Return Long-Term Expected F. Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability in 2020 was 7.50 percent. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from plan members and employers will be made at rates set in Minnesota Statutes. Based on these assumptions, the fiduciary net position of the GERF was projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current plan members. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability. G. Pension Liability Sensitivity The following table presents the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability, calculated using the discount rate disclosed in the preceding paragraph, as well as what the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate 1 percentage point lower or 1 percentage point higher than the current discount rate: 1% Decrease in 1% Increase in Discount Rate Discount Rate Discount Rate 6.50%7.50%8.50% City’s proportionate share of the GERF net pension liability 2,315,682$ 1,444,905$ 726,584$ H. Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position Detailed information about the pension plan’s fiduciary net position is available in a separately issued PERA financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary information. That report may be obtained on the PERA website at www.mnpera.org; by writing to the PERA at 60 Empire Drive, Suite 200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55103; or by calling (651) 296-7460 or (800) 652-9026. -42- NOTE 7 – INTERFUND RECEIVABLES, PAYABLES, AND TRANSFERS A. Interfund Receivable and Payable Interfund receivable and payable balances at December 31, 2020 are as follows: Fund Receivable Payable Governmental funds Permanent Improvement Revolving 194,879$ –$ Nonmajor – other governmental 35,222 230,101 Intra-activity eliminations (230,101) (230,101) Total governmental funds –$ –$ Interfund receivables and payables are used for temporary cash deficits. These balances will be eliminated with park dedication fees, future charges for services, grants, and other internal fund transfers, if needed. B. Transfers In and Transfers Out Permanent Nonmajor – Improvement Other Transfers Out Revolving Governmental Total Governmental funds General Fund 137,000$ 341,000$ 478,000$ Proprietary funds Water – 100,000 100,000 Sewer – 63,000 63,000 Surface Water Management – 74,000 74,000 Total 137,000$ 578,000$ 715,000$ Transfers In Governmental Funds Transfers are made in accordance with budget appropriations or as approved by the City Council for special funding of city activities. All of the transfers presented above were approved by the City Council to finance current and future capital expenditures of the City. -43- NOTE 8 – DEFICIT FUND BALANCES/NET POSITION The City had deficit fund balances/net position at December 31, 2020 as follows: Amount Governmental funds Nonmajor – EDA TIF District No. 5 22,000$ Nonmajor – Karth Lake Improvement District 13,222 Nonmajor – TCAAP 194,879 230,101$ These fund deficits will be eliminated with future contributions, grants, and internal fund transfers, if needed. NOTE 9 – TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENTS The City, in order to spur economic development and redevelopment, will enter into private development and redevelopment agreements to encourage a developer to construct, expand, or improve new or existing properties and buildings or clean-up and redevelop blighted areas. These agreements may in substance be a tax abatement, but will depend on their individual circumstances. The City currently has two agreements that would be considered a tax abatement under GASB Statement No. 77. In 2013, the City entered into a development agreement with Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. to aid in financing certain public development costs and administrative costs of a project undertaken. For this agreement, the City used an economic development vehicle known as tax increment financing, whereby tax increment revenue is generated on the incremental increase in value above a base value established on the date that the tax increment district is created. The City will abate 75 percent of the incremental taxes received through February 2028, through execution of a tax increment revenue note to be retired in 2028. The outstanding principal balance as of December 31, 2020 was $319,256, and the City rebated $226,677 in the current year. In 2016, the City entered into an abatement agreement with Land O’Lakes, Inc. (the Company) to aid in the expansion of its corporate headquarters in the City. Tax abatement assistance is where the City’s portion of the property tax attirbuted to the building expansion will be refunded to the Company over a period of not more than 15 years. This agreement is for the increases in taxes above the base year (2017) up to a maximum of $650,000, with limits on the amount of the annual payment. The City did not have any collections or rebate of property tax abatement in the current year. The City is authorized to create a tax increment financing plan under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469.175. The criteria that must be met under the statutes are that, in the opinion of the municipality: • The proposed development or redevelopment would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; • The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing, would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the plan. The requirements of this item do not apply if the district is a housing district; -44- NOTE 9 – TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENTS (CONTINUED) • The tax increment financing plan conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole; and • The tax increment financing plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the municipality as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the project by private enterprise. NOTE 10 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES A. Risk Management The City is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts: theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets; errors and omissions; injuries to employees; and natural disasters for which the City carries insurance . The City obtains insurance through participation in the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), which is a risk-sharing pool with other governmental units. The City pays an annual premium to the LMCIT for its workers’ compensation and property and casualty insurance. The LMCIT is self-sustaining through member premiums and will reinsure for claims above a prescribed dollar amount for each insurance event. There were no significant reductions in insurance from the previous year or settled claims in excess of insurance coverage for any of the past three fiscal years. Liabilities are reported when it is probable that a loss has occurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities, if any, include an amount for claims that have been incurred, but not reported. The City’s management is not aware of any incurred, but unreported claims. B. Litigation The city attorney has indicated that existing and pending lawsuits, claims, and other actions in which the City is a defendant are either covered by insurance, of an immaterial amount, or, in the judgment of the city attorney, remotely recoverable by plaintiffs. No loss has been recorded on the City’s financial statements relating to these claims. C. Federal and State Funds Amounts recorded or receivable from federal and state agencies are subject to agency audit and adjustment. Any disallowed claims, including amounts already collected, may constitute a liability of the applicable funds. The amount, if any, of claims which may be disallowed by the grantor agencies cannot be determined at this time, although the City expects such amounts, if any, to be immaterial. D. Tax Increment Districts The City’s tax increment districts are subject to review by the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor. Any disallowed claims or misuse of tax increments could become a liability of the applicable fund. Management has indicated that they are not aware of any instances of noncompliance , which would have a material effect on the financial statements. -45- NOTE 10 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (CONTINUED) E. Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. The City receives fire protection under a contract with the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Department, Inc . The contract calls for annual payments and expires December 31, 2023, with an extension option through December 31, 2038. The contract cost will be based on the budget submitted by the fire department and approved by the City. Capital costs are billed separately in addition to the contract rate. The amount expended under the contract was $620,986 in 2020. F. Construction Contract Commitments At year-end, the City had the following construction project commitments: Project Amount Nonmajor Fund – Equipment, Building, and Replacement Fund City Hall HVAC project 254,360$ Water Fund Highway 10 water main 5,514 Sewer Fund Lift station 6 rehabilitation 7,613 267,487$ G. COVID-19 Pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic has caused economic and financial market volatility in the United States and around the world, along with significant business and operational disruptions for many organizations. Due to the unknown breadth and duration of this pandemic, any potential impact it may have on the City’s future operations and financial condition cannot be determined at this time, and has not been reflected in these financial statements. NOTE 11 – CONDUIT DEBT OBLIGATION The City has issued private activity bonds to provide financial assistance to private sector entities for the acquisition and construction of industrial and commercial facilities deemed to be in the public interest . The bonds constitute special obligations of the City, payable solely from revenues of the projects pledged to the payment thereof. The bonds do not constitute a debt of the City and the City has no obligation for repayment. Accordingly, the bonds are not reported as liabilities in the City’s financial statements. Bonds outstanding at December 31, 2020 are as follows: Amount Bond Description Outstanding Commercial Facilities Revenue Note, Series 2008 Office facilities 2,912,421$ Housing Facility Revenue Note, Series 2011A Senior housing 7,942,494 Housing Facility Revenue Note, Series 2011B Senior housing 7,942,494 Housing Facility Revenue Note, Series 2012A Senior housing 7,942,494 Housing Facility Revenue Note, Series 2012B Senior housing 1,582,305 Housing Facility Revenue Note, Series 2015 Senior housing 8,668,651 Total 36,990,859$ REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Proportionate Share of the City’s Net Pension Proportionate Liability and City’s Share of the the City’s Proportionate Plan Fiduciary State of Share of the Share of the Net Position City’s City’s Minnesota’s State of Net Pension as a PERA Fiscal Proportion Proportionate Proportionate Minnesota’s Liability as a Percentage Year-End Date of the Net Share of the Share of the Share of the City’s Percentage of of the Total (Measurement Pension Net Pension Net Pension Net Pension Covered Covered Pension Date)Liability Liability Liability Liability Payroll Payroll Liability 06/30/2015 0.0283% 1,466,653$ –$ 1,466,653$ 1,662,826$ 88.20%78.20% 06/30/2016 0.0267% 2,167,909$ 28,367$ 2,196,276$ 1,669,147$ 129.88%68.90% 06/30/2017 0.0230% 1,468,305$ 18,435$ 1,486,740$ 1,479,483$ 99.24%75.90% 06/30/2018 0.0218% 1,209,375$ 39,819$ 1,249,194$ 1,467,987$ 82.38%79.50% 06/30/2019 0.0218% 1,205,274$ 37,332$ 1,242,606$ 1,540,669$ 78.23%80.20% 06/30/2020 0.0241% 1,444,905$ 44,478$ 1,489,383$ 1,715,236$ 84.24%79.10% Contributions Contributions in Relation to as a Statutorily the Statutorily Contribution Percentage Required Required Deficiency Covered of Covered Contributions Contributions (Excess)Payroll Payroll 129,774$ 129,774$ –$ 1,731,651$ 7.49% 115,814$ 115,814$ –$ 1,553,950$ 7.45% 106,513$ 106,513$ –$ 1,420,174$ 7.50% 111,628$ 111,628$ –$ 1,488,376$ 7.50% 121,063$ 121,063$ –$ 1,614,175$ 7.50% 134,798$ 134,798$ –$ 1,797,307$ 7.50% Note: 12/31/2019 12/31/2020 12/31/2018 12/31/2019 12/31/2020 The City implemented GASB Statement No.68 in fiscal 2015 (using a June 30,2015 measurement date).This schedule is intended to present 10-year trend information. Additional years will be added as they become available. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PERA – General Employees Retirement Fund Schedule of City’s and Nonemployer Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability PERA – General Employees Retirement Fund Schedule of City Contributions Year-End City Fiscal 12/31/2016 12/31/2015 Year Ended December 31, 2020 12/31/2017 12/31/2018 Year Ended December 31, 2020 12/31/2017 Year-End City Fiscal 12/31/2016 12/31/2015 -46- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Original Final Actual Variance With Budget Budget Amounts Final Budget Revenues General property taxes 3,619,700$ 3,619,700$ 3,629,819$ 10,119$ Special assessments 1,190 1,190 4,758 3,568 Licenses and permits Business 68,370 68,370 68,631 261 Nonbusiness 397,980 397,980 362,997 (34,983) Total licenses and permits 466,350 466,350 431,628 (34,722) Intergovernmental State Road maintenance 101,630 101,630 105,465 3,835 PERA aid 2,590 2,590 – (2,590) Police aid 47,460 47,460 64,353 16,893 Federal Coronavirus Relief Fund – – 459,614 459,614 Total intergovernmental 151,680 151,680 629,432 477,752 Charges for services General government 19,910 19,910 16,497 (3,413) Public safety 136,590 136,590 85,835 (50,755) Parks and recreation 127,780 127,780 13,114 (114,666) Administrative charges 115,650 115,650 100,472 (15,178) Total charges for services 399,930 399,930 215,918 (184,012) Fines and forfeits 30,030 30,030 13,581 (16,449) Earnings on investments 65,000 65,000 101,743 36,743 Antenna rental fees 140,680 140,680 140,707 27 Miscellaneous reimbursements 17,880 17,880 57,630 39,750 Other 4,280 4,280 4,325 45 Total revenues 4,896,720 4,896,720 5,229,541 332,821 Expenditures Current General government City Council Personal services 37,210 37,210 37,208 2 Other services and charges 34,890 34,890 28,010 6,880 Total City Council 72,100 72,100 65,218 6,882 Elections Other services and charges 23,000 23,000 25,443 (2,443) CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Required Supplementary Information Budgetary Comparison Schedule – General Fund Year Ended December 31, 2020 -47-(continued) Original Final Actual Variance With Budget Budget Amounts Final Budget Expenditures (continued) Current (continued) General government (continued) Administration Personal services 214,890 214,890 211,483 3,407 Materials and supplies 550 550 180 370 Other services and charges 135,000 135,000 103,250 31,750 Total administration 350,440 350,440 314,913 35,527 Finance Personal services 58,340 58,340 58,488 (148) Materials and supplies 20,500 20,500 8,170 12,330 Other services and charges 107,420 107,420 77,758 29,662 Total finance 186,260 186,260 144,416 41,844 TCAAP Personal services 36,610 37,110 36,316 794 Other services and charges 51,000 51,000 6,392 44,608 Total TCAAP 87,610 88,110 42,708 45,402 Planning and zoning Personal services 138,260 138,260 136,150 2,110 Other services and charges 67,950 67,950 18,797 49,153 Total planning and zoning 206,210 206,210 154,947 51,263 General government buildings Personal services 40,410 40,620 34,927 5,693 Materials and supplies 8,000 8,000 4,346 3,654 Other services and charges 155,840 155,840 140,401 15,439 Total general government buildings 204,250 204,460 179,674 24,786 Total general government 1,129,870 1,130,580 927,319 203,261 Public safety Police and animal control Other services and charges 1,338,120 1,338,120 1,427,395 (89,275) Dispatch Other services and charges 45,580 45,580 45,578 2 Fire protection Other services and charges 620,990 620,990 620,986 4 Emergency management Personal services 4,690 4,690 5,009 (319) Other services and charges 1,150 1,150 1,300 (150) Total emergency management 5,840 5,840 6,309 (469) CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Required Supplementary Information Budgetary Comparison Schedule – General Fund (continued) Year Ended December 31, 2020 -48-(continued) Original Final Actual Variance With Budget Budget Amounts Final Budget Expenditures (continued) Current (continued) Public safety (continued) Protective inspections Personal services 264,240 264,240 265,192 (952) Materials and supplies 2,750 2,750 2,065 685 Other services and charges 60,960 60,960 68,248 (7,288) Total protective inspections 327,950 327,950 335,505 (7,555) Total public safety 2,338,480 2,338,480 2,435,773 (97,293) Public works Street maintenance Personal services 295,030 300,480 270,909 29,571 Materials and supplies 38,000 38,000 33,903 4,097 Other services and charges 390,700 390,700 370,927 19,773 Total public works 723,730 729,180 675,739 53,441 Parks and recreation Park maintenance Personal services 280,230 286,390 259,311 27,079 Materials and supplies 43,250 43,250 23,786 19,464 Other services and charges 156,640 156,640 95,795 60,845 Total park maintenance 480,120 486,280 378,892 107,388 Recreation Personal services 237,830 238,660 153,773 84,887 Materials and supplies 35,250 35,250 1,314 33,936 Other services and charges 73,030 73,030 13,808 59,222 Total recreation 346,110 346,940 168,895 178,045 Total parks and recreation 826,230 833,220 547,787 285,433 Total expenditures 5,018,310 5,031,460 4,586,618 444,842 Revenues over (under) expenditures (121,590) (134,740) 642,923 777,663 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers out – (478,000) (478,000) – Net change in fund balance (121,590)$ (612,740)$ 164,923 777,663$ Fund balance – beginning 3,215,583 Fund balance – ending 3,380,506$ Year Ended December 31, 2020 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Required Supplementary Information Budgetary Comparison Schedule – General Fund (continued) -49- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Notes to Required Supplementary Information December 31, 2020 -50- NOTE 1 – LEGAL COMPLIANCE – BUDGETS The General Fund budget is legally adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The legal level of budgetary control is at the fund level. Budgeted appropriations lapse at year-end. NOTE 2 – PERA – GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND 2020 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The price inflation assumption was decreased from 2.50 percent to 2.25 percent. • The payroll growth assumption was decreased from 3.25 percent to 3.00 percent. • Assumed salary increase rates were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The net effect is assumed rates that average 0.25 percent less than previous rates. • Assumed rates of retirement were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The changes result in more unreduced (normal) retirements and slightly fewer Rule of 90 and early retirements. • Assumed rates of termination were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The new rates are based on service and are generally lower tha n the previous rates for years two through five, and slightly higher thereafter. • Assumed rates of disability were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2019 experience study. The change results in fewer predicted disability retirements for males and females. • The base mortality table for healthy annuitants and employees was changed from the RP-2014 Table to the Pub-2010 General Mortality Table, with adjustments. The base mortality table for disabled annuitants was changed from the RP-2014 Disabled Annuitant Mortality Table to the Pub-2010 General/Teacher Disabled Annuitant Mortality Table, with adjustments. • The mortality improvement scale was changed from MP-2018 to MP-2019. • The assumed spouse age difference was changed from two years older for females to one year older. • The assumed number of married male new retirees electing the 100.00 percent joint and survivor option changed from 35.00 percent to 45.00 percent. The assumed number of married female new retirees electing the 100.00 percent joint and survivor option changed from 15.00 percent to 30.00 percent. The corresponding number of married new retirees electing the life annuity option was adjusted accordingly. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Notes to Required Supplementary Information (continued) December 31, 2020 -51- NOTE 2 – PERA – GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND (CONTINUED) 2020 CHANGES IN PLAN PROVISIONS • Augmentation for current privatized members was reduced to 2.00 percent for the period July 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023, and zero percent thereafter. Augmentation was eliminated for privatizations occurring after June 30, 2020. 2019 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The mortality projection scale was changed from MP-2017 to MP-2018. 2019 CHANGES IN PLAN PROVISIONS • The employer supplemental contribution was changed prospectively, decreasing from $31.0 million to $21.0 million per year. The state’s special funding contribution was changed prospectively, requiring $16.0 million due per year through 2031. 2018 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The mortality projection scale was changed from MP-2015 to MP-2017. • The assumed benefit increase was changed from 1.00 percent per year through 2044, and 2.50 percent per year thereafter, to 1.25 percent per year. 2018 CHANGES IN PLAN PROVISIONS • The augmentation adjustment in early retirement factors is eliminated over a five-year period starting July 1, 2019, resulting in actuarial equivalence after June 30, 2024. • Interest credited on member contributions decreased from 4.00 percent to 3.00 percent, beginning July 1, 2018. • Deferred augmentation was changed to zero percent, effective January 1, 2019. Augmentation that has already accrued for deferred members will still apply. • Contribution stabilizer provisions were repealed. • Post-retirement benefit increases were changed from 1.00 percent per year with a provision to increase to 2.50 percent upon attainment of 90.00 percent funding ratio to 50.00 percent of the Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment, not less than 1.00 percent and not more than 1.50 percent, beginning January 1, 2019. • For retirements on or after January 1, 2024, the first benefit increase is delayed until the retiree reaches normal retirement age; does not apply to Rule of 90 retirees, disability benefit recipients, or survivors. • Actuarial equivalent factors were updated to reflect revised mortality and interest assumptions. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Notes to Required Supplementary Information (continued) December 31, 2020 -52- NOTE 2 – PERA – GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND (CONTINUED) 2017 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) loads were changed from 0.80 percent for active members and 60.00 percent for vested and nonvested deferred members. The revised CSA loads are now zero percent for active member liability, 15.00 percent for vested deferred member liability, and 3.00 percent for nonvested deferred member liability. • The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.00 percent per year for all years, to 1.00 percent per year through 2044, and 2.50 percent per year thereafter. 2017 CHANGES IN PLAN PROVISIONS • The state’s contribution for the Minneapolis Employees Retirement Fund equals $16.0 million in 2017 and 2018, and $6.0 million thereafter. • The Employer Supplemental Contribution for the Minneapolis Employees Retirement Fund changed from $21.0 million to $31.0 million in calendar years 2019 to 2031. The state’s contribution changed from $16.0 million to $6.0 million in calendar years 2019 to 2031. 2016 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.00 percent per year through 2035, and 2.50 percent per year thereafter, to 1.00 percent per year for all years. • The assumed investment return was changed from 7.90 percent to 7.50 percent. The single discount rate changed from 7.90 percent to 7.50 percent. • Other assumptions were changed pursuant to the experience study June 30, 2015. The assumed future salary increases, payroll growth, and inflation were decreased by 0.25 percent to 3.25 percent for payroll growth, and 2.50 percent for inflation. 2015 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS • The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.00 percent per year through 2030, and 2.50 percent per year thereafter, to 1.00 percent per year through 2035, and 2.50 percent per year thereafter. 2015 CHANGES IN PLAN PROVISIONS • On January 1, 2015, the Minneapolis Employees Retirement Fund was merged into the General Employees Fund, which increased the total pension liability by $1.1 billion and increased the fiduciary plan net position by $892.0 million. Upon consolidation, state and employer contributions were revised; the state’s contribution of $6.0 million, which meets the special funding situation definition, was due September 2015. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Special Revenue Funds – Special revenue funds are used to account for revenues derived from specific taxes or other earmarked revenue sources. They are usually required by statutes, local ordinance, and/or resolution to finance particular functions, activities, or governments. Capital Project Funds – Capital project funds account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by proprietary funds). Total Nonmajor Governmental Special Revenue Capital Project Funds Assets Cash and investments 1,820,028$ 852,540$ 2,672,568$ Accrued interest receivable 4,949 2,275 7,224 Accounts receivable 29,011 1,286 30,297 Taxes receivable 3,222 – 3,222 Interfund receivable 35,222 – 35,222 Prepaid items 3,680 – 3,680 Total assets 1,896,112$ 856,101$ 2,752,213$ Liabilities Accounts payable 122,981$ 21,979$ 144,960$ Interfund payable 35,222 194,879 230,101 Due to other governmental units 9,476 – 9,476 Total liabilities 167,679 216,858 384,537 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue – taxes 3,222 – 3,222 Fund balances (deficits) Nonspendable 3,680 – 3,680 Restricted 1,137,740 – 1,137,740 Committed 619,013 – 619,013 Assigned – 834,122 834,122 Unassigned (35,222) (194,879) (230,101) Total fund balances (deficits)1,725,211 639,243 2,364,454 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,896,112$ 856,101$ 2,752,213$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2020 -53- Total Nonmajor Governmental Special Revenue Capital Project Funds Revenues Taxes General property taxes 100,000$ 120,000$ 220,000$ Tax increments 273,043 – 273,043 Intergovernmental 285,426 – 285,426 Earnings on investments 52,628 11,372 64,000 Franchise taxes 101,057 – 101,057 Other – 270,163 270,163 Total revenues 812,154 401,535 1,213,689 Expenditures Current General government 273,824 – 273,824 Economic development 415,839 – 415,839 Capital outlay General government 13,222 94,643 107,865 Public safety – 299,107 299,107 Public works 38,999 52,595 91,594 Total expenditures 741,884 446,345 1,188,229 Revenues over (under) expenditures 70,270 (44,810) 25,460 Other financing sources Sale of capital assets – 17,500 17,500 Transfers in – 578,000 578,000 Total other financing sources – 595,500 595,500 Net change in fund balances 70,270 550,690 620,960 Fund balances – beginning 1,654,941 88,553 1,743,494 Fund balances – ending 1,725,211$ 639,243$ 2,364,454$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Year Ended December 31, 2020 -54- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The City had the following nonmajor special revenue funds during the year: Cable Fund – This fund was established to account for transactions associated with cable television in the City. Revenues are franchise fees from Comcast. Expenditures include the operation of the North Suburban Cable Commission and other costs relating to cable television activity, internet, and other forms of communication. EDA Operating Fund – The EDA Operating Fund accounts for revenue sources, including tax increments and other sources, that are legally restricted or committed to expenditures for specified purposes (not including major capital projects). EDA TIF District No. 3 Fund – This fund was established as a Housing District in 1993. The revenue is derived from tax increment and expenditures are for developer reimbursements and administrative ependitures. This tax increment district was decertified in 2019. EDA TIF District No. 4 Fund – This fund was established as a redevelopment plan for Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. in 2010. The revenue is derived from tax increment and expenditures are for developer reimbursements and administrative ependitures. EDA TIF District No. 5 Fund – This fund was established in 2019. The revenue is derived from tax increment and expenditures are for economic development and administrative ependitures. CARES Act 2020 Fund – This fund was established in 2020. The revenue is derived from federal coronavirus relief funds distributed to the City for expenditures incurred directly, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Karth Lake Improvement District Fund – This fund accounts for revenue sources, including taxes, that are restricted to finance capital and other improvements within the Karth Lake Improvement District. EDA EDA EDA EDA TIF District TIF District TIF District Cable Operating No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 Assets Cash and investments 96,744$ 604,144$ 776,737$ 342,403$ –$ Accrued interest receivable 258 1,647 2,131 913 – Accounts receivable 29,011 – – – – Taxes receivable – 3,222 – – – Interfund receivable – 13,222 22,000 – – Prepaid items – 3,680 – – – Total assets 126,013$ 625,915$ 800,868$ 343,316$ –$ Liabilities Accounts payable 9,643$ –$ –$ 113,338$ –$ Interfund payable – – – – 22,000 Due to other governmental units – – 9,476 – – Total liabilities 9,643 – 9,476 113,338 22,000 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue – taxes – 3,222 – – – Fund balances (deficits) Nonspendable – 3,680 – – – Restricted 116,370 – 791,392 229,978 – Committed – 619,013 – – – Unassigned – – – – (22,000) Total fund balances (deficits)116,370 622,693 791,392 229,978 (22,000) Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 126,013$ 625,915$ 800,868$ 343,316$ –$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2020 -55- Total Nonmajor Karth Lake Special CARES Act Improvement Revenue 2020 District Funds –$ –$ 1,820,028$ – – 4,949 – – 29,011 – – 3,222 – – 35,222 – – 3,680 –$ –$ 1,896,112$ –$ –$ 122,981$ – 13,222 35,222 – – 9,476 – 13,222 167,679 – – 3,222 – – 3,680 – – 1,137,740 – – 619,013 – (13,222) (35,222) – (13,222) 1,725,211 –$ –$ 1,896,112$ -56- EDA EDA EDA EDA TIF District TIF District TIF District Cable Operating No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 Revenues Taxes General property taxes –$ 100,000$ –$ –$ –$ Tax increments (abatements)– – (29,193) 302,236 – Intergovernmental – – – – – Earnings on investments 4,007 17,969 25,197 5,416 – Franchise taxes 101,057 – – – – Total revenues 105,064 117,969 (3,996) 307,652 – Expenditures Current General government 137,358 – – – – Economic development – 75,519 1,850 228,470 – Capital outlay General government – – – – – Public works – – – – – Total expenditures 137,358 75,519 1,850 228,470 – Revenues over (under) expenditures (32,294) 42,450 (5,846) 79,182 – Fund balances (deficits) – beginning 148,664 580,243 797,238 150,796 (22,000) Fund balances (deficits) – ending 116,370$ 622,693$ 791,392$ 229,978$ (22,000)$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Year Ended December 31, 2020 -57- Total Nonmajor Karth Lake Special CARES Act Improvement Revenue 2020 District Funds –$ –$ 100,000$ – – 273,043 285,426 – 285,426 39 – 52,628 – – 101,057 285,465 – 812,154 136,466 – 273,824 110,000 – 415,839 – 13,222 13,222 38,999 – 38,999 285,465 13,222 741,884 – (13,222) 70,270 – – 1,654,941 –$ (13,222)$ 1,725,211$ -58- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK NONMAJOR CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS The City had the following nonmajor capital project funds during the year: Equipment, Building, and Replacement Fund – This fund was established for resources designated to be used for the purchase of capital equipment and building repairs. Parks Fund – This fund was established for park/trail acquisition and development. Revenue for this fund comes from developer park dedication fees, contributions, state grants, and investment interest. Public Safety Capital Equipment Fund – This fund was established to account for resources designated to be used for the City’s share of public safety equipment through contracts with the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. and Ramsey County Sheriff’s Department. TCAAP Fund – This fund was established to account for resources designated to be used for the City’s share of capital costs related to the approximately 430-acre TCAAP site purchased by Ramsey County. Total Equipment,Public Safety Nonmajor Building, and Capital Capital Replacement Parks Equipment TCAAP Project Funds Assets Cash and investments 474,516$ 246,260$ 131,764$ –$ 852,540$ Accrued interest receivable 1,266 657 352 – 2,275 Accounts receivable – – 1,286 – 1,286 Total assets 475,782$ 246,917$ 133,402$ –$ 856,101$ Liabilities Accounts payable 14,201$ –$ 7,778$ –$ 21,979$ Interfund payable – – – 194,879 194,879 Total liabilities 14,201 – 7,778 194,879 216,858 Fund balances (deficits) Assigned 461,581 246,917 125,624 – 834,122 Unassigned – – – (194,879) (194,879) Total fund balances (deficits)461,581 246,917 125,624 (194,879) 639,243 Total liabilities and fund balances 475,782$ 246,917$ 133,402$ –$ 856,101$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Nonmajor Capital Project Funds Combining Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2020 -59- Total Equipment,Public Safety Nonmajor Building, and Capital Capital Replacement Parks Equipment TCAAP Project Funds Revenues General property taxes 50,000$ –$ 70,000$ –$ 120,000$ Earnings on investments 9,874 822 676 – 11,372 Other – 251,911 18,252 – 270,163 Total revenues 59,874 252,733 88,928 – 401,535 Expenditures Capital outlay General government 94,643 – – – 94,643 Public safety – – 299,107 – 299,107 Public works 52,595 – – – 52,595 Total expenditures 147,238 – 299,107 – 446,345 Revenues over (under) expenditures (87,364) 252,733 (210,179) – (44,810) Other financing sources Sale of capital assets 17,500 – – – 17,500 Transfers in 237,000 – 341,000 – 578,000 Total other financing sources 254,500 – 341,000 – 595,500 Net changes in fund balances 167,136 252,733 130,821 – 550,690 Fund balances (deficits) – beginning 294,445 (5,816) (5,197) (194,879) 88,553 Fund balances (deficits) – ending 461,581$ 246,917$ 125,624$ (194,879)$ 639,243$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Nonmajor Capital Project Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, Year Ended December 31, 2020 and Changes in Fund Balances -60- Variance With Original Budget Final Budget Actual Amounts Final Budget Revenues Earnings on investments 5,000$ 5,000$ 4,007$ (993)$ Franchise taxes 96,320 96,320 101,057 4,737 Total revenues 101,320 101,320 105,064 3,744 Expenditures Current General government Personal services 65,090 65,090 63,373 1,717 Other services and charges 73,690 73,690 73,985 (295) Total expenditures 138,780 138,780 137,358 1,422 Net change in fund balances (37,460)$ (37,460)$ (32,294) 5,166$ Fund balances – beginning 148,664 Fund balances – ending 116,370$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Special Revenue Fund – Cable Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual Year Ended December 31, 2020 -61- Variance With Original Budget Final Budget Actual Amounts Final Budget Revenues Taxes – tax increments 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ –$ Earnings on investments 10,000 10,000 17,969 7,969 Total revenues 110,000 110,000 117,969 7,969 Expenditures Economic development Current Personal services 52,160 52,160 51,300 860 Materials and supplies 400 400 – 400 Other services and charges 77,290 77,290 24,219 53,071 Total expenditures 129,850 129,850 75,519 54,331 Net change in fund balances (19,850)$ (19,850)$ 42,450 62,300$ Fund balance – beginning 580,243 Fund balance – ending 622,693$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Special Revenue Fund – EDA Operating Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Year Ended December 31, 2020 Budget and Actual -62- Variance With Original Budget Final Budget Actual Amounts Final Budget Revenues Taxes Tax increments (abatements)–$ –$ (29,193)$ (29,193)$ Earnings on investments 13,000 13,000 25,197 12,197 Total revenues 13,000 13,000 (3,996) (16,996) Expenditures Current Economic development Other services and charges 1,800 1,800 1,850 (50) Net change in fund balances 11,200$ 11,200$ (5,846) (17,046)$ Fund balances – beginning 797,238 Fund balances – ending 791,392$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Special Revenue Fund – EDA TIF District No. 3 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual Year Ended December 31, 2020 -63- Variance With Original Budget Final Budget Actual Amounts Final Budget Revenues Taxes Tax increments 283,410$ 283,410$ 302,236$ 18,826$ Earnings on investments 2,000 2,000 5,416 3,416 Total revenues 285,410 285,410 307,652 22,242 Expenditures Current Economic development Other services and charges 214,360 214,360 228,470 (14,110) Net change in fund balances 71,050$ 71,050$ 79,182 8,132$ Fund balances – beginning 150,796 Fund balances – ending 229,978$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Special Revenue Fund – EDA TIF District No. 4 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual Year Ended December 31, 2020 -64- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS The City had the following internal service funds during the year: Risk Management Fund – This fund was established to account for the payment of property, liability, and workers’ compensation insurance deductibles, and funds wellness activities for all departments. Engineering Fund – This fund was established to account for the costs related to engineering services. All costs are compiled in this fund and charged out to the departments based on usage. Central Garage Fund – This fund was established to account for certain public works department costs related to streets, parks, water, sanitary sewer, and surface water management . All costs are compiled in this fund and charged out to the departments based on usage. Technology Fund – This fund was established to account for costs related to technology. All costs are compiled in this fund and charged out to the departments based on usage. Total Risk Central Internal Management Engineering Garage Technology Service Funds Assets Current assets Cash and investments 431,466$ –$ 18,978$ 2,444$ 452,888$ Accrued interest receivable 1,151 – – 7 1,158 Accounts receivable 8,384 – – – 8,384 Total assets 441,001 – 18,978 2,451 462,430 Liabilities Current liabilities Accounts payable 222,958 – 8,093 61 231,112 Due to other governmental units – – 10,885 736 11,621 Compensated absences payable – – – 393 393 Total current liabilities 222,958 – 18,978 1,190 243,126 Noncurrent liabilities Compensated absences payable – – – 131 131 Total liabilities 222,958 – 18,978 1,321 243,257 Net position Unrestricted 218,043$ –$ –$ 1,130$ 219,173$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Combining Statement of Net Position Internal Service Funds as of December 31, 2020 -65- Total Risk Central Internal Management Engineering Garage Technology Service Funds Operating revenues Charges for services 137,092$ 11,430$ 178,520$ 178,666$ 505,708$ Miscellaneous 25,346 – – – 25,346 Total operating revenues 162,438 11,430 178,520 178,666 531,054 Operating expenses Personal services – – – 5,568 5,568 Supplies and maintenance – – 101,542 15 101,557 Other services and charges 174,792 3,960 74,596 792 254,140 Purchased services 110,561 7,470 2,382 172,656 293,069 Total operating expenses 285,353 11,430 178,520 179,031 654,334 Operating income (loss)(122,915) – – (365) (123,280) Nonoperating revenues (expenses) Earnings (charges) on investments 10,446 – – (4) 10,442 Change in net position (112,469) – – (369) (112,838) Net position – beginning 330,512 – – 1,499 .332,011 Net position – ending 218,043$ –$ –$ 1,130$ 219,173$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position Internal Service Funds Year Ended December 31, 2020 -66- Total Risk Central Internal Management Engineering Garage Technology Service Funds Cash flows from operating activities Receipts from customers and users 154,054$ 11,430$ 178,520$ 178,666$ 522,670$ Payments to suppliers (141,583) (13,421) (175,620) (175,260) (505,884) Payments to employees – (688) (1,217) (5,447) (7,352) Net cash flows from operating activities 12,471 (2,679) 1,683 (2,041) 9,434 Cash flows from investing activities Earnings (charges) on investments 10,590 – – (1) 10,589 Net change in cash and cash equivalents 23,061 (2,679) 1,683 (2,042) 20,023 Cash and cash equivalents – beginning 408,405 2,679 17,295 4,486 432,865 Cash and cash equivalents – ending 431,466$ –$ 18,978$ 2,444$ 452,888$ Reconciliation of operating income (loss) to net cash flows from operating activities Operating income (loss)(122,915)$ –$ –$ (365)$ (123,280)$ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided (used) by operating activities Decrease (increase) in accounts receivable (8,384) – – – (8,384) Increase (decrease) in accounts payable 143,770 (1,991) 3,722 (1,797) 143,704 Increase (decrease) in due to other governments – – (822) – (822) Increase (decrease) in compensated absences payable – (688) (1,217) 121 (1,784) Total adjustments 135,386 (2,679) 1,683 (1,676) 132,714 Net cash flows from operating activities 12,471$ (2,679)$ 1,683$ (2,041)$ 9,434$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Combining Statement of Cash Flows Internal Service Funds Year Ended December 31, 2020 -67- STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) This part of the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report presents detailed information as a context for understanding this year’s financial statements, note disclosures, and supplementary information. This information has not been audited by the independent auditor. The contents of the statistical section include: Financial Trends – These tables contain trend information that may assist the reader in assessing the City’s current financial performance by placing it in historical perspective. Revenue Capacity – These schedules contain information to assist the reader in assessing the City’s most significant local revenue source—property taxes. Debt Capacity – These tables present information that may assist the reader in analyzing the affordability of the City’s current levels of outstanding debt and the City’s ability to issue additional debt in the future. Demographic and Economic Information – These tables offer economic and demographic indicators that are commonly used for financial analysis and that can assist the reader in understanding the City’s present and ongoing financial status. Operating Information – These tables contain service and infrastructure indicators that can assist the reader in understanding how the information in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report relates to the services the City provides and the activities it performs. Source – Unless otherwise noted, the information in these tables is derived from the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the relevant year. 2011 2012 2013 2014 Governmental activities Investment in capital assets 17,498,478$ 17,167,531$ 17,435,976$ 18,837,904$ Restricted 1,694,212 1,788,007 896,106 917,300 Unrestricted 9,133,279 9,738,832 10,274,835 11,472,102 Total governmental activities net position 28,325,969$ 28,694,370$ 28,606,917$ 31,227,306$ Business-type activities Net investment in capital assets 10,961,855$ 12,360,674$ 14,356,782$ 14,464,713$ Unrestricted 3,248,534 2,403,645 1,158,470 1,793,112 Total business-type activities net position 14,210,389$ 14,764,319$ 15,515,252$ 16,257,825$ Primary government Net investment in capital assets 28,460,333$ 29,528,205$ 31,792,758$ 33,302,617$ Restricted 1,694,212 1,788,007 896,106 917,300 Unrestricted 12,381,813 12,142,477 11,433,305 13,265,214 Total primary government net position 42,536,358$ 43,458,689$ 44,122,169$ 47,485,131$ Note:The City implemented GASB Statement No.68 in fiscal 2015.The City reported a change in accounting principle,as a result of implementing this standard,which decreased unrestricted net position.Prior year information has not been restated. Fiscal Year CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Net Position by Component Last Ten Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis of Accounting) -68- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 24,909,453$ 25,178,721$ 22,750,377$ 26,972,898$ 26,988,912$ 26,418,066$ 675,052 786,678 898,739 1,010,521 1,096,698 1,137,740 8,765,793 8,249,560 10,678,219 8,736,913 9,070,332 10,534,206 34,350,298$ 34,214,959$ 34,327,335$ 36,720,332$ 37,155,942$ 38,090,012$ 16,167,536$ 16,306,381$ 16,292,000$ 17,295,916$ 17,452,137$ 17,248,962$ 238,381 1,116,957 1,298,744 1,329,268 2,025,812 3,000,493 16,405,917$ 17,423,338$ 17,590,744$ 18,625,184$ 19,477,949$ 20,249,455$ 41,076,989$ 41,485,102$ 39,042,377$ 44,268,814$ 44,441,049$ 43,667,028$ 675,052 786,678 898,739 1,010,521 1,096,698 1,137,740 9,004,174 9,366,517 11,976,963 10,066,181 11,096,144 13,534,699 50,756,215$ 51,638,297$ 51,918,079$ 55,345,516$ 56,633,891$ 58,339,467$ -69- 2011 2012 2013 2014 Expenses Governmental activities General government 1,199,609$ 1,186,404$ 1,133,379$ 1,294,830$ Public safety 1,736,422 1,900,443 1,956,260 1,887,877 Public works 614,761 894,954 944,104 852,109 Parks and recreation 811,533 838,138 807,363 711,174 Economic development 6,862 61,770 403,143 522,193 Interest on long-term debt 39,146 31,287 25,767 11,004 Total governmental activities 4,408,333 4,912,996 5,270,016 5,279,187 Business-type activities Water 1,573,669 1,983,200 1,843,530 1,893,217 Sewer 1,454,302 1,595,379 1,560,796 1,506,927 Surface water management 353,330 388,406 453,727 432,788 Recycling 137,622 142,114 144,541 150,417 Total business-type activities 3,518,923 4,109,099 4,002,594 3,983,349 Total primary government 7,927,256$ 9,022,095$ 9,272,610$ 9,262,536$ Program revenues Governmental activities Charges for services General government 353,224$ 377,621$ 338,546$ 275,735$ Public safety 385,133 376,576 341,114 366,452 Public works – – – 4,973 Parks and recreation 110,830 118,179 113,374 116,951 Operating grants and contributions 410,228 291,712 343,486 300,536 Capital grants and contributions 946,122 134,710 326,213 2,302,439 Total governmental activities 2,205,537 1,298,798 1,462,733 3,367,086 Business-type activities Charges for services Water 1,950,932 2,285,161 2,271,072 2,132,191 Sewer 1,852,364 1,739,123 1,798,889 1,857,272 Surface water management 531,845 567,361 639,747 762,884 Recycling 142,858 121,688 122,666 130,369 Operating grants and contributions 20,846 19,802 19,694 19,611 Capital grants and contributions 140,428 25,506 156,585 – Total business-type activities 4,639,273 4,758,641 5,008,653 4,902,327 Total primary government 6,844,810$ 6,057,439$ 6,471,386$ 8,269,413$ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Changes in Net Position Last Ten Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis of Accounting) Fiscal Year -70- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 1,281,557$ 1,384,908$ 1,322,106$ 1,286,845$ 1,337,262$ 1,460,627$ 1,978,210 2,047,961 2,158,835 2,248,540 2,471,567 2,737,348 194,667 800,157 3,512,218 1,695,449 1,416,785 1,267,480 711,181 751,910 759,737 765,843 798,717 634,195 733,528 361,029 276,841 391,156 369,256 480,307 817 – – – – – 4,899,960 5,345,965 8,029,737 6,387,833 6,393,587 6,579,957 1,803,405 1,833,468 2,159,874 2,147,359 2,295,820 1,996,083 1,587,808 1,513,219 1,780,260 1,654,079 1,663,498 1,665,146 489,377 468,965 481,026 499,049 513,209 546,365 239,727 141,190 147,919 168,145 172,232 139,840 4,120,317 3,956,842 4,569,079 4,468,632 4,644,759 4,347,434 9,020,277$ 9,302,807$ 12,598,816$ 10,856,465$ 11,038,346$ 10,927,391$ 271,991$ 299,692$ 314,166$ 214,833$ 250,643$ 198,708$ 628,573 735,730 915,632 619,406 817,238 431,830 5,205 4,535 7,029 6,150 5,250 3,900 119,338 134,579 123,550 113,968 106,317 13,114 389,219 308,900 2,031,474 840,634 347,823 409,403 3,080,749 462,105 448,945 2,494,823 613,263 634,369 4,495,075 1,945,541 3,840,796 4,289,814 2,140,534 1,691,324 2,099,242 2,165,773 2,127,452 2,256,859 2,286,542 2,316,891 1,855,802 1,989,066 1,796,144 1,769,466 1,892,740 1,870,850 782,501 812,044 834,973 839,499 850,971 876,527 129,030 134,739 151,272 134,228 140,149 136,865 124,228 26,323 24,655 27,429 24,752 25,365 – 59,248 – 735,220 332,092 60,661 4,990,803 5,187,193 4,934,496 5,762,701 5,527,246 5,287,159 9,485,878$ 7,132,734$ 8,775,292$ 10,052,515$ 7,667,780$ 6,978,483$ -71- 2011 2012 2013 2014 Net (expense) revenue Governmental activities (2,202,796)$ (3,614,198)$ (3,807,283)$ (1,912,101)$ Business-type activities 1,120,350 649,542 1,006,059 918,978 Total primary government (1,082,446)$ (2,964,656)$ (2,801,224)$ (993,123)$ General revenues and other changes in net position Governmental activities Taxes Property taxes 2,920,078$ 3,095,488$ 3,094,036$ 3,182,331$ Tax increment collections 342,109 431,060 466,280 565,422 Franchise taxes 90,123 94,532 96,820 103,711 Unrestricted grants and contributions – – – – Unrestricted investment earnings 307,769 218,519 (168,071) 450,261 Gain on sale of capital assets 46,712 – – – Transfers 143,000 143,000 230,765 230,765 Total governmental activities 3,849,791 3,982,599 3,719,830 4,532,490 Business-type activities Investment earnings 81,256 47,388 (24,361) 54,360 Transfers (143,000) (143,000) (230,765) (230,765) Total business-type activities (61,744) (95,612) (255,126) (176,405) Total primary government 3,788,047$ 3,886,987$ 3,464,704$ 4,356,085$ Change in net position Governmental activities 1,646,995$ 368,401$ (87,453)$ 2,620,389$ Business-type activities 1,058,606 553,930 750,933 742,573 Total primary government 2,705,601$ 922,331$ 663,480$ 3,362,962$ Fiscal Year CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Changes in Net Position Last Ten Fiscal Years (continued) (Accrual Basis of Accounting) -72- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 (404,885)$ (3,400,424)$ (4,188,941)$ (2,098,019)$ (4,253,053)$ (4,888,633)$ 870,486 1,230,351 365,417 1,294,069 882,487 939,725 465,601$ (2,170,073)$ (3,823,524)$ (803,950)$ (3,370,566)$ (3,948,908)$ 3,191,426$ 3,278,287$ 3,526,347$ 3,578,894$ 3,793,754$ 4,100,177$ 697,898 242,544 295,788 351,569 388,697 273,043 72,837 132,548 109,070 101,237 100,464 101,057 – – – – – 745,040 245,540 155,191 139,347 159,316 322,346 348,886 – – – – – 17,500 230,765 230,765 230,765 300,000 83,402 237,000 4,438,466 4,039,335 4,301,317 4,491,016 4,688,663 5,822,703 35,857 17,835 32,754 40,371 53,680 68,781 (230,765) (230,765) (230,765) (300,000) (83,402) (237,000) (194,908) (212,930) (198,011) (259,629) (29,722) (168,219) 4,243,558$ 3,826,405$ 4,103,306$ 4,231,387$ 4,658,941$ 5,654,484$ 4,033,581$ 638,911$ 112,376$ 2,392,997$ 435,610$ 934,070$ 675,578 1,017,421 167,406 1,034,440 852,765 771,506 4,709,159$ 1,656,332$ 279,782$ 3,427,437$ 1,288,375$ 1,705,576$ -73- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Tax Property Increment Franchise Fiscal Year Taxes Collections Taxes Total 2011 2,920,078$ 342,109$ 90,123$ 3,352,310$ 2012 3,095,488 431,060 94,532 3,621,080 2013 3,094,036 466,280 96,820 3,657,136 2014 3,182,331 565,422 103,711 3,851,464 2015 3,191,426 697,898 72,837 3,962,161 2016 3,278,287 242,544 132,548 3,653,379 2017 3,526,347 295,788 109,070 3,931,205 2018 3,578,894 351,569 101,237 4,031,700 2019 3,793,754 388,697 100,464 4,282,915 2020 4,100,177 273,043 101,057 4,474,277 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Governmental Activities Tax Revenues by Source Last Ten Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis of Accounting) -74- 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund Nonspendable 29,063$ 22,326$ 22,754$ 21,059$ Assigned 106,592 126,134 119,440 139,721 Unassigned 2,015,680 2,202,459 2,223,512 2,185,162 Total General Fund 2,151,335$ 2,350,919$ 2,365,706$ 2,345,942$ All other governmental funds Nonspendable –$ 628$ 910$ 395$ Restricted 1,696,379 1,799,380 888,707 917,300 Committed 264,016 452,496 421,989 471,161 Assigned 6,993,767 6,863,115 7,111,210 7,346,178 Unassigned (542,821) (303,339) (134,316) (150,893) Total all other governmental funds 8,411,341$ 8,812,280$ 8,288,500$ 8,584,141$ Total all governmental funds 10,562,676$ 11,163,199$ 10,654,206$ 10,930,083$ Fiscal Year CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Last Ten Fiscal Years -75- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 23,983$ 26,271$ 288,519$ 25,482$ 22,438$ 28,782$ 251,497 257,771 285,548 262,805 205,962 196,467 2,806,930 2,660,771 3,065,250 3,052,082 2,987,183 3,155,257 3,082,410$ 2,944,813$ 3,639,317$ 3,340,369$ 3,215,583$ 3,380,506$ 845$ 214$ 664$ 214$ 214$ 3,680$ 675,052 786,678 898,739 1,010,521 1,096,484 1,137,740 449,898 450,433 471,996 508,241 580,243 619,013 3,902,898 3,872,938 6,138,393 2,873,879 4,057,047 5,762,592 (216,521) (217,607) (439,147) (189,404) (227,892) (230,101) 4,812,172$ 4,892,656$ 7,070,645$ 4,203,451$ 5,506,096$ 7,292,924$ 7,894,582$ 7,837,469$ 10,709,962$ 7,543,820$ 8,721,679$ 10,673,430$ -76- Revenues Taxes General property tax Tax increments Special assessments Licenses and permits Intergovernmental Charges for services Fines and forfeits Earnings on investments Franchise taxes Antenna rental fees Miscellaneous/other Total revenues Expenditures Current General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Economic development Capital outlay General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Economic development Debt service Principal Interest and paying agent fees Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses) Sale of capital assets Transfers in Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balances Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures 6.99 %6.21 %5.82 %5.73 % Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds CITY OF ARDEN HILLS 2014 Fiscal Year (Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting) Last Ten Fiscal Years 201320122011 2,913,248$ 3,087,160$ 3,086,064$ 3,210,025$ 29,593 296,249 90,123 72,351 431,060 252,879 415,070 143,085 450,589 33,192 215,119 94,532 75,745 342,109 561,238 429,991 246,416 419,197 32,055 (164,535) 96,820 76,574 565,422 304,315 327,727 1,408,240 400,224 29,569 433,402 103,711 110,144 466,280 382,366 382,039 316,859 410,995 245,000 1,054,662 1,728,669 377,101 679,282 57,766 8,847 169,894 376,872 109,761 5,330 255,000 684,492 91,579 1,063,181 64,923 1,060,744 1,640,801 273,165 661,746 170,511 1,017,328 68,493 1,054,852 1,779,549 391,711 675,073 90,222 – 6,862 328,248 260,000 1,155,120 1,826,098 580,872 648,214 286,991 5,559 66,079 1,833,535 18,883 231,025 270,000 9,545 39,325 31,698 23,520 14,773 6,937,149 5,869,052 4,854,882 5,831,818 189,712 143,000 230,765 230,765 230,765 230,765 143,000 143,000 123,668$ 600,523$ (508,993)$ 275,877$ 46,712 – – – (66,044) 457,523 (739,758) 45,112 365,259 113,974 43,777 89,482 5,765,774 5,312,405 5,129,294 6,982,261 -77- 6.20 %– %– %– %– %– % 202020192018201720162015 3,260,537$ 3,541,705$ 3,578,628$ 3,795,624$ 4,099,819$ 3,203,004$ 32,792 236,947 72,837 189,534 242,544 373,415 598,686 396,275 577,041 31,868 148,679 132,548 123,815 697,898 908,964 518,846 1,396,269 496,908 29,989 133,231 109,070 128,765 351,569 735,369 526,444 1,003,685 427,905 37,080 154,369 101,237 57,067 295,788 308,990 729,197 2,124,414 590,141 34,512 310,607 100,464 134,505 273,043 329,781 431,628 1,231,252 215,918 13,581 338,444 101,057 140,707 388,697 828,487 714,530 603,966 440,616 – 1,143,037 1,920,280 336,398 573,587 249,484 2,058,037 443,633 618,614 264,905 502,842 280,000 1,194,579 1,981,506 479,814 621,832 229,688 – 47,880 786,873 – 151,306 – – 52,936 6,198,264 679,589 300,052 7,520 – 1,164,657 2,088,345 579,535 653,977 324,548 13,770 233,301 2,916,604 2,783,238 – – – 100,215 734,411 337,808 1,189,500 3,300 – 1,201,143 2,435,773 675,739 547,787 415,839 107,865 299,107 204,169 22,675 – – 115,924 69,666 713,156 549,812 1,195,335 2,399,296 632,531 – 5,910,097 – – 5,754,643 5,493,478 4,900 11,261,728 – 10,757,975 – 6,658,661 230,765 471,590 369,158 327,390 254,500 230,765 230,765 237,000 300,000 300,000 471,590 230,765 717,137$ 2,872,493$ (3,166,142)$ 1,177,859$ 1,951,751$ (3,035,501)$ – – 69,158 27,390 17,500 – 2,400,903 (3,535,300) 850,469 1,697,251 (3,266,266) 486,372 94,442 164,256 249,322 157,122 432,118 241,463 5,979,850 8,155,546 7,222,675 7,509,130 7,607,348 7,995,462 -78- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Fiscal Year General Tax Increment Franchise Tax Total 2011 2,913,248$ 342,109$ 90,123$ 3,345,480$ 2012 3,087,160 431,060 94,532 3,612,752 2013 3,086,064 466,280 96,820 3,649,164 2014 3,210,025 565,422 103,711 3,879,158 2015 3,203,004 697,898 72,837 3,973,739 2016 3,260,537 242,544 132,548 3,635,629 2017 3,541,705 295,788 109,070 3,946,563 2018 3,578,628 351,569 101,237 4,031,434 2019 3,795,624 388,697 100,464 4,284,785 2020 4,099,819 273,043 101,057 4,473,919 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS General Governmental Tax Revenues by Source Last Ten Fiscal Years (Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting) Property Tax -79- Fiscal Year Less Tax Less Fiscal Ended Real Personal Total Increment Disparity December 31,Property Property Tax Capacity District Contribution 2011 14,606,183$ 178,841$ 14,785,024$ 531,415$ 2,921,351$ 2012 13,848,510 190,989 14,039,499 436,893 2,505,319 2013 13,262,619 213,949 13,476,568 438,897 2,474,502 2014 13,413,316 216,679 13,629,995 510,906 2,375,745 2015 14,162,432 224,125 14,386,557 684,465 2,303,582 2016 14,364,828 236,271 14,601,099 207,526 2,280,682 2017 14,671,678 262,904 14,934,582 256,243 2,365,021 2018 15,751,958 276,244 16,028,202 308,152 2,141,470 2019 16,457,522 256,847 16,714,369 345,318 2,174,854 2020 17,592,301 268,599 17,860,900 273,444 2,627,733 Source: Ramsey County Assessor Last Ten Fiscal Years CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Tax Capacity Value and Estimated Market Value of Taxable Property -80- Adjusted Estimated Tax Capacity Market (ATC) Value Value (EMV) 11,332,258$ 24.19 %1,109,327,600$ 1.02 % 11,097,287 25.54 1,043,419,700 1.06 10,563,169 27.93 1,035,471,700 1.02 10,743,344 27.95 1,055,153,800 1.02 11,398,510 27.29 1,122,428,000 1.02 12,112,891 26.54 1,144,221,600 1.06 12,313,318 27.21 1,173,397,600 1.05 13,578,580 25.53 1,260,228,800 1.08 14,194,197 25.56 1,313,244,900 1.08 14,959,723 25.41 1,406,207,500 1.06 of EMV ATC as a Percentage Direct Tax Rate Total -81- 24.187 %54.678 %25.573 %8.354 %112.792 % 25.544 61.316 29.044 9.955 125.859 27.931 65.240 29.444 10.200 132.815 27.950 63.735 29.734 9.825 131.244 27.294 58.922 27.378 9.179 122.773 26.539 58.885 26.245 9.052 120.721 27.211 55.850 25.305 8.558 116.924 25.532 53.962 28.464 8.249 116.207 25.555 52.879 26.330 8.265 113.029 25.414 52.302 24.964 8.249 110.929 Note: Source: Ramsey County Assessor County TotalDistrict School Rate Special Ramsey Districts Overlapping RatesDirect Rate Operating Taxing City Fiscal Year CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Property Tax Rates Direct and Overlapping Governments Last Ten Fiscal Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2020 Overlapping rates are those of local and county governments that apply to property owners within the City.Not all overlapping rates apply to all city property owners (e.g.,the rates for special districts apply only to the proportion of the City’s property owners whose property is located within the geographic boundaries of the special district). 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 -82- Taxable Taxable Capacity Value Rank Capacity Value Rank Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc.1,082,940$ 1 7.24 %1,599,250$ 1 14.11 % Land O’Lakes, Inc.736,212 2 4.92 367,236 4 3.24 Space Center Arden Hills, LLC 529,992 3 3.54 – – – St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company 494,128 4 3.30 355,254 5 3.13 NSP 389,682 5 2.60 262,518 8 2.32 Presbyterian Homes, Inc.385,774 6 2.58 – – – RAM Development, LLC 232,400 7 1.55 – – – CSM Corporation 228,214 8 1.53 429,500 2 3.79 LSREF4 BISON LLC 220,766 9 1.48 – – – SUP I Shannon Square LLC 197,812 10 1.32 – – – Arden Hills Industrial, LLC – – – 392,460 3 3.46 Mutual Service Insurance Company – – – 339,250 6 2.99 IRET Properties, LP – – – 310,364 7 2.74 Pharmacia Deltec, Inc.– – – 245,850 9 2.17 Inland Shannon Square Cub, LLC – – – 168,450 10 1.49 Total 4,497,920$ 30.07 %4,470,132$ 39.45 % Total capacity value 14,959,723$ 11,332,258$ Source:Ramsey County Assessor CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Principal Property Taxpayers Current Year and Nine Years Ago 2020 Capacity 2011 Taxpayer Percentage of Total City Value Percentage of Total City Value Capacity -83- Taxes Collections Fiscal Year Levied in Ended for the Additions/Subsequent December 31,Fiscal Year Amount (Abatements)Years Amount 2011 3,040,964$ 3,008,068$ 98.92 %(2,326)$ 30,570$ 3,040,964$ 100.00 % 2012 3,096,994 3,045,572 98.34 (11,376) 40,046 3,096,994 100.00 2013 3,191,230 3,117,083 97.68 (38,542) 35,605 3,191,230 100.00 2014 3,257,456 3,219,641 98.84 (19,251) 17,175 3,256,067 99.96 2015 3,359,775 3,295,723 98.09 (75,019) (12,416) 3,358,326 99.96 2016 3,478,775 3,408,642 97.98 (79,442) (10,371) 3,477,713 99.97 2017 3,641,290 3,562,166 97.83 (66,924) 11,553 3,640,643 99.98 2018 3,786,942 3,710,786 97.99 (58,021) 16,646 3,785,453 99.96 2019 3,938,420 3,871,967 98.31 (55,679) 8,587 3,936,233 99.94 2020 4,135,340 4,116,483 99.54 (6,522) – 4,123,006 99.70 Source: Ramsey County Assessor CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Last Ten Fiscal Years Property Tax Levies and Collections Collected Within the Fiscal Year of the Levy Percentage of Levy Percentage of Levy Total Collections to Date -84- Governmental Activities General Total Percentage Obligation Revenue Primary of Personal Per TIF Bonds Bonds Premium Total Government Income (1)Capita (1) 1,065,000$ –$ –$ –$ 1,065,000$ 0.30 %114$ 810,000 – – – 810,000 0.24 84 550,000 – – – 550,000 0.17 59 280,000 – – – 280,000 0.08 29 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 2,415,000 156,952 2,571,952 2,571,952 0.71 260 – 2,415,000 141,394 2,556,394 2,556,394 0.69 255 – 2,215,000 125,838 2,340,838 2,340,838 0.61 232 (1) Note:Details regarding the City’s outstanding debt can be found in the notes to basic financial statements. See the Schedule of Demographic and Economic Statistics for personal income and population data. Business-Type Activities Fiscal Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type Last Ten Fiscal Years -85- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Estimated Share of Net Debt Overlapping Governmental Unit Outstanding Debt Debt repaid with property taxes Ramsey County 124,895,434$ 2.45 %3,061,652$ County library 22,712,406 4.87 1,105,961 Independent School District No. 621 204,505,060 13.24 27,070,263 Independent School District No. 623 170,735,015 0.78 1,324,026 Intermediate School District No. 916 75,365,000 4.94 3,725,338 Metropolitan Council 1,479,171,214 0.36 5,257,241 Rice Creek Watershed 255,531 11.58 29,598 Total overlapping debt 41,574,079 City of Arden Hills – 100.00 – Total direct and overlapping debt 41,574,079$ (1) Note: Source: The percentage of overlapping debt applicable is estimated using taxable assessed property values.Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of the county’s taxable assessed value that is within the City’s boundaries and dividing it by the county’s total taxable assessed value. Overlapping governments are those that coincide,at least in part,with the geographic boundaries of the City. This schedule estimates the portion of the outstanding debt of those overlapping governments that is borne by the residents and businesses of the City.This process recognizes that,when considering the City’s ability to issue and repay long-term debt,the entire debt burden borne by the residents and businesses should be taken into account.However,this does not imply that every taxpayer is a resident and,therefore,responsible for repaying the debt of each overlapping government. Assessed value data used to estimate applicable percentages provided by the Ramsey County Assessor.Debt outstanding data provided by the county. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt as of December 31, 2020 Estimated Percentage Applicable (1) -86- Fiscal Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 33,279,828$ 31,302,591$ 31,064,151$ 31,654,614$ – – – – 33,279,828$ 31,302,591$ 31,064,151$ 31,654,614$ Total net debt applicable to the limit – – – – Note: as a percentage of debt limit Under state finance law,the City’s outstanding general obligation debt should not exceed 3 percent of total market value.By law,the general obligation debt subject to the limitation may be offset by amounts set aside for repaying general obligation bonds. Tax increment bonds are not subject to the debt limit; therefore, they are not included. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Legal Debt Margin Information Last Ten Fiscal Years Debt limit Total net debt applicable to the limit Legal debt margin -87- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 33,672,840$ 34,326,648$ 35,201,928$ 37,806,864$ 39,397,347$ 42,186,225$ – – – – – – 33,672,840$ 34,326,648$ 35,201,928$ 37,806,864$ 39,397,347$ 42,186,225$ – – – – – – Total estimated market value 1,406,207,500$ Debt limit (3% of market value)42,186,225 Debt applicable to the limit General obligation bonds – Less amount set aside for repayment of general obligation debt – Total net debt applicable to the limit – Legal debt margin 42,186,225$ Legal Debt Margin Calculation for Fiscal Year 2020 -88- Less Operating Operating Net Available Revenues Expenses Revenue Principal Interest 4,026,325$ 3,279,800$ 746,525$ –$ 52,333$ 14.3 % 4,179,282 3,387,940 791,342 – 94,288 8.4 4,187,741 3,085,624 1,102,117 200,000 86,998 3.8 Note 1: Note 2: 2020 Coverage CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Pledged Revenue Coverage Last Three Fiscal Years Fiscal year 2018 represents the first year the City pledged revenue for utility revenue bonds. Debt Service Includes Water and Sewer Funds. Operating expenses do not include depreciation. Fiscal Year 2018 2019 -89- Per Capita Arden Hills Personal Total Personal Median School Population (1)Income (3)Income (4)Age (6)Enrollment (5) 9,381 37,371$ 350,577,351$ 34.8 10,090 6.6 % 9,597 35,375 339,493,875 34.8 10,234 5.7 9,359 33,688 315,285,992 34.8 10,480 4.9 9,652 34,481 332,810,612 36.9 10,734 4.0 9,847 35,222 346,831,034 36.0 11,011 3.5 9,966 35,994 358,716,204 36.0 11,401 3.6 9,969 37,723 376,060,587 36.3 11,556 3.2 9,889 36,553 361,472,617 36.3 11,647 2.7 10,008 36,989 370,185,912 36.4 11,957 3.0 10,108 37,729 381,365,527 36.2 12,061 6.5 Sources: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 2018 2019 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Demographic and Economic Statistics Last Ten Fiscal Years Unemployment Rate (2) Personal income is calculated based on the population and per capita personal income. Enrollment numbers are based off of Independent School District No.621,Mounds View from the Minnesota Department of Education website. Median age is from www.city-data.com website. Fiscal Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2020 Population data is obtained from the Metropolitan Council website. Fiscal year 2020 is estimated by city staff. Unemployment rate information is from DEED for Ramsey County. Per capita personal income is obtained from the Metropolitan Council website.Fiscal year 2020 is estimated by city staff. 2015 2016 2017 -90- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Employees Rank Employees Rank Boston Scientific 3,200 1 29.6 %2,000 1 17.1 % Land O’Lakes, Inc.1,565 2 14.5 800 2 6.8 University of Northwestern 1,020 3 9.4 – – – Bethel University 930 4 8.6 – – – Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills 500 5 4.6 500 4 4.3 National Recoveries 350 6 3.2 – – – Independent School District No. 621, Mounds View Public Schools 225 7 2.1 – – – Gradient Financial 175 8 1.6 – – – Delkor 160 9 1.5 – – – International Paper 112 10 1.0 – – – Smiths Medical M.D., Inc.– – – 525 3 4.5 Fair Issac Corp.– – – 280 5 2.4 Country and MSI Insurance – – – 236 6 2.0 Total 8,237 76.3 %4,341 37.1 % Total city employees 10,799 (2)11,703 (1)Information only readily available for the listed employers. (2)This is an estimate from 2019. Information for 2020 is not yet available. Note: Source:City staff research; Metropolitan Council. 2020 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Principal Employers Current Year and Nine Years Ago Employees of Total City 2011 (1) Percentage of Total City Percentage Employer Employees This does not purport to be a comprehensive list and is based on available data from the City’s 2018 Official Statement,and updates received since then through a survey of individual employers.Some employers do not respond to inquiries for employment data. -91- 2011 2012 2013 2014 Function Towed vehicles 3 7 2 1 96 140 149 144 Driving impaired/alcohol 13 15 23 18 Traffic stops 328 17 78 20 Traffic investigations 24 33 78 40 Total calls for service N/A N/A N/A N/A Fire 559 522 561 651 1.9 5.2 4.4 – 250 250 250 250 Sanitation (residential) Refuse collected (tons/day)7.85 7.90 8.05 8.65 Recyclables collected (tons/day)2.01 2.20 2.20 2.21 Recycling clean up days N/A N/A N/A N/A Tons collected during clean up days N/A N/A N/A N/A Parks and recreation Athletic field permits issued 20 19 30 22 Water New connections 2 31 10 2 Water main breaks 2 12 6 2 Average daily consumption (thousands of gallons)1,135 1,269 1,162 983 N/A – Not Applicable Note 1:Indicators are not available for the general city functions. Note 2: Note 3: Note 4: Source:Various city departments Last Ten Fiscal Years Operating Indicators by Function CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Traffic accidents Police (see Note 2) Fiscal Year Recyclables –numbers based off yearly tonnage total divided into 365 days in the year.Starting in 2018,the refuse collected information is no longer being provided,as it is not readily available.Instead,information on recycling clean up days is being provided. Fire information provided by Lake Johanna Fire Department, which is contracted out by the City. Street resurfacing (miles) Number of calls answered Potholes repaired Highways and streets Information provided by the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Department.Starting in 2015,the Sheriff changed reporting standards, and information is no longer easily broken down. Total calls for service is now provided. -92- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4,892 4,413 5,152 5,331 5,253 3,924 804 930 986 1,039 1,138 1,044 2.84 0.25 0.20 1.00 0.30 2.32 600 600 700 800 750 1,000 8.76 8.75 8.80 N/A N/A N/A 2.16 2.06 2.22 2.17 2.20 2.19 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 – N/A N/A N/A 73.7 44.8 – 22 22 30 25 20 2 7 8 8 8 2 3 10 6 7 8 4 2 857 812 853 869 841 855 -93- Fiscal Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 Function General government 6.79 6.12 6.11 6.45 Public safety 2.73 2.66 2.46 2.60 Public works 2.40 3.53 4.49 4.20 Parks and recreation 8.10 7.43 7.02 6.70 Water 3.51 3.56 3.70 3.75 Sewer 4.30 4.25 4.49 4.60 Surface water management 2.24 2.61 2.66 2.65 Recycling 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.20 Total 30.27 30.37 31.13 31.15 Note: Source:Finance and Administration Seasonal staff are calculated by total hours worked (2,080 hours per year),added together to total an equivalent. Seasonal hours fluctuate throughout the year. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Full-Time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years -94- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 6.37 4.56 4.10 4.61 5.10 5.61 2.70 2.47 2.19 2.39 2.34 2.66 4.22 3.47 2.70 3.08 2.86 2.64 6.74 6.09 5.58 5.96 6.13 5.14 3.69 3.46 3.42 3.24 3.39 3.54 4.43 4.24 4.21 3.99 4.11 4.20 2.64 2.64 2.43 2.30 2.35 2.53 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.29 30.97 27.09 24.78 25.80 26.60 26.61 -95- 2011 2012 2013 2014 Function Highways and streets Streets (miles)57 57 57 57 Streetlights 250 250 250 250 Traffic signals 18 18 18 18 Parks and recreation* Parks acreage 111 111 111 111 Parks 14 14 14 14 Trails acreage 54 54 54 54 Trails (miles)15 15 15 21 Tennis courts 4 4 5 6 Softball/baseball fields 6 6 8 8 Basketball courts 10 10 10 10 Hockey/skating rinks 5 5 6 6 Permanent restrooms 3 3 2 3 Water Water mains (miles)43 43 43 43 Fire hydrants 520 520 537 537 Maximum daily capacity (thousands of gallons)1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 Sewer Sanitary sewers (miles)44 44 49 52 Storm sewers (miles)20 20 20 25 * Note: Source: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Capital Asset Statistics by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years Various city departments No capital asset indicators are available for the general city functions. Fiscal Year Information used for parks and recreation was taken from the Arden Hills Parks and Trails Guide,from the Parks and Recreation Department. -96- 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 57 57 57 57 57 57 250 250 252 252 254 254 18 18 18 18 18 18 111 111 111 111 111 111 14 14 14 14 14 14 54 54 54 54 54 54 21 21 21 22 22 22 6 5 5 5 5 5 8 8 7 7 7 7 10 10 10 10 10 10 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 4 4 43 43 43 44 44 44 537 537 537 537 537 537 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 2,160 2,160 52 52 52 52 52 52 25 25 25 25 25 25 -97- THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Special Purpose Audit Reports Year Ended December 31, 2020 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards 1–2 Independent Auditor’s Report on Minnesota Legal Compliance 3 Schedule of Findings and Responses 4 Table of Contents CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Year Ended December 31, 2020 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Special Purpose Audit Reports THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -1- INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS To the City Council and Management City of Arden Hills, Minnesota We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the City) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2020, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated May 3, 2021. INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the City’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and, therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that have not been identified. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. We did identify one deficiency in internal control, described in the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Responses as finding 2020-001, which we consider to be a significant deficiency. (continued) C E R T I F I E D A C C O U N T A N T S P UBLIC PRINCIPALS Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA Paul A. Radosevich, CPA William J. Lauer, CPA James H. Eichten, CPA Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA Victoria L. Holinka, CPA/CMA Jaclyn M. Huegel, CPA Kalen T. Karnowski, CPA Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard • Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 • Phone: 952-545-0424 • Fax: 952-545-0569 • www.mmkr.com Standard Letterhead-r2.qxp_167639 Letterhead-RV1 9/7/18 6:34 PM Page 1 -2- COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. CITY’S RESPONSE TO FINDING The City’s response to the finding identified in our audit is described in the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Responses. The City’s response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City’s internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other purpose. Minneapolis, Minnesota May 3, 2021 -3- INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE To the City Council and Management City of Arden Hills, Minnesota We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the City) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2020, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated May 3, 2021. MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City failed to comply with the provisions of the contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, claims and disbursements, miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financing sections of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities, promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 6.65, insofar as they relate to accounting matters. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding the City’s noncompliance with the above referenced provisions, insofar as they relate to accounting matters. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on compliance. Accordingly, th is report is not suitable for any other purpose. Minneapolis, Minnesota May 3, 2021 C E R T I F I E D A C C O U N T A N T S P UBLIC PRINCIPALS Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA Paul A. Radosevich, CPA William J. Lauer, CPA James H. Eichten, CPA Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA Victoria L. Holinka, CPA/CMA Jaclyn M. Huegel, CPA Kalen T. Karnowski, CPA Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard • Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 • Phone: 952-545-0424 • Fax: 952-545-0569 • www.mmkr.com Standard Letterhead-r2.qxp_167639 Letterhead-RV1 9/7/18 6:34 PM Page 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Schedule of Findings and Responses Year Ended December 31, 2020 -4- FINDINGS – SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING 2020-001 SEGREGATION OF DUTIES Criteria – Internal control over financial reporting. Condition – The City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the City) has limited segregation of duties in a number of areas. Context – This is a current year finding. In the prior year we reported this finding as a material weakness and have downgraded the finding to a significant deficiency, due to improvements made in the internal controls over financial reporting implemented in the current year. Cause – The limited segregation of duties is primarily caused by the limited size of the City’s finance department staff. Effect – One important element of internal accounting controls is an adequate segregation of duties such that no one individual should have responsibility to execute a transaction, have physical access to the related assets, and have responsibility or authority to record the transaction. A lack of segregation of duties subjects the City to a higher risk that errors or fraud could occur and not be detected in a timely manner in the normal course of business. Recommendation – This condition is common to organizations of your size. We recommend that the City segregate duties as best it can within the limits of the staff available . Any modifications in internal control in this area should be viewed from a cost -benefit perspective. Management Response – There is no disagreement with the audit finding. The City reviews and makes improvements to its internal control structure on an ongoing basis and attempts to maximize the segregation of duties in all areas within the limits of the staff available. However, the City does not consider it cost-beneficial at this time to increase the size of its staff in order to further segregate accounting functions. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 1 of 1 STAFF COMMENTS – 5A MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: May 24, 2021 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator SUBJECT: COVID-19 Update Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $ $ $ A verbal update will be provided at the City Council meeting. Page 1 of 1 STAFF COMMENTS – 5B MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: May 24, 2021 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Transportation Update Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $ $ $ A verbal update will be provided at the City Council meeting. Approved: May 24, 2021 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 3, 2021 5:45 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 5:45 p.m. Note: On March 20th, 2020 the Mayor signed a determination allowing Councilmembers to participate in City Council meetings via telephone pursuant to State Statute 13D.021 Present: Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave McClung and Steve Scott Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Dave Perrault; Planning Consultant Jane Kansier; and City Clerk Julie Hanson 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as presented. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried (5-0). 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Motion to Approve Memorandum of Understanding with Ramsey County for the Construction of Temporary Traffic Signal on Lexington Avenue (Target South Access Road) MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried (5-0). ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 2 3. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS None. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Resolution 2021-026 Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan – Bethel University (Football Field) – 3900 Bethel Drive – PC 21-002 Planning Consultant Kansier stated Bethel University (“The Applicant”) is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment and Site Plan Review to update the existing football and practice fields located in the southern quadrant of their main campus at 3900 Bethel Drive. The Applicant is proposing to convert the existing grass football field into a synthetic turf stadium field with a new track constructed around it and the existing grass practice field into a synthetic turf multi-purpose field. The Applicant is also proposing changes to the lighting around the two fields, scoreboards, the spectator plazas, the perimeter fencing, and the grandstand and press box. It was noted the seating capacity will remain as is. Planning Consultant Kansier reported Bethel University operates under a CUP Master Plan. As the university comes forward with plans, they are reviewed against the Master Plan for consistency. Building plans that are consistent with the Master Plan require a Site Plan Review. A CUP Amendment is required when plans are not included in the approved Master Plan. The two proposed improvements to the football field and the practice field are not included on the Master Plan and a CUP Amendment is therefore required. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the Site Data and Plan Evaluation in detail with the Council and offered the following Findings of Fact: General Findings: 1. The Bethel University main campus at 3900 Bethel Drive is located in the Institutional Zoning District. 2. A Higher Education, College Campus is a Conditional Use in the Institutional District. 3. Bethel University operates under a Conditional Use Permit Master Plan. 4. The proposed additions are not included on the Master Plan and a CUP Amendment is required. 5. Bethel University has requested Site Plan Review approval for the proposed changes to the football and practice fields. 6. The proposed changes to the football and practice fields would be in compliance with all provisions of the Zoning Code. 7. A public hearing for a PUD Amendment request is required before the request can be brought before the City Council. 8. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 7, 2021. Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings: 1. The proposed plan is not anticipated to have any impact on traffic or parking conditions because the additions do not include an increase in football field seating. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 3 2. The proposed plan includes the addition of LED lights and will increase illumination around the football fields. 3. The proposed plan will not produce any permanent noise, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid, or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics. 4. The proposed plan will impact drainage on the site. 5. The proposed plan will not impact population density. 6. The proposed plan is not expected to have a visual impact on surrounding properties or on land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land or adjoining land values because the new additions will not be easily visible from outside the Bethel University campus. 7. Park dedication requirements are not applicable. 8. The proposed plan does not conflict with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code or the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. Planning Consultant Kansier stated the Planning Commission reviewed this application at their April 7, 2021 meeting. At that time, they recommended approval of the Bethel University application for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan by a 6-0 vote. Staff recommended adoption of Resolution 2021-026 approving the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review for Planning Case 21-002 at 3900 Bethel Drive, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, subject to the following conditions: 1. All conditions of the original Conditional Use Permit shall remain in full force and effect. 2. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, all items identified in the March 11, 2021 Engineering Division memo shall be addressed. All comments shall be adopted herein by reference. 3. 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. 4. The proposed structures shall conform to all other regulations in the City Code. 5. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County prior to the start of any site activities. 6. Heavy duty silt fence and adequate erosion control around the entire construction site shall be required and maintained by the Developer during construction to ensure that sediment and storm water does not leave the project site. 7. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a landscape financial security equal to 125% of the cost of the landscaping to be installed on the site shall be submitted. The Applicant must submit a detailed cost estimate for the landscaping so staff can determine the final amount. Landscape financial security shall be held for two full growing seasons. 9. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a landscaping letter of credit or escrow shall be required. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 4 10. The Applicant shall be required to provide photometric calculations for the lighting at the property lines of all adjacent residential properties indicating the plan meets ordinance requirements. 11. A separate permit shall be required for the scoreboard. The scoreboard must meet all requirements of City Code Section 1250.05. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the options available to the City Council on this matter: 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions 2. Recommend Approval as Submitted 3. Recommend Denial 4. Table Planning Consultant Kansier discussed the 60 day time period for the Planning Case and noted the Council must take action prior to May 23, 2021. Councilmember Holden asked if Bethel was doing construction work across the street. Planning Consultant Kansier deferred this question to the applicant. Jay Pomeroy, representative for the applicant, explained as part of the track and field experience the shot put, hammer throw and discus area would be located down in the broomball area. He discussed the concrete slabs and cages that would be needed for the throw areas. He explained the broomball area would be constructed in the winter months and taken down during the track and field season. Mayor Grant questioned how tall the protective wall or safety net would be. Jay Pomeroy indicated the netted cage would keep all hammer throw and discus within the netted cage area. He stated this was an NCAA requirement. Mayor Grant inquired if the drainage of the football field was being altered. Mr. Pomeroy reported the drainage was being changed, modified and expanded. He explained drainage was a significant part of this project. He stated he was going through the Rice Creek Watershed approval process. He noted the turf was considered pervious. Councilmember Holmes requested further information regarding the sound system. Mr. Pomeroy explained the existing sound system would be replaced with a better aimed sound system. He discussed where the new speakers would be located on the light poles noting the sound would be better distributed to the spectators. Councilmember Holmes asked when the sound system and lighting would be available. She recommended specific hours of operation be set. In addition, she supported the applicant providing the City with additional information on the specific sound system that would be installed. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 5 Mayor Grant explained a condition for approval could be that the sound system could only be used during competitions and/or games. Councilmember Holden questioned if the Council was approving a new sound system with this Planning Case. Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff does not have any information on the proposed new sound system but understood that Bethel would like to install a new sound system. Councilmember Holden recommended that a condition for approval be added to require Bethel University to come before the City Council prior to replacing the sound system at the football stadium. Mike Lindsey, Bethel University Facilities Management, explained he did not have a specific sound system in place. He indicated Bethel would like to replace the sound system, but this was not in the budget at this time. He reported the current system was mounted at the top of the bleachers and projects to the south towards the adjacent residential homes. He indicated the new system would be affixed to the light poles and would project to the north. He stated this would improve the experience for the neighbors, as well as the fans. Councilmember Holmes questioned if the current speakers would be moved to the new light poles or would they remain in the bleachers. Mr. Lindsey commented the speakers would not be moved until Bethel has funding in place to purchase a new sound system. Councilmember Holmes questioned when the sound system would be used. Mr. Lindsey reported the intent would be to set parameters as to who has access to the lights and sound system and the system could only be used under supervision. Further discussion ensued regarding the concerns the City has had with the softball and soccer fields. Mayor Grant asked if soccer games would be played at the football field after the renovations were completed. Mr. Pomeroy explained the intention was to continue to have soccer games at Ona Orth Field and the football field will be striped only for football. He commented the multi-purpose field will be striped for football and soccer. Councilmember Holden indicated she would like to require Bethel to come before the Council when the sound system is replaced and wanted to see staff/coaches controlling the sound and lighting at the football stadium. Councilmember Holmes supported this recommendation. She suggested the lights and sound system be shut down by 10:00 p.m. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 6 Councilmember McClung stated he agreed with the conditions as recommended by Councilmember Holden. It was his hope the new technology would improve the sound situation at the stadium. In terms of the lights, he supported the lights being shut down by 10:00 p.m. on a nightly basis. Councilmember Holden commented she believed that 10:00 p.m. was pretty early. She suggested the lights be allowed to remain on until 10:30 p.m. She questioned when football games were typically held. Mr. Lindsey reported Bethel football games were typically held in the afternoon. He explained if an evening game were held, they typically began at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Holden stated she could support the lights be turned off at 10:00 p.m. on non- event days. She indicated for game days or track competitions, the lights should be allowed to remain on for a certain amount of time after the event ends to ensure the stadium is safely cleared of player and spectators. Mayor Grant agreed. He commented he happy to see the sound system was being replaced because this would allow the system to be more properly directed. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to adopt Resolution #2021-026 – Approving a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan for the Football Field for Bethel University at 3900 Bethel Drive, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, and the eleven (11) conditions in the May 3, 2021, Report to the City Council. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to add Condition 12 stating: When Bethel University replaces the sounds system at the football field, this matter must come before the City Council for approval. A roll call vote was taken. The amendment adding Condition 12 carried (5-0). AMENDMENT: Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Grant seconded a motion to add Condition 13 stating: A Bethel employee shall control the lighting and sound system at the football field. Councilmember Scott believed that the sound system issues have been vastly improved over the last few years. He indicated he would like to see oversight of the sound system being monitored by Bethel staff. Mayor Grant asked if a Bethel RA would be considered an employee. Mr. Pomeroy reported an RA would be considered an employee of Bethel’s. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 7 Councilmember Scott offered a friendly amendment suggesting the Bethel employee be changed to Bethel approved designee. Councilmember Holden and Mayor Grant supported this friendly amendment. A roll call vote was taken. The amendment adding Condition 13 carried (5-0). Councilmember McClung recommended the Council set a limit of 10:00 p.m. for use of the sound system and lights at the football field, except on scheduled competition or game days. Mr. Lindsey suggested the language read a Bethel University sponsored event. Councilmember Scott indicated he would like to see the City offering more latitude on the weekends, especially considering the new system would improve the sound around the stadium. AMENDMENT: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to add Condition 14 stating: The use of the sound system and lights at the football field be capped at 10:00 p.m., except on nights that have a Bethel University sponsored events. Councilmember Holden questioned how long the lights typically stayed on after a Bethel sponsored event. Mr. Lindsey stated 30 minutes would be an adequate amount of time to clear the field after an event. Mark Posner, Bethel University, explained he wants to be a good neighbor. He indicated the lighting and sound were two different issues. He stated he was comfortable with 30 minutes for the sound, but requested more than 30 minutes in order to safely clear the field. Councilmember Holden stated she supported the original amendment language as proposed by Councilmember McClung. Councilmember Scott questioned if full intensity of the LED lights should be capped at 10:00 p.m. and then allow the lights to dim in order to allow fans to exit safely. Mayor Grant inquired if the LED lighting that Bethel would be purchasing would be dimmable. Mr. Posner commented the lights were dimmable and could be brought down to 50%. Councilmember McClung explained he did not want things to get too complicated. He supported the lighting being capped at 10:00 p.m. unless there was a Bethel sponsored event. He stated if events were to arise the City can speak with Bethel regarding the concerns. A roll call vote was taken. The amendment adding Condition 14 carried (5-0). ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 8 Councilmember Holmes asked if the City should require Bethel to provide the City with a letter of credit. Councilmember Scott questioned if this was necessary when the City would also be requiring Bethel to provide the City with an escrow. He requested comment from staff on this matter. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed Conditions 8 and 9 noting staff had referenced a financial security, which could be a letter of credit or an escrow. Mayor Grant questioned why the City was requiring 125% of the landscaping costs. Planning Consultant Kansier reported this would cover the cost for the City to go in and replace all items within the landscaping plan plus an administrative cost. Mayor Grant stated he supported Conditions 8 and 9. A roll call vote was taken. The motion to adopt Resolution #2021-026 – Approving a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan for the Football Field for Bethel University at 3900 Bethel Drive, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, the eleven (11) conditions in the May 3, 2021, Report to the City Council, and the addition of Conditions 12, 13 and 14 as stated in the above amendments carried (5-0). 5. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Holmes suggested the Council discuss the water meter issue at an upcoming worksession meeting, along with the PTRC recommendations for benches and trails. City Administrator Perrault noted he had forwarded an email to the Council prior to tonight’s meeting with an update on the water meter issue. He stated items could be addressed at the upcoming work session in May. Mayor Grant supported the Council having a discussion regarding the water meters because there were some larger issues that had to be addressed. Councilmember Holden stated she would like to know more about the properties that were impacted by the water meter concerns, to learn how many people were affected. She explained she would like to know if this was a bandwidth and frequency concern. Mayor Grant requested staff provide the Council with more information regarding the water meter reading concern. City Administrator Perrault reported he would work to provide the Council with more granular information regarding the water meters. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL – MAY 3, 2021 9 ADJOURN MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to adjourn. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried (5-0). Mayor Grant adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:15 p.m. __________________________ __________________________ Julie Hanson David Grant City Clerk Mayor CONSENT ITEM 7A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Gayle Bauman, Finance Director Pang Silseth, Accounting Analyst SUBJECT: Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider A.Approve Claims and Payroll or B.Reject Claims and Payroll Background Payroll is processed biweekly and accounts payable is processed weekly. Budget Impact NA Attachments 2021 Payroll #10 ……………………………………………………………. $100,406.22 Total Payroll $100,406.22 Paid Claims--- 04/30/2021 through 05/14/2021 (ACH Checks ) ……………………………... $4,803.27 (Check Nos. 50047-50077 and ACH Checks) ……………………………... $374,900.73 Total Accounts Payable $379,704.00 Total Claims $480,110.22 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PAYROLL # 10 CHECKS DATED: 05/14/21 Biweekly: 04/24/21 - 05/07/21 EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONS AMT.Payment Method FIT 6,750.42 EFT SIT 3,004.78 EFT FICA Oasdi 4,276.08 EFT FICA Medicare 1,000.06 EFT TOTAL TAXES 15,031.34 Health Premium 1,368.38 A/P Check* Dental Premium 193.02 A/P Check* FSA Health Care Reimb. 0.00 A/P Check* FSA Dependent Care Reimb. 0.00 A/P Check* TOTAL FLEXIBLE SPENDING 1,561.40 HSA Health Saving 473.33 Health Care Savings Plan-Retirement 0.00 EFT Health Care Savings Plan-2% 422.84 EFT Health Care Savings Plan-4% 400.20 EFT TOTAL HEALTH SAVINGS 1,296.37 PERA 3,832.11 EFT ICMA 2,408.70 EFT Central Pension Fund-Union 614.40 A/P Check* MN State Retirement System 750.00 EFT TOTAL RETIREMENT 7,605.21 IUOE 49 Dues (Union) 140.00 A/P Check* LTD/STD Insurance 1,050.41 A/P Check* PERA Life Insurance 32.00 A/P Check* Life/Addl/Dep Life 77.24 A/P Check* Life/Addl non-tax 26.10 A/P Check* UNUM 19.51 A/P Check* AFLAC 22.76 EFT TOTAL VOLUNTARY 1,368.02 Total Employee Deductions 26,862.34 Net Payroll 0.00 Direct Deposit 45,283.01 EFT Gross Payroll Tie-Out 72,145.35 Plus City Paid Benefit 28,260.87 TOTAL PAYROLL COST 100,406.22 FICA TIE-OUT Gross Payroll 72,145.35 Less Total FSA 1,561.40 Less Total H.SA 1,296.37 Less Voluntary Ins 48.86 Less Non Taxable Reimbursement 270.00 Net P/R Subject to FICA 68,968.72 FICA Oasdi @ 6.20% 4,276.08 FICA Medicare @ 1.45% 1,000.06 Note: Federal and State Payroll Tax obligations are satisfied by means of utilizing the US Bank Easy Tax Deposit Service. Transfers are typically made up to two days after the payroll date. * A/P Checks can be found on the ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Check Approval report. Checks may be paid this week or the following week. 4,843.40 86.00 86.00 1,125.00 4,421.66 421.74 CITY BENEFIT 4,276.08 1,000.06 5,276.14 16,489.78 440.55 16,930.33 1,125.00 Accounts Payable Check Detail User:pang.silseth Printed:05/13/2021 - 3:14PM Check Number Check Date Amount ACH002 - AFLAC 0 04/30/2021 Inv 299131 Line Item Date Line Item Description 04/16/2021 45.52Insurance Premiums- Apr 2021 Inv 299131 Total 45.52 0 Total: 45.52 45.52ACH002 - AFLAC Total: ACH005 - MINNESOTA REVENUE-SALES & USE TAX 0 04/30/2021 Inv 32021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 03/31/2021 0.32March Sales/Use Tax 03/31/2021 56.68March Sales/Use Tax 03/31/2021 -0.04March Sales/Use Tax 03/31/2021 12.04March Sales/Use Tax Inv 32021 Total 69.00 0 Total: 69.00 69.00ACH005 - MINNESOTA REVENUE-SALES & USE TAX Total: ACH006 - MN DEPT OF LABOR-BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE 0 04/30/2021 Inv 32021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 03/31/2021 -87.41Q1 Building Surcharge 03/31/2021 2,183.45Q1 Building Surcharge Inv 32021 Total 2,096.04 0 Total: 2,096.04 2,096.04ACH006 - MN DEPT OF LABOR-BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE Total: Page 1AP-Check Detail (5/13/2021 - 3:14 PM) Check Number Check Date Amount ACH003 - PITNEY BOWES INC 0 04/30/2021 Inv 3232021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 03/23/2021 19.99Mar Postage - fee 03/23/2021 792.54March Postage-Newsletter Inv 3232021 Total 812.53 0 Total: 812.53 812.53ACH003 - PITNEY BOWES INC Total: ACH001 - US BANK 0 04/30/2021 Inv BAUMG42021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 04/12/2021 582.00WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN-March Warming House Inv BAUMG42021 Total 582.00 Inv CHRIM42021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 04/12/2021 93.26THE HOME DEPOT-Supplies 04/12/2021 56.70COSTCO WHSE-Clothing Allowance 04/12/2021 66.55FLEET FARM-Clothing Allowance 04/12/2021 19.99COSTCO WHSE-Clothing Allowance Inv CHRIM42021 Total 236.50 Inv FRIDJ42021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 04/12/2021 93.99CARHARTT RETAIL-Clothing Allowance 04/12/2021 66.46AMAZON.COM-Supplies 04/12/2021 75.00LOCAL 49-Training 04/12/2021 33.20USPS-Postage 04/12/2021 279.91FLEET FARM-Clothing Allowance Inv FRIDJ42021 Total 548.56 Inv MIKAT42021 Line Item Date Line Item Description 04/12/2021 39.95BATTERIES PLUS-Easement Machine 04/12/2021 0.99APPLE.COM-Icloud 04/12/2021 364.69THE HOME DEPOT-Supplies 04/12/2021 7.49FLEET FARM-Supplies Inv MIKAT42021 Total 413.12 0 Total: 1,780.18 Page 2AP-Check Detail (5/13/2021 - 3:14 PM) Check Number Check Date Amount 1,780.18ACH001 - US BANK Total: 4,803.27Total: Page 3AP-Check Detail (5/13/2021 - 3:14 PM) Accounts Payable User: Printed: pang.silseth 5/13/2021 3:18 PM Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 0008 JOSEPH MOONEY 05/07/2021ACH 5042021 Clothing Allowance 293.94 293.94Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0008: 0230 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO INC 05/07/2021ACH 1296227-000 Parts for 85457/85458 635.38 635.38Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0230: 0285 XCEL ENERGY 05/07/2021ACH 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 217.81 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 1,260.72 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 1,041.10 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 47.22 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 2,860.85 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 1,471.43 729879114 3/17/21-4/17/21 1,439.91 8,339.04Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0285: 0922 NORTH SUBURBAN ACCESS CORPORATION05/07/2021ACH 2021-053 Production Svcs-March 967.35 967.35Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0922: 1125 BOLTON & MENK INC 05/07/2021ACH 267832 Lift Station 10 6,263.00 6,263.00Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 1125: 1223 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL - MAIN 05/07/2021ACH 3298066 Pest Control-May 71.59 71.59Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 1223: 1330 MN CLN SERVICES INC 05/07/2021ACH 0421NN09 Janitorial Svcs-April 2,005.58 2,005.58Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 1330: 3096 AUTO PLUS 05/07/2021ACH 2104391050531 Supplies 41.70 4302021 Credit -38.83 2.87Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 3096: 491177SM STEPP MANUFACTURING CO INC 05/07/2021ACH 059153 Supplies 108.50 108.50Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 491177SM: Page 1AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 5596 JAMAR COMPANY 05/07/2021ACH 581815 Supplies 64.09 581962 Supplies-Mortar Mix 350.00 414.09Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 5596: 7025 ON SITE COMPANIES -OSSTC INC 05/07/2021ACH 1108596 Restrooms 4/17-5/14 622.00 622.00Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 7025: 7064 ROTARY CLUB OF ARDEN HILLS-SHOREVIEW05/07/2021ACH 2073 Q2 2021 Dues 127.50 127.50Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 7064: FPTC FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY INC 05/07/2021ACH 26080 Supplies-Coupling 347.20 347.20Total for this ACH Check for Vendor FPTC: GRANTD DAVID GRANT 05/07/2021ACH 4292021 Mileage Reimbursement 22.18 22.18Total for this ACH Check for Vendor GRANTD: JOHC JOHNSON CONTROLS INC 05/07/2021ACH 1-102765762205 Leaky Valve Repair 1,933.55 1,933.55Total for this ACH Check for Vendor JOHC: TOII TOKLE INSPECTIONS INC 05/07/2021ACH 5032021 Electrical Inspections-April 1,273.60 1,273.60Total for this ACH Check for Vendor TOII: 0081 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC 05/07/202150047 101467 Water Meter Interference 1,600.00 1,600.00Total for Check Number 50047: 0131 BEISSWENGERS DO IT BEST 05/07/202150048 428533 Supplies 6.99 6.99Total for Check Number 50048: 1033 COMCAST 05/07/202150049 101030.0521 Service 5/3-6/2 108.35 108.35Total for Check Number 50049: 7400 FORTERRA PIPE & PRECAST 05/07/202150050 ST00024629 Supplies-connector/joint seal 948.00 948.00Total for Check Number 50050: 3351 HIGHLAND PRODUCTS GROUP LLC 05/07/202150051 Q21.42400 Benches 444.00 Q21.42400 Benches 3,079.00 3,523.00Total for Check Number 50051: 10218 HR GREEN INC 05/07/202150052 Page 2AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 142664 MS4 Permit Compliance-March 10,099.50 142664 Engineering Svcs-March 370.00 142714 SWPPP Self Audit-March 3,330.00 13,799.50Total for Check Number 50052: 0447 I.U.O.E LOCAL 49 BENEFIT FUND-INSURANCE05/07/202150053 BP3.0621 Insurance-June 10,600.00 NB4.0621 Insurance-June 1,527.00 12,127.00Total for Check Number 50053: 10460 LANO EQUIPMENT INC 05/07/202150054 02-827324 Altoz Mower 19,237.65 19,237.65Total for Check Number 50054: NSCC NORTH SUBURBAN COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION INC05/07/202150055 2021-503 Q1 2021 Contribution 6,144.89 6,144.89Total for Check Number 50055: AR-O'ME2 O'MEARA CUSTOM BUILDING INC.05/07/202150056 GE 2019-01089 Escrow Refund GE 2019-01089, 3277 Katie Ln 961.08 961.08Total for Check Number 50056: 10250 PEAK STAFFING INC 05/07/202150057 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 90.00 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 30.00 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 90.00 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 660.00 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 90.00 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 120.00 47451 Office Support 4/19-4/23 120.00 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 83.25 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 27.75 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 111.00 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 111.00 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 610.50 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 83.25 47464 Office Support 4/26-4/30 83.25 2,310.00Total for Check Number 50057: 3100 PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INS CO05/07/202150058 E0471136-0421 Insurance-April 39.02 39.02Total for Check Number 50058: 0282 REPUBLIC SERVICES #899 05/07/202150059 0899-003714654 Recycling-April 8,181.00 0899-003714654 Recycling-April -584.30 0899-003718459 PW Waste-April 162.36 7,759.06Total for Check Number 50059: 5576 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP 05/07/202150060 8105619614 Annual Service 5/2021-4/2022 1,154.16 1,154.16Total for Check Number 50060: Page 3AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 0336 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS INC 05/07/202150061 67019 Asphalt Purchase 4/11-4/17 605.01 605.01Total for Check Number 50061: 3099 TRI STATE BOBCAT INC-LITTLE CANADA05/07/202150062 A86027 Supplies #85461 10.85 10.85Total for Check Number 50062: 93,761.93Total for 5/7/2021: 0189 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 05/14/2021ACH 1040185 April Locates 128.25 1040185 April Locates 128.25 1040185 April Locates 128.25 384.75Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0189: 0230 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO INC 05/14/2021ACH 1298765-00 Wheel Assembly # 457/458 1,106.13 1,106.13Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0230: 0243 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL-WASTE WATER05/14/2021ACH 0001124263 June Wastewater 70,596.57 70,596.57Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0243: 0319 CITY OF ROSEVILLE 05/14/2021ACH 0230046 IT Support-May 6,803.72 6,803.72Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0319: 0320 HEALTH PARTNERS INC 05/14/2021ACH 104790202 June Insurance 875.52 875.52Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0320: 0327 STAPLES INC 05/14/2021ACH 3474686580 Supplies 31.30 3474686583 Supplies 27.67 3474771297 Supplies 29.67 3475227819 Supplies 46.03 3475804284 Supplies 34.48 3475804287 Supplies 9.04 178.19Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0327: 0382 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 106944 05/14/2021ACH PR 21-10 PR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employer Percent 401PR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employer Percent 401 421.74 PR 21-10 PR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employee Percent 401PR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employee Percent 401 365.51 787.25Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0382: 0387 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST #302482 05/14/2021ACH PR 21-10 PR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employee PercentPR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employee Percent 231.65 PR 21-10 PR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employee DeductionPR Batch 00100.05.2021 ICMA Employee Deduction 1,811.54 2,043.19Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0387: Page 4AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 0761 ELECTRIC PUMP INC 05/14/2021ACH 0070785-IN Repair LS #7 3,703.50 0070786-IN Repair LS #7 680.40 4,383.90Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0761: 10343 TIM BEEBE 05/14/2021ACH 05112021 Expense Reimb-Clothing 224.24 224.24Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10343: 10363 MINUTE MAKER SECRETARIAL 05/14/2021ACH M1264 April CC Minutes 889.00 889.00Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10363: 10433 STEVEN BAAR 05/14/2021ACH 05042021 Expense Reimb-Clothing 136.97 136.97Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10433: 4889 COMMUNITY FOOTWORKS 05/14/2021ACH 05052021 Foot Clinic-May 252.00 252.00Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 4889: 6129 FAST SIGNS INC 05/14/2021ACH 204-55762 Nameplate-JJ 80.40 80.40Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 6129: 7501 KELLY & LEMMONS PA 05/14/2021ACH 55696 April Prosecution 3,105.00 3,105.00Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 7501: 8029 MMKR & CORP PA 05/14/2021ACH 50326 2020 Audit Services 2,404.00 50326 2020 Audit Services 2,714.00 50326 2020 Audit Services 2,404.00 50326 2020 Audit Services 1,260.00 50326 2020 Audit Services 2,404.00 50326 2020 Audit Services 2,404.00 13,590.00Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 8029: JOHC JOHNSON CONTROLS INC 05/14/2021ACH 1-102808639394 Transmitter Replacement 1,216.00 1-102817096942 Repair Leaky Valve 694.40 1,910.40Total for this ACH Check for Vendor JOHC: 1033 COMCAST 05/14/202150063 98681.0521 Service: 5/5-6/4 109.71 109.71Total for Check Number 50063: 10244 COMCAST BUSINESS INC 05/14/202150064 122194937 Service: 5/1-5/31 497.93 497.93Total for Check Number 50064: 10218 HR GREEN INC 05/14/202150065 Page 5AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 143391 Hamline Crosswalk-April 3,575.45 143421 Engineering-April 10,513.00 143422 Lex StationTraffic Signs-April 1,225.00 143423 Engineering-April-PC 19-010 #466 120.00 15,433.45Total for Check Number 50065: 0390 INT'L UNION OPERATING ENGINEERS-UNION DUES05/14/202150066 1200-0521 May Dues 280.00 280.00Total for Check Number 50066: 1055 KODIAK POWER SYSTEMS INC 05/14/202150067 KPS0718 Generator Testing 3,386.10 KPS0718 Generator Testing 1,128.70 4,514.80Total for Check Number 50067: 10448 MARCO TECHNOLOGIES LLC 05/14/202150068 442290953 Contract 4/25-5/25 200.35 442290953 Contract 4/25-5/25 35.36 235.71Total for Check Number 50068: 10286 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 05/14/202150069 367985 Drug Testing 62.00 62.00Total for Check Number 50069: 10271 MN PEIP 05/14/202150070 1087944 June Insurance 7,971.58 7,971.58Total for Check Number 50070: AR-NORT1 NORTH HEIGHTS LUTHERAN CHURCH 05/14/202150071 PC 20-011 Escrow Refund: PC 20-011, 1700 West Highway 96 1,152.88 1,152.88Total for Check Number 50071: 10250 PEAK STAFFING INC 05/14/202150072 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 90.00 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 90.00 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 120.00 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 90.00 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 30.00 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 120.00 47469 Office Support 5/3-5/7 660.00 1,200.00Total for Check Number 50072: 10373 QUADIENT FINANCE USA INC 05/14/202150073 6418.0421 Postage 1,000.00 1,000.00Total for Check Number 50073: 0811 RAMSEY COUNTY 05/14/202150074 EMCOM-009231 Fleet Support-April 24.96 EMCOM-009267 911 Dispatch-April 3,978.60 EMCOM-009284 CAD Svcs-April 544.99 PUBW-019122 Brine Purchases 1/13-2/17 792.93 SHRFL-001979 Law Enforcement Svcs-May 115,686.34 Page 6AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Check Amount Invoice No ReferenceDescription 121,027.82Total for Check Number 50074: SRFC SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC 05/14/202150075 14320.00-3 MVHS Trail-April 18,035.54 18,035.54Total for Check Number 50075: 0336 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS INC 05/14/202150076 67053 Asphalt Purchases 4/18-4/24 1,946.35 1,946.35Total for Check Number 50076: 9755 VERIZON CONNECT 05/14/202150077 OSV000002431541 Service 4/1-4/30 323.80 323.80Total for Check Number 50077: 281,138.80Total for 5/14/2021: Report Total (64 checks): 374,900.73 Page 7AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/13/2021 3:18 PM) CONSENT ITEM – 7B MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Gayle Bauman, Finance Director SUBJECT: Approve 2020 City Financial Statements and Audit Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motion(s) to approve, table or deny the following: • 2020 City of Arden Hills Financial Report and Audit Results. All items need a simple majority for action unless otherwise noted. Discussion The 2020 financial statements and audit results are completed and a presentation was made to the City Council by the City’s auditor, Aaron Neilson of MMKR, earlier this evening. The reports will be submitted to both the State Auditor and the Government Finance Officers Association. Budget Impact None. Attachments None. Page 1 DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Dave Perrault, City Administrator SUBJECT: City Hall HVAC Project Payment #5 to Air Express Budgeted Amount: Cost to Date: Funding Source: $303,800 $204,440 of $280,783 Building/Equipment Fund Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: •Payment # 5 to Air Express for the City Hall HVAC Project in the amount of $34,390. All items need a simple majority for action unless otherwise noted. Discussion On October 12, 2020, the City Council awarded the City Hall HVAC Project to Air Express in the amount of $268,560.00 (an additional five percent contingency ($12,223) was built into the project for a total project cost of $280,783). Two changes orders were previously approved, bringing the expected cost to $275,481.00 ($5,302 of remaining contingency). The contractor is requesting payment, less five percent ($1,810) in retainage, in the amount of $34,390. The City’s engineering consultant, Paulson and Clark, has reviewed and agrees with the payment request. Previous payments made to the contractor and the requested payments are below. Payment # Work Completed Retainage Payment Payment #1 14,200$ 710$ 13,490$ Payment #2 12,500$ 625$ 11,875$ Payment #3 141,800$ 7,090$ 134,710$ Payment #4 10,500$ 525$ 9,975$ Payment #5 36,200$ 1,810$ 34,390$ Total to date 215,200$ 10,760$ 204,440$ Budget Impact This payment is in-line with previously approved project costs. Attachment Attachment A: Certificate for Payment #5 Attachment B: Schedule of Values CONSENT ITEM – 7C MEMORANDUM CONTINUATION SHEET - Schedule of Values AIA DOCUMENT G703PAGE - 2 OF 2AIA Document G702, APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT,APPLICATION NO:5containing Contractor's signed Certification is attached.APPLICATION DATE:04/25/21In tabulations below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar.PERIOD TO:3-26 to 4-25Use column 1 on Contracts where variable retainage for line items may apply.ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO:ABCDEFG HIITEM DESCRIPTION OF WORKSCHEDULED WORK COMPLETED MATERIALS TOTAL % BALANCE RETAINAGENO. VALUE FROM PREVIOUS THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY COMPLETED (G/C) TO FINISH 5%APPLICATION STORED AND STORED (C-G)(D+E) (NOT IN TO DATED OR E) (D+E+F)1 HVAC and Plumbing$0.00 $0.002 Equipment $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 100% $0.00 $5,000.003 Equipment install-labor $25,000.00 $20,000.00 $0.00 $20,000.00 80% $5,000.00 $1,000.004 Demolition $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $0.00 $18,000.00 100% $0.00 $900.005 Balancing $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0% $5,000.00 $0.006 Bond/Permit $8,500.00 $8,500.00 $0.00 $8,500.00 100% $0.00 $425.007 Misc/overhead/profit $20,780.00 $10,000.00 $4,500.00 $14,500.00 70% $6,280.00 $725.008910 Subcontractors11 Electrical $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 100% $0.00 $125.0012 Johnson Controls $58,000.00 $0.00 $26,000.00 $26,000.00 45% $32,000.00 $1,300.0013 Roofers $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $0.00 $7,500.00 100% $0.00 $375.0014 Refrigerant Recovery $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 100% $0.00 $125.0015 Misc/overhead/profit $20,780.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 72% $5,780.00 $750.0017182021222324252627282930313234353637 SUB TOTALS: $268,560.00 $179,000.00 $35,500.00 $0.00 $214,500.00 $54,060.00 $10,725.00Change OrdersChange Orders: Fix leak in plumbing pipes $700.00 $0.00 $700.00 $700.00 $0.00 $35.00Change Order: HVAC Control Deficiencies $6,221.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,221.00 $0.00$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00CHANGE ORDER TOTALS: $6,921.00 $0.00 $700.00 $0.00 $700.00 10% $6,221.00 $35.00GRAND TOTALS $275,481.00 $179,000.00 $36,200.00 $0.00 $215,200.00 78% $60,281.00 $10,760.00 Page 1 of 2 CONSENT ITEM – 7D MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2021 Concrete Improvements Project Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $65,000 $64,586.30 Surface Water (604-49550-44030) Part of In-House Paving $ 7,280.00 General Fund, Street Maintenance Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Approval of a construction contract with Pember Companies for 2021 Concrete Improvements in the amount of $71,866.30 All items need a simple majority for action unless otherwise noted. Background/Discussion The Public Works Department has compiled a list of miscellaneous concrete repairs to address failing curb, flatwork, and storm sewer catch basins. Similar repair work was completed in 2020 using this vendor approach and a formal construction contract to guide the work and add a bid component to obtain competitive prices for concrete repairs. Staff recently issued a quotation package to five contractors to obtain bids for upcoming concrete repairs. Through inspections from our Public Works staff and using our ESRI applications, the work has been organized to capture repairs within the same neighborhood and also repairs that need to be addressed more immediately. The repair locations can be seen on the location map in Attachment B. Page 2 of 2 The City received three bids from the five contractors receiving the bid solicitation. One contractor declined due to current work load and one contractor did not respond. As shown in Attachment A, Pember Companies has the lowest bid of $71,866.30 which is slightly lower than the engineer’s estimate of $72,530.00. Pember has successfully completed projects with Arden Hills in the past and is currently the contractor for two 2021 City projects, the Hamline Crosswalks and Shorewood Drive Improvements and the Karth Lake Runoff Control project. City staff recommends awarding the 2021 Concrete Improvements contract to Pember Companies. Budget Impact The 2021 Operating Budget for the Surface Water Management Fund includes funding for repairs to drainage assets, including curbs and catch basins in the amount of $65,000 under 604- 49550-44030. All work items included in this project are associated with surface drainage or subsurface water causing heaving and damage to flatwork. Staff intends to also use this contract to repair two catch basins and approximately 160 feet of damaged curb within the 2021 Public Works In-House Paving project. There are sufficient funds budgeted in the General Fund to cover the In-House Paving project costs. 2021 Concrete Improvements $61,186.30 – Surface Water Mgmt Fund 2021 PW In -House Paving catch basins $ 3,400.00 – Surface Water Mgmt Fund 2021 PW In-House Paving curbing $ 7,280.00 – General Fund, Street Maintenance Total Cost $71,866.30 Attachments Attachment A: Bid Tabulation Attachment B: Project Location Maps Attachment C: Construction Contract Item No. Item UnitEst. QuantityUnit PriceKlein Underground LLCUnit PricePember CompaniesUnit Price C&L Excavating Unit PriceEngineer's Estimate2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 4,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 8,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 3,500.00$ 3,635.00$ 5,800.00$ 3,000.00$ 2104.501REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 160 7.00$ 1,120.00$ 10.00$ 1,600.00$ 20.00$ 3,200.00$ 10.00$ 1,600.00$ 2531.501CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, DESIGN B618 - HAND FORMLIN FT 160 55.00$ 8,800.00$ 35.50$ 5,680.00$ 75.00$ 12,000.00$ 70.00$ 11,200.00$ 2232.501MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.0")SQ YD 84 27.00$ 2,268.00$ 20.00$ 1,680.00$ 17.00$ 1,428.00$ 2.50$ 210.00$ 2357.502BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COATGALS 4.20 10.00$ 42.00$ 10.00$ 42.00$ 10.00$ 42.00$ 25.00$ 105.00$ 2360.501TYPE SPWEB240C WEARING COURSE MIXTURETON 9.66 300.00$ 2,898.00$ 355.00$ 3,429.30$ 200.00$ 1,932.00$ 250.00$ 2,415.00$ 2506.522ADJUST FRAME AND RING CASTINGEACH 24 3,850.00$ 92,400.00$ 1,700.00$ 40,800.00$ 2,100.00$ 50,400.00$ 2,000.00$ 48,000.00$ 115,028.00$ 71,866.30$ 82,802.00$ 72,530.00$ TOTAL COST STOWE AVE L A K E V A L E N T I N E R D RED FOX RD GREY FOX RD INGERSON RDROUND LAKE RD WAMBLE DRSIEMS CTSNELLING AVE NCOLLEEN AVE TILLER LN HAM LI N E VENU S A V E THOM DR ARDEN VIEW DR GLENARDEN RDCHATHAM AVEAMBLE RD NOBLE RD GRAMSIE RD ARDEN PL GRANT RD OAK AVE EDGEWATER AVE JERROLD AVE DUNLAP ST NHARRIET AVE FLORAL DR W GLENVIEW AVE KARTH LAKE DR GAT E W A Y B L V D WYNC R E S T CARLTON DR FORE S T L N PRIOR AVE NCUMMINGS PARK DR ROYAL LN KATIE LN PINE TREE DRFAIRVIEW AVE NRIDGEWOOD RDCRYSTAL AVE PLEASANT DRARDEN OAKS DR V A L E N T I N E A VE BENTON WAYINDIAN OAKS TRL SKILESLNBRIAR BECKMAN AVE LAMETTI LN MCCR A C K E N L N KEITHSON DRASBURY AVE NNURSERY HILL LN BUSSARD CT DAWN CIR W JAMES AVEJANET C T CANNONNORMA AVEA R D E N V IE W C TROY KATIE CT GLENARDENCTRIDGEWOOD CTKARTH LAKE CIRGALE CIRMCCLUNG DR WYNCREST LNSAND E E N RD PARKSHORE DR EIDE CIR NORTH-WOODS DRNURSERY HILL CT C UMM I NG S LNVALENTINE CTING E R S O N C T COLL E E N CT G L E N V I E W C T HU N T E R S CTPASCA L AVE NLAKE LN NCONNELL Y AVE THOM CT AMBLE CIRCHATHAM CTCOLLEEN CIRROLLING HILLS RDARDEN OAK S C TNORMA CIRIND IAN PLEDGEWATER AVENORMAAVE TILLER LNSNELLING AVE NDUNLAP ST NARDEN P L SKIL E S L N FAIRVIEW AVE NHAMLINE AVE NW Y N R I D G E PLEASANT CIR ARDEN INDIAN OAKS CT JAMES CIRDELLVIEW AVEDELLVIEW AVEDELLWOOD STGATEWAY CT VALENTINE CREST RD BRUEBERR Y LN BRIARKNOLL CIR DELLWOOD AVELAMETTI CIRWALDEN PLWEDGEWOOD CIR INDIAN OAKS CIR C H A T H A M CI R L A K E J O H A N N A B L V D LAKE JOHANNA BLVDEDGEWATER AVEFAIRVIEW AVE NFERNWOOD STSNELLING AVE NSHORELINELNKATIE LN SHOREWOODDR LAKE LN COUNTY ROAD E W LAKEJO H A N N A BLVD CLEVELAND AVE NNEW BR IGHTON RDNEW BRIGHTON RDHUDSON RDTHOM D RCLEVELAND AVE NBRIGHTON WAYNEW BRIGHTON RDINTERSTATE 35WCOUNTY ROAD E2 W COUNTY R O A D E 2 WLAKEVIEWCT C H A T H A M A V E SIEMS CTARDEN P L GLE N A RDENRDOLD SN ELL IN GARDEN OAK S DRSNELLING AVE NBETHEL DROLD HIGHWAY 10OLD SNELLINGVENUS AVEINTERSTATE 35WLAKE V A L E N T I N E R DINTERSTATE 35WROUNDL A K E R D W OLD H IGHWA Y 1 0 LA K E S H O R E P L INTERSTATE 694 INTER S T A T E 6 9 4 H IGHWAY 1 0 COUNTY ROAD 96 W COUNTY ROAD 96 WTODD DR (Private)TODD DR (Private)EN(Pri vate)LISA LN (Private)LEXINGTON AVE NKN O L L D R VISTA CTDAWN CIR ECOLLEEN AV E ARDENVIEWDR COUNTY ROAD F W INNOVATION WAY (Private)FERNWOOD STPLEASANT DR A M B L E D R COUNTY ROAD 96 W LEXINGTON AVE NDR CT BOSTON SCIENTIFIC DR (Private)BETHEL DR BE T H E L D R COUNTY ROAD E W BENTON WAYAVE INGERSON RD AVE NWOOD RDCOUNTY ROAD E HAMLINE AVE NHAMLINE AVE NPrivateKATIE LNKEITHSON DR AL HILLS DRLake Josephine Lake Johanna Valentine Lake Round Lake Karth LakeSun Fish Lake ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_ ^_ ^_^_ ^_^_^_^_^_^_^_^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_ 2021 Concrete Inprovement Project 0 1,000 Feet Ü Document Path: P:\PR&PW\Numbered Projects\PW-21-0102 2021 Concrete Improvement Project\02 design - plan - bid\GIS\Concrete Repairs 2021.mxd^_Project Location Address 4075 Valentine Crest Rd 4452 Pleasant Dr SSMH 2-154, Crystal Ave/ Lake Valentin Seims Ct (No CB numbers on Dashboard) 2 catchbasins east of 1590 Lake Johanna Blvd 3365 Lake Johanna Blvd. STMH ID 15 3377 Lake Johanna Blvd. Storm MH ID 1700. 1580 Chatham Ave. CB 233 1621 Chatham Ave. CB 234 1624 Chatham Ave. CB 286 3700 Chatham Circle. CB 230 3720 Chatham Circle. CB 231 1684 Chatham Ave. CB 228 1687 Chatham Ave. CB 227 1712 Chatham Ave. CB226 3708 Chatham Ct. CB 225 3707 Chatham Ct. CB 224 3707 Chatcham Ct STMH ID 153 1776 Chatham Ave. CB 237 1771 Chatham Ave. CB 236 1160 Grey Fox Rd STMH ID 176 3728 Dunlap St. CB 821 3609 Pascal CB 219 1435 County Rd E (Pascal) CB 218 Pascal Spot Curbing Replacment Fairview Ave Spot Curbing Replacment This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF. Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice. 2021 Concrete Improvement Project AGREEMENT PW-21-0102 1 of 5 AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND CONTRACTOR FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT is made this 24th day of May, 2021 (hereinafter “Effective Date of the Contract”) by and between the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota (hereinafter “Owner”) and Pember Companies (hereinafter “Contractor”). The Owner and Contractor hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 – THE WORK AND THE PROJECT 1.01 1.02 Contractor shall complete all Work as specified or indicated in the Contract Documents. The Work is generally described as follows: Construction of spot curb replacement, pavement patching, and adjust frame and ring castings including all restoration work. The Project, of which the Work under the Contract Documents is a part is generally described as follows: 2021 Concrete Improvements Project, City Project No. PW-21-0102. ARTICLE 2 – CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 2.01 The Contract Documents consist of the following: A. This Agreement B. Proposal Form C. Insurance Certificates D. Instructions to Bidders E. Division 1 – General Requirements F. The following which may be delivered or issued on or after the Effective Date of the Contract and are not attached hereto: 1. Notice to Proceed 2. Work Change Directives 3. Change Orders 4. Field Orders 2.02 This instrument, together with the documents hereinabove mentioned, form the Agreement, and they are as fully a part of the Agreement as if hereto attached or herein repeated. 2.03 The Contract Documents may only be amended, modified, or supplemented as provided in the General Conditions and Supplemental Conditions. ARTICLE 3 – CONTRACT TIMES 1.01 1.02 1.03 Contract Times: The Work will be substantially completed on or before August 31, 2021, and completed and ready for final payment in accordance with Paragraph 15.06 of the General Conditions on or before October 25, 2021. All time limits for Milestones, if any, Substantial Completion, and completion and readiness for final payment as stated in the Contract Documents are of the essence of the Contract. Liquidated Damages: Contractor and Owner recognize that time is of the essence as stated above and that Owner will suffer financial and other losses if the Work is not completed and Milestones not achieved within the times specified in Paragraph 3.01 above, plus any extensions thereof allowed in accordance with the Contract. The parties also recognize that delays, expense, and difficulties involved in proving in a legal or arbitration proceeding the actual loss suffered by Owner if the Work is not completed on time. Accordingly, instead of requiring any such proof, Owner and Contractor agree that as liquidated damages for delay, but not as a penalty; 2021 Concrete Improvement Project AGREEMENT PW-21-0102 2 of 5 A. Milestone: Spot curb replacement on Fairview and Pascal, less restoration of turf, and 2 adjust ring and castings on Pascal Ave must be completed prior to June 16, 2021. B.Substantial Completion: Contractor shall pay Owner $200.00 for each day that expires after the time specified in Paragraph 3.01 above for Substantial Completion until the Work is substantially complete, as duly adjusted pursuant to the Contract. C.Completion of Remaining Work: After Substantial Completion, if Contractor shall neglect, refuse, or fail to complete the remaining Work within the Contract Time for completion and readiness for final payment, as duly adjusted pursuant to the Contract, Contractor shall pay Owner $300.00 for each day that expires after such time until the Work is completed and ready for final payment. D.Liquidated damages for failing to timely attain Substantial Completion and final completion are not additive and will not be imposed concurrently. ARTICLE 4 – CONTRACT PRICES 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 The Owner shall pay the Contractor for the performance of this Agreement according to the schedule of approximate quantities and unit prices as set out in the Contract Documents submitted by the Contractor on May 19, 2021, the aggregate of which is estimated to be $71,866.30. The Contract shall include schedule items as provided on the Proposal Form. Payment is based an amount equal to the sum of the extended prices, established for each separately identified item of Unit Price Work by multiplying the unit price times the actual quantity of that item completed and accepted by the Engineer. The extended prices for Unit Price Work set forth as of the Effective Date of the Contract are based on estimated quantities. As provided in Paragraph 13.03 of the General Conditions, estimated quantities are not guaranteed, and determination of actual quantities and classifications are to be made by the Engineer. ARTICLE 5 – PAYMENT PROCEDURES 5.01 Progress Payments: Owner shall make progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications for Payment on or about the 10th day of each month during performance of the Work as provided in Paragraph 5.02 below, provided that such Applications for Payment have been submitted in a timely manner and otherwise meet the requirements of the Contract. All such payments will be measured by the Schedule of Values established as provided in the General Conditions (and in the case of Unit Price Work based on the number of units completed) or, in the event there is no Schedule of Values, as provided elsewhere in the Contract. 5.02 Retainage: Prior to Substantial Completion, progress payments will be made in an amount equal to the percentage indicated below but, in each case, less the aggregate of payments previously made and less such amounts as Owner may withhold, including but not limited to liquidated damages, in accordance with the Contract. A. Ninety five (95) percent of Work completed (with the balance being retainage). If the Work has been 50 percent completed as determined by Engineer, and if the character and progress of the Work has been satisfactory to Owner and Engineer, then as long as the character and progress of the Work remain satisfactory to Owner and Engineer, there will be no additional retainage; and B. Fifty (50) percent of cost of materials and equipment not incorporated in the Work (with the balance being retainage). 5.03 Upon Substantial Completion, Owner shall pay an amount sufficient to increase total payments to Contractor to 100 percent of the Work completed, less such amounts set-off by Owner pursuant to Paragraph 15.01E of the General Conditions, and less 200 percent of Engineer’s estimate of the value of Work to be completed or corrected as shown on the punch list of items to be completed or corrected prior to final payment. 2021 Concrete Improvement Project AGREEMENT PW-21-0102 3 of 5 5.04 Final Payment: Upon final completion and acceptance of the Work in accordance with Paragraph 15.06 of the General Conditions, Owner shall pay the remainder of the Contract Prices as recommended by Engineer as provided in said Paragraph 15.06. ARTICLE 6 – CONTRACTOR’S REPRESENTATIONS 6.01 In order to induce the Owner to enter into this Contract, Contractor makes the following representations: A. Contractor has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents, and any data and reference identified in the Contract Documents. B. Contractor has visited the Site, conducted a thorough, alert visual examination of the Site and adjacent areas, and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local, and Site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. C. Contractor is familiar with and is satisfied as to all laws and regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. D. Contractor has carefully studied all reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions at or adjacent to the Site and all drawings of physical conditions relating to existing surface or subsurface structures at the Site that have been identified in the Contract Documents, and reports relating to Hazardous Environmental Conditions, if any, at or adjacent to the Site that have been identified in the Contract Documents. E. Contractor has considered the information known to Contractor itself; information commonly known to contractors doing business in the locality of the Site; information and observations obtained from visits to the Site; the Contract Documents; and the site-related reports identified in the Contract Documents, with respect to the effect of such information, observation, and documents on (1) the cost, progress and performance of the Work; (2) the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by the Contractor; and (3) Contractor’s safety precautions and programs. F. Based on the information and observations referred to in the preceding paragraph, Contractor agrees that no further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract. G. Contractor is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by Owner and others at the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the Contract Documents. H. Contractor has given Engineer written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that Contractor has discovered in the Contract Documents, and the written resolution thereof by Engineer is acceptable to Contractor. I. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing of the Work. J. Contractor’s entry into this Contract constitutes an incontrovertible representation by Contractor that without exception all prices in the Agreement are premised upon performing and furnishing the Work required by the Contract Documents. ARTICLE 7 – MISCELLANEOUS 7.01 Terms: Terms used in the Agreement will have the meanings stated in the General Conditions and Supplementary Conditions. 7.02 Assignment of Contract: Unless expressly agreed to elsewhere in the Contract, no assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interests in the Contract will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of the party sought to be bound; and, specifically but without limitation, money that may become due and money that is due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction may be limited by law), and unless specifically 2021 Concrete Improvement Project AGREEMENT PW-21-0102 4 of 5 stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents. 7.03 Successors and Assigns: Owner and Contractor each binds itself, its successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its successors, assigns, and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations in the Contact Documents. 7.04 Severability: Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any law or regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon Owner and Contractor, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. 7.05 Contractor’s Certifications A. The provisions of Minn. Stat. 16C.285 Responsible Contractor are imposed as a requirement of this Contract. This Contract may be terminated by the Owner at any time upon discovery by the Owner that the prime contractor or subcontractor has submitted a false statement under oath verifying compliance with any of the minimum criteria set forth in the Statute. B. The provisions of Minn. Stat. 471.425, subdivision 4a regarding payments to subcontractors are imposed as a requirement of this Contract. REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS BLANK 2021 Concrete Improvement Project AGREEMENT PW-21-0102 5 of 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and Contractor have caused this instrument to be executed in duplicate as of the Effective Date of the Contract. OWNER: CONTRACTOR: City of Arden Hills By: By: Title: Mayor Title: Attest: Attest: Title: City Clerk Title: Address for Giving Notices: Address for Giving Notices: City of Arden Hills Attention: Public Works Director 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Page 1 of 2 CONSENT ITEM – 7E MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director SUBJECT: Public Works 2021 Capital Equipment Purchases Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $94,000 $89,392.45 Equipment Replacement Fund (2021 CIP) Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Purchase of Public Works equipment, 2022 Ford F-350 with Tommy Gate, V-Plow and hitch, and 2022 Ford F-250 Super Cab with service body. Total purchase price of $89,392.45. All items need a simple majority for action unless otherwise noted. Background/Discussion At the March 15, 2021 Work Session, staff presented to Council the eight equipment items included in the 2021 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for replacement or addition, consisting of two pickup trucks, a plow truck, three mowers and two pieces of safety equipment. At the April 12th Regular City Council meeting, Council approved the purchase of all the equipment except for the trucks due to the timing of the new State Contract transition. The new State Contract has been finalized and an order for the remaining trucks has been created. Attachment A is the 2022 Ford F-350 with Tommy Gate, back rack, strobe, V-Plow and hitch. Attachment B is the 2022 Ford F-250 Super Cab with service body. Attach C is Tommy Gate with an aluminum platform that will be installed on the F-350. Attachment D is the V-Plow to be attached to the F-350. Attachment E is the Service Body to be outfitted on the F-250. Page 2 of 2 Budget Impact The net total purchase price for the two trucks falls within the budgeted amount included in the 2021 CIP. F350 F250 Base truck $35,896.30 $32,788.15 Trade in old trucks (6,500.00) (5,000.00) Tommy Gate 5,449.00 V-Plow 7,007.00 Service Body 19,752.00 Total purchase price $41,852.30 $47,540.15 Attachments Attachment A: 2022 Ford F-350 Attachment B: 2022 Ford F-250 Attachment C: Tommy Gate for 2022 Ford F-350 Attachment D: V-Plow for 2022 Ford F-350 Attachment E: Service Body for 2022 Ford F-250 Midway Ford Commercial Travis Swanson Fleet and Government Sales 651-343-5212 2777 N. Snelling Ave. tswanson@rosevillemidwayford.com Roseville MN 55113 Fax # 651-604-2936 FTM28 Contract # 169665 Standard Automatic Transmission 40/20/40 Vinyl Front Seat Front Tow Hooks Dual Front Air Bags Standard Base Upholstery Rubber Floor Covering AM/FM Radio 4-Wheel ABS Brakes Black Bumpers w/Rear Step Tow Hitch Air Conditioning Matching Full Size Spare Tire Tilt Wheel LT245/75r17 E All Season Tires 6.2L V8 E85 12-16 weeks delivery Lead Time No order cut off at this time Options Code Price Select 7.3L V8 w/3.73 E-Locker 99N $1,551 x Exterior Colors Code Select LT275/70r18E AT Tires TDX $241 x Blue Jeans Metallic N1 18" Wheels 64F $414 x Race Red PQ Cloth 40/20/40 Seat 1S $91 x Caribou Metallic LQ XL Value Pkg 96V $660 x Shadow Black G1 Power Group 90L $832 x Magnetic Metallic J7 Snow Plow/Camper Pkg 47B $277 x Ingot Silver Metallic UX Skid Plates 41P $91 x Oxford White Z1 x Dual Batteries 86M $191 x 397 Amp Alternator 67B $104 x Brake Controller 52B $246 x Extended Service Contracts Cost Select Running Boards 18B $291 x 7 year/75,000 mile $2,570 Spray In Bedliner 85S $542 x PremiumCare Warranty 110V Outlet 43C $160 x (Bumper to Bumper) Upfitter Switches 66S $150 x Tiger Tough Seat Covers $450 x Option Total $6,291 You must have a active FIN code to participate in this Base Price Totals purchase contract : FIN code # 6.2 Gas $27,614.68 Purchase Order required prior to order placement Options Price Totals $6,291.00 Trade In 2010 F-350 ($6,500.00)PO # Transit Impr Excise Tax $20.00 Tax Exempt Lic $64.25 6.5% Sales Tax $1,781.37 Name of Organization Document fee $125.00 Sub total per vehicle $29,396.30 Number of Vehicles 1 Address Grand Total for all units $29,396.30 City, State, Zip Acceptance Signature Contact Person/ Phone # Print Name and Title Date Contact's e-mail address and fax # 2022 F350 4X4- Regular Cab- 8' Box Midway Ford Commercial Travis Swanson Fleet and Government Sales 651-343-5212 2777 N. Snelling Ave. tswanson@rosevillemidwayford.com Roseville MN 55113 Fax # 651-604-2936 FTM24 Contract # 169665 Standard Automatic Transmission 40/20/40 Vinyl Front Seat Front Tow Hooks Dual Front Air Bags Standard Base Upholstery Rubber Floor Covering AM/FM Radio 4-Wheel ABS Brakes Black Bumpers w/Rear Step Tow Hitch Air Conditioning Matching Full Size Spare Tire Tilt Wheel LT245/75r17 E All Season Tires 6.2L V8 E85 Shift on Fly 4x4 Rear View Camera Options Code Price Select Exterior Colors Code Select LT265/70r17E AT Tires TCD $414 x Blue Jeans Metallic N1 Cloth 40/20/40 Seat 1S $91 x Race Red PQ XL Value Package 96V $360 x Stone Gray Metallic LQ Power Group 90L $832 x Shadow Black G1 Dual Batteries 86M $191 x Magnetic Metallic J7 240 Amp Alternator 67E $78 x Ingot Silver Metallic UX Brake Controller 52B $245 x Oxford White Z1 x Running Boards 18B $405 x 110V Outlet 43C $160 x Upfitter Switches 66S $150 x Extended Service Contracts Cost Select Tiger Tough Seat Covers(Black)$450 x 7 year/75,000 mile $2,570 (Embroidered, Front Only)PremiumCare Warranty (Bumper to Bumper) Option Total $3,376 You must have a active FIN code to participate in this Base Price Totals purchase contract : FIN code # 6.2 Gas $27,519.68 Purchase Order required prior to order placement Options Price Totals $3,376.00 Trade In 2012 F-350 ($5,000.00)PO # Transit Impr Excise Tax $20.00 Tax Exempt Lic $64.25 6.5% Sales Tax $1,683.22 Name of Organization Document fee $125.00 Sub total per vehicle $27,788.15 Number of Vehicles 1 Address Grand Total for all units $27,788.15 City, State, Zip Acceptance Signature Contact Person/ Phone # Print Name and Title Date Contact's e-mail address and fax # 2022 F250 4X4- Super Cab- 8' Box May 6, 2021 Jeff Frid City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112-5743 Crysteel Truck Equipment is pleased to submit this quote for your approval. Quote: Please reference State Contract # T -763(5) Truck, Light Duty, Components & Attachments for pricing Boss 8’ 2” Power- V XT Steel (Mild Steel) Blade width: 98” (straight) Blade width: 88” (V position) Blade width: 81” (scoop) Blade width: 85” (@30 degree angle) Blade height: 37” at end, 30” at center Blade thickness: 11 gauge steel Cutting edge: ½” X 6” Hardox Reinforcement ribs: 6 vertical, 2 diagonal Plow shoes: optional Trip springs: 4 Angle cylinders: 1-1/2” X 10” (SmartLock-standard) Lift cylinder: 2” X 1-1/8” X 10” Attachment system: Smart Hitch 2 Plow weight: 785 lbs. Plow lights: SL3 L.E.D. With Ice Shield Technology™ Plow control: SmartTouch 2 3.38 Price of 8’2” V-XT Steel Vee Plow $ 5,995.00 3.38 Price to Install $ 700.00 3.97 Snow Deflector $ 312.00 TOTAL PRICE OF ABOVE PACKAGE $ 7,007.00 Joshua Taylor Municipal/State Contract Specialist Crysteel Truck Equipment Fridley Subject to all applicable taxes Quote valid for 30 days 1130 73rd Avenue NE Highway 60 East Fridley, MN 55432 Lake Crystal, MN 56055 (763) 571-1902 (507) 726-6041 1-800-795-1280 1-800-722-0588 Fax # (763) 571-5091 Fax # (507) 726-2984 www.crysteeltruck.com AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Page 1 of 2 CONSENT ITEM – 7F MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant SUBJECT: PC21-004 – Amended Master Planned Unit Development Agreement For Lexington Station Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development Agreement for Phase 3 – Lexington Station based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-004 on April 26. 2021. This items requires a simple majority. Background On April 26, 2021, the City Council approved an amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development and Site Plan for Lexington Station. The City Council approved a 43,000 square foot standalone grocery store on the subject property at 3787 Lexington Avenue. An amendment to the Master PUD Agreement is required to be signed between the City and the developer before the issuance of development permits. The City Attorney has prepared the Agreement and the document has been reviewed and approved by the Applicant and staff (Attachment A). Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following motion language for this case. Page 2 of 2 1. Approval: Motion to approve the Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement for Phase 3 – Lexington Station based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-004 on April 26. 2021. 2. Denial: Motion to deny the Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement for Phase 3 – Lexington Station based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-004 on April 26. 2021: the City Council should identify findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 3. Table: Motion to table the Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement for Phase 3 – Lexington Station based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-004 on April 26. 2021. Budget Impact NA Attachments A. Master Planned Unit Development Agreement 215189v1A (reserved for recording information) MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT AND PHASE 3 – FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LEXINGTON STATION (PC#21-004) THIS MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT AND PHASE 3 – FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (“Agreement”) is dated effective ______________, 2021, and is entered into by and among the CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, a Minnesota statutory city (“City”); LEXINGTON STATION, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Lexington Station”); KENSINGTON DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, INC.; an Illinois corporation (“KDP”); IMKD3 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“IMKD3”); and ARDEN HILLS 1031 LLC, an Illinois limited liability company (“AH1031”) (Lexington Station, KDP, IMKD3 and AH1031 collectively “Developer”). 1. RECITALS. A. In 2013, the City approved a Master Planned Unit Development Agreement for the Lexington Station redevelopment project at the southwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road. Phase 1 of the redevelopment was completed in 2013-2014 and included the 215189v1A construction of a 15,340 square foot multi-tenant commercial building. The Master Planned Unit Development Agreement and Phase 1 Final Plan was recorded June 26, 2014 as document number A04512856. On September 30, 2013, the City Council approved an Amendment to the Phase 1 Sign Plan. The First Amendment to Phase 1 - Final Plan and Master Planned Unit Development Agreement was recorded on June 26, 2014 as document number A04512857. On the 5th day of March, 2014, the City Council approved an Amendment to Phase I revised Building Plan. The Second Amendment to Phase 1 - Final Plan and Master Planned Unit Development Agreement was recorded on June 26, 2014 as document number A04512858. B. On the 6th day of March, 2017, an application was submitted requesting the approval of a Master Planned Unit Development Amendment (“PUD-Master Plan”) and approval of a Phase 2 Final Planned Unit Development (“Phase 2-Final Plan”), for the properties located at 3771 and 3833 Lexington Avenue, and 1120 Red Fox Road, Arden Hills, legally described as Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Roberts Addition to Arden Hills – (i) at the time Roberts Commerical Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, was the fee owner of Lots 1 and 3, Block 1; and (ii) Lexington Station is the owner of Lot 2, Block 1. The Master Planned Unit Development Agreement and Phase 2-Final Plan was recorded on June 27, 2017 as document number A04664511. C. On the 4th day of March, 2021, the Developer submitted an application requesting the approval of PUD-Master Plan Amendment and approval of a Phase 3 Final Planned Unit Development (“Phase 3-Final Plan”), for the property located at 3787 Lexington Avenue, Arden Hills, legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Roberts Addition to Arden Hills (the “Property”). The Property is zoned in the B-3 District. 215189v1A D. On ________________, 2021, the prior owner/developer of the Property, Roberts Commercial Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, sold its interest to KDP, IMKD3 and AH1031 pursuant to the ______________________ recorded as Ramsey County document number A_____________. By acquiring the Property, the Developer will assume all rights, obligations and conditions under all previous Master PUD Agreements, permits, and reviews. E. The redevelopment plans are illustrated and described on the following documents (“Redevelopment Plan Documents”). The Plans shall not be attached to this Agreement. The Plans will be prepared and submitted to the City for approval. 1. Master and Final PUD Plan Set, consisting of: a. Master PUD Site Plan dated 03/06/17 b. ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey dated 8/13/2019 c. Demolition Plan – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 d. Paving Plan – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 e. Grading and Erosion Control Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 f. Utility Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 g. Tree Preservation Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 h. Tree Mitigation Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 i. Landscape Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 j. Landscape Details Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 k. Site Plan/Electrical – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 l. Exterior Concept Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 m. Building Elevations Plans – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 215189v1A n. Stormwater Calculations – Phase 3 dated 2/17/2021 o. Sign Plans dated 2/17/2021 F. Subject to the conditions and modifications contained herein, the Redevelopment Plan Documents represent the nature, scope and configuration of the Project which the Developer is requesting the City to approve. G. The PUD-Master Plan and the Redevelopment Plan Documents indicate that the Property will be redeveloped in multiple phases: i. Phase 1 consisted of the demolition of the existing structure and the construction of a multi-tenant commercial building on Lot 2, Block 1, Roberts Addition to Arden Hills, which has been completed. ii. Phase 2 consisted of the demolition of the existing building on Lot 1, Block 1, Roberts Addition to Arden Hills and the construction of a new 16,922 square foot multi-tenant commercial building with a drive through, which has been completed. iii. Phase 3 will consist of the demolition of the existing multi-tenant building and the construction of a stand-alone 43,000 square foot grocery store on Lot 3, Block 1 of Roberts Additions to Arden Hills and related work on previous phases of the Property (the “Project”). 2. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION. On the 7th day of April, 2021, the City Planning Commission reviewed the application at a public hearing and after considering the application, the reports and comments of the City’s staff and consultants, reports and comments of the Developer, and other public comments; and, subject to conditions, recommended approval of the PUD Master Plan Amendment and the Phase 3-Final Plan. 3. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW. On the 26th day of April, 2021, the City Council reviewed the application, the reports and recommendations of the City’s staff and consultants; 215189v1A the reports and requests of the Developer; and the recommendations of the City Planning Commission; and has approved the PUD Master Plan Amendment and the Phase 3 – Final Plan, all subject to the terms and conditions contained herein. 4. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. In consideration of the City’s development approvals; in compliance with the City’s development regulations; and in consideration of the undertakings expressed herein, the parties agree: A. PUD – Master Plan. The PUD-Master Plan is issued subject to the following conditions: 1. The Developer shall continue to abide by the conditions of all previous Master PUD Agreements, permits, and reviews, except as hereinafter amended. 2. Prior to the City’s issuance of a grading permit, all items identified in the March 4, 2021 Engineering Division memorandum shall be addressed and all comments shall be adopted herein by reference. 3. The Project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans 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 the City Council. 4. The proposed structures shall conform to all other regulations of the City Code. 5. The Developer shall obtain a grading and erosion permit for Phase 3 from the City’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including, but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County prior to the start of any site activities. 6. The Developer shall install and maintain heavy-duty silt fencing and adequate erosion control measures around the entire construction site during construction to ensure that sediment and storm water do not leave the Project site. 7. The Developer shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. 215189v1A 8. Prior to the City’s issuance of a building permit, Developer shall submit to the City a landscape financial security equal to 125% of the cost of the landscaping to be installed for the Project. The Developer must submit a detailed cost estimate for the landscaping so City staff can determine the final amount. The landscape financial security shall be held by the City for two (2) full growing seasons. 9. Prior to the City’s issuance of a building permit, Developer shall submit to the City floor plans for the Project to be reviewed and approved by City staff. 10. The Developer shall obtain separate sign permits for all signs to be installed for the Project. 11. Current Ramsey County plans for the reconstruction of Lexington Avenue, dated December 31, 2020, indicate the construction of an eight (8’) foot sidewalk on the west side of Lexington Avenue abutting the Phase 3 Project. The Developer shall be responsible for constructing this sidewalk, as shown on the Master Plan, and/or sidewalk connections to the buildings it constructs as part of the Project, if the County does not construct the sidewalk and connection. The Developer shall use best efforts to obtain approvals from Ramsey County to construct a sidewalk along Lexington Avenue should the County not proceed with its Lexington Avenue improvements. If the County seeks payment from the City for the construction cost, the City may specially assess the Project for the proportional share of the construction cost of the sidewalk abutting the Project. 12. The Developer shall install and maintain a bike rack or other means to secure non-motorized bicycles for employees and customers. The size, location and style is subject to City staff review and approval. 13. This PUD-Master Plan and Phase 3-Final Plan shall be executed prior to the issuance of any development permits. 14. Except as otherwise modified herein, the development of Phase 3 and subsequent Phases shall comply with all applicable City Regulations. B. Phase 3 – Final Plan. 1. The Developer shall submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the estimated costs of site improvements including grading, utilities, and paving, prior to the issuance of any development permits. The Developer shall also submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the estimated costs for the removal of Lexington Avenue temporary access improvements, if needed. The financial surety shall be in 215189v1A the form of a letter of credit issued by a FDIC-insured bank, and be in a form acceptable to the City. The purpose of the letter of credit is to ensure that site improvements are completed in the event that the developer defaults on the development agreement 2. The Developer shall submit a cash escrow for site improvements, including grading, utilities, and paving, in the amount of $20,000 or 25 percent of the total estimated costs of the site improvements, whichever amount is less prior to the issuance of any development permits. The escrow will be used for City costs related to review, approval, and inspection of site improvements or any costs incurred by the City in the event of a developer default. 3. The Developer shall submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the estimated costs of landscaping prior to the issuance of a building permit. The financial surety shall be in the form of a letter of credit issued by a FDIC-insured bank. The purpose of the letter of credit is to ensure that landscaping is completed in the event that the developer defaults on the development agreement. The City will hold the letter of credit for two years after the installation of landscaping. The letter of credit should not expire during the two-year period. 4. The Developer shall submit a cash escrow for landscaping improvements in the amount of $15,000 or 25 percent of the estimated costs of landscaping, whichever amount is less, prior to the issuance of a building permit. The escrow will be held by the City for two years after installation of landscaping and used for City costs related to review, approval, and inspection of landscaping, or developer default. C. Lexington Avenue Access. The County is planning roadway improvements to Lexington Avenue and the County and City have entered into a Cooperative Agreement, dated December 1 2020, to share expenses for those roadway improvements. Those planned improvements include the construction of a signalized intersection aligned with Target Road to the east. The City has entered into an Agreement with Ramsey County dated May 3, 2021 that would allow the City or another party acting on its behalf to construct the planned improvements. Should the County fail to cause the planned improvements, which includes which includes the access work for the Project to be fully funded by January 1, 2022 and/or fails to award a contract for the improvement by February 1, 2022 the Developer will undertake to construct the improvement, all at Developer’s cost with a completion date no later than October 31, 2022. All plans and specifications must be reviewed and approved by the City and must be consistent with any permits or other approvals from Ramsey County or other approving agencies, and consistent with Exhibit A, KDP ROW Work, attached hereto. Should the Trigger Events outlined in Exhibit A occur, the City agrees that KDP, at KDP’s cost, shall perform the KDP ROW Work and complete same by the 215189v1A Grocery Deadline. The “KPD ROW Work” is that part of the ROW Work that includes the full access (right in/right out/left in/left out) traffic signal and intersection/curb cut/entry apron adjacent to and leading into the KDP Parcel which is located in Lexington Avenue and is labeled as the KDP ROW Work on the Site Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, the KDP ROW Work (a) is only that part of the ROW Work that falls in Lexington Avenue and is labeled as the KPD ROW Work on the Site Plan, (b) does not include the deceleration lane, and (c) includes the work necessary to install a temporary traffic signal. So long as KDP has obtained a building permit for the work it will perform on the KDP Parcel, the City acknowledges and agrees that KDP shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits to perform the KDP ROW Work and the KDP ROW Work shall be substantially consistent with the County. The KPD ROW Work shall be performed by KDP in accordance with the plans and specifications generated by the County. 5. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES. It is agreed that nothing contained in this Agreement or any referenced document shall be deemed or construed as creating a partnership or joint venture between the parties. 6. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and assigns, including without limitation, any and all future and present owners, tenants, occupants, licensee, mortgagee and any other parties with any interest in the Property. Should the Developer convey any lot or lots in the Project to a third party, the City and the owner of that lot or those lots may amend the Master Plan or other city approvals for development or use of those lots without the approval or consent of the Developer or other lot owners in the Project. Private agreements between the owners of lots within the Project for shared service or access and related matters necessary for the efficient use of the Project shall be the responsibility of the lot owners and shall not bind or restrict City authority to approve applications from any lot owner in the Project. 7. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the liability of the Developer shall be limited to its ownership of the Property. Upon sale or conveyance of any portion of the Property, the transferee shall be liable for all 215189v1A obligations of the Developer which relate to the portions of the Property so transferred and the transferor shall be automatically released from any further obligation, liability, right or responsibility in respect to such transfer. Moreover, nothing herein shall be construed to create a cause of action on behalf of the City against the Developer with respect to its business operations beyond the obligations set forth herein relating to the development and maintenance of the Property. 8. RECORDING OF DOCUMENT. This Agreement shall run with the Property 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 there under. 9. GOVERNING LAW. The City and the Developer agree that the laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations between the undersigned parties and performance under it without regard to principals of conflicts of law. The language of this Agreement is and shall be deemed a result of negotiations among the parties and the respective legal council and shall not be strictly extrude for or against any party. Each party agrees that any action arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be brought solely in the courts of the State of Minnesota, Second Judicial District, or the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. 10. EVENT OF DEFAULT. The occurrence of any of the following shall be considered an “event of default” and the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement: 1. Failure of the Developer to comply with any of the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement; and 2. Failure of the Developer to comply with any applicable ordinance or statute with respect to the development of the Property. 215189v1A 11. REMEDIES. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the City, in addition to any other remedy which may be available to it, shall be permitted to do any of the following: 1. City may make advances or take other steps to cure the default, and, where necessary, enter the Property for that purpose. The Developer shall pay all sums so advanced, or expenses incurred by the City, upon demand, with interest from the dates of such advances or expenses at the rate of 10% per annum or the maximum amount permitted by law if less than 10%. If no action taken by the City pursuant to this section shall be deemed to relieve the Developer from curing any such defaults to the extent that it is not cured by the City or from any other default hereunder. The City shall not be obligated, by virtue of the existence or exercise of this right, to perform any such act or cure any such default. The Developer shall save, indemnify, and hold harmless, including reasonable attorney’s fees, the City from liability or other damages which may be incurred as a result of the exercise of the City’s rights pursuant to this section. 2. Obtain an order from a Court of Competent Jurisdiction requiring the Developer to specifically perform its obligations pursuant to the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 3. Exercise any other remedies which may be available to it, including an action for damages. 4. Withhold the issuance of any building permits and/or prohibit the occupancy of all building which permits have been issued. 5. In addition to the remedies and amounts payable as set forth herein, upon the occurrence of an event of default, the Developer shall pay the City all fees and expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees, engineering and consultant fees incurred by the City as a result of an event of default, whether or not a lawsuit or action is formally undertaking. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Developer have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date and year first above written. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signature pages follow.] 215189v1A CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By: ______________________________________ David Grant, Mayor (SEAL) And _____________________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of _________________, 2021, by David Grant and by Julie Hanson, respectively the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Arden Hills, a Minnesota statutory city, on behalf of the City and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. __________________________________________ Notary Public 215189v1A LEXINGTON STATION, LLC A Minnesota Limited Liability Company By: ______________________________________ Nicholas S. Roberts, President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of _________________, 2021, by Nicholas S. Roberts, the President of Lexington Station, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company. __________________________________________ Notary Public 215189v1A KENSINGTON DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, INC., an Illinois corporation By ______________________________________ ____________________________ [print name] Its ___________________________ [title] STATE OF ______________ ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of _____________, 2021, by ___________________________, the _______________________ of Kensington Development Partners, Inc., an Illinois corporation, on behalf of said corporation. ______________________________________ Notary Public 215189v1A IMKD3 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By ______________________________________ ____________________________ [print name] Its ___________________________ [title] STATE OF ______________ ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of _____________, 2021, by ___________________________, the _______________________ of IMKD3 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company. ______________________________________ Notary Public 215189v1A ARDEN HILLS 1031 LLC, an Illinois limited liability company By ______________________________________ ____________________________ [print name] Its ___________________________ [title] STATE OF ______________ ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of _____________, 2021, by ___________________________, the _______________________ of Arden Hills 1031 LLC, an Illinois limited liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company. ______________________________________ Notary Public DRAFTED BY: DRAFTED BY: Campbell Knutson Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 JJJ 215189v1A MORTAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT AND PHASE 3 – FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LEXINGTON STATION (PC#21-004) 215189v1A EXHIBIT A TO MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT AND PHASE 3 – FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LEXINGTON STATION (PC#21-004) Page 1 of 2 CONSENT ITEM – 7G MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant SUBJECT: PC21-001 – Amended Master Planned Unit Development Agreement with Boston Scientific Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • The 16th Amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development Agreement with Boston Scientific based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-001 on April 26. 2021. This items requires a simple majority. Background On April 26, 2021, the City Council approved an amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development and Site Plan for Boston Scientific. The City Council approved a 17,450 square foot addition to the south side of Building 14, in the northwest corner of the Arden Hills campus near Innovation Way. The purpose of this facility is the development and production of lithium batteries for use in medical devices. The primary space in the facility is a ‘dry room,’ a space maintained at less than 1% relative humidity, which is required for handling lithium. Ancillary functions in the addition include office and conference space. An amendment to the Master PUD Agreement is required to be signed between the City and the developer before the issuance of development permits. The City Attorney has prepared the Agreement and the document has been reviewed and approved by the Applicant and staff (Attachment A). Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following motion language for this case. Page 2 of 2 1. Approval: Motion to approve the 16th Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement with Boston Scientific based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21- 001 on April 26, 2021. 2. Denial: Motion to deny the 16th Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement with Boston Scientific based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-001 on April 26, 2021: the City Council should identify findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 3. Table: Motion to table the 16th Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement with Boston Scientific based on the City Council approval of Planning Case 21-001 on April 26, 2021. Budget Impact NA Attachments A. Master Planned Unit Development Agreement 1 215196v1 (Reserved for recording) CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 16TH AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION (Planning Case #21-001) 1. PARTIES. This Amendment is dated the 24th day of May, 2021, and is entered into by and between the City of Arden Hills, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and Boston Scientific Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns (“Boston Scientific” and/or “Applicant”). 2. RECITALS. A. On November 12, 2002, the City Council approved a Planned Unit Development entitled “Guidant Campus Master Plan – Prepared by Guidant Corporation for the City of Arden Hills, September, 2002” (“Master Plan”) which guides the future development of property located at 4100 Hamline Avenue North, situated in the City of Arden Hills, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, and legally described as: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Boston Scientific Campus (“Property”). B. The Master Plan was previously amended on fifteen (15) occasions. The last amendment, being the 15th Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement, was recorded on January 17, 2018 with the Ramsey County Recorder as document number A04694265. The Master Plan and all previous amendments run with the land and are binding on successors in interest to Guidant Corporation, including Boston Scientific. C. On March 9, 2021 Boston Scientific submitted an application requesting approval of a 16th Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement to construct a 17,450 square foot addition to the south side of Building 14, which is in the northwest corner of the 2 215196v1 Arden Hills campus near Innovation Way (the “Project”). As stated in the application and project narrative submitted by Boston Scientific, the purpose of the Project is for the development and production of lithium batteries for use in medical devices. The primary space in the facility is a ‘dry room’, a space maintained at less than one (1%) percent relative humidity, which is required for handling lithium. E. For building construction or site modifications not included on the approved Master Plan, an Amendment to the Planned Unit Development Agreement is required. The proposed Project is not identified on the approved Campus Master Plan. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW. On April 7, 2021, the City Planning Commission reviewed the application at a public hearing and after considering the application, the reports and comments of the City’s staff, the reports and comments of Boston Scientific, and other public comments, and subject to conditions, recommended approval of the 16th Amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW. On April 26, 2021, the City Council reviewed the application, the reports and recommendations of City’s staff, the reports of Boston Scientific, the recommendations of the City Planning Commission, additional testimony from nearby residents, and has approved the 16th Amendment to Master Planned Unit Development Agreement, all subject to the terms and conditions herein contained. 5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 1. All conditions of the original Planned Unit Development shall remain in full force and effect. 2. Prior to the City’s issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall address all items identified in the February 17, 2021 Engineering Division memorandum and all comments shall be adopted herein by reference. 3. The Project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted or as referenced at the City Council meeting of April 26, 2021 as amended by the conditions of approval, including the planting of new or relocated evergreen trees to serve as additional buffer from the existing building and addition and neighboring residential properties . Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 4. Applicant shall conform all proposed structures to all applicable regulations in the City Code. 5. Applicant shall obtain from the City’s Engineering Division the grading and erosion permit prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. 3 215196v1 6. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies including, but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District and Ramsey County prior to the star of any site activities. 7. The Applicant shall install and maintain heavy-duty silt fencing and adequate erosion control measures around the entire construction site during construction to ensure that sediment and storm water does not leave the project site. 8. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. 9. Prior to the City’s issuance of a building permit, Applicant shall submit to the City a landscape financial security equal to 125% of the cost of the landscaping to be installed for the Project. The Applicant must submit a detailed cost estimate for the landscaping so City staff can determine the final amount. The landscape financial security shall be held by the City for two (2) full growing seasons. 10. The Applicant shall submit to the City, prior to the issuance of a building permit, a materials board to be approved in writing by City staff. 11. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. The Applicant must provide photometric calculations for the lighting at the west property line. 12. Once the Project is completed and the equipment is operational, Applicant must conduct a noise study at the time of completion and occupancy permit and six month following Project completion and occupancy to ensure the facility does not exceed maximum notice standards. If necessary, Applicant will take steps to correct any deficiencies. 13. Applicant will complete yearly noise studies on Building 14 and provide the results and findings to the City and take steps to correct any deficiencies that are identified by the studies. 14. The current and subsequent owners of the Property shall continue to abide by the conditions of all previous Development Agreements, Master Planned Unit Development approvals, and subsequent Planned Unit Development Amendments, and Planned Unit Development approvals. 15. Upon Project completion and occupancy, applicant will remove the existing cooling equipment located on the northern area of the roof that is being replaced by the installation of new units as part of this Project. 4 215196v1 6. ACKNOWLEDGMENT/COMPLIANCE. Boston Scientific acknowledges and understands the conditions of approval and agrees to comply with such conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the date and year first above written. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signatures contained on the following pages.] 5 215196v1 SIGNATURE PAGE 16TH AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By: _____________________________________ David Grant, Mayor (SEAL) By: _____________________________________ Dave Perrault, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2021, by David Grant and by Dave Perrault, respectively the Mayor and City Administrator of the City of Arden Hills, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ___________________________________ Notary Public 6 215196v1 SIGNATURE PAGE 16TH AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION By: __________________________________ Lorne Rothbauer, Its Facilities Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of _____________, 2021, by Lorne Rothbauer, the Director of Facilities, for Boston Scientific Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. ___________________________________ Notary Public DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL, KNUTSON Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 JJJ Page 1 of 2 CONSENT ITEM – 7H MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, Interim Public Works Director SUBJECT: AHSL Partners, LLC (Trident Development) - Maintenance Agreements required by Rice Creek Watershed District Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council shall consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Agreement Regarding Watershed Maintenance Agreement between AHSL Partners LLC and City of Arden Hills. • Stormwater Maintenance Agreement between the Rice Creek Watershed District and City of Arden Hills. This action requires a simple majority vote of the Council. Background On April 26, 2021 Council adopted a motion to approve the amended Stormwater and Recreational Facilities Operations and Maintenance Agreement for Trident Development, Planning Case 19- 002. As seen in Attachment A, Basin #20 is located on City property but the City is requiring the property owner to maintain. The Rice Creek Watershed District currently does not have a protocol for stormwater facility maintenance obligations by private parties for facilities located on property owned by a public entity. The recommended way to proceed with the stormwater maintenance obligation would is to have two separate documents for each respective facility, where AHSL Partners LLC would complete a maintenance declaration for Basin 10 and the City would complete Page 2 of 2 a maintenance agreement with the District for Basin 20. The City could then defer to a separate agreement between the City and AHSL Partners LLC. The presented Agreements do not change any requirements already adopted for the basins between the property owner and the City. This is simply a procedural step for the Rice Creek Watershed District. Budget Impact: NA Attachments: Attachment A – Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan Attachment B - Agreement Regarding Watershed Maintenance Agreement between AHSL Partners LLC and City of Arden Hills Attachment C - Stormwater Maintenance Agreement between the Rice Creek Watershed District and City of Arden Hills Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRC5GRADING, DRAINAGE, & EROSION CONTROL PLAN f:\jobs\7781 - 7800\7781 - summit - arden hills\cad c3d\engineering\7781_grade.dwgSave Date:03/08/21of9 TRIDENT DEVELOPMENT, LLC 3601 18th Street South, Suite 103 St. Cloud, MN 56301REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR02/25/21ARDEN HILLS SENIOR LIVING Arden Hills, MinnesotaJoseph T. Radach, PEName:Signature:Date:02/25/21License #:45889I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State of Minnesota1. 02/25/21 RCWD Submittal2. 03/10/21 Permit Set AGREEMENT REGARDING WATERSHED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT REGARDING WATERSHED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into as of the ______ day of _____________, 2021, by and between AHSL PARTNERS LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“AHSL”) and the CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”). RECITALS A. AHSL is the fee owner of certain real property located in Ramsey County, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "AHSL Property"); and B. The City is the fee owner of certain real property located in Ramsey County, Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit B attached hereto (the “City Property”) (the AHSL Property and City Property are collectively referred to as the “Properties”); and C. AHSL plans to construct and maintain a biofiltration system on the City Property (“Basin”) pursuant to that certain Amended and Restated Stormwater and Recreational Facilities Operation, Maintenance and Easement Agreement dated ______________, 2021 and recorded on ___________, 2021 in the Office of the County Recorder in and for Ramsey County, Minnesota, as Document No. _______________ (the “OEM”). D. The Rice Creek Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers set forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D and a drainage authority pursuant to chapter 103E of the laws of the State of Minnesota, (“RCWD”) has required that the City and RCWD enter into that certain Maintenance Agreement – Stormwater Management Facilities – Between the Rice Creek Watershed District and City of Arden Hills, dated _______________, 2021 (the “Watershed Maintenance Agreement”). E. The parties desire to have AHSL perform all of the City’s maintenance and payment obligations set forth in the Watershed Maintenance Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants of the parties set forth herein and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Performance of Maintenance Obligations. AHSL hereby agrees to perform all of the inspection and maintenance obligations set forth in Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement in accordance with the terms of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement. Owner shall construct the Stormwater Facilities in accordance with the plans. 2. Performance of Payment Obligations. Provided the City promptly delivers to AHSL a copy of any notice delivered by RCWD to the City pursuant to Section 5 of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement (and in no event later than 5 business days after such notice is delivered to the City), then, in the event RCWD takes steps that it deems reasonable to correct the deficiency detailed in said notice in accordance with the terms of said Section 5 of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement, AHSL shall pay directly to RCWD all amounts due to RCWD pursuant to said Section 5 of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement in connection with the associated work performed by RCWD. 3. City Obligations. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, if the City conveys into private ownership a fee interest in all or any portion of the City Property, then the City shall be obligated to comply with, and perform the obligations set forth in, Section 7 of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement, and AHSL shall have no obligations in connection with the obligations set forth in said Section 7 of the Watershed Maintenance Agreement. 4. Notices. All notices or copies of notices required or permitted to be delivered under this Agreement shall either be personally delivered or be sent by certified or registered mail and addressed as follows: To the Owner: AHSL Partners LLC Attention: Roger Fink 3601 18th Street South, Suite 103 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56301 To the City: City of Arden Hills Attention: City Administrator 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 All notices given hereunder shall be deemed given when personally delivered or two business days after being placed in the mail properly addressed as provided herein. [Signature Pages Follow] [Signature Page 1 of 2 to Agreement Regarding Watershed Maintenance Agreement] AHSL: AHSL PARTNERS LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company By: Jeffrey Drown Its: President [Signature Page 2 of 2 to Agreement Regarding Watershed Maintenance Agreement] CITY: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By: ____________________________________ David Grant, Mayor By: ____________________________________ Dave Perrault, City Administrator EXHIBIT A TO AGREEMENT REGARDING WATERSHED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Legal Description of the AHSL Property Lot 1, Block 1, ARDEN HILLS SENIOR LIVING, Ramsey County, Minnesota. EXHIBIT B TO AGREEMENT REGARDING WATERSHED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Legal Description of the City Property Outlot A, ARDEN HILLS SENIOR LIVING, Ramsey County, Minnesota. 1 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Stormwater Management Facilities Between the Rice Creek Watershed District and City of Arden Hills This Maintenance Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the Rice Creek Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers set forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D and a drainage authority pursuant to chapter 103E of the laws of the State of Minnesota, (RCWD), and City of Arden Hills, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Permittee”). Recitals and Statement of Purpose WHEREAS pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 103D.345, the RCWD has adopted and implements Rule C, Stormwater Management Plans; WHEREAS Rule C imposes certain requirements, which the Permittee will meet in this case by constructing and maintaining stormwater management facilities as identified on the site plan incorporated into this Agreement as Exhibit A; WHEREAS in accordance with Rule C and as a condition of Permit 19-063, the Permittee’s obligation to maintain these stormwater facilities must be memorialized by a recorded maintenance declaration or, alternatively, a maintenance agreement establishing the Permittee’s perpetual maintenance obligation; WHEREAS the Permittee and the RCWD execute this Agreement to fulfill the condition of Permit 19-063, and concur that it is binding and rests on mutual valuable consideration; THEREFORE: 1. The Permittee, at its cost, will inspect and maintain the stormwater management facilities delineated and labeled on Exhibit A as follows: 2 Proposed BMP Description Location Pretreatment Volume provided EOF Biofiltration Basin 20 Western Property Line Sump and grassy swales 5,357± cubic feet below the outlet 907± (verify of final plans) 2. The Permittee will: a. Obtain certified as-built contours for all ponds and inspect the ponds, and associated outlet structures, culverts and outfall structures one year and two years after the completion of as-builts, including measuring sediment accumulation by a method accurate to within one vertical foot. Thereafter, the Permittee will perform inspections in the fifth year after pond completion and every five years thereafter. If inspections show that sediment may accumulate to 50 percent of wet storage volume, or 25 percent of dry detention volume, within less than five years, the Permittee will inspect more frequently. Pond function will be considered inadequate if sediment accumulation has decreased the wet storage volume by 50 percent or dry detention volume by 25 percent, and the Permittee will restore the basin to its original design elevations and dimensions and restore vegetation in disturbed areas within one year of the inspection date. b. Inspect stormwater infiltration and filtration basins, including rain gardens, annually, to preserve live storage capacity at or above the design volume. Remove vegetation, maintain healthy plant growth and remove excess sediment and debris to ensure that the facilities continue to perform per design. c. Inspect grit chambers, sump catch basins and sump manholes annually. Accumulated sediment and debris will be removed so that the each facility continues to operate as designed and erosion or structural problems are corrected. d. Inspect conveyances and other structures annually. Ensure preservation of designed hydraulic capacity. 3. If the Permittee conveys into private ownership a fee interest in all or any portion of the public property that is subject to this Agreement, it must require as a condition of 3 sale, and enforce: (a) that the purchaser record a declaration on the property incorporating the stormwater management facility maintenance requirements of this Agreement; and (b) that recordation occur either before any encumbrance is recorded on the property or, if after, only as accompanied by a subordination and consent executed by the encumbrance holder ensuring that the declaration will run with the land in perpetuity. If the Permittee conveys into public ownership a fee interest in all or any portion of the property that is subject to this Agreement, it must require as a condition of the purchase and sale agreement that the purchaser accept an assignment of all obligations vested under this Agreement. 4. This Agreement is in force for five years from the date on which it is fully executed and will renew automatically for five-year terms unless terminated by the parties. This Agreement may be amended only in a writing signed by the parties. 5. Any notice under this declaration shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, or delivered to the following address: City of Arden Hills Attention: Public Works Director 1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 With a copy to: AHSL Partners, LLC Attn: Roger Fink 3601 18th Street So., #103 St. Cloud, MN 56301 rogerf@tridentdevelomentmn.com 763-412-7609 Permittee may change this address by a certified letter to the RCWD referencing the permit number. 6. The recitals are incorporated as a part of this Agreement. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement. RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT By _______________________________ Date: _____________ RCWD Administrator, Nick Tomczik CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By: _______________________________ Date: ______________ David Grant, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM and EXECUTION By: ________________________________ Date: _______________ Its Attorney 5 EXHIBIT A [SITE PLAN/MAP WITH ALL FACILITIES DENOTED, NEXT PAGE] Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRC5GRADING, DRAINAGE, & EROSION CONTROL PLAN f:\jobs\7781 - 7800\7781 - summit - arden hills\cad c3d\engineering\7781_grade.dwgSave Date:03/08/21of9 TRIDENT DEVELOPMENT, LLC 3601 18th Street South, Suite 103 St. Cloud, MN 56301REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR02/25/21ARDEN HILLS SENIOR LIVING Arden Hills, MinnesotaJoseph T. Radach, PEName:Signature:Date:02/25/21License #:45889I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State of Minnesota1. 02/25/21 RCWD Submittal2. 03/10/21 Permit Set Page 1 DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Dave Perrault, City Administrator SUBJECT: Planning Commission Appointment Budgeted Amount: Cost to Date: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Resolution 2021-028 Appointing Kurtis Weber to the City of Arden Hills Planning Commission. All items need a simple majority for action unless otherwise noted. Discussion Kurtis Weber is currently an alternate on the Planning Commission; following the resignation of a different Planning Commissioner it was the recommendation of the Council Liaison, Mayor and Chair of the Planning Commission to appoint Kurtis Weber to a full-member. Budget Impact N/A Attachment Attachment A: Resolution 2021-028 Appointing Kurtis Weber to the Planning Commission CONSENT ITEM – 7I MEMORANDUM To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2021-028 RESOLUTION APPOINTING KURTIS WEBER TO THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the City Council annually appoints residents to serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council for planning and zoning issues on the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on March 23, 2020, the City Council appointed Kurtis Weber as an Alternate to the Planning Commission with a term expiration of December 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, due to the resignation of a regular seated Planning Commissioner resulting in a vacancy, it is recommended that Kurtis Weber be appointed as a regular seated member of the Planning Commission. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council appoints Kurtis Weber to serve on the Planning Commission with a term expiring on December 31, 2022. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 24th DAY OF MAY 2021. ____________________________________ David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 1 of 7 PUBLIC HEARING – 9A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case # 21-011 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Chick-fil-A, represented by HR Green Property Location: 3855 Lexington Avenue Request: Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider the Following: Hold the required public hearing for Planning Case 21-011 for an application for a Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development for a project located at 3855 Lexington Avenue (“Subject Property”). The City Council will be asked to make a formal decision regarding the application under Agenda Item 10A. Background 1. Proposal and Use: The proposed development site is the location of the former Perkins and is approximately 66,853 square feet (1.535 acres) in size. HR Green, on behalf of Chick-fil-A has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development. The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building on this site and construct a 4,995 square foot fast food restaurant, with dual drive-through lanes. There are two canopies, totaling approximately 3,654 square feet covering the ordering and pick-up areas. There is also a 50-stall parking lot. The Chick-fil-A building is proposed to be located on the west side of the site, with the storefront facing Lexington Avenue. The applicant is choosing to face the store front towards Lexington Avenue to attract potential new customers that are traveling along the major arterial roadway. Positioning the building in the given layout allows the applicant to begin the drive-thru lane at the north end of the lot and run it along the west property line. The proposed patio will feature 6 tables for a total of 24 outdoor seats. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 2 of 7 2. Previous City Council Review The City Council discussed this project at a Work Session on March 15, 2021. Minutes from the meeting is included in Attachment J. Plan Evaluation A PUD proposal shall identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning requirements as well as the reasons why the modifications would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the purpose of the underlying B-3 District. Modifications to these requirements may be granted by the City without a variance through the PUD process. A Conditional Use Permit is required for drive-up windows in the B-3 district. City Code Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. 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 and the community, 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; 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. A full evaluation of the proposal was presented to the Planning Commission on May 5, 2021. The memo to the Planning Commission on this case is provided in Attachment H. Draft minutes from the meeting are included in Attachment I. 1. Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review A. B-3 District Provisions – Meets Requirements Under the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, this site is guided as Retail Mixed Use on the land use plan and is zoned B-3. Fast food restaurants are a permitted use within this district. The proposed plans are attached as Attachment C. The table below provides the performance standards for the B-3 District and the preliminary analysis for the proposed development: The proposed development meets the general district provision requirements. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 3 of 7 Ordinance Requirements B-3 District Standards Proposed Development Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.8 0.07 Maximum Structure Coverage 40% 12.9% Minimum Landscape Lot Area 25% 30% Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 ft. 62 ft. (patio)/84 ft. (building) Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 ft. 160 ft. Minimum Side Yard Setback 20 ft. (min)/ 40 ft. (total) 30 ft. (min) / 150 ft. (total) Minimum Side Yard Setback (Corner) 50 ft. 120 ft. Maximum Building Height 35 ft. 21 ft. 2. Design Standards A. Accessory Structures – Section 1325.01 – Flexibility Requested The applicant is proposing to install two free-standing canopies over the drive-thru lane: An order point canopy to be located north of the building, setback 14.7 feet from the property line; and an order meal delivery canopy to be located on the west side of the building, over the pick- up window, setback 2.3 feet from the property line. The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 10 feet from the property line in the B-3 District. B. Drive-Through Facilities – Section 1325.04 – Flexibility Requested Chick-fil-A’s drive-thru operation consists of two lanes of customer ordering and two lanes of meal fulfillment. This dual flex lane concept allows the restaurant operator to use the outer lane as either a second meal fulfillment lane or as a by-pass lane at their discretion to properly support the operational needs of the business. If/when the outer lane is not in use, a series of magnetic delineators will be used to merge cars back into one lane for meal fulfillment at the window. The pick-up window will be a multi-function door that can also function as a window. The purpose of the drive thru door is to allow team members to stage more meals and beverages indoors while they are delivering meals outside, directly to vehicle windows. The door allows easier access to the meals without passing them through a small window. During non-peak times or periods of inclement weather, the door can be closed and will function as a standard pickup window. The applicant is requesting flexibility of setback requirements for the two canopies proposed on the site. A dual drive-thru lane is proposed to start on the north side of the parking lot, curl around to the west side of building, and end on the south side of the building. The drive thru lane has been positioned in a way to promote circulation on the exterior of the site in order to prevent backups within the parking lot. The applicant is proposing to install two free-standing canopies over the drive-thru lane: An order point canopy to be located north of the building, setback 14.7 feet from the property line; and an order meal delivery canopy to be located on the west side of the building, over the pick-up window, setback 2.3 feet from the property line. The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 10 feet from the property line in the B-3 District. Section 1325.04 of the Zoning Code lists special requirements for drive-up facilities. One of these requirements states no drive up facility shall be located within 1,320’ of another facility. The nearest drive-up facility is the Starbucks, located to the south across Red Fox Road. Section 1320.09 allows this requirement to be waived if the following conditions are met: City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 4 of 7 A. The operation consists of one or more drive-up windows and is an integral part of a building containing one or more other allowed uses, or the operation is part of an architecturally unified complex containing two or more businesses using drive-up windows B. Shared access drives and shared parking are utilized by all such businesses using drive-up windows in said building or complex. C. Only one building or architecturally unified complex containing two or more businesses using drive-up windows will be allowed in addition to one freestanding business using a drive-up window. D. The architecture and the site, grading, circulation, landscaping, screening and signage plans shall unify the appearance and function of the complex or building. E. An architecturally unified complex may consist of one or more buildings on one or more parcels if the intent of providing a unified appearance and function is not compromised. F. The applicant shall submit a circulation plan that demonstrates that the use will not interfere or reduce the safety of non-motorized movements, specifically pedestrian and bicyclists. Section 1325.04 also requires any electronic devices, including loudspeakers, be located at least 50’ from any lot line. The nearest order box on the west side of the site is located approximately 20’ from the west property boundary. The applicant is requesting flexibility from this requirement. C. Exterior Materials – Meets Requirements At least seventy-five (75) percent of the exterior building materials should be made of brick masonry, tile masonry, natural stone or its synthetic equivalent, decorative concrete plank, transparent glass or any combination thereof. Trim and other accent or decorative features may be metal, wood, split faced block, EIFS, or stucco. Undesirable materials 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, and mirrored or reflective glass. The proposed building elevations consist of brick veneer with metal coping. During the concept plan discussion, the applicant stated the material finish would be brick. Building elevations are shown in Attachment D. The applicant has submitted a materials board to staff. The figure below illustrates the proposed building materials. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 5 of 7 D. Lighting – Meets Requirements The Applicant has submitted a lighting plan that identifies general pole heights and lumen levels; however, the lumen levels are not extended to the property lines. As a condition of approval, all lighting shall be downward directed shoebox style with flush lenses. Details about the proposed lighting are found in Attachment E. During review of the concept plan, the Council expressed concern about the lighting along the west side of the building, and how that might impact the adjacent hotel. The applicant indicated they are installing additional landscaping along the west side and have removed the sign from the west side of the building to mitigate lighting. E. Screening and Fencing – Meets Requirements Screens and fencing help minimize adverse impacts of public nuisances, such as noise. The proposed dumpsters are located on the northeast side of the building, and are enclosed with galvanized panels. The mechanical equipment is location on the roof and is screened by a short parapet wall. F. Landscaping and Tree Preservation – Meets Requirements The Zoning Code lists several criteria for landscaping and tree preservation, including minimum caliper inches, tree mitigation, street frontage, perennials and shrubberies, planting islands and tree selection. The specifics of these are discussed more fully in the Planning Commission report. This proposal meets these requirements. G. Drive-Through Landscaping – Flexibility Requested Section 1325.04, Subdivision 2, requires landscaping on lots used for drive-up windows to the minimum widths: Front Lot Line 20’ Side Lot Line 10’ Rear Lot Line 15’ The parking and drive-thru lane on the east side of the property will be located approximately 11’ from the property line, which is consistent with the existing pavement. On the west side of the property, the curb of the drive thru lane is proposed to be located about 5’ from the west lot line. Along the front lot line, the applicant is proposing the parking lot be setback 20’ from the lot line. The applicant is requesting flexibility in the side and rear yard setbacks to allow for the dual drive-through lanes. H. Snow Storage – Meets Requirements Adequate area should be designed for snow storage such that clear visibility shall be afforded from the property to any public street. The Applicant is proposing to store snow on the north corner of the site. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 6 of 7 I. Parking, Loading and Circulation – Flexibility Requested Parking requirements for fast food restaurants include 15 stacking spaces for each customer pick- up window plus one space for each 2 seats. This use requires a total of 58 parking spaces and 15 stacking spaces. The applicant is proposing a total of 50 parking spaces and 40 stacking spaces. The parking lot has been configured to maximize circulation and minimize backups given the drive-thru facility. Access to the parking lot will be provided via a one-way entrance off Red Fox Road and a one-way exit onto Red Fox Road. J. Drainage, Wetlands and Flood Plain – Meets Requirements The city code requires stormwater management be provided to meet water quantity, infiltration, and water quality requirements. The application identifies the construction of a stormwater pond located to the north of the building. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater facilities. K. Freestanding Signs – Flexibility Requested Properties in Sign District 5 are allowed one freestanding sign measuring up to 100 square feet in area and not exceeding 16 feet in height. The Applicant would like to utilize the monument sign standards previously approved in the original PUD. The approved monument signs measure 26 feet in height and have a total sign copy area of 171.9 square feet (see Attachment F). L. Sign Code – Meets Requirements This proposal includes freestanding signs, wall signs, and drive-thru menu boards, The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing Perkins sign on the north side of the property by changing the sign face. A freestanding sign is also proposed at the corner of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road. This sign is 16’ in height and includes 57 square feet of sign area. The applicant is proposing two styles of wall signs, one 35 square feet in area and one 57 square feet in area. Both styles are internally lit. One of these signs will be located on each face of the building, as shown in the Sign Plan (Attachment F). There are two drive-through menu boards located along the northwest side of the drive-through lane. The menu board is 6.5’ in height and approximately 32.5 square feet in area. M. Traffic Study A traffic study has been prepared (see Attachment G). The study reviewed existing operations within the area, evaluated traffic impacts to the roadway network, and recommended improvements to the proposed development site. In summary, the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 200 a.m. peak hour, 163 p.m. peak hour, and 2,352 daily site trips. Results of the year 2023 build operations analysis indicate that all intersections are expected to operate at a LOS C or better during peak hours. With the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project, the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to continue to operate at a LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. The report concludes the proposed development would not result in significant degradation in peak period traffic operations and level of service. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 24, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\CC Packet\PH Page 7 of 7 Public Notice and Comments A Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on May 14, 2021. A public neighborhood notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Attachments A. Project Narrative B. Location Map C. 11x17 Civil Plan Sets D. Architectural Plans E. Lighting and Photometric Plan F. Signage Plans G. Traffic Study H. Planning Commission Memo I. Draft Planning Commission Minutes J. March 15, 2021 City Council Work Session Minutes K. Public Comments Received L. City Council Presentation Chick-fil-A, Inc. | 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349-2998 | chick-fil-a.com | 404.765.8000 Project Narrative Site Summary Chick-fil-A (CFA) is proposing to redevelop a 1.535-acre parcel located at 3855 Lexington Avenue in the City of Arden Hills. The site is currently developed with an approximate 6,131 square foot restaurant building and associated parking lot. CFA is proposing to raze the building and redevelop the site with a new single story 4,995 square foot free-standing restaurant, dual drive-thru facility with free-standing canopies for the CFA, 50 stall parking lot, and associated utilities. The property is currently zoned B-3 (Service Business District) which permits restaurants with drive-thru facilities via Conditional Use Permit. Although operating hours have not yet been defined, many CFA restaurants are generally open Monday thru Saturday, between 6:00 AM to 10:30 PM, closed on Sundays. We are anticipating that a total of 15-20 employees will be at the restaurant during the largest shift. Construction is anticipated to start Fall 2021 and open in early 2022. As stated previously a conditional use permit will be required for the proposed drive-thru facility. Chick-fil-A believes that the conditional use request is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The subject property lies within an existing commercial zoning district which allows restaurant uses. Per the Comprehensive plan, the property is planned to have a future commercial land use. CFA believes that allowing the drive-thru lane facility will not adversely affect the surrounding area. The proposed drive-thru lane will not endanger the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the owners & occupants of the surrounding land and the community as a whole. The site has been configured in a way to create a separation between drive-thru and dine-in traffic for the CFA restaurant. Doing so promotes safe and efficient traffic flow throughout the site. The CFA drive-thru lane has been designed to accommodate a sufficient queue of cars which will help prevent backups onto adjacent roadways. The proposed CFA development will not cause any excess noise, odors, dust, air pollution, waste, or any other nuisance characteristics that would adversely affect neighboring properties and the surrounding area. Lot Layout/Configuration The CFA building is proposed to be located on the west side of the site, with the storefront facing Lexington Avenue. Providing ample vision will be key to the success of the CFA restaurant as it will attract potential new customers that are traveling along the major arterial roadway. Positioning the building in the given layout allows CFA to best utilize the site with the drive-thru lane starting at the north end, then running along the west property line. The proposed patio will feature 6 tables for a total of 24 outdoor seats. Parking will be located east of the proposed building. Per City Code, the restaurant use will require a total of 58 spaces and the total parking being provided is 50 spaces. The parking lot has been configured to maximize circulation and minimize backups given the drive-thru facility. Access to the parking lot will be provided via a one-way entrance off Red Fox Road and a one-way exit onto Red Fox Road. Chick-fil-A, Inc. | 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349-2998 | chick-fil-a.com | 404.765.8000 A dual bin trash enclosure for CFA has been situated at the north side of the parking lot in order to provide maximum separation from the Red Fox Road frontage and the Lexington Avenue frontage. A sufficiently long CFA dual drive-thru lane is proposed to start on the north side of the parking lot, curling around to the west side of building, and ending on the south side of the CFA building. The drive-thru lane has been positioned in a way to promote circulation on the exterior of the site in order to prevent backups within the parking lot. CFA is proposing to install two free-standing canopies over the drive-thru lane: An order point canopy to be located north of the CFA building; and an order meal delivery canopy to be located on the west side of the CFA building, over the pick-up window. CFA’s drive-thru operation consists of two lanes of customer ordering and two lanes of meal fulfillment. This dual flex lane concept allows the restaurant operator to use the outer lane as either a second meal fulfillment lane or as a by-pass lane at their discretion to properly support the operational needs of his or her business. If/when the outer lane is not in use, a series of magnetic delineators will be used to merge cars back into one lane for meal fulfillment at the window. Providing the two full lanes gives the operator the most flexibility to service their guests effectively and efficiently. Additionally, Chick-fil-a has a philosophy of encouraging a team member forward drive-thru operation to provide a personal guest experience and increase overall efficiency. CFA has achieved this through incorporating the ability for team members to take meal orders & payment face-to-face prior to guests arriving at the meal fulfillment area and through team members executing outdoor meal delivery in the meal fulfillment area. Enhancements have also been made at the pick-up window through implementation of a drive thru door. The enhancement constitutes replacing the typical window with a multi-function door, that also can function as a window. The purpose of the drive thru door is to allow team members to stage more meals and beverages indoors while they are delivering meals outside, directly to vehicle windows. The door allows easier access to the meals without passing them through a small window. This change helps to create an efficient drive-thru operation and improve the overall guest experience. During non-peak times or periods of inclement weather, the door can be closed and will function as a standard pickup window. Innovative features such as these are what have earned Chick-fil-A best drive-thru in America for ten consecutive years as determined by a nationally recognized quick service authority. Out of all the quick service restaurants surveyed, Chick-fil-A scored the highest in order accuracy, friendliness of the order takers, and speed of service. Deliveries to the site will occur both after operating hours via key drops and during non-peak hours of operating days. The semi-truck deliveries will be made overnight and would occur 1-2 times a week with the smaller box truck type deliveries occur daily. The Chick-fil-A site will be attractively landscaped to provide year-round interest and to meet the intent of the City Code. Curb depressions will be installed within the parking lot and drive-thru lane to assist in snow removal. A 12-foot wide depression is proposed to be located just north of the trash enclosure which will allow Chick-fil-A, Inc. | 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349-2998 | chick-fil-a.com | 404.765.8000 all parking lot snow to be pushed into the southern stormwater basin. An additional 12-foot wide depression will be positioned on the north side of the drive-thru lane which will allow snow to be pushed in the northern stormwater basin. Signage CFA’s signage will be paramount and has been designed to notify potential customers that are approaching the site from multiple directions. In an effort to assist them in locating the restaurant, signage is proposed on all four elevations: north, south, east, & west. Additionally, CFA is proposing the reuse of an existing pylon sign at the northwest corner of the property. This sign will be crucial for notifying potential customers traveling on Interstate 694. There will also be a monument sign along the Red Fox Road frontage. Appropriate signage will be key to the success of the restaurant. Building Elevations The Chick-fil-A building has been designed with a mixture of brick veneer, prefinished metal, and glass. The mechanical units for heating/cooling will be located on the roof and will be screened via a parapet wall. Accent light via wall sconces are proposed around the building to provide nighttime interest. The trash enclosure will incorporate the same colored brick veneer as the building to maintain consistency. The dumpsters inside of the enclosure will be screened from the front by durable double gates with prefinished plastic lumber (weathered wood). The Chick-fil-A Story It’s a story that began when a man named Truett Cathy was born in 1921 in the small town of Eatonton, Georgia, about 80 miles from Atlanta, where he grew up. Truett’s mom ran a boarding house, which meant she had to cook a lot of meals – but Truett helped, and he paid close attention, and picked up cooking and serving tips that would come in quite handy later. Along the way, he also learned to be quite the entrepreneur. He sold magazines door to door, delivered newspapers all over the neighborhood, and sold Coca-Colas from a stand in his front yard and all the while he was learning the importance of good customer service. After serving his country in World War II, in 1946 Truett used the business experience he gained growing up and opened his first restaurant with his brother, Ben, calling it the Dwarf Grill (later renamed the Dwarf House). Hamburgers were on the menu but, ironically, no chicken because he said it took too long to cook. Truett worked hard with that first venture, but considered Sunday to be a day of rest, for himself and his employees and as you know, that’s a practice that Chick-fil-A honors to this day. The early 60s would be a pivotal time in Truett’s life. That’s when he first took a boneless breast of chicken and spent the next few years experimenting until he found the perfect mix of seasonings. He breaded and cooked the filet so that it stayed juicy, put it between two buttered buns and added two pickles for extra measure and in 1963 unveiled what we now know as the Chick-fil-A Chicken Sandwich. As far as the name, Truett says it just came to him. He had it registered that year in 1963 Chick-fil-A, Inc. | 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349-2998 | chick-fil-a.com | 404.765.8000 and created a logo that has been updated but is still very similar to the original designed 50 years ago. The Chick-fil-A sandwich was a huge hit, and in 1967 Truett opened his first Chick-fil-A restaurant in an enclosed shopping mall where, up to that point, food normally wasn’t sold. Frankly, the developer of the Greenbriar Shopping Center in Atlanta wasn’t too keen on serving food inside his mall, but as we know that turned out to be a very smart decision on his part, and especially Truett’s. Today, Truett is recognized as the pioneer in quick-service mall food. It wasn’t until 1986 that Chick- fil-A opened its first “freestanding” restaurant on North Druid Hills Road in Atlanta. Today there are over 2,300 restaurants locations in 47 states and it’s become so popular that people literally camp out in the parking lot the night before a grand opening of a new restaurant; they’re hoping to be one of the first 100 people in line because they’ll be rewarded with free Chick-fil-A for a year, which gives new meaning to the phrase “happy campers!” Chick-fil-A is now the largest quick-service chicken restaurant and one of the largest that’s privately- held. Three generations of Cathy family members are involved in the business, including Truett’s sons Dan (the president and CEO) and Bubba (senior VP) and also, his grandchildren. Our Food There are a lot of things people say they like about Chick-fil-A, but it all begins with the food, and especially the Original Chick-fil-A Chicken Sandwich. It was a significant product innovation, and it remains our best-selling item on the menu. Our innovations didn’t stop with the chicken sandwich. In 1982, we were the first restaurant to sell chicken nuggets nationally, and three years later added our trademark Waffle Potato Fries to the menu, and we still use 100% fully refined peanut oil, which is cholesterol and trans fat free. In 2010, we introduced the Chick-fil-A Spicy Chicken Sandwich. With its special blend of peppers and other seasonings, it became such a “hot” selling item that we soon after introduced the Spicy Chicken Biscuit. More recently and within the last couple years we introduced to our menu a new grilled chicken sandwich and grilled chicken nuggets along with the most recent addition of mac & cheese. People also like the fact that we offer a variety of menu options for those wanting foods that are lower in calories, carbs or fats, such as the Chick-fil-A Chargrilled Chicken Sandwich, entrée salads and fruit cups and by the way, fruit cups are an option with our kid’s meals these days. In fact, Men’s Health magazine named us “America’s Healthiest Chain Restaurant for Kids.” The high quality of our food is the number one reason people keep coming back to Chick-fil-A but there are a few more reasons – and one has four legs and is a terrible speller. Serving our Customers Whenever you ask people what they like about Chick-fil-A, one of first things they say is “the service” and it’s an important part of our story, because it goes back to Truett’s experience as a young businessman and to the values he instilled in Chick-fil-A. We call it Second Mile Service, and it’s based on the belief that if someone asks you to carry something for them one mile, you do one better and carry it for them two. Its doing those unexpected things that make people feel special. Our drive-thru has been voted “America’s #1 drive-thru” for six years in a row. We do our best to Chick-fil-A, Inc. | 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349-2998 | chick-fil-a.com | 404.765.8000 ensure a quick and pleasurable experience, and might even have a nugget for the family pet when you arrive at the window. But no matter if you’re being served in our restaurants, at our drive-thrus, or with an outside delivery, you can always count on our team members responding to your words of thanks with two special words of their own – “My pleasure.” Chick-fil-A Philosophy & Operator/Employment Model The Company's philosophy is that their restaurants become integral parts of the communities in which they are located. Chick-fil-A makes scholarships available to store employees and sponsors the Winshape Foundation which supports a family of programs designed to encourage outstanding young people nationwide. The Foundation has a college program and operates a series of camps, homes, and retreats. On the local level, individual restaurant operators typically engage in community support activities such as sponsoring youth sports teams, supporting educational activities, and leadership initiatives. Finally, and in accordance with company policy, the operators and employees in each Chick fil A Restaurant strive for a level of customer service unequaled in the quick-service food industry. It is quite common to go into a Chick-fil-A and have your tray carried to your table, have people clear your table, and ask if they can come and refresh your beverage. Beyond the above, Chick-fil-A’s operators model is very unique in the fast food industry. In their situation, the operator is part owner with Chick-fil-A. It’s similar to a franchise except they usually have one location. Sometimes they have two but for the most part they have one location and what that provides is a situation where they have very competent partners with great character in the restaurants who are deeply involved in the community. What Chick-fil-A likes to say is that their operators are in business for themselves, but not by themselves. It is very unusual for an operator to shut down and the retention rate for operators is about 98%. A typical Chick-fil-A store will employ approximately 60 - 80 jobs with approximately 120 jobs created for temporary construction employment. A typical store will operate between the hours of 6:30am to 10:00pm; Monday thru Saturday and are always closed on Sundays. Location Map Legend Municipal Boundary City Mask April 28, 2021 Map Powered By DataLink 1 in = 188 ft ± $WWDFKPHQW% REMOVALS / RELOCATES / ADJUSTMENTSNUMBERREMARKSR-1 ASPHALT PAVEMENTREMOVE (FULL DEPTH)R-2CONCRETE SIDEWALK/PAD REMOVE (FULL DEPTH)R-3BUILDING AND FOUNDATIONREMOVER-4CONCRETE CURB REMOVER-5PYLON SIGN REMOVE PANEL & REUSE POLER-6TRASH ENCLOSURE WITH ROOF REMOVER-7LIGHT POLEREMOVER-8TREEREMOVER-9GAS METER AND SERVICEREMOVER-10TRANSFORMERREMOVER-11RETAINING WALL (NON-STRUCTURAL)REMOVER-12HANDRAIL/GUARDRAILREMOVER-13FLAG POLEREMOVER-14UTILITY POLEREMOVE (COORDINATE W/ UTILITY)R-15WATER SERVICEREMOVE AS NECESSARY (APPROX. LOCATION)R-16SAN SERVICE AND GREASE TRAPREMOVE AS NECESSARY (APPROX. LOCATION)R-17GRAVEL LANDSCAPE BEDREMOVER-18TELEPHONE SERVICEREMOVEInformation contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126xxxxxxxxxC-100SITE DEMOLITION PLAN Attachment C DRIVETHRUDRIVETHRUInformation contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126C-200SITE PLAN Information contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126C-300GRADING PLAN Information contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126C-302EROSION CONTROLPLANX Information contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126PS-100PLUMBING SITE PLAN Know what'sRInformation contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126P R E L I M I N A R YNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Information contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126Know what'sRP R E L I M I N A R YNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Information contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126Know what'sRP R E L I M I N A R YNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Information contained on this drawing and in all digital filesproduced for above named project may not be reproduced inany manner without express written or verbal consent fromauthorized project representatives.ENGINEER'S PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BY:Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington RoadAtlanta, Georgia30349-2998REVISION SCHEDULEFSR#CHICK-FIL-A200930PRELIMINARY12/02/2020ARDEN HILLS (MN) FSUPRELIMINARY04807NO.DATEDESCRIPTIONCHECKED BY:ECHJFV3855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 55126P R E L I M I N A R YNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTESA.1ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE FRAMING DIMENSIONS (FACE OF STUD/JAMB) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. A.2FASTENERS, ANCHORS, CLIPS, STRAPS, ETC WHICH ARE IN CONTACT WITH PRESERVATIVE AND/OR FIRE TREATED WOOD SHALL BE OF G-185 HOT DIPPED ZINC-COATED GALVANIZED STEEL, STAINLESS STEEL, OR AN APPROVED EQUAL. A.3REFER TO CIVIL AND LANDSCAPE FOR LOCATIONS OF WALKS, BOLLARDS, LANDSCAPING AREAS, FLAG POLE, AND OTHER SITE ITEMS.A.4REFER TO INTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF CORNER GUARDS.A.5CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE LOCATION OF POLE MOUNTED EXTERIOR CAMERA WITH STRONG SYSTEMS AND INSTALL UNDERGROUND CONDUIT AS REQUIRED. RE: ELECTRICAL.A.6REFER TO ACCESSIBILITY PLAN AND FURNITURE DRAWINGS FOR SEATING LAYOUT & SPECIFICATIONS. CONTACT: OWNER. A.7REFER TO ACCESSIBILITY PLAN AND OWNER DRAWINGS FOR CONDIMENT COUNTERS AND TRASH RECEPTACLES. A.8REFER TO IT WALLBOARD USER GUIDE FOR WALLBOARD INSTALLATION, IF APPLICABLE.WALL INSULATION NOTESWALL NOTESINTERIOR WALL FRAMING NOTESEXTERIOR WALL FRAMING NOTESD.1SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR STUD DIMENSIONS AND SPACING.D.2AT WOOD STUD EXTERIOR WALLS, USE TREATED SILL PLATES. EXTERIOR SHEATHING NOTESE.1REFER TO STRUCTURAL FOR EXTERIOR SHEATHING TYPES.BLOCKING NOTESF.1WALL BLOCKING SHALL BE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR’S RESPONSIBILITY. BLOCKING SHALL INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: AREAS INDICATED ON INTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR GRAB BARS, SHELVING BRACKETS, MONITORS, FIXTURES, ETC, AS WELL AS BLOCKING FOR WINDOWS, CANOPIES ROOF FRAMING, ROOF TOP UNITS, ETC. INTERIOR WALL FINISH & INTERIOR SHEATHING NOTESAT MATERIALS LABELED "INTERIOR SHEATHING”ON WALL TYPE DRAWINGS AND DETAILS, SHEATHING SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. REFER TO FINISH PLAN AND INTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR FINISH MATERIAL ON INTERIOR SHEATHING. DO NOT USE WOOD SHEATHING WITHIN 18" OF HOODS. G.1WHERE SHEATHING IS EXPOSED: 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD. PAINTED PER INTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND FINISH PLAN. G.2BETWEEN WALL TILE AND STUDS: 1/2" CEMENTITIOUS BACKER BOARD.G.3BETWEEN FRP PANELS AND WOOD STUDS AT BACK OF HOUSE: COMPOSEAL GOLD 40 MIL WATERPROOF MEMBRANE AND 1/2" CEMENTITIOUS BOARD TO 1'-0" ABOVE SLAB. 1/2”CDX PLYWOOD SUBSTRATE ABOVE CEMENTIOUS BOARD TO 1'-0" ABOVE CEILING. RE: TYPICAL WALL BASE DETAIL. G.4BETWEEN FRP PANELS AND METAL STUDS: COMPOSEAL GOLD 40 MIL WATERPROOF MEMBRANE AND 1/2" CEMENTIOUS BOARD TO 1'-0" ABOVE SLAB. 1/2" CEMENTITIOUS BOARD TO 4" ABOVE CEILING, EXCEPT AT AREAS WHERE DRAFTSTOPPING IS REQUIRED. REFER TO DRAFTSTOPPING DETAILS FOR THOSE AREAS. G.5BETWEEN FRP PANELS AND WOOD STUDS AT PLAY AREA: 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD.G.6BETWEEN STAINLESS STEEL PANELS AND METAL STUDS: 1/2" CEMENTIOUS BOARD.G.7BETWEEN STAINLESS STEEL PANELS AND WOOD STUDS: 1/2" CEMENTIOUS BOARD.G.8BETWEEN WALLCOVERING AND STUDS: 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD. G.9BETWEEN WOOD WAINSCOT AND WOOD STUDS: 1/2" PLYWOOD.G.10BETWEEN WOOD WAINSCOT AND METAL STUDS: 1/2”PLYWOOD. G.11BETWEEN FREEZER/COOLER WALLS AND WOOD STUD WALLS: 1 FT TALL CEMENT BOARD BASE WITH 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD (LEVEL 1 FINISH) TO 6”ABOVE FINISH CEILING. EXTEND 40 MIL COMPOSEAL GOLD WATERPROOF MEMBRANE FROM FLOOR AS INDICATED ON FINISH PLAN UP WALL AS INDICATED ON FREEZER AND COOLER SCREED DETAILS. G.12BEHIND WOOD BOARD FINISH AT ICON WALL: 3/4" PLYWOOD. G.13BEHIND WOOD BOARD FINISH AT OTHER LOCATIONS: 1/2" PLYWOOD.INTERIOR BASE FINISH & SHEATHING NOTESAT MATERIALS LABELED "INTERIOR SHEATHING”ON WALL TYPE DRAWINGS AND DETAILS, MATERIALS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. REFER TO FINISH PLAN AND INTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR BASE FINISH MATERIAL. H.1BETWEEN TILE BASE AT KITCHEN AND STUDS: 1/2" CEMENTITIOUS BACKER BOARD TO MINIMUM 1'-0" ABOVE SLAB.H.2BETWEEN TILE BASE AT NON-KITCHEN AREAS AND STUD WALLS: 1/2" CEMENT BACKER BOARD TO MINIMUM 5" ABOVE SLAB. H.3BETWEEN VINYL BASE AND WOOD STUD WALLS: 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD. B.1WHERE EXTERIOR METAL STUD WALL TYPE REQUIRES BATT INSULATION, USE R-19 FOIL FACED BATT INSULATION. B.2WHERE EXTERIOR WOOD STUD WALL REQUIRES BATT INSULATION, USE R-19 KRAFT FACED FIBERGLASS BATT INSULATION WITH FLAME SPREAD INDEX OF NOT MORE THAN 25 AND SMOKE DEVELOPED INDEX OF NOT MORE THAN 450. B.3WHERE EXTERIOR STUD WALLS REQUIRE BATT INSULATION, EXTEND INSULATION UP 12" ABOVE ROOFTOP RIGID INSULATION. B.4AT INTERIOR METAL STUD WALLS WHERE INSULATION IS SCHEDULED, USE 3-1/2" FOIL FACED BATT INSULATION. B.5AT INTERIOR WOOD STUD WALLS WHERE INSULATION IS SCHEDULED, USE 3-1/2" BATT INSULATION WITH MAXIMUM FLAME SPREAD INDEX OF 25. B6.NOT USEDC.1UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, EXTEND FRAMING TO 6" ABOVE ADJACENT CEILINGC.2AT DRAFT STOPPING PARTITION INTERIOR WALLS, EXTEND FRAMING TO ROOF DECK AS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE SMOKE BARRIER. C.3WHERE INTERIOR WALLS ARE NOT INSULATED AND NOT A DRAFT STOPPING PARTITION, FRAMING MAY STOP 6" ABOVE HIGHEST ABUTTING FINISH CEILING. C.4WHERE INTERIOR WALL FRAMING DOES NOT EXTEND TO STRUCTURE ABOVE, BRACE INTERIOR WALLS AS REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING CODE, REF BUILDING DATA ON COVER SHEET.C.5FRAMING AT NON-LOADBEARING INTERIOR WALLS SHALL MEET REQUIREMENTS OF APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES AND LOCAL AMENDMENTS.FLOOR PLAN WALL & PARTITION LEGENDWOOD STUD WALLMETAL STUD WALLNOTE: SEE WALL & PARTITION TYPES AND SMOKE BARRIER INDICATED ON REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONBATT INSULATIOND1A-301B1A-301B3A-301C1A-301A-621785A-6011432A-60110987A-602576A-611D3A-6035A-60212786141315A-62212A-6226A-6219A-6022A-62110111213A-62211A-60244A-62231E2A-604_____________________E1A-604_____________________A-6211A-623B3A-62210A3A-401A-701A3A2A-401A4A-401A1A-4016A-701A2A-701A4A-631522LW6W4W4W4W4SW6SW6W822LSW635'-5 1/2"33'-8 1/4"4'-11 1/2"11'-6 1/2"4'-3 3/4"W4W4W4WOMENSMENSRR VEST31CLOSET32304'-6 1/4"6'-0"14'-5"6'-0"4'-6 1/4"KK22LW6W63'-4"40'-1"3'-7 1/2"W618L3LKITCHENTEAM MEMBERROOM1'-7 21/32"41'-11"5'-4"8'-5 1/2"8'-5 1/2"18LW6W630'-7 1/2"7'-11"2 3/4"8'-5 3/4"8'-5 1/2"8'-5 1/2"W822LHOOD #15L1LSM6DRIVE THRU4L6 1/2"3'-4"8'-11 3/4"10'-1"4'-3 1/4"6"2'-4"HOOD #3SERVING10M84L9L2LHOOD #2SW6SW6PROVIDE MINIMUM 9" CLEAR FROM EDGE OF PANEL TO ADJACENT WALL SURFACE TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH LADDER 18LMAINTAIN 1" GAP -TYPICAL TRIMW6419'-6"64'-4"W6W6W6SM6SW6.1SM6SW6.17'-4 1/8"8'-2 3/8"4'-4"8'-10 3/8"5'-3 5/8"3'-4"2'-8 1/2"2'-5"25A02.0L24A02.0L22LSW615FCC17'-1 3/4"7'-9 1/2"W63'-4"1'-9 1/8"10'-7 3/4"7'-0 1/2"1'-9 3/4"7'-9"6'-0"20'-8"6'-0"23'-11"5L14'-4 3/4"6'-0"13'-3 1/2"SERVICEDTT CLOSETOFFICESTORAGE33SW6401211167'-8"4'-0"19'-5"9'-0"C1'-10"3'-10"13W6W6W614METAL INFILL4'-4 1/2"11'-4"METAL INFILL17'-3"8'-4 1/2"3'-3 1/2"3'-8 1/2"4'-4"SW647'-0 1/2"REFER TO A-105 FOR OMD CANOPY INFO4L22L22L22L22L22L20L1981922L22L19L9'-6 1/2"4'-8 1/2"4'-4 1/2"4'-0 1/2"17'-2"4L10'-5"6'-4 1/2"1'-10 3/4"4'-9 3/4"6'-0"4'-8"6'-0"4'-7 3/4"3'-4 1/2"2'-9"AA22LE20H21AO23AAAA3'-6 3/8"6'-0"6'-0"6'-0"3'-9 7/8"4'-10 1/8"6'-0"4'-4 5/8"40'-7"7'-3"2'-8"6'-4 1/2"5"23'-0 3/4"7'-0"VESTIBULEDINING1'-8"6'-0"4'-8"6'-0"4'-8"6'-0"1'-7 7/8"35'-9"50'-11 1/4"W6W6W6SW6SW6SW6.2SW6.2SW65'-2"120'-1"SW6.214'-11"8'-8 1/2"5'-7 3/4"1GC SHALL PROVIDE 5-1/2" HIGH CONCRETE MILLWORK CURBS. RE: OWNER SHOP DRAWINGS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS & DIMENSIONS.3FREEZER AND COOLER DOORS AND HARDWARE SUPPLIED BY FREEZER/ COOLER MANUFACTURER.2GC SHALL SECURE SAFE USING (4) HILTI-HAS-E 1/2" x 4-1/2" ANCHOR BOLTS WITH HILTI HVU ADHESIVE CAPSULE. AT EACH HOLE FASTEN THRU PHENOLIC BASE OF CABINET AND INTO CONCRETE CURB BELOW. VERIFY LOCATION WITH SAFE MANUFACTURER. 4DASHED LINE INDICATES SOFFIT OR BULKHEAD ABOVE, RE: REFLECTED CEILING PLAN.5RECESSED PIN AND SLEEVE BOX, RE: A4/A-620 & ELECTRICAL. 2'-1" ROUGH OPENING WIDTH AT HOOD #2. 11" ROUGH OPENING WIDTH AT HOOD #38STEEL WALL BY OWNER (TYP.) RE: OWNER FOR EXACT LOCATION.9 SAFE SCREEN BY OWNER.15NETWORK CABINET.18 ELECTRICAL PANEL. RE: ELECTRICAL.19 ITEM BY OWNER. 20 2-SIDED ICON. RE: OWNER DRAWINGS. 22 CANOPY ABOVE BY OWNER. 23 DROP SLAB IN PLAY AREA 1-1/2". RE: STRUCTURAL. 24 MDP. RE: ELECTRICAL. 25CT CABINET. RE: ELECTRICAL.FLOORPLAN KEYNOTES26HAND SANITIZER CENTERED UNDER PLAY RULES SIGNAGE (WITH DECAL ON OPPOSITE SIDE IF MOUNTED ON STOREFRONT). RE: SCHEDULE ON A-701 FOR MODEL INFO./A4A-604Chick-fil-A5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349-2998Information contained on this drawing and in all digital files produced for above named project may not be reproduced in any manner without express written or verbal consent from authorized project representatives.CONSULTANT PROJECT #PRINTED FORDATESHEETSHEET NUMBERDRAWN BYREVISION SCHEDULEA1234BCDEABCDE1234CHICK-FIL-ABUILDING TYPE / SIZE:RELEASE:#3/24/2021 1:47:46 PMBIM 360://MN_04807_Arden Hills FSU_2021.2_FSR/04807_Arden Hills FSU_ARC.rvtA-201FLOOR PLANPROJECT STATUS02/19/21AuthorARDEN HILLS (MN) FSU048073855 LEXINGTON AVENUEARDEN HILLS, MN 5512610-LS-04807-A-201-FLOOR PLAN####21.02P13 LSFSRI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THESE PLANS HAVE BEENPREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND THAT TOTHE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE SAME COMPLYWITH ALL RULES, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES OFARDEN HILLS, MN RELATING TO STRUCTURES ANDBUILDINGS.NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE INDICATED IN STATISTICS IS NET SQUARE FOOTAGE AND DOES NOT INCLUDED INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR WALLS. REFER TO FOOTPRINT FOR BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE.1/4" = 1'-0"FLOOR PLANC4WALL TYPE SCHEDULE - INTERIORMARK DESCRIPTION (DOES NOT INCLUDE FINISHES)M8 8" MTL STUDS @ 24" O.C. MAX, WITH ONE LAYER 1/2" SHEATHING EAEXPOSED SIDEW4 2x4 WD STUDS @ 24" O.C. MAX, WITH ONE LAYER 1/2" SHEATHING EAEXPOSED SIDEW6 2x6 WD STUDS @ 24" O.C. MAX, WITH ONE LAYER 1/2" SHEATHING EAEXPOSED SIDEW8 2x8 WD STUDS @ 24" O.C. MAX, WITH ONE LAYER 1/2" SHEATHING EAEXPOSED SIDEW64 2X6 & 2X4 PAIR WD STUDS @ 24" O.C. MAX, WITH ONE LAYER OF 1/2"SHEATHING EA EXPOSED SIDEBUILDING FOOTPRINT:WALL TYPE SCHEDULE - EXTERIORMARK DESCRIPTION (DOES NOT INCLUDE FINISHES)SM6 6" MTL STUD EXTERIOR WALL WITH 1/2" SHEATHING ON EXTERIORFACES - REF STRUCT DRAWINGS AND ARCH SECTIONS/ELEVATIONSFOR CONSTRUCTION/MATERIAL INFORMATIONSW6 2X6 WD STUD EXTERIOR WALL WITH 1/2" SHEATHING EA SIDE - REFSTRUCT DRAWINGS AND ARCH SECTIONS/ELEVATIONS FORCONSTRUCTION/MATERIAL INFORMATIONSW6.1 2X6 WD STUD EXTERIOR WALL WITH ONE LAYER 1/2" SHEATHINGEXTERIOR SIDE AND TWO LAYERS 1/2" SHEATHING INTERIOR SIDE -REF STRUCT DRAWINGS AND ARCH SECTIONS/ELEVATIONS FORCONSTRUCTION/MATERIAL INFORMATIONSW6.2 2X6 WD STUD EXTERIOR FURRING WALL WITH ONE LAYER 1/2"SHEATHING EXPOSED SIDE - REF STRUCT DRAWINGS AND ARCHSECTIONS/ELEVATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION/MATERIAL INFORMATIONSTATISTICS (NET)Name AreaCLOSET 11 SFDINING 1571 SFDRIVE THRU 279 SFDTT CLOSET 27 SFKITCHEN 1518 SFMENS 188 SFOFFICE 56 SFRR VEST 83 SFSERVICE 149 SFSERVING 233 SFSTORAGE 63 SFTEAM MEMBER ROOM 225 SFVESTIBULE 57 SFWOMENS 181 SF4987 SFNO.DATEDESCRIPTION Attachment D (;7(5,25),1,6+(635(),1,6+('0(7$/&23,1*&2/25'$5.%521=(%5,&.9(1((5&2/25'$5.%52:16,=(02'8/$5(;7(5,253$,17&2/25'$5.%521=(6725()5217&2/25'$5.%521=(),1,6+6(0,*/266%5,&.9(1((5&2/25/,*+7%52:16,=(02'8/$50(7$/3$1(/&2/25&)$5('%5$%5%(&3767037)5$0,1* &&&&76/$%:$7(57$%/( 7)5$0,1* %&$123< &&522)/,1(578 61279,6,%/()520*5$'(0(&+$1,&$/(48,30(17 7<3 762/',(5 7)5$0,1* %&$123< :$7(57$%/( 76/$%&&&&522)/,1(578 61279,6,%/()520*5$'(0(&+$1,&$/(48,30(17 7<3 7)5$0,1* 7)5$0,1* %&$123< :$7(57$%/( 76/$%&&&$522)/,1(578 61279,6,%/()520*5$'(0(&+$1,&$/(48,30(17 7<3 7)5$0,1* 762/',(5 7)5$0,1* :$7(57$%/( %&$123< 76/$%522)/,1(578 61279,6,%/()520*5$'(0(&+$1,&$/(48,30(17 7<3 23&$123<),1,6+(6&335(),1,6+('0(7$/&2/25'$5.%521=(&30(7$/'(&.,1*&2/25:+,7(&KLFNILO$%XIILQJWRQ5RDG$WODQWD*HRUJLD,QIRUPDWLRQFRQWDLQHGRQWKLVGUDZLQJDQGLQDOOGLJLWDOILOHVSURGXFHGIRUDERYHQDPHGSURMHFWPD\QRWEHUHSURGXFHGLQDQ\PDQQHUZLWKRXWH[SUHVVZULWWHQRUYHUEDOFRQVHQWIURPDXWKRUL]HGSURMHFWUHSUHVHQWDWLYHV&2168/7$17352-(&735,17(')25'$7(6+((76+((7180%(5'5$:1%<5(9,6,216&+('8/($%&'($%&'(&+,&.),/$%8,/',1*7<3(6,=(5(/($6(30%,001BB$UGHQ+LOOV)68BB)65B$UGHQ+LOOV)68B$5&UYW;'(6,*1'(9(/230(17352-(&767$786$6$5'(1+,//6 01 )68/(;,1*721$9(18($5'(1+,//601;;/6;'(6,*1'(9(/230(173/6)65,+(5(%<&(57,)<7+$77+(6(3/$16+$9(%((135(3$5('81'(50<683(59,6,21$1'7+$7727+(%(672)0<.12:/('*(7+(6$0(&203/<:,7+$//58/(65(*8/$7,216$1'25',1$1&(62)$5'(1+,//6015(/$7,1*726758&785(6$1'%8,/',1*63(563(&7,9(9,(:)52175,*+73(563(&7,9(9,(:5($5/()73(563(&7,9(9,(:5($55,*+73(563(&7,9(9,(:)5217/()7$77$&+('&$123<6&+('8/(0DUN 'HVFULSWLRQ &RXQW2YHUDOO:LGWK2YHUDOO'HSWK7LH%DFN0RXQWLQJ 2IIVHW)URP7RS ,QWHJUDO/LJKWLQJ&$ ([WHULRU&DQRS\       <HV&& ([WHULRU&DQRS\       1R&% ([WHULRU&DQRS\        1R&& ([WHULRU&DQRS\        <HV&* ([WHULRU&DQRS\        <HV*UDQGWRWDO   :(67(;7(5,25(/(9$7,21  6287+(;7(5,25(/(9$7,21  ($67(;7(5,25(/(9$7,21  1257+(;7(5,25(/(9$7,213(563(&7,9(9,(:12'$7('(6&5,37,21 3$,17('67((/3267&$36 7<3 3$,17&2//$5+,1*(6 7$3 $''*5($6(),77,1*6$7($&++,1*(*5($6(+,1*(6$)7(53$,17,1* ;3$,17('67((/78%(*$7()5$0(3$,17',$0(7(53$,17('67((/32673$,17;3$,17('67((/$1*/(63$,1735(),1,6+(';3/$67,&/80%(5 ($57+&$5(352'8&76  :($7+(5(':22' $77$&+('7267((/)5$0(:,7+7+58%2/7('&$55,$*(%2/763(575,0%2$5'3$,17+($'6'$5.%521=('52352'6%(<21'(48$/3$1(/6  76/$% 373737377(;7(5,25%21'%($0 7,17(5,25%21'%($0 76/$% %5$76/$% %5$7(;7(5,25%21'%($0 7,17(5,25%21'%($0 76/$% $$%$BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB($6$:&875(&,9,/[:$//'5$,123(1,1*%(/2:          ',$0(7(567((/3,3(*$7(32673,3(%2//$5'65(&,9,/+<'5$175(3/80%,1*5(.,7&+(1)256+(/9,1*,17+,6$5($6725$*(5()86(                   /2:352),/(785%,1(522)9(17,/$7256833/,('$1',167$//('%<*&  5$0372'2250$;6/23( 81,6758766725$*(5()86(:+,7(522),1*0(0%5$1(21522)'(&.,1*5(6758&785$/215$)7(565(6758&785$/21&';3/<:22'&(,/,1*3$,1737:+,7(522),1*0(0%5$1($7:$//%(<21'(;3$16,21-2,175(6758&785$/&21&5(7(6/$%5(6758&785$/6($/('&21&5(7(6/$%5(6758&785$/21(&2$72)35,0(5 21(&2$72)377<3,16,'(7+,65220%/2&.),//(5:,7+21(&2$72)35,0(5 21(&2$7(32;<3$,17720$7&+%5,&.%2//$5'5(&,9,/ ,167$// /(1*7+2)81,675879(57,&$//<%(+,1'($&+%2//$5'3$,17720$7&+$'-$&(17:$//   7(;7(5,25%21'%($07,17(5,25%21'%($076/$%7232)81,675876+$//%()/86+:,7+%277202)'5,3('*($7,16,'()$&(2)0(7$/&$37(50,1$7,21%$5$7(;326('('*($'$'$%[($57+&$5(35(),1,6+('75,06855281'*$7(38//6$6$33529('%<2:1(567((/3/$7($1'$1&+25$*(',$0(7(567((/'52352'',$0(7(5'5,//('+2/(,1&21&5(7('5,9([($57+&$5(35(),1,6+('75,06855281'/21*'52352'*8,'(9(57,&$/('*(2)&21&5(7(6/$%%(+,1' %(/2:*$7(&21&5(7('5,9(5(&,9,/*5$<,1',&$7(63$,1737,17+,6'5$:,1*7<3(;3$16,21-2,175(&,9,/3,3(%2//$5'*$7(3267%(<21'3$,1737(;3$16,21-2,175(&,9,/&21&5(7(3$9,1*5(&,9,/0,1&586+('6721(%$6(3267)281'$7,215(6758&785$/&21&5(7(6/$% )227,1* 5(6758&785$/ 6/23()25'5$,1$*(5(3/$1&+$0)(5('('*(*$7(3$1(/ 6725$*(50)/225 *5287&$9,7<62/,'$7%(/2:)/$6+,1*/,1(2)),1,6+('*5$'(5(&,9,/&2170(0%5$1()/$6+,1*:,7+:((3+2/(6$72&*5287%277207:2&2856(662/,'7<3$1'(;7(1'*5287,1*'2:1:$5',172)227,1*$66+2:1216758&785$/'5$:,1*6%5,&.9(1((5+25,=217$/-2,175(,1)25&(0(17:,7++22. (<(7<3(%5,&.7,(65(6758&785$/(;7(1'%5,&.9(1((572)227,1*%(/2:&2175$&7256+$//+$9(237,217286(7+,&.&08,167($'2)%5,&.$7$5($6%(/2:),1,6+*5$'(&21&5(7(6/$%5(6758&7)227,1*5(6758&785$//(9(/ (;3$16,21-2,17$,563$&('$033522),1* +0'2253$,173$,17('+2//2:0(7$/'225 )5$0(&21&5(7(),//(' 5(,1)25&('&(//5(6758&785$/6($/$177<3$//6,'(6$1&+2563(5-$0%*528762/,'&086/23('(&.,1*5(6758&785$/5$)7(565(6758&785$/%21'%($05(6758&785$/+$5',(3/$1.;%/2&.,1*3,(&(0(7$/'5,3('*('$5.%521=('1$,/6$72&522),1*0(0%5$1(-2,67$1&+25$*(5(6758&785$/+25,=217$/-2,175(,1)25&(0(175(6758&785$/ $));75($7('7233/$7(3735(),1,6+('0(7$/&23,1* '$5.%521=( ;75($7('7233/$7(&217,18286&/($7%21'%($05(6758&785$/%5,&.9(1((5&';3/<:22'&(,/,1*3$,175$)7(565(6758&785$/$1&+25$*(5(6758&785$/522)'(&.,1*5(6758&785$/0,/6,1*/(3/<39&522)0(0%5$1(%<'852/$67666&5(:6:,7+1(235(1(:$6+(5$72&6/23(+25,=217$/-2,175(,1)25&(0(17:,7++22. (<(7<3(%5,&.7,(65(6758&785$/02,6785(%$55,(537$6($/$177<3$//6,'(63$,17('+2//2:0(7$/'225 )5$0(37*528762/,''5,3&$3&08%21'%($05(6758&785$/%$&.(552' 6($/$17:((36$72& $))5()86((1&/2685(127(6 ,17+($5&+,7(&785$/'5$:,1*65()86((1&/2685($1'0$,1%8,/',1*$5(%27+127(':,7+),1,6+6/$%$7 $&78$/),1,6+6/$%+(,*+76:,//9$5<%(7:((10$,1%8,/',1*$1'5()86((1&/2685(5()(572&,9,/)25$//),1,6+6/$%+(,*+76&KLFNILO$%XIILQJWRQ5RDG$WODQWD*HRUJLD,QIRUPDWLRQFRQWDLQHGRQWKLVGUDZLQJDQGLQDOOGLJLWDOILOHVSURGXFHGIRUDERYHQDPHGSURMHFWPD\QRWEHUHSURGXFHGLQDQ\PDQQHUZLWKRXWH[SUHVVZULWWHQRUYHUEDOFRQVHQWIURPDXWKRUL]HGSURMHFWUHSUHVHQWDWLYHV&2168/7$17352-(&735,17(')25'$7(6+((76+((7180%(5'5$:1%<5(9,6,216&+('8/($%&'($%&'(&+,&.),/$%8,/',1*7<3(6,=(5(/($6(30%,001BB$UGHQ+LOOV)68BB)65B$UGHQ+LOOV)68B$5&UYW$5()86((1&/2685(352-(&767$786$XWKRU$5'(1+,//6 01 )68/(;,1*721$9(18($5'(1+,//601/6$5()86((1&/2685(3/6)65,+(5(%<&(57,)<7+$77+(6(3/$16+$9(%((135(3$5('81'(50<683(59,6,21$1'7+$7727+(%(672)0<.12:/('*(7+(6$0(&203/<:,7+$//58/(65(*8/$7,216$1'25',1$1&(62)$5'(1+,//6015(/$7,1*726758&785(6$1'%8,/',1*6  5()86((1&/2685((/(9$7,21$  5()86((1&/2685((/(9$7,21&  5()86((1&/2685((/(9$7,21&  5()86((1&/2685(3/$1'  5()86((1&/2685(6(&7,21(  5()86((1&2685('52352'''(7$,/  5()86(3$'$7&21&5(7(3$9,1*'(7$,/%  5()86((1&/2685(%$6('(7$,/%  5()86((1&/2685('225-$0%'(7$,/&  5()86((1&/2685('5,3('*('  5()86((1&/2685(522)('*('(7$,/'  5()86((1&/2685('225+($''(7$,/(12'$7('(6&5,37,21 Lumark PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL LED AREA / SITE / ROADWAY LUMINAIRE SPECIFICATION FEATURES Construction Construction is comprised of a heavy-duty, single-piece die-cast aluminum housing. The LED drivers are mounted in direct contact with the casting to promote low operating temperature and long life. The die-cast aluminum door is tethered to provide easy access to the driver if replacement is required. A one-piece silicone gasket seals the door to the fixture housing. The optics is mounted on a versatile, aluminum plate that dissipates heat from the LEDs resulting in longer life of the fixture. The fixture is IP66 and vibration rated (ANSI C136.31) to insure strength of construction and longevity in the selected application. Optics Precision molded, high efficiency optics are precisely designed to shape the distribution, maximizing efficiency and application spacing. Available in Type II, III, IV and V distributions with lumen packages ranging from 6,100 to 18,900 nominal lumens. Light engine configurations consist of high-efficacy LEDs mounted to metal-core circuit boards to maximize heat dissipation and promote long life. For the ultimate level of spill light control, an optional house side shield accessory can be field or factory installed. Electrical LED drivers are mounted to the fixture for optimal heat sinking and ease of maintenance. Class 1 electronic drivers have a power factor >90%, THD <20%, and an expected life of 100,000 hours with <1% failure rate. Available in 120- 277V 50/60Hz, 347V 60Hz or 480V 60Hz operation. 480V is compatible for use with 480V Wye systems only. 10kV/10 kA surge protection standard. 0-10V dimming driver is standard with leads external to the fixture. Suitable for ambient temperatures from -40°C to 40°C. Optional 50°C HA (high ambient) available. Standard NEMA 3-PIN twistlock photocontrol receptacle and NEMA 7-PIN twistlock photocontrol receptacles are available as options. Controls See Control Options section for more details on available offerings. Mounting Standard pole mount arm is bolted directly to the pole and the fixture slides onto the arm and locks in place with a bolt facilitating quick and easy installation. The versatile, patented, standard mount arm accommodates multiple drill patterns ranging from 1-1/2" to 4-7/8". Removal of the door on the standard mounting arm enables wiring of the fixture without having to access the driver compartment. A knock-out on the standard mounting arm enables round pole mounting. Wall mount and mast arm mounting options are available. Mast arm adapter fits 2-3/8" O.D. tenon. Finish Housing and cast parts finished in five-stage super TGIC polyester powder coat paint, 2.5 mil nominal thickness for superior protection against fade and wear. Standard color is bronze. Additional colors available in white, grey, black, dark platinum and graphite metallic. Warranty Five-year warranty. TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM The Prevail LED area, site luminaire combines optical performance, energy efficiency and long term reliability in an advanced, patent pending modern design. Utilizing the latest LED technology, the Prevail luminaire delivers unparalleled uniformity resulting in greater pole spacing. A versatile mount standard arm facilitates ease of installation for both retrofit and new installations. With energy savings greater than 85%, the Prevail fixture replaces 150-1,000W metal halide fixtures in general area lighting applications such as parking lots, walkways, roadways and building areas. DESCRIPTION CERTIFICATION DATA UL and cUL Wet Location Listed DesignLights Consortium® Qualified* IP66-Rated 3G Vibration Rated (PRV) 1.5G Vibration Rated (PRV-XL) ISO 9001 FCC Class A ENERGY DATA Electronic LED Driver 0.9 Power Factor <20% Total Harmonic Distortion 120-277V/50 and 60Hz, 347V/60Hz, 480V/60Hz -40°C Minimum Temperature Rating +40°C Ambient Temperature Rating SHIPPING DATA Approximate Net Weight: PRV: 20 lbs. (9.09 kgs.) PRV-XL: 45 lbs. (20.41 kgs.) Prevail XL Prevail 17-7/8" [454mm]39-5/8" [1006mm] 3-11/16" [94mm] 13-15/16" [354mm]26-13/16" [681mm] 2-3/4" [70mm]6-15/16" [177mm] 7-1/8" [180mm] DIMENSIONS SY S T EM SCERT I F I E DCatalog # Type Date Project Comments Prepared by LumenSafe Technology *www.designlights.org OD, OD1, OD2, OD3 $WWDFKPHQW( Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM Wall Mount Arm Mount Single EPA 0.75 (PRV) EPA 1.12 (PRV-XL) Arm Mount 2 @ 180° EPA 1.50 (PRV) EPA 2.25 (PRV-XL) Arm Mount 2 @ 90° EPA 1.50 (PRV) EPA 2.13 (PRV-XL) Arm Mount 4 @ 90° EPA 3.00 (PRV) EPA 2.52 (PRV-XL) Arm Mount 3 @ 90° EPA 2.25 (PRV) EPA 2.52 (PRV-XL) MOUNTING CONFIGURATIONS AND EPAS 4-15/16" [125mm] 3-3/4" [96mm] 6-15/16" [177mm] 4" [102mm] 4-7/8" [124mm] 1-1/4" [32mm] 9/16" [15mm] Dia. Hole POLE MOUNT ARM (PRV) 5-11/16" [144mm] 3-1/8" [78mm] 7-1/8" [180mm]4" [102mm] 4-7/8" [124mm] 1-7/16" [34mm] 1/2" [14mm] Dia. Hole POLE MOUNT ARM (PRV-XL) 6" [153mm] 3-1/4" [83mm] 2-1/2" [64mm] O.D. MAST ARM MOUNT (PRV) 6" [152mm] 2-3/8" [60mm] 8" [203mm] 7-1/8" [181mm] 7/16" [12mm] Dia. Hole 5-1/8" [130mm] WALL MOUNT (PRV) page 2 PRV-C15 (7,100 Nominal Lumens) PRV-C25/C40/C60 (13,100/17,100/20,000 Nominal Lumens) PRV-XL-C75/C100/C125 (26,100/31,000/36,300 Nominal Lumens) PRV-XL-C150/C175 (41,100/48,600 Nominal Lumens) OPTICAL CONFIGURATIONS VERSATILE MOUNT SYSTEM Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM PRV / PRV-XL PREVAILpage 3 POWER AND LUMENS (PRV-XL) LUMEN MAINTENANCE Configuration TM-21 Lumen Maintenance (50,000 Hours) Theoretical L70 (Hours) Up to PRV-C60 at 25ºC 91.30% 194,000 Up to PRV-C60 at 40ºC 87.59% 134,000 Up to PRV-XL-C175 at 25ºC 91.40% 204,000 Up to PRV-XL-C175 at 40ºC 89.41% 158,000 POWER AND LUMENS (PRV) Light Engine C15 C25 C40C60 Power (Watts) 52 96 131 153 Input Current @ 120V (A) 0.43 0.80 1.09 1.32 Input Current @ 277V (A) 0.19 0.35 0.48 0.57 Input Current @ 347V (A) 0.17 0.30 0.41 0.48 Input Current @ 487V (A) 0.12 0.22 0.30 0.35 Distribution Type II 4000K Lumens 7,123 13,205 17,172 20,083 BUG Rating B2-U0-G2 B2-U0-G2 B3-U0-G3 B3-U0-G3 3000K Lumens 6,994 12,965 16,860 19,718 Type III 4000K Lumens 7,111 13,183 17,144 20,050 BUG Rating B1-U0-G2 B2-U0-G3 B3-U0-G4 B3-U0-G4 3000K Lumens 6,982 12,944 16,832 19,686 Type IV 4000K Lumens 7,088 13,140 17,087 19,984 BUG Rating B1-U0-G3 B2-U0-G4 B2-U0-G4 B3-U0-G5 3000K Lumens 6,959 12,901 16,777 19,621 Type V 4000K Lumens 7,576 14,045 18,264 21,360 BUG Rating B3-U0-G3 B4-U0-G3 B4-U0-G4 B5-U0-G4 3000K Lumens 7,438 13,790 17,932 20,972 Light Engine C75 C100 C125 C150 C175 Power (Watts) 176 217 264 285 346 Input Current @ 120V (A) 1.50 1.84 2.21 2.38 2.92 Input Current @ 277V (A) 0.66 0.82 0.97 1.04 1.25 Input Current @ 347V (A) 0.54 0.66 0.79 0.84 1.02 Input Current @ 487V (A) 0.40 0.48 0.57 0.62 0.74 Distribution Type II 4000K Lumens 26,263 31,231 36,503 41,349 48,876 BUG Rating B3-U0-G3 B3-U0-G4 B4-U0-G4 B4-U0-G4 B4-U0-G5 3000K Lumens 25,786 30,664 35,840 40,598 47,989 Type III 4000K Lumens 26,120 31,061 36,304 41,124 48,610 BUG Rating B3-U0-G5 B3-U0-G5 B3-U0-G5 B4-U0-G5 B4-U0-G5 3000K Lumens 25,646 30,497 35,645 40,377 47,727 Type IV 4000K Lumens 26,098 31,035 36,274 41,089 48,569 BUG Rating B3-U0-G5 B3-U0-G5 B3-U0-G5 B3-U0-G5 B4-U0-G5 3000K Lumens 25,624 30,471 35,615 40,343 47,687 Type V 4000K Lumens 28,129 33,450 39,097 44,287 52,349 BUG Rating B5-U0-G5 B5-U0-G5 B5-U0-G5 B5-U0-G5 B5-U0-G5 3000K Lumens 27,618 32,843 38,387 43,483 51,398 LUMEN MULTIPLIER Ambient Temperature Lumen Multiplier 10ºC 1.02 15ºC 1.01 25ºC 1.00 40ºC 0.99 Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting page 4 CONTROL OPTIONS PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM page 4 0-10V (D) The dimming option provides 0-10V dimming wire leads for use with a lighting control panel or other control method. Photocontrol (PER and PER7) Photocontrol receptacles provide a flexible solution to enable "dusk-to-dawn" lighting by sensing light levels. Advanced control systems compatible with NEMA 7-pin standards can be utilized with the PER7 receptacle. Dimming Occupancy Sensor (MSP and MS) These sensors are factory installed in the luminaire housing. When a sensor for dimming operation (/DIM) option is selected, the luminaire will dim down to approximately 50 percent power after five minutes of no activity detected. When activity is detected, the luminaire returns to full light output. When a sensor for ON/ OFF operation is selected, the luminaire will turn off after five minutes of no activity. These occupancy sensors include an integral photocell that can be activated or inactivated with the programming remote / configuration tool for "dusk-to-dawn" control or "daylight harvesting". Note: For MSP sensors, the factory preset is ON (Enabled), and for MS sensors, the factory preset is OFF (Disabled). The programming remote / tool is a wireless tool that can be utilized to change the dimming level, time delay, sensitivity and other parameters. A variety of sensor lenses are available to optimize the coverage pattern for mounting heights from 8'-40'. WaveLinx Wireless Control and Monitoring System Available in 7-PIN or 4-PIN configurations, the WaveLinx Outdoor control platform operates on a wireless mesh network based on IEEE 802.15.4 standards enabling wireless control of outdoor lighting. Use the WaveLinx Mobile application for set-up and configuration. At least one Wireless Area Controller (WAC) is required for full functionality and remote communication (including adjustment of any factory pre-sets). WaveLinx Outdoor Control Module (WOLC-7P-10A) A photocontrol that enables astronomic or time-based schedules to provide ON, OFF and dimming control of fixtures utilizing a 7-PIN receptacle. The out-of-box functionality is ON at dusk and OFF at dawn. WaveLinx Wireless Sensor (SWPD4 and SWPD5) These outdoor sensors offer passive infrared (PIR) occupancy and a photocell for closed loop daylight sensing. These sensors c an be factory installed or field-installed via simple, tool-less integration into luminaires equipped with the Zhaga Book 18 compliant 4-PIN receptacle (ZW). These sensors are factory preset to dim down to approximately 50 percent power after 15 minutes of no activity detected. These occupancy sensors include an integral photocell for "dusk-to-dawn" control or daylight harvesting that is factory-enabled. A variety of sensor lenses are available to optimize the coverage pattern for mounting heights from 7'-40'. LumaWatt Pro Wireless Control and Monitoring System (LWR-LW and LWR-LN) The Eaton’s LumaWatt Pro powered by Enlighted is a connected lighting solution that combines LED luminaires with an integrated wireless sensor system. The sensor controls the lighting system in compliance with the latest energy codes and collects valuable data about building performance and use. Software applications turn the granular data into information through energy dashboards and specialized apps that make it simple and help optimize the use of other resources beyond lighting. LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera (LD) The LumenSafe integrated network camera is a streamlined, outdoor-ready camera that provides high definition video surveillance. This IP camera solution is optimally designed to integrate into virtually any video management system or security software platform of choice. No additional wiring is needed beyond providing line power to the luminaire. LumenSafe features factory-installed power and networking gear in a variety of networking options allowing security integrators to design the optimal solution for active surveillance. Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 8' to 12' (-L12) 12 8 0 20 15 10 10515205 0 30 22 15 157.5 22 307.5 0 30 20 0 Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 12' to 30' (-L30) Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 9' to 20' (-L20) 30 20 0 Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 21' to 40' (-L40W) 20 15 10 5 0 20 18 15 12 9 6 63 9 12 15 1830 20 50 30 0305040 1020 10 20 40 Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 16' to 40' (SWPD) 01020304010203040 40 30 20 0 Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 8' to 16' (LWR-LW) 16 0 Coverage Side Area (Feet) For mounting heights from 16' to 40' (LWR-LN) 01020304010203040 40 30 20 0 24 18 8 0 8 18 24 Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM ORDERING INFORMATION STOCK ORDERING INFORMATION page 5 Product Family 1 Light Engine Voltage Distribution Options (Add as Suffix) PRVS= Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C40=(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 2 T3=Type III T4=Type IV MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, Maximum 30' Mounting Height 2 PRVS-XL= Prevail C75=(4 LEDs) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LEDs) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LEDs) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LEDs) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LEDs) 48,600 Nominal Lumens NOTES: 1. All stock configurations are standard 4000K/70CRI, bronze finish, and include the standard versatile mounting arm. 2. Only available in PRVS configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL Sample Number: PRV-XL-C75-D-UNV-T4-SA-BZ Product Family 1, 2 Light Engine 3 Driver Voltage Distribution Mounting Color PRV=Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C 40 =(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens D= Dimming (0-10V)UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 480=480V 4 T2=Type II T3=Type III T4 =Type IV T5=Type V SA=Standard Versatile Arm MA=Mast Arm 5 WM=Wall Mount Arm 5 AP= Grey BZ= Bronze (Standard) BK=Black DP=Dark Platinum GM=Graphite Metallic WH=White PRV-XL=Prevail XL C75=(4 LED) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LED) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LED) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LED) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LED) 48,600 Nominal Lumens Options (Add as Suffix)Accessories (Order Separately) 16 7030=70 CRI / 3000K CCT 6 7050=70 CRI / 5000K CCT 6 HSS=House Side Shield 7 L90=Optics Rotated 90° Left R90=Optics Rotated 90° Right 10K=10kV/10kA UL 1449 Fused Surge Protective Device HA=50°C High Ambient Temperature 8 PER=NEMA 3-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle PER7=NEMA 7-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle MSP/DIM-L12= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L12= Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L30=Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MS/DIM-L20=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS/DIM-L40W=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L20=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L40W=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 ZW=Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN Twistlock Receptacle 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4BZ= Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5BZ=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 LWR-LW=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Wide Lens for 8' - 16' Mounting Height 9, 13 LWR-LN=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Narrow Lens for 16' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 13 (See Table Below)= LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera 14, 15 PRVWM-XX=Wall Mount Kit 5 PRVMA-XX=Mast Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVXLSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit (for Prevail XL) 14 MA1010-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1011-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1017-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon MA1018-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon HS/VERD=House Side Shield 7 VGS-F/B=Vertical Glare Shield, Front/Back 7 VGS-SIDE=Vertical Glare Shield, Side 7 OA/RA1013=Photocontrol Shorting Cap OA/RA1014=NEMA Photocontrol - 120V OA/RA1016 =NEMA Photocontrol - Multi-Tap 105-285V OA/RA1201=NEMA Photocontrol - 347V OA/RA1027=NEMA Photocontrol - 480V ISHH-01=Integrated Sensor Programming Remote 17 FSIR-100=Wireless Configuration Tool for Occupancy Sensor 18 SWPD4-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD4-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 SWPD5-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD5-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 WOLC-7P-10A=WaveLinx Outdoor Control Module (7-PIN) 20 NOTES: 1. DesignLights Consortium® Qualified. Refer to www.designlights.org Qualified Products List under Family Models for details. 2. Customer is responsible for engineering analysis to confirm pole and fixture compatibility for applications. Refer to installation instructions and pole white paper WP513001EN for additional support information. 3. Standard 4000K CCT and 70CRI. 4. Only for use with 480V Wye systems. Per NEC, not for use with ungrounded systems, impedance grounded systems or corner grounded systems (commonly known as Three Phase Three Wire Delta, Three Phase High Leg Delta and Three Phase Corner Grounded Delta systems). 5. Only available in PRV configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. 6. Use dedicated IES files on product website for non-standard CCTs. 7. Option will come factory-installed. Must order one per optic/LED when ordering as a field-installable accessory (1, 2, 4, or 6). House Side Shield not suitable with T5 distribution or C60 lumen package. 8. Not available with C60 lumen package. 9. Controls system is not available with photocontrol receptacle (PER or PER7) or other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). 10. Utilizes the Wattstopper sensor FSP-211. 11. Sensor passive infrared (PIR) may be overly sensitive when operating below -20°C (-4°F). 12. In order for the device to be field-configurable, requires WAC Gateway components WAC-PoE and WPOE-120 in appropriate quantities. Only compatible with WaveLinx system and software and requires system components to be installed for operation. See website for more Wavelinx application information. 13. LumaWatt Pro wireless sensors are factory installed and require network components LWP-EM-1, LWP-GW-1, and LWP-PoE8 in appropriate quantities. See website for LumaWatt Pro application information. 14. Only available in PRV-XL configurations C75, C100, C125, C150, or C175. 15. Not available with 347V, 480V, or HA options. Consult LumenSafe system product pages for additional details and compatability information. 16. Replace XX with paint color. 17. This tool enables adjustment to Integrated Sensor (MSP) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 18. This tool enables adjustment to Motion Sensor (MS) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 19. Requires Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN twistlock receptacle (ZW) option. 20. Requires 7-PIN NEMA twistlock photocontrol receptacle (PER7) option. The WOLC-7 cannot be used in conjunction with other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera Technology Options (Add as Suffix) Product Family Camera Type Data Backhaul L=LumenSafe Technology D=Dome Camera C=Cellular, Customer Installed SIM Card A=Cellular, Factory Installed AT&T SIM Card V=Cellular, Factory Installed Verizon SIM Card S=Cellular, Factory Installed Sprint SIM Card E=Ethernet Networking LumenSafe Technology OD Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM ORDERING INFORMATION STOCK ORDERING INFORMATION page 5 Product Family 1 Light Engine Voltage Distribution Options (Add as Suffix) PRVS= Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C40=(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 2 T3=Type III T4=Type IV MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, Maximum 30' Mounting Height 2 PRVS-XL= Prevail C75=(4 LEDs) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LEDs) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LEDs) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LEDs) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LEDs) 48,600 Nominal Lumens NOTES: 1. All stock configurations are standard 4000K/70CRI, bronze finish, and include the standard versatile mounting arm. 2. Only available in PRVS configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL Sample Number: PRV-XL-C75-D-UNV-T4-SA-BZ Product Family 1, 2 Light Engine 3 Driver Voltage Distribution Mounting Color PRV=Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C 40 =(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens D= Dimming (0-10V)UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 480=480V 4 T2=Type II T3=Type III T4 =Type IV T5=Type V SA=Standard Versatile Arm MA=Mast Arm 5 WM=Wall Mount Arm 5 AP= Grey BZ= Bronze (Standard) BK=Black DP=Dark Platinum GM=Graphite Metallic WH=White PRV-XL=Prevail XL C75=(4 LED) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LED) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LED) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LED) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LED) 48,600 Nominal Lumens Options (Add as Suffix)Accessories (Order Separately) 16 7030=70 CRI / 3000K CCT 6 7050=70 CRI / 5000K CCT 6 HSS=House Side Shield 7 L90=Optics Rotated 90° Left R90=Optics Rotated 90° Right 10K=10kV/10kA UL 1449 Fused Surge Protective Device HA=50°C High Ambient Temperature 8 PER=NEMA 3-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle PER7=NEMA 7-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle MSP/DIM-L12= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L12= Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L30=Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MS/DIM-L20=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS/DIM-L40W=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L20=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L40W=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 ZW=Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN Twistlock Receptacle 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4BZ= Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5BZ=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 LWR-LW=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Wide Lens for 8' - 16' Mounting Height 9, 13 LWR-LN=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Narrow Lens for 16' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 13 (See Table Below)= LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera 14, 15 PRVWM-XX=Wall Mount Kit 5 PRVMA-XX=Mast Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVXLSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit (for Prevail XL) 14 MA1010-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1011-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1017-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon MA1018-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon HS/VERD=House Side Shield 7 VGS-F/B=Vertical Glare Shield, Front/Back 7 VGS-SIDE=Vertical Glare Shield, Side 7 OA/RA1013=Photocontrol Shorting Cap OA/RA1014=NEMA Photocontrol - 120V OA/RA1016 =NEMA Photocontrol - Multi-Tap 105-285V OA/RA1201=NEMA Photocontrol - 347V OA/RA1027=NEMA Photocontrol - 480V ISHH-01=Integrated Sensor Programming Remote 17 FSIR-100=Wireless Configuration Tool for Occupancy Sensor 18 SWPD4-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD4-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 SWPD5-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD5-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 WOLC-7P-10A=WaveLinx Outdoor Control Module (7-PIN) 20 NOTES: 1. DesignLights Consortium® Qualified. Refer to www.designlights.org Qualified Products List under Family Models for details. 2. Customer is responsible for engineering analysis to confirm pole and fixture compatibility for applications. Refer to installation instructions and pole white paper WP513001EN for additional support information. 3. Standard 4000K CCT and 70CRI. 4. Only for use with 480V Wye systems. Per NEC, not for use with ungrounded systems, impedance grounded systems or corner grounded systems (commonly known as Three Phase Three Wire Delta, Three Phase High Leg Delta and Three Phase Corner Grounded Delta systems). 5. Only available in PRV configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. 6. Use dedicated IES files on product website for non-standard CCTs. 7. Option will come factory-installed. Must order one per optic/LED when ordering as a field-installable accessory (1, 2, 4, or 6). House Side Shield not suitable with T5 distribution or C60 lumen package. 8. Not available with C60 lumen package. 9. Controls system is not available with photocontrol receptacle (PER or PER7) or other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). 10. Utilizes the Wattstopper sensor FSP-211. 11. Sensor passive infrared (PIR) may be overly sensitive when operating below -20°C (-4°F). 12. In order for the device to be field-configurable, requires WAC Gateway components WAC-PoE and WPOE-120 in appropriate quantities. Only compatible with WaveLinx system and software and requires system components to be installed for operation. See website for more Wavelinx application information. 13. LumaWatt Pro wireless sensors are factory installed and require network components LWP-EM-1, LWP-GW-1, and LWP-PoE8 in appropriate quantities. See website for LumaWatt Pro application information. 14. Only available in PRV-XL configurations C75, C100, C125, C150, or C175. 15. Not available with 347V, 480V, or HA options. Consult LumenSafe system product pages for additional details and compatability information. 16. Replace XX with paint color. 17. This tool enables adjustment to Integrated Sensor (MSP) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 18. This tool enables adjustment to Motion Sensor (MS) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 19. Requires Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN twistlock receptacle (ZW) option. 20. Requires 7-PIN NEMA twistlock photocontrol receptacle (PER7) option. The WOLC-7 cannot be used in conjunction with other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera Technology Options (Add as Suffix) Product Family Camera Type Data Backhaul L=LumenSafe Technology D=Dome Camera C=Cellular, Customer Installed SIM Card A=Cellular, Factory Installed AT&T SIM Card V=Cellular, Factory Installed Verizon SIM Card S=Cellular, Factory Installed Sprint SIM Card E=Ethernet Networking LumenSafe Technology OD1 Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM ORDERING INFORMATION STOCK ORDERING INFORMATION page 5 Product Family 1 Light Engine Voltage Distribution Options (Add as Suffix) PRVS= Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C40=(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 2 T3=Type III T4=Type IV MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, Maximum 30' Mounting Height 2 PRVS-XL= Prevail C75=(4 LEDs) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LEDs) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LEDs) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LEDs) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LEDs) 48,600 Nominal Lumens NOTES: 1. All stock configurations are standard 4000K/70CRI, bronze finish, and include the standard versatile mounting arm. 2. Only available in PRVS configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL Sample Number: PRV-XL-C75-D-UNV-T4-SA-BZ Product Family 1, 2 Light Engine 3 Driver Voltage Distribution Mounting Color PRV=Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C 40 =(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens D= Dimming (0-10V)UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 480=480V 4 T2=Type II T3=Type III T4 =Type IV T5=Type V SA=Standard Versatile Arm MA=Mast Arm 5 WM=Wall Mount Arm 5 AP= Grey BZ= Bronze (Standard) BK=Black DP=Dark Platinum GM=Graphite Metallic WH=White PRV-XL=Prevail XL C75=(4 LED) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LED) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LED) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LED) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LED) 48,600 Nominal Lumens Options (Add as Suffix)Accessories (Order Separately) 16 7030=70 CRI / 3000K CCT 6 7050=70 CRI / 5000K CCT 6 HSS=House Side Shield 7 L90=Optics Rotated 90° Left R90=Optics Rotated 90° Right 10K=10kV/10kA UL 1449 Fused Surge Protective Device HA=50°C High Ambient Temperature 8 PER=NEMA 3-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle PER7=NEMA 7-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle MSP/DIM-L12= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L12= Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L30=Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MS/DIM-L20=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS/DIM-L40W=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L20=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L40W=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 ZW=Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN Twistlock Receptacle 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4BZ= Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5BZ=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 LWR-LW=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Wide Lens for 8' - 16' Mounting Height 9, 13 LWR-LN=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Narrow Lens for 16' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 13 (See Table Below)= LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera 14, 15 PRVWM-XX=Wall Mount Kit 5 PRVMA-XX=Mast Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVXLSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit (for Prevail XL) 14 MA1010-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1011-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1017-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon MA1018-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon HS/VERD=House Side Shield 7 VGS-F/B=Vertical Glare Shield, Front/Back 7 VGS-SIDE=Vertical Glare Shield, Side 7 OA/RA1013=Photocontrol Shorting Cap OA/RA1014=NEMA Photocontrol - 120V OA/RA1016 =NEMA Photocontrol - Multi-Tap 105-285V OA/RA1201=NEMA Photocontrol - 347V OA/RA1027=NEMA Photocontrol - 480V ISHH-01=Integrated Sensor Programming Remote 17 FSIR-100=Wireless Configuration Tool for Occupancy Sensor 18 SWPD4-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD4-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 SWPD5-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD5-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 WOLC-7P-10A=WaveLinx Outdoor Control Module (7-PIN) 20 NOTES: 1. DesignLights Consortium® Qualified. Refer to www.designlights.org Qualified Products List under Family Models for details. 2. Customer is responsible for engineering analysis to confirm pole and fixture compatibility for applications. Refer to installation instructions and pole white paper WP513001EN for additional support information. 3. Standard 4000K CCT and 70CRI. 4. Only for use with 480V Wye systems. Per NEC, not for use with ungrounded systems, impedance grounded systems or corner grounded systems (commonly known as Three Phase Three Wire Delta, Three Phase High Leg Delta and Three Phase Corner Grounded Delta systems). 5. Only available in PRV configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. 6. Use dedicated IES files on product website for non-standard CCTs. 7. Option will come factory-installed. Must order one per optic/LED when ordering as a field-installable accessory (1, 2, 4, or 6). House Side Shield not suitable with T5 distribution or C60 lumen package. 8. Not available with C60 lumen package. 9. Controls system is not available with photocontrol receptacle (PER or PER7) or other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). 10. Utilizes the Wattstopper sensor FSP-211. 11. Sensor passive infrared (PIR) may be overly sensitive when operating below -20°C (-4°F). 12. In order for the device to be field-configurable, requires WAC Gateway components WAC-PoE and WPOE-120 in appropriate quantities. Only compatible with WaveLinx system and software and requires system components to be installed for operation. See website for more Wavelinx application information. 13. LumaWatt Pro wireless sensors are factory installed and require network components LWP-EM-1, LWP-GW-1, and LWP-PoE8 in appropriate quantities. See website for LumaWatt Pro application information. 14. Only available in PRV-XL configurations C75, C100, C125, C150, or C175. 15. Not available with 347V, 480V, or HA options. Consult LumenSafe system product pages for additional details and compatability information. 16. Replace XX with paint color. 17. This tool enables adjustment to Integrated Sensor (MSP) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 18. This tool enables adjustment to Motion Sensor (MS) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 19. Requires Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN twistlock receptacle (ZW) option. 20. Requires 7-PIN NEMA twistlock photocontrol receptacle (PER7) option. The WOLC-7 cannot be used in conjunction with other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera Technology Options (Add as Suffix) Product Family Camera Type Data Backhaul L=LumenSafe Technology D=Dome Camera C=Cellular, Customer Installed SIM Card A=Cellular, Factory Installed AT&T SIM Card V=Cellular, Factory Installed Verizon SIM Card S=Cellular, Factory Installed Sprint SIM Card E=Ethernet Networking LumenSafe Technology OD2 2 Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting TD500069EN September 30, 2019 9:28 AM ORDERING INFORMATION STOCK ORDERING INFORMATION page 5 Product Family 1 Light Engine Voltage Distribution Options (Add as Suffix) PRVS= Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C40=(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 2 T3=Type III T4=Type IV MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, Maximum 30' Mounting Height 2 PRVS-XL= Prevail C75=(4 LEDs) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LEDs) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LEDs) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LEDs) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LEDs) 48,600 Nominal Lumens NOTES: 1. All stock configurations are standard 4000K/70CRI, bronze finish, and include the standard versatile mounting arm. 2. Only available in PRVS configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. PRV / PRV-XL PREVAIL Sample Number: PRV-XL-C75-D-UNV-T4-SA-BZ Product Family 1, 2 Light Engine 3 Driver Voltage Distribution Mounting Color PRV=Prevail C15=(1 LED) 7,100 Nominal Lumens C25=(2 LEDs) 13,100 Nominal Lumens C 40 =(2 LEDs) 17,100 Nominal Lumens C60=(2 LEDs) 20,000 Nominal Lumens D= Dimming (0-10V)UNV= Universal (120-277V) 347=347V 480=480V 4 T2=Type II T3=Type III T4 =Type IV T5=Type V SA=Standard Versatile Arm MA=Mast Arm 5 WM=Wall Mount Arm 5 AP= Grey BZ= Bronze (Standard) BK=Black DP=Dark Platinum GM=Graphite Metallic WH=White PRV-XL=Prevail XL C75=(4 LED) 26,100 Nominal Lumens C100=(4 LED) 31,000 Nominal Lumens C125=(4 LED) 36,000 Nominal Lumens C150=(6 LED) 41,100 Nominal Lumens C175=(6 LED) 48,600 Nominal Lumens Options (Add as Suffix)Accessories (Order Separately) 16 7030=70 CRI / 3000K CCT 6 7050=70 CRI / 5000K CCT 6 HSS=House Side Shield 7 L90=Optics Rotated 90° Left R90=Optics Rotated 90° Right 10K=10kV/10kA UL 1449 Fused Surge Protective Device HA=50°C High Ambient Temperature 8 PER=NEMA 3-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle PER7=NEMA 7-PIN Twistlock Photocontrol Receptacle MSP/DIM-L12= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP/DIM-L30= Integrated Sensor for Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L12= Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Operation, 8' - 12' Mounting Height 5, 9 MSP-L30=Integrated Sensor ON/OFF Dimming Operation, 12' - 30' Mounting Height 5, 9 MS/DIM-L20=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS/DIM-L40W=Motion Sensor for Dimming Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L20=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 9' - 20' Mounting Height 9, 10 MS-L40W=Motion Sensor for ON/OFF Operation, 21' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 10 ZW=Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN Twistlock Receptacle 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD4BZ= Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5WH=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 9, 11, 12 ZW-SWPD5BZ=Wavelinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 9, 11, 12 LWR-LW=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Wide Lens for 8' - 16' Mounting Height 9, 13 LWR-LN=LumaWatt Pro Wireless Sensor, Narrow Lens for 16' - 40' Mounting Height 9, 13 (See Table Below)= LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera 14, 15 PRVWM-XX=Wall Mount Kit 5 PRVMA-XX=Mast Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit 5 PRVXLSA-XX=Standard Arm Mounting Kit (for Prevail XL) 14 MA1010-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1011-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 3-1/2" O.D. Tenon MA1017-XX=Single Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon MA1018-XX=2@180° Tenon Adapter for 2-3/8" O.D. Tenon HS/VERD=House Side Shield 7 VGS-F/B=Vertical Glare Shield, Front/Back 7 VGS-SIDE=Vertical Glare Shield, Side 7 OA/RA1013=Photocontrol Shorting Cap OA/RA1014=NEMA Photocontrol - 120V OA/RA1016 =NEMA Photocontrol - Multi-Tap 105-285V OA/RA1201=NEMA Photocontrol - 347V OA/RA1027=NEMA Photocontrol - 480V ISHH-01=Integrated Sensor Programming Remote 17 FSIR-100=Wireless Configuration Tool for Occupancy Sensor 18 SWPD4-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD4-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 7' - 15' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 SWPD5-WH=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, White 12, 19 SWPD5-BZ=WaveLinx Wireless Sensor, 15' - 40' Mounting Height, Bronze 12, 19 WOLC-7P-10A=WaveLinx Outdoor Control Module (7-PIN) 20 NOTES: 1. DesignLights Consortium® Qualified. Refer to www.designlights.org Qualified Products List under Family Models for details. 2. Customer is responsible for engineering analysis to confirm pole and fixture compatibility for applications. Refer to installation instructions and pole white paper WP513001EN for additional support information. 3. Standard 4000K CCT and 70CRI. 4. Only for use with 480V Wye systems. Per NEC, not for use with ungrounded systems, impedance grounded systems or corner grounded systems (commonly known as Three Phase Three Wire Delta, Three Phase High Leg Delta and Three Phase Corner Grounded Delta systems). 5. Only available in PRV configurations C15, C25, C40 or C60. 6. Use dedicated IES files on product website for non-standard CCTs. 7. Option will come factory-installed. Must order one per optic/LED when ordering as a field-installable accessory (1, 2, 4, or 6). House Side Shield not suitable with T5 distribution or C60 lumen package. 8. Not available with C60 lumen package. 9. Controls system is not available with photocontrol receptacle (PER or PER7) or other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). 10. Utilizes the Wattstopper sensor FSP-211. 11. Sensor passive infrared (PIR) may be overly sensitive when operating below -20°C (-4°F). 12. In order for the device to be field-configurable, requires WAC Gateway components WAC-PoE and WPOE-120 in appropriate quantities. Only compatible with WaveLinx system and software and requires system components to be installed for operation. See website for more Wavelinx application information. 13. LumaWatt Pro wireless sensors are factory installed and require network components LWP-EM-1, LWP-GW-1, and LWP-PoE8 in appropriate quantities. See website for LumaWatt Pro application information. 14. Only available in PRV-XL configurations C75, C100, C125, C150, or C175. 15. Not available with 347V, 480V, or HA options. Consult LumenSafe system product pages for additional details and compatability information. 16. Replace XX with paint color. 17. This tool enables adjustment to Integrated Sensor (MSP) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 18. This tool enables adjustment to Motion Sensor (MS) parameters including high and low modes, sensitivity, time delay, cutoff and more. Consult your lighting representative at Eaton for more information. 19. Requires Wavelinx-enabled 4-PIN twistlock receptacle (ZW) option. 20. Requires 7-PIN NEMA twistlock photocontrol receptacle (PER7) option. The WOLC-7 cannot be used in conjunction with other controls systems (MS, MSP, ZW or LWR). LumenSafe Integrated Network Security Camera Technology Options (Add as Suffix) Product Family Camera Type Data Backhaul L=LumenSafe Technology D=Dome Camera C=Cellular, Customer Installed SIM Card A=Cellular, Factory Installed AT&T SIM Card V=Cellular, Factory Installed Verizon SIM Card S=Cellular, Factory Installed Sprint SIM Card E=Ethernet Networking LumenSafe Technology OD3 2 4/29/2019 KW Industries submittal.info/LightingStandards.asp?Serie=SSP&Print=Yes 1/4 SSP Square Non-Tapered Steel Poles Pole Shaft The pole shaft is one piece construction, being fabricated from a weldable grade carbon steel structural tubing which has a uniform wall thickness of 11 gauge (0.1196"), 7 gauge (0.1793"), or 3 gauge (0.2391"). The pole shaft material shall conform to ASTM A500 Grade C with a minimum yield strength of 50,000 psi. The pole shaft has a full length longitudinal resistance weld and is uniformly square in cross-section with flat sides, small corner radii and excellent torsional properties. Base Plate The anchor base is fabricated from structural quality hot rolled carbon steel plate that meets or exceeds a minimum yield strength of 36,000 psi. The anchor base telescopes the pole shaft and is circumferentially welded top and bottom. All welds are performed in accordance with the American Welding Society specification AWS D1.1, latest edition. Anchor Bolts Anchor bolts are fabricated from commercial quality hot rolled carbon steel bar that meets or exceeds a minimum yield strength of 55,000 psi. Four properly sized anchor bolts, each with two regular hex nuts and washers, are furnished and shipped with all poles unless otherwise specified. Anchor bolts shall have the threaded end galvanized a minimum of 8 inches in accordance with ASTM A153. Fully galvanized anchor bolts are available upon request. Handhole An oval reinforced gasketed handhole, having a nominal 3" x 5" or 4" x 6-1/2" inside opening, located 1'-6" above base, is standard on all poles. Optional 5" x 8" and 4" x 10" handholes are available (see options). A grounding provision is located inside the handhole ring. Finishes The Standard Finish is a polyester thermosetting powder coating applied to the surface of the substrate to a minimum of 3 mils for all color finishes. Hot dip Galvanized finish to a ASTM A123 specification or primed finish is also available. For optional finishes, see K-KLAD and K-KLAD Over Galvanizing. HOW TO ORDER When ordering KW lighting standards, mounting adaptors and accessories, be sure to specify the complete catalog number. Our catalog numbers reflect the precise specifications of the item ordered to ensure our customers will receive the product which meets their exact requirements. The following explanation of the catalog numbers will be helpful in placing orders: CATALOG LOGIC - ORDERING SAMPLE Catalog Number Nominal Height Pole Shaft Gauge Handhole Size Anchor Bolt Bolt Circle 80 MPH 90 MPH 100 MPH Ship WT. SSP10-4.0-11 10 4.0 x 10.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 42.1 33.5 27.1 87 SSP10-4.0-7 10 4.0 x 10.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 55 44 35.5 130 SSP10-5.0-11 10 5.0 x 10.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 58 44 34 151 SSP12-4.0-11 12 4.0 x 12.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 33.7 26.7 21.4 100 SSP12-4.0-7 12 4.0 x 12.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 47.5 37.3 29.8 150 SSP12-5.0-11 12 5.0 x 12.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 49 38 29 168 SSP14-4.0-11 14 4.0 x 14.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 27.4 21.5 17.1 113 SSP14-4.0-7 14 4.0 x 14.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 40 31 24.5 170 4/29/2019 KW Industries submittal.info/LightingStandards.asp?Serie=SSP&Print=Yes 2/4 SSP14-5.0-11 14 5.0 x 14.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 40 30 23 184 SSP14-5.0-7 14 5.0 x 14.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 65 52 41.5 242 SSP15-4.0-11 15 4.0 x 15.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 20.7 16.1 12.6 119 SSP15-4.0-7 15 4.0 x 15.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 30.9 24.4 19.6 172 SSP15-5.0-11 15 5.0 x 15.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 36 27.5 21 192 SSP15-5.0-7 15 5.0 x 15.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 59 46.5 37 254 SSP16-4.0-11 16 4.0 x 16.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 18.7 14.4 11.2 125 SSP16-4.0-7 16 4.0 x 16.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 27.2 20.7 16 210 SSP16-5.0-11 16 5.0 x 16.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 33.5 25 18 201 SSP16-5.0-7 16 5.0 x 16.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 54 43 34 266 SSP18-4.0-11 18 4.0 x 18.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 15.2 11.5 8.7 138 SSP18-4.0-7 18 4.0 x 18.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 27.2 20.7 16 210 SSP18-5.0-11 18 5.0 x 18.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 27 19.5 15 218 SSP18-5.0-7 18 5.0 x 18.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 46 36 28 291 SSP20-4.0-11 20 4.0 x 20.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 12.3 9 6.5 151 SSP20-4.0-7 20 4.0 x 20.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 19.6 15 11.5 219 SSP20-5.0-11 20 5.0 x 20.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 22.2 16.8 12.6 235 SSP20-5.0-7 20 5.0 x 20.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 35.4 27.5 21.5 313 SSP20-6.0-7 20 6.0 x 20.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 56 42.5 33.5 368 SSP22-4.0-11 22 4.0 x 22.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 6.9 4.3 2.3 182 SSP22-4.0-7 22 4.0 x 22.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 12.2 8.7 6 266 SSP22-5.0-11 22 5.0 x 22.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 18.5 13.6 9.8 252 SSP22-5.0-7 22 5.0 x 22.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 30.2 23.2 17.8 337 SSP22-6.0-7 22 6.0 x 22.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 49 37.5 28 398 SSP24-4.0-7 24 4.0 x 24.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 12.2 8.7 6 266 SSP24-5.0-11 24 5.0 x 24.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 15.2 10.8 7.4 268 SSP24-5.0-7 24 5.0 x 24.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 25.8 19.4 14.6 361 SSP24-6.0-7 24 6.0 x 24.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 42 31.5 23 428 SSP25-4.0-11 25 4.0 x 25.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 6.9 4.3 2.3 182 SSP25-4.0-7 25 4.0 x 25.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 12.2 8.7 6 266 SSP25-5.0-11 25 5.0 x 25.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 13.8 9.5 6.3 276 SSP25-5.0-7 25 5.0 x 25.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 23.8 17.7 13.1 373 SSP25-6.0-7 25 6.0 x 25.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 39 28.5 21 443 SSP26-4.0-7 26 4.0 x 26.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 6.9 4 1 312 SSP26-5.0-11 26 5.0 x 26.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 12.4 8.3 5.2 284 SSP26-5.0-7 26 5.0 x 26.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 21.9 16.1 11.8 384 SSP26-6.0-7 26 6.0 x 26.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 35.5 25.5 18.5 457 SSP28-4.0-7 28 4.0 x 28.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 6.9 4 1 312 SSP28-5.0-11 28 5.0 x 28.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 9.8 6.1 3.2 300 SSP28-5.0-7 28 5.0 x 28.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 18.4 13.2 9.2 408 SSP28-6.0-7 28 6.0 x 28.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 30 21.5 15 487 SSP30-4.0-7 30 4.0 x 30.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 6.9 4 1 312 SSP30-5.0-11 30 5.0 x 30.0 11 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 6.5 3.5 1.2 315 SSP30-5.0-7 30 5.0 x 30.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 13.4 9.1 5.9 432 SSP30-6.0-7 30 6.0 x 30.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 27.5 19.9 14.1 512 SSP30-6.0-3 30 6.0 x 30.0 3 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 12 34.3 25.3 18.5 645 SSP35-5.0-7 35 5.0 x 35.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11 7.2 3.7 1 491 SSP35-6.0-7 35 6.0 x 35.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 15 9.5 5.3 584 SSP35-6.0-3 35 6.0 x 35.0 3 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 12 19.7 13.2 8.2 739 SSP39-6.0-7 39 6.0 x 39.0 7 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 11.5 9.2 4.3 0.6 642 SSP39-6.0-3 39 6.0 x 39.0 3 3 x 5 1.00 x 36 x 4 12 13 7.4 3.1 814 FINISHES Standard BRZ Bronze BLK Black GRY Gray GRN Green WHT White P Primed NA Natural Aluminum Galvanized G Galvanized K-KLAD K813 Bronze K821 Black K841 Gray K891 Green K881 White K845 Natural Aluminum K-KLAD Over Galvanizing KZ13 Bronze KZ21 Black KZ41 Gray KZ91 Green KZ81 White KZ45 Natural Aluminum SSP25-4.0-11 25 4.0 x 25.0 11 3 x 5 0.75 x 17 x 3 8 6.9 4.3 2.3 182 SSP25-4.0-7 25 4.0 x 25.0 7 3 x 5 0.75 x 30 x 3 8 12.2 8.7 6 266 BRZ Bronze 4/29/2019 KW Industries submittal.info/LightingStandards.asp?Serie=SSP&Print=Yes 3/4 1 YEAR WARRANTY 5 YEAR WARRANTY 10 YEAR WARRANTY MOUNTING DESIGNATIONS Tenon Mount 2 2 3/8'' x 4'' TENON 3 2 7/8'' x 4'' TENON 3.5 3 1/2'' x 6'' TENON 4 4'' x 6'' TENON Drill Mount DM10 Drilled for 1 Luminaire DM2090 Drilled for 2 Luminaires @ 90º DM2180 Drilled for 2 Luminaires @ 180º DM3090 Drilled for 3 Luminaires @ 90º DM4090 Drilled for 4 Luminaires @ 90º Open Mount OT Open Top OTC Open Top includes Pole Cap Gain Mount 1GSS4 (1) CXA 2GSS4 (2) CXA's located on the Same Side 3GSS4 (3) CXA's located on the Same Side 4GSS4 (4) CXA's located on the Same Side 2GBB4 (2) CXA's located Back to Back 4GBB4 (4) CXA's located Back to Back 1GSS9 (1) CXASQ 2GSS9 (2) CXASQ's located on the Same Side 3GSS9 (3) CXASQ's located on the Same Side 4GSS9 (4) CXASQ's located on the Same Side 2GBB9 (2) CXASQ's located Back to Back 4GBB9 (4) CXASQ's located Back to Back OPTIONS There are numerous options that can be ordered. Please indicate these selections under the options column in the catalog number. Example: CPL-WPR2-BC. Accessories BC Base Cover CPL Threaded Coupling* NPL Threaded Nipple* WPRP Festoon Opening** LAB Less Anchor Bolt VDI Vibration Damper Internal Optional Handholes 58HH 5'' x 8'' Handhole* 410HH 4'' x 10'' Handhole* Extra Handholes XHH Extra Handhole* Embedment Pole Options E Embedded Pole GS Ground Sleeve CTE Coal Tar Epoxy For Embedment Poles: Recommended Mounting Height Recommended Embedment Depth Less than 20' 4' 20' - 33' 6' Greater than 33' 7' Greater embedment depths are available upon request. Embedment poles greater than 35' are not available. Additional Simplex 1S 1 @ 0º * 2S 2 @ 180º * 3S 3 @ 90º * 4S 4 @ 90º * BC Base Cover Drill Mount 4/29/2019 KW Industries submittal.info/LightingStandards.asp?Serie=SSP&Print=Yes 4/4 * Please advise size, location, and orientation. (Handholes are restricted by size of pole shaft diameter) ** Located 24" above baseplate and same side as handhole. (No electrical included) PACKAGING Immediately after coating, the lighting standard including the baseplate shall be wrapped in heavy corrugation specially designed and sized to achieve maximum protection in transit. KW Industries, Inc. coating process system and stringent quality control procedures provide our customer the finest quality lighting standards in the industry. ORDERING INFORMATION ORDERING EXAMPLE: LNC-9LU-5K-3-1-PC1 SERIES LNC LNC zero uplight NUMBER OF LEDS/SOURCE/VOLTAGE 5LU3 5 LEDs, Universal voltage 120-277V 7LU3 7 LEDs, Universal voltage 120-277V 9LU3 9 LEDs, Universal voltage 120-277V CCT 3K 3000K nominal, 70 CRI 4K 4000K nominal, 70 CRI 5K3 5000K nominal AM2 Amber (590 μm available for “Turtle Friendly”/ observatory appli- cations, 350 mA (consult factory) IES DISTRIBUTION 2 Type II 33 Type III 43 Type IV OPTIONS PC(X)1 Button photocontrol, replace X with voltage, specify 1-120V, 2-208V, 3-240V, 4-277V LNC FINISH 1 Bronze 2 Black 3 Gray 4 White 5 Platinum LNC SERIES A B C D 4.81” 1.55” 8.22” 5.25” (122 mm) (39 mm) (209 mm) (133 mm) Intended Use: The compact LED LNC is designed for entry/pe- rimeter illumination for safety, security and identity. Typical mounting height is up to 12 feet with 40ft fixture spacing (without acrylic diffuser) and 30ft spacing with acrylic diffuser installed. Photocontrol option is available to provide dusk-to-dawn control for additional energy savings. Construction: Decorative die-cast aluminum housing and door. Rugged design protects internal components and provides excellent thermal management for long life – 60,000 hours minimum LED life at L96 rating per IESNA TM-21-11. Powder paint finishes provide lasting appearance in outdoor environments. Optics/Electrical LED: Drivers are 120-277V, 50/60Hz Type II, III and Type IV lenses provide wide lateral spread. 0-10V dimming 120-277V only. • LNC5L – 5 LEDs, Types II, III or IV available, see page 2 for electrical details • LNC7L – 7 LEDs, Type II, III or IV available, see page 2 for electrical details • LNC9L – 9 LEDs, Types II, III or IV available, see page 2 for electrical details • 3000K - 80 CRI, 4000K - 70 CRI, and 5000K - 70 CRI, CCT nominal • Minimum operating temperature is -40˚C/-40˚F • Drivers have greater than .90 power factor and less than 20% Total Harmonic Distortion Lenses: Full cut-off distribution; Ambient diffuser included, use for applications near enterances or locations where reduced brightness is desired. Installation: Quick mount adapter provides quick installation, designed for recessed box 4” square junction box. Listings: Listed and labeled to UL 1598 for wet locations, 25˚ C ambient environments. Some models meet DesignLights Consortium (DLC) qualifications, consult DLC website for more details: http://www.designlights.org/QPL • IES Progress Award Winner - 2012 Warranty: Five year limited warranty (for more information visit: http://www.hubbelloutdoor.com/resources/ warranty/ B C D A LNC-5L LNC-7L LNC-9L With diffuser 1 When PC is ordered, input must match PC voltage 2 Amber LEDs only available on 7LU and 9LU configurations, 350 mA only 3 DesignLights Consortium (DLC) qualified 5/7/9 models 5K only: LNC-9LU-5K-4, LNC-9LU-5K-3, LNC-7LU-5K-4, LNC-7LU-5K-3, LNC-5LU-5K LED Product Partner CERTIFICATIONS/LISTINGS DIMENSIONS PRODUCT IMAGE(S)SPECIFICATIONS Hubbell Outdoor Lighting • 701 Millennium Boulevard • Greenville, SC 29607 • Phone: 864-678-1000 Due to our continued efforts to improve our products, product specifications are subject to change without notice. © 2016 HUBBELL OUTDOOR LIGHTING, All Rights Reserved • For more information visit our website: www.hubbelloutdoor.com • Printed in USA LAREDOLNC-SPEC 8/16 Catalog Number G.W(kg)/ CTN Carton Dimensions Carton Qty. per Master Pack Length Inch (cm) Width Inch (cm) Height Inch (cm) LNC-5LU 9.6 (4.36) 14.5 (37) 9.6 (24.5) 6.8 (17.5) 2 LNC-7LU 9.6 (4.36) 14.5 (37) 9.6 (24.5) 6.8 (17.5) 2 LNC-9LU 9.6 (4.36) 14.5 (37) 9.6 (24.5) 6.8 (17.5) 2 SHIPPING INFORMATION Cat.# Approvals Job Type *3000K and warmer CCTs only OK FLL LED FLOODLIGHT ORDERING INFORMATION - STOCK VERSION PRODUCT IMAGE(S)SPECIFICATIONS CERTIFICATIONS/LISTINGS Intended Use: Large LED flood with beam distribution for lighting applications such as safety/security, facade, area, or signs Construction: • Corrosion resistant, rugged die-cast aluminum housing with powder coat paint finish • Tempered glass lens protects LEDs and allows for cleaning/debris removal • Vented housing isolates LED module from driver, maximizing product life and performance • Visor, louver and vandal accessories available LED: • 28 high power LED’s (Stock/MTO) • 42 high power LED’s (MTO) • 140 high power LED’s (Stock) • Ambient operating temperature -35°C to 40°C • Stock Versions: 4000K and 5000K CCT • MTO Versions: 3000K nominal with 80 CRI, 4000K and 5000K CCT nominal with 70 CRI Optical/Electrical: • Variety of NEMA distributions - N (3x3), M (4x4), RM (5x4) and W (6x6) - for wide range of lighting applications; Stock version Wide (6x6) only • 120-277V operation, 50/60Hz, 95W, 1050mA, 100 LPW (Stock/MTO - 28LED) • 120-277V operation, 50/60Hz, 150W, 158mA, 98 LPW (Stock only - 140LED) Optical/Electrical (Cont.) • 120-277V, 347V, and 480V operation, 50/60Hz, 95W, 700mA, up to 119 LPW (MTO only - 42LED) • IP65 fixture, Driver IP66 and RoHS compliant • 10KV surge protector comes standard • 0-10V dimming driver standard, continuous dimming option to have leads pulled out for easy connection Installation: • Knuckle mount 15’ aiming angle increments for precise aiming and control, fits 2-3/8” tenons or pipes • Heavy duty steel yoke with adjustable stainless steel hardware, mounting holes for one center - 3/4” bolt or two side - 3/8” bolts •3’ SEOOW cord with yoke mount Listings: • IP65, Listed to UL1598 for use in wet locations. • DLC Qualified (4000K and 5000K models only); Consult DLC website for more details: https://www.designlights.org/QPL • EPA = 1.0ft2 Warranty: For more information visit: http://www.hubbelllighting.com/resources/warranty/ Hubbell Outdoor Lighting • 701 Millennium Boulevard • Greenville, SC 29607 • Phone: 864-678-1000 Due to our continued efforts to improve our products, product specifications are subject to change without notice. © 2017 HUBBELL OUTDOOR LIGHTING, All Rights Reserved • For more information visit our website: www.hubbelloutdoor.com • Printed in USA FLL-SPEC JUNE 22, 2017 11:15 AM SHIPPING INFORMATION Cat.# Approvals Job Type Catalog Number G.W(kg)/CTN Carton Dimensions Length Inch (cm) Width Inch (cm) Height Inch (cm) FLL (Single Carton)25 (12.3) lbs 17.72" (45) 13.0" (33) 10.00" (25.5)IP65 Carton dimensions for shipping purposes only Yoke Knuckle Catalog Number Mount Max Candle Power Beam Pattern Wattage # Drivers/ Current Voltage Color Temperature/ CRI Lumens LPW Weight lbs. (kg)Finish FLL-95-Y Yoke 7789 Wide 98w 1@1050mA 120-277V 5000K/70 10536 108 20 (9.0) Bronze FLL-28L4K Yoke 7560 Wide 98w 1@1050mA 120-277V 4000K/70 10291 105 20 (9.0) FLL-150-4K-U-Y Yoke 5627 Wide 150w 1@158mA 120-277V 4000K/80 14665 98 20 (9.0) FLL-150L5K-U-Y Yoke 5731 Wide 150w 1@158mA 120-277V 5000K/80 14764 98.4 20 (9.0) FLL-K-140L4K-U Knuckle 5627 Wide 150w 1@158mA 120-277V 4000K/80 14665 98 20 (9.0) FLL-K-140L5K-U Knuckle 5731 Wide 150w 1@158mA 120-277V 5000K/80 14764 98.4 20 (9.0) ORDERING INFORMATION - MADE TO ORDER FAMILY FLL FACTOR Flood Large DISTRIBUTION N 3x3 M 4x4 RM 5x4 W 6x6 CONTROL OPTION PC Photocontrol (voltage specified and determined by voltage field) CD Continuous dim- ming VOLTAGE U 120V- 277V 1 120V 2 208V 3 240V 4 277V 51 480V F1 347V MOUNTING K Knuckle Y Yoke # LEDS 28L 28 LED 42L 42 LED WATTS 95 95W OPTIONS F Fusing 120 or 277V only (determined by voltage field) FINISH DB Bronze BL Black WH White GR Gray PS Platinum silver CC Custom Color CCT 3K 3000K 4K 4000K 5K 5000K FLL A B C D E F G H I J K 14.9” 5.5” 6.0” 7.0 14.57” 17/32” 7/8” 3-1/8” 3.0” 2.9” 7.57” 378mm 140mm 152mm 177mm 370mm 14mm 22mm 79mm 77mm 75mm 192mm DIMENSIONS B A C D Yoke Mount IG H Knuckle Mount Detail K J I E KnuckleYoke 1 42L only OC 5K (5000K nominal, 70 CRI) 4K (4000K nominal, 70 CRI) 3K (3000K nominal, 80 CRI) # OF LEDS DRIVE CURRENT SYSTEM WATTS DIST. TYPE NEMA FIELD ANGLE H˚ X V˚ LUMENS LPW 1 MAX BEAM CANDLEPOWER LUMENS LPW 1 MAX BEAM CANDLEPOWER LUMENS LPW 1 MAX BEAM CANDLEPOWER 28 1050mA 95W W 6 x 6 107˚ x 107˚ 9557 100.6 6935 8992 94.5 6805 42 700mA 95W N 3 x 3 32˚ x 32˚ 10860 114 91770 10263 108 85000 7473 80 63093 M 4 x 4 53˚ x 53˚ 11400 119 46836 10335 108 33566 7654 81 26201 RM 5 x 5 84˚ x 86˚ 9806 102 17388 8889 93 14733 6702 71 11395 W 6 x 6 107˚ x 107˚ 10967 113 8024 10173 105 7265 7694 79 5475 Lumen values are from photometric tests performed in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08. Data is considered to be representative of the configurations shown. Actual performance may differ as a result of end-user environment and application. 4K (4000K nominal) 5K (5000K nominal) # OF LEDS DRIVE CURRENT (MILLIAMPS SYSTEM WATTS DISTRIBUTION TYPE NEMA LUMENS LPW MAX BEAM CANDLEPOWER LUMENS LPW MAX BEAM CANDLEPOWER 28 1050mA 95W W 6 x 6 8992 94.5 6805 9557 100.6 6935 140 158mA 150W W 7 x 7 14665 98 5627 14764 98.4 5731 Lumen values are from photometric tests performed in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08. Data is considered to be representative of the configurations shown. Actual performance may differ as a result of end-user environment, application and inherent performance tolerances of the electrical components. PERFORMANCE DATA - Stock PERFORMANCE DATA - MTO LUMINAIRE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE FACTOR (LATF) AMBIENT TEMPERATURE LUMEN MULTIPLIER 0°C 32°F 1.02 10°C 50°F 1.01 20°C 68°F 1.00 25°C 77°F 1.00 30°C 86°F 1.00 40°C 104°F 0.99 Use these factors to determine relative lumen output for average ambient temperatures from 0-40°C (32-104°F). OPERATING HOURS – FLL-28L AMBIENT TEMP. 0 25,000 50,000 1TM-21-11 60,000 100,000 Calculated L70 (HOURS) 25°C / 77°C 1.00 0.94 0.91 0.88 0.79 >149,000 40°C / 104°F 1.00 0.92 0.90 0.87 0.76 >132,000 Nichia 219B, 1080mA, 85˚C OPERATING HOURS – FLL-140L AMBIENT TEMP. 0 25,000 50,000 1TM-21-11 60,000 100,000 Calculated L70 (HOURS) 25°C / 77°C 1.00 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.89 >331,000 40°C / 104°F 1.00 0.95 0.92 0.90 0.85 >237,000 Nichia NFSL757DT-V1, 150mA, 85˚C ELECTRICAL DATA # OF LEDS NUMBER OF DRIVERS DRIVE CURRENT (mA) INPUT VOLTAGE (V) CURRENT (Amps) SYSTEM POWER (W) 28 1 1050mA 120 0.82 95 277 0.36 95 42 1 700mA 120 .80 96 277 .35 96 140 1 158mA 120 1.25 150 277 0.54 150 ACCESSORIES & REPLACEMENT PARTS - Order Separately Catalog Number Description FLL-VISOR-DB Bronze top visor (Tap holes in lens frame for field installation) 93053186 FLL28, 95w, 120-277V Dimming driver, 1050mA (1 Qty) 93053187 FLL140, 95w, 120-277V Dimming driver, 700mA (1 Qty) FLL-LOUVER-BL Black adjustable louver ARF-SPC Polycarbonate vandal shield 4024C Steel slipfitter for 2" pipe, 2 3/8" OD yoke mount, bronze finish 4040 Heavy-duty steel wall/pole bracket; bronze Lektrocote® FLL-LOUVER-BL FLL-VISOR-XX ARF-SPC OPERATING HOURS – FLL-42L AMBIENT TEMP. 0 25,000 50,000 1TM-21-11 60,000 100,000 Calculated L70 (HOURS) 25°C / 77°F 1.00 0.98 0.96 0.96 0.94 >625,000 40°C / 104°F 1.00 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.90 >435,000 PROJECTED LUMEN MAINTENANCE Hubbell Outdoor Lighting • 701 Millennium Boulevard • Greenville, SC 29607 • Phone: 864-678-1000 Due to our continued efforts to improve our products, product specifications are subject to change without notice. © 2017 HUBBELL OUTDOOR LIGHTING, All Rights Reserved • For more information visit our website: www.hubbelloutdoor.com • Printed in USA FLL-SPEC JUNE 22, 2017 11:15 AM PHOTOMETRICS For additional photometric information and IES downloads, visit our web site at www.hubbelloutdoor.com 50‘ 50‘ 25‘ 25‘ 25‘ 25’ 50‘ 75‘ 100‘ 75‘ 75‘ 5fc 2fc 1fc .5fc 40‘ 40‘ 20‘ 20‘ 20‘ 20’ 40‘ 60‘ 80‘ 60‘ 60‘ 5fc 2fc 1fc .5fc 50‘ 50‘ 25‘ 25‘ 25‘ 25’ 50‘ 75‘ 100‘ 75‘ 75‘ 5fc 2fc 1fc .5fc 20' 20' 20' 10' 10' 30' 30' 10'20' 30' 10'20' .5fc 5fc 2fc 10fc 1fc 20fc 50fc 45˚ Tilt 20' 20' 20' 10' 10' 30' 30' 10'20' 30' 10'20' .5fc 5fc 2fc 1fc 45˚ Tilt 20fc 10fc 20' 20' 20' 10' 10' 30' 30' 10'20' 30' 10'20' .5fc 5fc 2fc 1fc 10fc 45˚ Tilt 20' 40' 50' 10' 30' 20' 60' 30' 10'20' 30' 10'20' .5fc 5fc 2fc 1fc 45˚ TiltFLL42L FLL42L FLL42L FLL42L 3x3 Narrow 4x4 Medium 5x5 Rectangular Medium 6x6 Wide FLL140L, 6x6 Wide FLL28L, 6x6 WideFLL140L, 6x6 Wide45˚ Tilt 45˚ Tilt˚ Tilt0 Hubbell Outdoor Lighting • 701 Millennium Boulevard • Greenville, SC 29607 • Phone: 864-678-1000 Due to our continued efforts to improve our products, product specifications are subject to change without notice. © 2017 HUBBELL OUTDOOR LIGHTING, All Rights Reserved • For more information visit our website: www.hubbelloutdoor.com • Printed in USA FLL-SPEC JUNE 22, 2017 11:15 AM TD518264EN 11/13/2018 SPECIFICATION FEATURES DESCRIPTION The Halo Surface LED Downlight (SLD) incorporates WaveStream™ technology to create an ultra-low profile surface mounting luminaire with the performance and look of a traditional downlight. SLD4 is designed for installation in many 3-1/2” and 4” round or octagon junction boxes. May also retrofit in 4” aperture IC and Non-IC recessed housings*. Dedicated LED wiring connector meets high-efficacy code requirement in recessed downlighting. Suitable for residential or commercial installations. Ideal for closets, storage areas, attics and basements. Compliant with NFPA® 70, NEC® Section 410.16 (A)(3) and 410.16 (C)(5). CONSTRUCTION • Die cast aluminum trim ring and die formed aluminum frame OPTICS • WaveStream™ technology provides uniform luminance from a low profile flat lens • AccuAim™ optics provide directional control for the “cone-of-light” beam distribution of a traditional downlight • Precision molded lens features high transmission polymer with UV stabilized protecting film DESIGNER TRIMS Accessories (sold separately) SLD designer trims are accessory rings that attach to the SLD for a permanent finish. Refer to SLD accessories specification sheet for details. • White (Paintable) • Satin Nickel • Tuscan Bronze ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOX MOUNTING • SLD may be used in compatible electrical junction boxes in direct contact with insulation including spray foam insulation • Suitable for installation in many 3-1/2” and 4” octagon and round electrical junction boxes. Note: Driver consumes 3 cubic inches of junction box. • Installer must ensure compatibility of fit, wiring and proper mounting in the electrical junction box. This includes all applicable national and local electrical and building codes. • Proprietary Slot-N-Lock quick installation system for junction box installation • T-bracket with Slot-N-Lock mounting tabs included. RECESSED HOUSING MOUNTING Friction Blade • Pre-installed precision formed friction blades included • Friction blade design allows the SLD to be installed in any position within the housing aperture (360 degrees) * Note: Not for use in recessed housings in direct contact with spray foam insulation refer to NEMA LSD 57-2013 LED • Trilateral linear LED assembly is integrated in trim perimeter. • Color Temperature: 2700K, 3000K, 3500K, 4000K • CRI options: 80 and 90† • 90 CRI can be used to comply with California Title 24 High Efficacy requirements. Certified to California Appliance Efficiency Database under JA8 • L70 at 50,000 hours projected in accordance with TM-21 WARRANTY Eaton provides a five year limited warranty on the SLD LED LED CHROMATICITY • A tight chromaticity specification ensures LED color uniformity, sustainable Color Rendering Index (CRI) and Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) over the useful life of the LED • LED chromaticity of 3 SDCM exceeds ENERGY STAR® color standards per ANSI C78.377-2008 • 90 CRI model features high color performance with R9 greater than 50 • Every Halo LED is quality tested, measured, and serialized in a permanent record to register lumens, wattage, CRI and CCT. • Halo LED serialized testing and measurement ensures color and lumen consistency on a per-unit basis, and validates long-term product consistency over time ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS Junction Box • Compatible with many 3-1/2” x 2” and 4” x 1-1/2” round and octagon boxes (2-1/8” deep boxes recommended) • Supply Wire Adapter with LED quick connector included Recessed Housings • LED connector is compatible with Halo 4” H995 and H245 Series LED Housings • LED Connector meets California Title-24 high-efficacy luminaire standard as a non-screw base • The included E26 Edison screw-base adapter provides capability for retrofit* • LED connector is a non-screwbase luminaire disconnect for tool-less installation LED DRIVER • Driver is a 120V input high efficiency, dimmable electronic power supply providing DC power to the LED array • Driver features high power factor, low THD, and has integral thermal protection in the event of over temperature or internal failure. • Driver is replaceable if it should be required SLD4058xxWH 80CRI 2700K, 3000K, 3500K, and 4000K SLD4059xxWH 90CRI 2700K, 3000K, 3500K, and 4000K 4” Surface LED Downlight Suitable for ceiling or wall electrical junction boxes Suitable for 4” recessed housing retrofit (IC, Non-IC & AIR-TITE™) ENERGY DATA 80 CRI 90 CRI Lumens (4000K models)800 710 Input Voltage 120V 120V Frequency 50/60 Hz 50/60 Hz Input Current 0.10 A 0.10 A Input Power 12.2 W 12 W Efficiency (4000K models)66 lm/W 59 lm/W THD ≤ 20% Power Factor ≥ 0.90 T Ambient -30 - +40°C Sound Rating Class A NOMENCLATURE SLD405830WH 405 = 4” SLD 8 = >80 CRI 30 = 3000K WH = Matte White Refer to ENERGY STAR® Certified Products List. Refer to ENERGY STAR® Qualified Products List. Can be used to comply with California Title 24 High Efficacy requirements. Certified to California Appliance Efficiency Database under JA8. Indoor LED nominal CCT of 4000K or less. *Non-California Product Only Catalog # Project Comments Prepared by Type Date HALO Z1 SLD4058xxWH SLD4059xxWH ORDERING INFORMATION SAMPLE NUMBER: SLD405927WH SLD4TRMSN Junction Box Installation: Order junction box separately, as supplied by others, to complete installation. Recessed Installation: Order Halo recessed housing separately to complete installation. Models Color Rendering Index Color Temperature (CCT) Finish Accessories SLD405= 4” Surface LED Downlight, 120V California non-E26 Models SLD405927WH-CA SLD405930WH-CA SSLD405935WH-CA SSLD405940WH-CA 8=80 CRI 9=90 CRI 27=2700K 30=3000K 35=3500K 40=4000K WH=White Designer Trims Fit over the SLD4 for a designer finish SLD4TRMSN=4” SLD Satin Nickel SLD4TRMTBZ=4” SLD Tuscan Bronze SLD4TRMWH=4” SLD White (paintable) J-Box Spacer Extension Ring Add 15/16” depth when SLD driver cannot fit into installed junction box SLD4EXT=4” Surface LED J-Box Extender, 7.75” O.D. RAD Adapters When junction box is mounted flat on a ceiling or beam surface (not recessed in ceiling) SLD4RAD=4” SLD Round Surface J-Box Adapter, 6.15” O.D. (For 4-inch round or octagon junction boxes) Spare Parts SLD4ACCKIT=4” Accessory Parts Replacement Kit (Screwbase adapter, torsion springs, friction blades) SLD4BRKT=4” Junction Box Bracket & Screws Refer to SLD Accessories specification sheet for further information. DIMENSIONS SLD4058xxWH 80CRI 2700K, 3000K, 3500K, and 4000K SLD4059xxWH 90CRI 2700K, 3000K, 3500K, and 4000K 4” Surface LED Downlight Suitable for ceiling or wall electrical junction boxes Suitable for 4” recessed housing retrofit (IC, Non-IC & AIR-TITE™) DIMMING • Designed for continuous dimming capability to nominally 5% with many 120V Leading Edge (LE) and Trailing Edge (TE) phase control dimmers. Dimming to 5% is best assured using dimmers with low end trim adjustment. Consult dimmer manufacturer for compatibility and conditions of use. (Note some dimmers require a neutral in the wallbox.) COMPLIANCE • cULus Listed ceiling and wall • cULus Damp Location listed ceiling and wall • cULus Wet Location Listed, ceiling only (shower rated) • Suitable for use in closets, compliant with NFPA® 70, NEC® Section 410.16 (A)(3) and 410.16 (C)(5) • SLD may be used in compatible electrical junction boxes in direct contact with insulation including spray foam insulation • May be installed in IC recessed housings in direct contact with insulation (Not for use in recessed housings in direct contact with spray foam insulation. Refer to NEMA LSD 57-2013) • UL Classified when used in retrofit with listed housings (See Housing Compatibility) • EMI/RFI: meets FCC 47CFR Part 15 Class B limits, and is suitable for use in residential and commercial installations • Airtight certified per ASTM E283 (not exceeding 2.0 CFM under 57 Pascals pressure difference) • 90 CRI: Can be used to comply with California Title 24 High Efficacy requirements. • 80 CRI: Can be used to comply with California Title 24 Non- Residential Lighting Controls requirements as a LED luminaire. • Can be used for International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) • ENERGY STAR® Certified luminaire - consult ENERGY STAR® Certified Product List • Contains no mercury or lead and RoHS compliant. • Photometric testing in accordance with IES LM-79 • Lumen maintenance projections in accordance with IES LM-80 and TM-21 6” [152mm] .7” [17.42mm] .8” [20.20mm] 6” [152.65mm] page 2 SLD4058xxWH SLD4059xxWH HOUSING COMPATIBILITY The SLD4 is UL Listed in Halo recessed housings, and is UL Classified for use with any 4 inch diameter recessed housing constructed of steel or aluminum with an internal volume that exceeds 62.3 in³ in addition to those noted below: *This is a representative list of compatible junction boxes only. Information contained in this literature about other manufacturers’ products is from published information made available by the manufacturer and is deemed to be reliable, but has not been verified. Eaton makes no specific recommendation on product selection and there are no warranties of performance or compatibility implied. Installer must determine that site conditions are suitable to allow proper installation of the SLD mounting bracket in the box. COMPATIBLE WITH MANY OTHER JUNCTION BOXES* COMPATIBLE WITH EATON’S CROUSE-HINDS JUNCTION BOXES 4" octagon light fixture/fan steel box 4" x 4" x 2-1/8" (102mm x 102mm x 54mm) 4" round new work non-metallic light fixture/fan box 4" diameter x 2-3/16" (102mm x 56mm) • TP316 - for non-metallic cable • TP317 - for metal clad cable • UL Listed • Refer to www.crouse-hinds.com TP316 for non-metallic cable 4” x 4” x 2-1/8” (102mm x 102mm x 54mm) TP317 for metal clad cable 4” x 4” x 2-1/8” (102mm x 102mm x 54mm) 4" round new work non-metallic box with hanger bar assembly 4" diameter x 2-3/16" (102mm x 56mm) 3-1/2" round old work non-metallic box 4-1/4" O.D. flange, 3-1/2" I.D. x 2-5/8” (108mm O.D., 89mm I.D. x 67mm) 4" octagon steel box 4" x 4" x 1-1/2" (102mm x 102mm x 38mm) 3-1/2" round new work non-metallic ceiling box 3-1/2" diameter x 2-3/4" (89mm x 70mm) Compatible Halo LED Housings with LED luminaire connector (high-efficacy compliant) HALO LED Recessed Can Size Catalog Number 4"H995ICAT, H995RICAT, H245ICAT, H245RICAT Compatible Halo Incandescent E26 Screwbase Housings HALO Recessed Can Size Catalog Number 4"H99ICAT, H99TAT, H99RTAT, E4ICATSB, E4TATSB, E4RTATSB 4” round surface mount box 4" diameter x 1-1/2” (102mm x 38mm) Requires SLD4RAD adapter page 3 Eaton 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 P: 770-486-4800 www.eaton.com/lighting Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice. SLD4058xxWH SLD4059xxWH LIGHTING FACTS® SLD405827WH - 80 CRI SLD405927WH - 90 CRI SLD405835WH - 80 CRI SLD405935WH - 90 CRI SLD405830WH - 80 CRI SLD405930WH - 90 CRI SLD405840WH - 80 CRI SLD405940WH - 90 CRI PRODUCT DATA Cat No. CRI CCT Lumens Power (W) LPW SLD405827WH 81 2700 720 12.2 59 SLD405830WH 81 3000 750 12.2 61 SLD405835WH 81 3500 780 12.2 64 SLD405840WH 81 4000 800 12.2 66 SLD405927WH 92 2700 650 12 54 SLD405930WH 92 3000 670 12 56 SLD405935WH 92 3500 690 12 58 SLD405940WH 92 4000 710 12 59 Performance values are presented as typical for the model(s) indicated. Field results may vary. page 4 Catalog # : Project : Date :Prepared By : LSI Industries Inc. 10000 Alliance Rd. Cincinnati, OH 45242 • www.lsi-industries.com (513) 372-3200 • ©2020 LSI Industries Inc. All Rights Reserved. Specifications subject to change without notice. Page 1/3 Rev. 07/09/20 SPEC.1020.A.0420 Scottsdale® Legacy (CRUS) LED Canopy Luminaire ) FEATURES & SPECIFICATIONS Construction • Features a ultra-slim 3/4” profile die-cast housing, with flat glass lens. Unit is water- resistant, sealed and IP67 rated. Integral designed heat sink does not trap dirt and grime, ensuring cool running performance over the life of the fixture. • Standard color is white and is finished with LSI’s DuraGrip® polyester powder coat process. DuraGrip withstands extreme weather changes without cracking or peeling. • Luminaire assembly incorporates a pressure stabilizing vent breather to prevent seal fatigue and failure. Optical System • Features an array of select, mid-power, high brightness, high efficiency LED chips; 5000K, 4000K, 3000K color temperature, 70 CRI. • Choice of Symmetrical or Asymmetrical, which directs light through a clear tempered glass lens, to provide a uniform distribution. • Five Lumen Packages: VLW (9,000), LW (10,000), SS (13,000), HO (18,000), VHO (22,000). Electrical • High performance factory programmable driver features over-voltage, under voltage, short-circuit and over temperature protection with integral surge protection that meets IEEE C62.41.2 and ANSI C82.77- 5 Location Category C Low standards. Additional 10kV surge protection device meets a minimum Category C Low standards (per ANSI/IEEE C62.41.2). • Driver components are fully encased in potting for moisture resistance. Complies with IEC and FCC standards. 0-10 V dimming supplied standard with all drive currents. • Die-cast aluminum, wet location rated driver/electrical enclosure is elevated above canopy deck to prevent water entry, provide easy “knock-out” connection of primary wiring and contributes to attaining the lowest operating temperatures available. Seals to optical housing via one- piece molded silicone gasket. • Universal voltage power supply, 120-277 VAC, 50/60 HZ and 347-480 VAC, 50/60 HZ input. • -40°C to 50°C (-40°F to +122°F) ambient operating temperature. • Minimum 60,000 to 100,000 hours depending upon the ambient temperature of the installation location. See LSI website for specific guidance. Hazardous Locaiton • Designed for lighter than air fuel applications. Product is suitable for Class 1 Divisions 2 only when properly installed per LSI installation intructions. See lsi- industries.com for specific guidance. LW and SS lumen packages only. Installation • One-person installation. • Installs in a 12” or 16” deck pan. Deck penetration consists of a 4” hole, simplifying installation and water sealing. Unit is designed to quickly retrofit into existing Scottsdale (4”) hole as well as openings for Encore and Encore Top Access and to reconnect wiring for the SC/ECTA without having to relocate the conduit. • Retro panels are available for existing Encores as well as kits for recessed and 2x2 installations (see separate spec sheets). Support brackets are provided standard, to prevent sagging of deck. Warranty • LSI LED Fixtures carry a 5-year warranty or 10-year warranty with registration for petroleum applications only (contact your LSI representative for details). Listings • UL and ETL listed to UL 1598, UL 8750 and other U.S. and International safety standards. Suitable for wet locations. • Meets Buy American Act requirements. OVERVIEW Lumen Package 6,000 - 22,000 Wattage Range 61 - 159 Efficacy Range (LPW) 95 - 148 Weight lbs(kg) 27 (12.2) QUICK LINKS Ordering Guide Performance DimensionsPhotometrics Z2 LSI Industries Inc. 10000 Alliance Rd. Cincinnati, OH 45242 • www.lsi-industries.com (513) 372-3200 • ©2020 LSI Industries Inc. All Rights Reserved. Specifications subject to change without notice. Page 2/3 Rev. 07/09/20 SPEC.1020.A.0420 Scottsdale® Legacy LED Canopy Luminaire ORDERING GUIDE Back to Quick Links Prefix Distribution Light Source Drive Current Color Temp Input Voltage Finish Options CRUS - LED Canopy Luminaire SC - Symmentric AC1 - Asymmetric LED VLW - Very Low Watt LW - Low Watt SS - Super Saver HO - High Output VHO - Very High Output 50 - 5,000K 40 - 4,000K 30 - 3,000K UE - Universal Voltage (120 - 277V) 347 - 480V WHT - White BRZ - Bronze BLK - Black HL2 - Hazardous Location TYPICAL ORDER EXAMPLE:CRUS SC LED SS 50 UE WHT Notes: 1 - AC distribution utilizes a reflector which alters the look from a standard SC distribution. 2 - LW and SS lumen packages only PERFORMANCE Back to Quick Links RECOMMENDED LUMEN MAINTENANCE Ambient Temperature C 0 hrs. 25K hrs. 50K hrs. 75K hrs. 100K hrs 25 25 100% 97% 92% 88% 30 30 100% 97% 92% 88% 35 40 100% 95% 90% 85% 40 50 100% 94% 89% 83% *LED Chips are frequently updated therefore values are nominal. FOOTNOTES: 1 - Lumen maintenance values at 25˚C are calculated per TM-21 based on LM-80 data and in-situ luminaire testing. 2 - In accordance with IESNA TM-21-11, Projected Values represent interpolated value based on time durations that are within six times (6X) the IESNA LM-80-08 total test duration (in hours) for the device under testing ((DUT) i.e. the packaged LED chip). 3 - In accordance with IESNA TM-21-11, Calculated Values represent time durations that exceed six times NA LM-80-08 total test duration (in hours) for the device under testing ((DUT) i.e. the packaged LED chip). DELIVERED LUMENS* Lumen Package Distribution 3000K CCT 4000K CCT 5000K CCT Avg. WattsDelivered Lumens Efficacy BUG Ratings Delivered Lumens Efficacy BUG Ratings Delivered Lumens Efficacy BUG Ratings VLW SC 7933 130 B3-U0-G1 7977 131 B3-U0-G1 9055 148 B3-U0-G1 61AC 6687 110 B2-U0-G1 6723 110 B2-U0-G1 7632 125 B2-U0-G2 LW SC 9221 125 B3-U0-G1 9272 125 B3-U0-G1 10525 142 B3-U0-G1 74AC 7783 105 B2-U0-G1 7826 106 B2-U0-G1 8884 120 B2-U0-G2 SS SC 11980 122 B3-U0-G1 12046 128 B3-U0-G1 13674 140 B3-U0-G1 98AC 10159 104 B3-U0-G2 10215 104 B3-U0-G2 11595 118 B3-U0-G2 HO SC 16325 124 B3-U0-G1 16415 124 B3-U0-G1 18633 141 B3-U0-G1 132AC 13269 101 B3-U0-G2 13342 101 B3-U0-G2 15145 115 B3-U0-G2 VHO SC 19641 124 B4-U0-G2 19749 124 B4-U0-G2 22418 141 B4-U0-G2 159AC 15124 95 B3-U0-G2 15207 96 B3-U0-G2 17262 109 B3-U0-G2 LSI Industries Inc. 10000 Alliance Rd. Cincinnati, OH 45242 • www.lsi-industries.com (513) 372-3200 • ©2020 LSI Industries Inc. All Rights Reserved. Specifications subject to change without notice. Page 3/3 Rev. 07/09/20 SPEC.1020.A.0420 Scottsdale® Legacy LED Canopy Luminaire PRODUCT DIMENSIONS Back to Quick Links Back to Quick Links 7 1/8” (181 mm) 7/8” (22 mm) 15 15/16” (404 mm) 15 15/16” (404 mm) Luminaire photometry has been conducted by an accredited testing laboratory in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08. As specified by IESNA LM-79-08 the entire luminaire is tested as the source resulting in a luminaire efficiency of 100%. See http://www.lsi-industries.com/products/led-lighting-solutions.aspx for detailed photometric data. PHOTOMETRICS LUMINAIRE DATA Wide Distribution Description 5000 Kelvin, 70 CRI Delivered Lumens 13,674 Watts 97.9 Efficacy 140 IES Type Type VS - Very Short BUG Rating B3-U0-G1 LUMINAIRE DATA Wide Distribution Description 5000 Kelvin, 70 CRI Delivered Lumens 11595 Watts 98.8 Efficacy 117 IES Type Type III - Very Short BUG Rating B2-U0-G2 Zonal Lumen Summary Zone Lumens %Luminaire Low (0-30)° 3652.2 26.7% Medium (30-60)° 7382.4 54.0% High (60-80)° 2489.8 18.2% Very High (80-90)° 149.4 1.1% Uplight (90-180)° 0.0 0.0% Total Flux 13673.8 100% Zonal Lumen Summary Zone Lumens %Luminaire Low (0-30)° 2766.0 23.9% Medium (30-60)° 5868.8 50.6% High (60-80)° 2712.2 23.4% Very High (80-90)° 248.1 2.1% Uplight (90-180)° 0.0 0.0% Total Flux 11595.1 100% 1123 2247 3370 4493 1347 2695 4042 5389 ISO FOOTCANDLE PLOT ISO FOOTCANDLE PLOT POLAR CURVE POLAR CURVE CRUS-SC-SS-50 CRUS-AC-SS-50 15’ Mounting Height / 10’ Grid Spacing 10 FC 5 FC 2 FC 1 FC 15’ Mounting Height / 10’ Grid Spacing 10 FC 5 FC 2 FC 1 FC For more information visit our website: www.progresslighting.com Progress Lighting • 701 Millennium Boulevard • Greenville, SC 29607 Images: Specifications: Performance: Description: Catalog number: The P5642 Series are ideal for a wide variety of interior and exterior applications including residential and commercial. The Cylinders feature a 120V alternating current source and eliminates the need for a traditional LED driver. This modular approach results in an encap- sulated luminaire that unites performance, cost and safety benefits. Construction: • Powdercoated Antique Bronze (-20), White (-30), Black (-31), Metallic Gray (-82) • Die-cast aluminum construction • Flicker-free dimming to 10% brightness with most ELV type dimmers (See Dimming Notes) • Covers a standard 4” recessed outlet box • Mounting strap for outlet box included Project: Fixture Type: Location: Contact: Dimensions: A 6” Extends 8-7/8” B 18” H/CTR 8” A B P5642 SERIES LED Wall Mount • Wet Location Number of Modules 2 Input Power 29W per module Input Voltage 120V Input Frequency 60Hz Lumens/LPW 2000/68 (LM-79) PER MODULE CCT 3000K CRI 90 Life 60,000 (L70/TM-21) EMI/RFI FCC Title 47, Part 15, Class B Min. Start Temp -30º C Max. Operating Temp 30º C Warranty 5 yrs. Labels cCSAus certified for wet locations P5642-30/30K Base Finish P5642 20 - Antique Bronze 30 - White 31 - Black 82 - Metallic Gray -Color Temp CRI 30K - 3000K 90 CRI OA LED Wall Mount • Wet Location Dimming Notes: P5642 is designed to be compatible with many Electronic Low Voltage (ELV-Reverse Phase) controls. The following is a partial list of known compatible dimmer controls: For more information visit our website: www.progresslighting.com Progress Lighting • 701 Millennium Boulevard • Greenville, SC 29607 P5642-30/30K Electronic Low Voltage ELV Reverse Phase Controls Digital type dimmers are not recommended. Dimming capabilities will vary depending on the dimmer control, load, and circuit installation. Always refer to dimmer manufacturer instructions or a controls specialist for specific requirements. Dimmer control brand names where identified above are trade names or registered trademarks of each respective company. Lutron Diva Series (Part Number DVELV-300) Lutron Nova T Series (Part Number NTELV-300) Lutron Vierti Series (Part Number VTELV-600) Lutron (Part Number MAELV-600) Lutron (Part Number SPELV-600) Leviton (Part Number AWRMG-EAW) P5642 SERIES Attachment F ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/7216,7(3/$1ϭ1$1$ 1$1$ ϮϭͲϯ&ϭϮϭ1$Ϯ1$^/dW>Eϭ^>͗ϭͬϲϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗEKd͗&KZ>Kd/KE^K&dZ&&/͘K͘d͘^/'E^͖Z&ZdK^/dW>EϮKEW'ϯEW'ϭϲ͘EKZd,ϮϭϭϮϯϭϮ&Ϯϭ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/7216,7(3/$1^/dW>EϮ^>͗ϭͬϲϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗEKd͗&KZ>Kd/KEK&h/>/E'^/'E^EZ/sͲd,Zh/dD^͖Z&ZdK^/dW>EϭKEW'Ϯ͘1$1$,'/ϭͲϲ1$:<Ϯ<ϭ1$/ϭ/Ϯ/ϯ/ϰ/ϲ/ϱ:<ϭ<Ϯ,' ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721$'$/0$18)$&785,1*1(:5%)217ϮΖͲϬΗϳΖͲϬΗEs/tϱϳ^Y͘&d͘^>͗ϯͬϴΗсϭΖͲϬΗϮϬΗϭϴΗϭϲΖͲϭΗK͘͘,͘ϱΖͲϲϯͬϰΗϳΖͲϮΗϳΖͲϬΗͬ&DKEhDEd^/'EKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϭϴΖͲϮΗ^W^͗DKEhDEd/^ydZh>hD/EhD&ZDt/d,>hD/EhDdh&ZD^t/d,͘ϬϴϬ>hD͘>/E'͘^W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘D/E/ydZh>hD/EhD/EdW/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘t,/d>ϯDWEK'ZW,////&^t/d,ϯDηϯϲϯϬͲϱϯZ/E>ZdZE^>hEds/Ez>WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘/Ed/^/EdZE>>z/>>hD/Edt/d,ϳϭϬϬ<t,/d>^͘ZZKZ/^W>z͘ϭϮϱΗ>hD͘&WEWE>t/d,ZKhdKhdKWE/E'&KZZZKZEZ͘K͘^͘d͘KWzZ/E'Η>K^^hEzΗ͕t/d,,/E'>K<>&ͲdZ<sE>KsZW/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘>Z>yE&t/d,,/E'sE>KsZ&ZD͘/E^dϯͬϭϲΗηϳϯϮϴt,/dW>y͘dZ<dKKDKdd,Z;ϯͿ>/E^K&ϲΗ,/<Ͳ&/>ͲKDDZ/>t'EZ/W>ddZ^dK&ϯϯϰ͘/EdZE>>z/>>hD/Edt,/d>Ζ^͘&KhEd/KE^z^dDKE;ϭͿϲΗy͘ϮϱΗd,<͘^d>^hWWKZdKE;ϭͿϮΖͲϬΗdžϳΖͲϬΗWKEZdW/Z͘KEZdWEϭΗyϭΗy͘ϭϮϱΗ>hD͘&Z/d&ZDt/d,ϭͬϮΗDEdKZ͘D^KEZzͬZ/<͗z'͘͘d,DKEhDEdZ/<DdZ/>E^/'E^,>>Dd,d,h/>/E'DdZ/>EDKZdZ&/E/^,͘WZ/DZz>dZ/>ZhEd,ZhEWWZKstd,ZWZKK&KEh/d͘ͲKKZ/EdWZ/KZdKKEZd&KhEd/KEͬWWKhZ͘ϲΗdž͘Ϯϱt>>^dh^hWWKZd>>Kytͬ^t/d,+LQJHG3URWHFWLYH/RFNDEOH'RRU&RYHUϳΖͲϭΗϳΖͲϬΗϯΖͲϮϳͬϴΗ/EdϮΖͲϰϭͬϮΗ&WE>ϲΗ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721$ZW>DEd&&KZD/E/E͘d͘^͘KE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϮZDKsE/^ZdtK;ϮͿ&^&ZKDy/^d/E'ͬ&Wz>KED/E/͘DEh&dhZE/E^d>>dtK;ϮͿEtW>y&^t/d,EtdZ/D&KZy/^d/E'ͬ&D/E/͘t,/d&t/d,dZE^>hEdϯDηϮϯϬͲϱϯZ/E>Zs/Ez>WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&t/d,^,Ktd,Zh>K'K͘Wz>KE^d>^hWWKZd͕D/E//Ed͕E&/>>Z^dKW/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE^D/Ͳ'>K^^WZKWK^E͘d͘^͘y/^d/E'E͘d͘^͘&/>^hZszͬZh/E'^ZYh/Z&KZWz>KE&^WZ/KZdKDEh&dhZ/E'͘   2$+;646833257 ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721(/(9$7,216&ZKEd>sd/KE^>͗ϯͬϯϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗϰϰΖͲϴΗϭϯΖͲϭϬϭͬϮΗdKKddKDK&ΖΖϭϮϭΖͲϭϭΗD/E>sd/KE^>͗ϯͬϯϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗϭϯΖͲϬΗ͘K͘/KEZ/sd,Zh>sd/KE^>͗ϯͬϯϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗZZ>sd/KE^>͗ϯͬϯϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗϭϰΖͲϮΗdKKddKDK&ΖΖϯϭϮϭϯΖͲϭϭΗdKKddKDK&ΖΖEKdh^>sd/KE^^W>,K>Z͘^/d^W/&/Z,/ddhZ>Zt/E'^dKWZKs/WZ/KZdKDEh&dhZ/E'͘ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721%ϵϯͬϴΗϱΗsEdKE,^/K&/EdϱΖͲϭϭΗϱΖͲϭϭΗ&Ͳ^ͬ&t>>>^/'E^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϯϱ^Y͘&d͘Es/t'$/0$18)$&785,1*1(:&)$/2*2ϯΗ^ͬ&Zd/EZ>^^ydZh>hD͘t>>/Ed͘t,/d>ϯDWEK'ZW,////&>y&t/d,ϯDηϯϲϯϬͲϱϯZ/E>ZdZE^>hEds/Ez>WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘/EddKW/Ed'E^/^D^/E'>^d';'ϮͲ^Z/^ͿZηϰϴϮϰϳ͘/EdZE>>z/>>hD/EdϳϭϬϬ<t,/d>͛^͘ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721%'W^ϮϰWKtZ^hWW>zϭϮϬsͬϭ͘ϭDW^^/'EKDWηϮϬϮϱ^ͬ&Kz͘ϭΗdžϮΗdž͘ϭϮϱΗ>hD͘E'>^d/&&EZdd,dK&^/tͬϯͬϴΗ&^dEZ^^ZYh/ZWZt>>KE/d/KEϰΖͲϬΗK͘͘ϱΖͲϭϭΗϱΖͲϬΗK͘͘ϱЪΗϱΖͲϭϭΗϭϭПШЖΗ^t/d,ϭϭПШЖΗϱЪΗ^/'EKDWηϮϬϮϱ^ͬ&Kz͘^/'EKDWηϮϬϵϱ>dE^/KE&ZDKsZ͘^/'EKDWηϮϬϴϱdE^/KE&ZD^/'EKDWdE^/KEZ^/'EKDWηϱϯϱϬ&ZDZ^/'EKDWηϱϭϳϬ,/E'^ZtϭϭͬϮΗdžϭϭͬϮΗ^Y͘dh͘</<Z&>y/>&͘ϵϯͬϴΗ͘ϬϰϬΗWZ&/E/^,t,/d>hD͘<͘͘ϬϰϬΗWZͲ&/E/^,t,/d>hD͘KsZϭΗdžϮΗdž͘ϭϮϱΗ>hD͘E'>^d/&&EZdd,dK&^/tͬϯͬϴΗ&^dEZ^^ZYh/ZWZt>>KE/d/KE^d/KEd/>^>ϯΗсϭΖ;ϯϲͿ'ddZWKtZDy;ϭͿ'W^ϮϰͲϭϬϬhϭ͘ϭDW^ϵϲDK^Dy>/'ZDͬ&ZD/E'd/>^>ϭͬϮΗсϭΖͲϬ͟;ϭϬͿZYh/ZDEh&dhZE/E^d>>'ddZWKtZDy>͘͘͘;ϭ͘ϱͬĨƚͿdKd>DKh>^сϯϲ;ϮϰĨƚͿWZ/EddKd>DW^сϭ͘ϭDW^,;ϭͿϭϮϬǀ͕ϮϬDW/Zh/dZYh/Z/E^d>>WZ/DZzWZE͘͘͘h͘>͘>>ZYh/Z/E^d>>^/'E'WZE͘͘͘ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721&&ͲW>ϱͲϬ^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗd,Z;ϯͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>^^d/KEd/>'$/0$18)$&785,1*1(:&)$/2*2>/sZ͗ϯϯ^Y͘&d͘KsZ>>Z͗ϱϵ^Y͘&d͘ϭͲϯϱΖͲϬΗϮΖͲϲΗϯΖͲϰϭͬϴΗϭϭΖͲϵϭͬϰΗ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721&&ͲW>EKddK^>t>>EKd͗D/E/D/WEdZd/KE^KEd,t>>t/d,/E^dZ/'^;W/Ed^tηϲϭϬϴ>ddͿ&ZKDKD͕<͕zEKd^KEd,͚ŝ͛E>dZ/>t/Z/E'd,Zhd,DЬΗ/͘tW,K>^>Kd/E>KtWK/EdK&,EE>^͘ϱΗϭΗ:t>/ddZ/DͲZϯͬϭϲΗd,<͘ͲηϮϳϵϯZZz>/&^͘ϬϱϬΗ>hD/EhDZdhZE^dW>dK͘ϬϲϯΗ>dZ͘<^EW/EddKDd,^,Zt/Et/>>/D^ηϲϭϬϴ>ddZ>DKh>^&h>>zE>K^ZDKdDKhEdWKtZ^hWW>zEKd͗KE>z;ϯͿd,Z>dZ/>WEdZd/KE^>>KtWZ,^dK&,EE>>ddZ^>ddZ^^WK&&t>>ϯͬϴ͟ϯͬϭϲΗd,<͘Zz>//^<WdD͘ZdhZE^tͬϭ^d͘^hZ&WW>/ηϭϴϬDͲϱϯZ/E>Zs/Ez>Π'ZW,/^͘^dhͲDKhEd&>h^,dKt>>͘W>KZ/E'dKWZs/Kh^W'͘ϱͬϭϲΗdžϭЪΗ>'^D/E͘ϰWZ>dZ͘>ddZͲƚŽͲ>ddZ^W>/^ŝŶtd,ZWZKK&^W>/KyKZW/'KyW/'Ky'>sE/Dd>WKtZ^hWW>zE>K^hZ΀tdͬZz>Kd/KE^΁WZ/DZz>d͘^Zs/ďLJKd,Z^ϭͬϮΗdžϯΗZ/'/'>s͘E/WW>d,ZΛ͘EϭϮϬͲϮϳϳsϮϬϮͲWK>^t/d,>>DyϭϬϱϬKsZ&KZ>K<Khdd'ͬ>K<td,ZWZKK&^W>/Ky ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721''^>͗ПШЖΗсϭΖͲϬΗ&Ͳϳ/'/d>KZZ/E'^dd/KEdtK;ϮͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZΘ/E^d>>ϭϮ6833/,('%<86, ,167$//('%<&6, ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721(ϴΗ &ZKD<K&hZ͘WZ</E'>KdͲZ/sd,Zh>E͘EKd,hZdKWdW/Z&KZEKWzE,KZ^͘ϮϰΗ/͘džϰΖͲϬΗWKEZdW/Z&KhEd/KE͘ϭΗ/͘džϯϲΗ>>d,ZE,KZK>dǁŝƚŚϯϭͬϮΗWZK:d/KEKs'ZϵΖͲϬΗW/sKdϭϯΗdžϭϯΗdžϯͬϰΗ^d>^W>dt/d,;ϰͿϭΗ/͘E,KZ^KEϵΗEdZ^/E/Zd/KE͘ϵΖͲϬΗϴΖͲϵΗϲΗϯΗdžϯΗdž͘ϮϱΗ>hD͘^Y͘dht/d,WWE^͘d^ϲΗyϲΗy͘ϭϮϬΗ^d>dhEdZ^hWWKZdǁŝƚŚЪΗd,<͘^d>͘WW>d͘&>dhdKhd>hD͘KWzKE&K&ZD&/E'EdZzdKZ/sd,ZhdKDd,^tηϱϰϬϯ'ZzEd/Z>ZEZE,ZtZdKWKtZKdYWWͲϴϮϬDdd><&/E/^,͘ϮΖͲϬΗd,W>dKEZZK&EdZ^hWWKZdd/>KE&K>>Kt/E'W'dKWK&hZϮΗϮϭͬϰΗϭΖͲϭϳͬϴΗϳϳͬϴΗϭϯͬϰΗϰϱΣϴΖͲϯСШИΗϳΗϵΖͲϳΗK͘͘>͘&KƐdK^,/WW>KK^>zEWW>/KEZD&/E'dZ&&/d/E^d>>>Kd/KE&Ͳ>ZEZ^>͗ϭͬϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϭ6833/,('%<86, ,167$//('%<&6, ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721(ϴΗ &ZKD<K&hZ͘WZ</E'>KdͲZ/sd,Zh>E͘EKd,hZdKWdW/Z&KZEKWzE,KZ^͘ϮϰΗ/͘džϰΖͲϬΗWKEZdW/Z&KhEd/KE͘ϭΗ/͘džϯϲΗ>>d,ZE,KZK>dǁŝƚŚϯϭͬϮΗWZK:d/KEKs'ZϯΗdžϯΗdž͘ϭϴϳΗ^Y͘^d>dht/d,WWE^͘&Ͳ>ZEZ^>͗ϭͬϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>&>dhdKhd>hD͘KWzKE&K&ZD&/E'EdZzdKZ/sd,ZhdKDd,^tηϱϰϬϯ'Zz&KƐdK^,/WW>KK^>zEWW>/KEZD&/E'dZ&&/d/E^d>>>Kd/KEW/sKdϭϯΗdžϭϯΗdžϯͬϰΗ^d>^W>dt/d,;ϰͿϭΗ/͘E,KZ^KEϵΗEdZ^/E/Zd/KE͘d^ϲΗyϲΗy͘ϭϮϬΗ^d>dhEdZ^hWWKZdǁŝƚŚЪΗd,<͘^d>͘WW>d͘Ed/Z>ZEZE,ZtZdKWKtZKdYWWͲϴϮϬDdd><&/E/^,͘d,W>dKEZZK&EdZ^hWWKZdd/>KE&K>>Kt/E'W'ϵΖͲϬΗϳΗϵΖͲϳΗK͘͘>͘ϴΖͲϵΗϲΗϮΖͲϬΗϴΖͲϯСШИΗϵΖͲϬΗdKWK&hZϮΗϮϭͬϰΗϭΖͲϭϳͬϴΗϳϳͬϴΗϭϯͬϰΗϰϱΣϮ6833/,('%<86, ,167$//('%<&6, ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721)&Ͳ&>'ϮϬE͘d͘^͘KE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲWZKs/E/E^d>>ϮE,>zZ;KƉƚŝŽŶĂůͿ^dEZ&>^,K>>ZϮϬΖͲϬΗ&>'WZKs/z^/'ZKhE^>sEKEZd/E^d>>zd,'EZ>KEdZdKZWK>/E^d>>KEWZͲ/E^d>>'ZKhE^>sz^/'EKEdZdKZ,/',d    &>'^/ϮϬΖ ϯΖͲϲΗ ϯϬΗϮϰΗϲΖͲϭϬΖϮϱΖ ϯΖͲϲΗ ϯϬΗϮϰΗϲΖͲϭϬΖϯϬΖ ϯΖͲϲΗ ϯϬΗϮϰΗϲΖͲϭϬΖϯϱΖ ϰΖͲϬΗ ϯϲΗϯϬΗϲΖͲϭϬΖϰϬΖ ϰΖͲϲΗ ϰϮΗϯϲΗϭϮΖͲϭϴΖϰϱΖ ϱΖͲϬΗ ϰϴΗϰϮΗϭϮΖͲϭϴΖϱϬΖ ϱΖͲϲΗ ϰϴΗϰϮΗϭϮΖͲϭϴΖ&KhEd/KE^/^'K>EK/^WhE>hD͘>>͕&>h^,^D^d>hD͘dZh<ZsK>s/E'EKEͲ&Kh>/E'dzW^t/s>^EW^ΘKsZ^,>zZ;ZKWͿ,>zZKsZ;KWd/KE>Ϳ>dKsZKy;KWd/KE>ͿϵΗ^d>hD͘>d;KWd/KE>ͿϵΗ^d>hD͘>d>hD͘&>^,K>>ZϯϬϬϬW^/KEZd,ZtKKt'^;^hWW>/zKd,Z^Ϳ&/>>^WtͬW<Zz^E&KhEd/KE^>s,Kd/W'>sE/^d>^d>EdZ/E't'^^d>^W>d^d>^hWWKZdW>dt>dK'ZKhE^W/<& ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721)&>'>/',dE/E'</dE͘d͘^͘KE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲWZKs/E/E^d>>ϭͬϮΗ^,͘ϰϬW/W>>KzϲϬϲϯͲdϲϯͬϴΗ/͘,K>ϭͬϮΗ/͘>hD͘'ZKhE>;ϳ^dZEϯͬϭϲΗ/͘t/ZͿϲΖͲϬΗϱͬϴΗ/͘KWWZ>ZKyϱΖͲϬΗ>KE'Z^^'ZKhEKEEdKZtͬϭͬϮΗͲϭϯE,y,^d^ZtZ/>>ΘdWϱͬϭϲΗͲϭϴE,K>KE^/K&^W>dKZt/Z/Zd>zdKE,KZK>d^EZZ;/&y/^d/E'Ϳ>/',dE/E'ZK^^D>zZ/sE/EdK'ZKhE^,K^^WhEKsZϮΗ^WhEKsZϭΗZ/>>ΘdWϱͬϭϲΗͲϭϴE,K>Edd,t/d,ϱͬϭϲΗK>ddKWK>^>s>/',dE/E'ZK^^D>zZ/sE/EdK'ZKhE'ZKhE^d ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/7216,7(3/$11$1$,'/ϭͲϲ1$:<Ϯ<ϭ1$^/dW>EϮ^>͗ϭͬϲϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗEKd͗&KZ>Kd/KEK&h/>/E'^/'E^EZ/sͲd,Zh/dD^͖Z&ZdK^/dW>EϭKEW'Ϯ͘/ϭ/Ϯ/ϯ/ϰ/ϲ/ϱ:<ϭ<Ϯ,' ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721*+ϭΖͲϬΗϭΖͲϬΗ&Ͳ^ͬ&,^/'E^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϭ͘ϱ^Y͘&d͘&Ͳ^ͬ&,s^/'E^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>Ϯ^Y͘&d͘ϳΖͲϬΗKddKDK&WE>ϵΖͲϲΗϮϰΗWWZKy͘ϭϴΗϴΖͲϬΗKddKDK&WE>ϭϴΗϯΖͲϬΗϯΖͲϬΗϭϮΗϭϮΗK>>ZdKWZKs/z'E͘KEdZdKZK>>ZdKWZKs/z'E͘KEdZdKZϮϰΗWWZKy͘ϲΗϭϭͬϮΗZ/h^ϭϭͬϮΗZ/h^ϭϭͬϮΗZ/h^EKd͗/&^/'E/^>KdKE^/t><͕d,E/d/^d,Z^WKE^//>/dzK&d,'EZ>KEdZdKZdK/E^d>>Ws^>s/EdKd,KEZdt,Ed,^/t></^WKhZWZ/KZdK/E^d>>d/KEK&d,^/'E͘K>>ZDKhEd,E/W^/'E^^W/&/d/KE^^/'EWE>^͘ϬϴϬ>hD/EhDt/d,<^W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^EDhds/Ez>'ZW,/^WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘^/'EWE>^ZdK^hZdK^/'EWK^dt/d,Ehd^EK>d^W/EddKDd,s/Ez><'ZKhE^/'EWK^dϮΗdžϮΗ>hD/EhD^Y͘dh͕WWKEdKW͕W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘K>>ZͲdKWZKs/z'E͘KEdZdKZϱϵͬϭϲΗK͘͘dž͘ϮϴϬt>>d,/<E^^^d>W/W͘K>>ZEKEZddKWdKW/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱZ<ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘/E^d>>ZdKWZKs/W/Ed͘>ͲDEh&dhZ/E'DhdWE>ͲhWWZ^',ϲΗϵΖͲϲΗ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721,ϮΖͲϬΗϮΖͲϬΗϲΖͲϬΗϴΖͲϬΗK͘͘,͘&&dKWs/t^>͗вΗсϭΖͲϬΗϮΖͲϬΗϭΖͲϬΗ&ͲKdͬ&^dKWͬE^/'E^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗ^/y;ϲͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϰ^Y͘&d͘ϭϭͬϮΗZ/h^'ZEKd͗/&^/'E/^>KdKE^/t><͕d,E/d/^d,Z^WKE^//>/dzK&d,'EZ>KEdZdKZdK/E^d>>Ws^>s/EdKd,KEZdt,Ed,^/t></^WKhZWZ/KZdK/E^d>>d/KEK&d,^/'E͘>ͲDEh&dhZ/E'DhdWE>ͲhWWZ^<K&ΖEΖWE>WdDdd,t^EϮϬϮt,/dϯDηϲϴϬͲϭϬZ&>d/st,/dϯDηϲϴϬͲϴϮZ&>d/sZϯDηϲϴϬͲϭϬZ&>d/st,/dϯDηϲϴϬͲϴϮZ&>d/sZ^W/&/d/KE^^/'EWE>^͘ϬϴϬ>hD/EhDWE>^t/d,<^W/EdEZ&>d/ss/Ez>Ddd,t^EϮϬϮt,/d'ZW,/^WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘^/'EWE>/^dK^hZdK^/'EWK^dt/d,Ehd^EK>d^W/EddKDd,s/Ez><'ZKhE^/'EWK^dϮΗdžϮΗ^YhZ>hD/EhDdh/E'͕WWKEdKW͘W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱ<͘ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘ϭϱΗ,K>^/ϭͲϲ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721-ϮΖͲϬΗϭΖͲϬΗ&ͲKd^ͬ&E^/'E^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗKE;ϭͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>ϰ^Y͘&d͘ϮΖͲϬΗϮΖͲϬΗϲΖͲϬΗϴΖͲϬΗK͘͘,͘'ZϭϭͬϮΗZ/h^>ͲDEh&dhZ/E'DhdWE>ͲhWWZ^:^W/&/d/KE^^/'EWE>͘ϬϴϬ>hD/EhDWE>t/d,<W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱ<͘ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^EZ&>d/ss/Ez>'ZW,/^WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘^/'EWE>/^dK^hZdK^/'EWK^dt/d,Ehd^EK>d^W/EddKDd,s/Ez><'ZKhE^/'EWK^dϮΗdžϮΗ^YhZ>hD/EhDdh/E'͕WWKEdKW͘W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱ<͘ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘EKd͗/&^/'E/^>KdKE^/t><͕d,E/d/^d,Z^WKE^//>/dzK&d,'EZ>KEdZdKZdK/E^d>>Ws^>s/EdKd,KEZdt,Ed,^/t></^WKhZWZ/KZdK/E^d>>d/KEK&d,^/'E͘ϯDηϲϴϬͲϭϬZ&>d/st,/dϯDηϲϴϬͲϴϮZ&>d/sZϭϱΗ,K>^ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721.ϭΖͲϲΗϭΖͲϬΗϰΖͲϬΗK͘͘,͘ϭϮΗ&Ͳ^ͬ&WͲy^/'E^>͗ϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗdtK;ϮͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZΘ/E^d>>ϭ͘ϱ^Y͘&d͘ϭϴΗϭϭͬϮΗZ/h^dyd͗WZhd/d>^K><ϭ<ϮEKd͗/&^/'E/^>KdKE^/t><͕d,E/d/^d,Z^WKE^//>/dzK&d,'EZ>KEdZdKZdK/E^d>>Ws^>s/EdKd,KEZdt,Ed,^/t></^WKhZWZ/KZdK/E^d>>d/KEK&d,^/'E͘ϯDηϲϴϬͲϭϬZ&>d/st,/dϯDηϲϴϬͲϴϮZ&>d/sZ^W/&/d/KE^^/'EWE>͘ϬϴϬ>hD/EhDWE>t/d,<W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱ<͘ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^EZ&>d/ss/Ez>'ZW,/^WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘^/'EWK^dϮΗdžϮΗ^YhZ>hD/EhDdh/E'͕WWKEdKW͘W/EdDdd,t^ηϳϰϭϱϱ<͘ZKE͕^D/Ͳ'>K^^͘ ϬϲϮϳϯϬϴZϰ,͘WzEϭϮͬϬϯͬϮϬϮϬηϰϴϬϳϯϴϱϱ>y/E'dKEsE͘ZE,/>>^͕DE͘,RI$EĂƚŝŽŶĂů,ĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐϭϰϮϬϭ^ŽǀĞƌĞŝŐŶZŽĂĚηϭϬϭ&ŽƌƚtŽƌƚŚ͕dyϳϲϭϱϱ;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϬϬ&Ădž;ϮϭϰͿϵϬϮͲϮϬϰϰ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽϭϳϯϭϵ^ĂŶWĞĚƌŽǀĞ^ƚĞϮϬϬ^ĂŶŶƚŽŶŝŽ͕dyϳϴϮϯϮ;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϯϴϬϰ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰtĞƐƚŽĂƐƚϯϮϮϬdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞZŝĚŐĞƌ^ƚĞϮϱϬsŝƐƚĂ͕ϵϮϬϴϭ;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϭϳϬϴ&Ădž;ϳϲϬͿϳϯϰͲϯϳϱϮEŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚh^ϮϯϬϭZŝǀĞƌZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϮϬϭ>ŽƵŝƐǀŝůůĞ͕<zϰϬϮϬϲ;ϱϬϮͿϴϵϳͲϵϴϬϬĞůů;ϱϬϮͿϱϱϰͲϮϱϳϱ&ůŽƌŝĚĂϮϱϴϰ^ĂŶĚ,ŝůůWŽŝŶƚŝƌĐůĞĂǀĞŶƉŽƌƚ͕&>ϯϯϴϯϳ;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϬͲϭϭϬϬ&Ădž;ϴϲϯͿϰϮϰͲϭϭϲϬ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂϭϭϭtŽŽĚƐƚŽŶĞWůĂĐĞĂǁƐŽŶǀŝůůĞ͕'ϯϬϱϯϰ;ϲϳϴͿϳϮϱͲϴϴϱϮ&Ădž;ϮϭϬͿϯϰϵͲϴϳϮϰ^ŽƵƚŚdĞdžĂƐWKKyϭϮϱϮϬϲŽƌĂůƌŝǀĞWŽƌƚůĂŶĚ͕dyϳϴϯϳϰ;ϯϲϭͿϱϲϯͲϱϱϵϵ&Ădž;ϯϲϭͿϲϰϯͲϲϱϯϯ5  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1&%'(6,*1&+$1*($1':$<),1',1*83'$7('3(56,7(3/$15  +383'$7('6,7(3/$1$''('3</216859(<,1)250$7,211(:0280(17$1'83'$7('$''5(665  +383'$7('6,7(3/$11(:%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216)257+(1(:7<3(&672+$9(72365  +383'$7('6,7(3/$172+$9(675,36.5,67(1+$0,/721/0s/Ez>KWz^,KtE/E'Zz&KZs/^h>WhZWK^^KE>zKKZ>sd/KE^^>͗ϯͬϴΗсϭΖͲϬΗ&ͲZ^^sz>^>͗ϭϭͬϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗdtK;ϮͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZE/E^d>>KWzdKKWYht,/ds/Ez>͕WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘;ydZ/KZK&KKZͿ,/'/d>WZ/Ed>K'KdKhd/E/s/h>>z&ͲKKZsz>^>͗ϭϭͬϮΗсϭΖͲϬΗd,Z;ϯͿZYh/ZͲDEh&dhZΘ/E^d>>KWzdKKWYht,/ds/Ez>͕WW>/ϭ^d^hZ&͘;ydZ/KZK&KKZͿ,/'/d>WZ/Ed>K'KdKhd/E/s/h>>zs/Ez>EKd͗ydZs/Ez>EhDZ^dK/E>hKEs/Ez>^,d&KZ>dZh^K&WK^^/>,KhZ,E'͘ϴΗ>Ϯ>ϭDϭͲϯ   Memorandum www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 | Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 | 763.475.0010 Fax: 1.866.440.6364 An Equal Opportunity Employer SRF No. 14324.00 To: Joe Vavrina, PE, LEED AP, Senior Project Manager HR Green | Land Development From: Jeff Bednar, TOPS, Senior Traffic Engineering Specialist Date: March 26, 2021 Subject: Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study Introduction SRF has completed a traffic study for the proposed Chick-fil-A development, which is located in the northwest quadrant of the Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road intersection in the City of Arden Hills (see Figure 1: Project Location). The primary objectives of the study are to review existing operations within the study area, identify any transportation impacts both externally and internally to the site, and recommend improvements to address any issues, if necessary. The following information provides the assumptions, analysis, and study recommendations offered for consideration. Existing Conditions Existing conditions were reviewed to establish a baseline and identify any future impacts associated with the proposed development. Evaluation of the existing conditions includes a review of traffic volumes, roadway characteristics, and an intersection capacity analysis, which are summarized in the following sections. Traffic Volumes Weekday a.m. and p.m. peak period vehicular turning movement and pedestrian/bicyclist counts were collected by SRF during the week of February 22, 2021 at the following study intersections: x Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road (traffic signal controlled) x Red Fox Road and East Site Access x Red Fox Road and West Site Access Historical average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were provided by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for the study area. Note that traffic data collection efforts were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and traffic volumes were estimated to be approximately 20 to 30 percent lower than normal conditions for the study area. Therefore, the newly collected turning movements were adjusted to reflect non-COVID conditions by using a combination of recently collected ADT volumes in the study area between 2016 and 2019 and turning movement counts collected/developed as part of the Lexington Station Traffic Study completed by SRF in May 2013 $WWDFKPHQW* Figure 1 Project Location Chick-fil-A | Arden Hills | Traffic Study HR Green | Land Development | City of Arden Hills, Minnesota H:\Projects\14324\TS\Figures\Figure1 02114324 March 2021 N Lexington Avenue Red Fox Road Grey Fox Road Target Road County Road E Proposed Site Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 3 Roadway Characteristics A field assessment was completed to identify various roadway characteristics within the transportation system study area, such as functional classification, general configuration, and posted speed limit. A summary of these roadway characteristics is shown in Table 1. Note that these are general characteristics and that there are some deviations within portions of roadway segments. For example, Red Fox Road is a two-lane undivided roadway that transitions into a three-lane undivided roadway with a continuous center two-way left-turn lane east of Lexington Avenue. Table 1. Existing Roadway Characteristics (1) Functional Classification based on MnDOT’s Functional Classification GIS. (2) Red Fox Road transitions from a two-lane undivided roadway to a 3-lane undivided roadway with a continuous center two-way left-turn lane east of Lexington Avenue. Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road is a traffic signal-controlled intersection while the two other study intersections are unsignalized with side-street stop control. Existing geometrics, traffic controls, and traffic volumes in the study area are shown in Figure 2. Intersection Operations Analysis An operations analysis was conducted to determine how traffic is currently operating at the study intersections. All intersections were analyzed using Synchro/SimTraffic computer model. 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 results from SimTraffic, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in Table 2. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation and LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. Overall intersection LOS A through D is generally considered acceptable by drivers in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections LOS Designation Signalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) Unsignalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) A ≤ 10 ≤ 10 B > 10 - 20 > 10 - 15 C > 20 - 35 > 15 - 25 D > 35 - 55 > 25 - 35 E > 55 - 80 > 35 - 50 F > 80 > 50 Roadway Functional Classification (1) General Configuration Posted Speed Limit (mph) Lexington Avenue Minor Arterial 5-lane undivided 40 Red Fox Road Local Road 2-lane undivided/3-lane undivided (2) 30 Figure 2 Existing Conditions Chick-fil-A | Arden Hills | Traffic Study HR Green | Land Development | City of Arden Hills, Minnesota H:\Projects\14324\TS\Figures\Figure2 02114324 March 2021 N Lexington Avenue Red Fox Road Target Road Proposed Site Lexington Ave Red Fox Rd Red Fox Rd Red Fox Rd West Site Access East Site Access 0 (0) 300 (160) 0 (0) 300 (160) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) (0) 0 (370) 130 (0) 0 (370) 130 Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 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 considers 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, most of the delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high levels of delay (poor levels of service) on the side- street approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level of service during peak hours. Results of the existing operations analysis shown in Table 3 indicate that all study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with the existing traffic control, geometric layout, and signal timing. Table 3. Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay LOS Delay Lexington Avenue / Red Fox Road B 11 sec D 37 sec Red Fox Road / East Chick-fil-A Site Access (1) N/A N/A N/A N/A Red Fox Road / West Chick-fil-A Site Access (1) N/A N/A N/A N/A (1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay. N/A - The subject site is currently vacant. The following information summarizes the operational and/or queueing issues identified as part of the existing capacity analysis: x Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road: o Southbound left-turn queues extend beyond turn lane storage and into the Lexington Avenue/ I-694 South Ramp intersection approximately 25 percent of the p.m. peak hour. These queues cause friction over the I-694 bridge, as the left-turn queues restrict the through volume along Lexington Avenue to one (1) lane. o Eastbound left-turn queues extend beyond the existing/subject west site access approximately 25 percent of the p.m. peak hour. o Westbound right-turn queues extend beyond turn lane storage approximately 25 percent of the p.m. peak hour. x Red Fox Road/Chick-fil-A Site Access Locations: o Since the existing site of the proposed Chick-fil-A is currently vacant (Perkins restaurant closed in 2019) there is no traffic entering or exiting the site at these locations at this time. Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 6 Planned Transportation Improvements Ramsey County has programmed a reconstruction project for Lexington Avenue from County Road E to I-694. The reconstruction project includes replacing aging and deteriorating pavement, replacing traffic signals, and improving pedestrian and bicycle facilities. As part of the reconstruction project, Lexington Avenue will be converted from a 5-lane undivided roadway to a 4- lane divided roadway with left- and right-turn lanes. Dual southbound left-turn lanes and an eastbound right-turn lane are planned to be constructed at the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection, which are expected to mitigate existing queuing issues at the intersection. In addition, access management strategies will be implemented along the corridor. The reconstruction project is expected to be completed by 2023, therefore, for the purpose of this study, the reconstruction project was assumed under year 2023 no build and build conditions. Year 2023 No Build Conditions To understand how the planned transportation improvements and general background growth are expected to impact the study intersections, year 2023 no build conditions were reviewed. Note that the year 2023 represents one-year post construction of the proposed development and includes the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project. General Background Traffic Growth To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half percent was applied to the existing peak hour traffic volumes to develop year 2023 background traffic forecasts. This growth rate is consistent with future traffic volume projections identified in the City of Arden Hills - 2040 Comprehensive Plan and with historical growth in the study area based on MnDOT AADT volumes. The proposed Lexington Station Phase 3 development-generated traffic was also included. Intersection Capacity Analysis To determine how the adjacent roadway network will accommodate the year 2023 no build traffic volumes, an intersection capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic computer model. Year 2023 no build traffic forecasts, which include general background growth and the planned transportation improvements, are shown in Figure 3. As mentioned previously, the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project was assumed, and signal timing was optimized. Figure 3 Year 2023 No Build Conditions Chick-fil-A | Arden Hills | Traffic Study HR Green | Land Development | City of Arden Hills, Minnesota H:\Projects\14324\TS\Figures\Figure3 02114324 March 2021 N Lexington Avenue Red Fox Road Target Road Proposed Site Lexington Ave Red Fox Rd Red Fox Rd Red Fox Rd West Site Access East Site Access 0 (0) 365 (245) 0 (0) 365 (245) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) (0) 0 (475) 185 (0) 0 (475) 185 Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 8 Results of the year 2023 no build intersection capacity analysis, shown in Table 4, indicate that all intersections are expected to operate at a LOS C or better during peak hours. With the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project, the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to improve from an overall LOS D to a LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. In addition, queueing on all approaches of the intersection is expected to be significantly reduced, and the maximum southbound left-turn queue is not expected to extend beyond the proposed dual-lane storage. Table 4. 2023 No Build Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection LOS (Delay) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Lexington Avenue / Red Fox Road A (9 sec) C (23 sec) Red Fox Road / East Chick-fil-A Site Access (1) N/A N/A Red Fox Road / West Chick-fil-A Site Access (1) N/A N/A (1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay. N/A - The subject site was assumed to be vacant. The following information summarizes the operational issues that warrant consideration as under year 2023 no build conditions: x Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road: o Eastbound left-turn queues may extend beyond the existing/subject west site access approximately 50 percent of the p.m. peak hour. x Red Fox Road/Chick-fil-A Site Access Locations: o The proposed Chick-fil-A site was assumed to be vacant, with no traffic entering or exiting. Proposed Development The proposed development, shown in Figure 4, includes construction of a 4,995 square foot Chick- fil-A, fast food restaurant with dual drive-thru lanes to be located in the northwest quadrant of the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection. This development would replace the existing building on-site (previously a Perkins restaurant, permanently closed in 2019), which remained vacant during traffic data collection efforts. The proposed development is expected to be fully constructed and open by February 2022. As mentioned previously, Lexington Avenue is expected to be reconstructed independent of the proposed development. Year 2023 Build Conditions To identify potential impacts associated with the proposed development, traffic forecasts for year 2023 conditions (i.e. one-year after opening) were developed. The year 2023 conditions consider general background growth and traffic generated by the proposed development. The following sections provide detail on the proposed development trip generation, intersection capacity analysis, and potential improvements. Figure 4 Proposed Site Plan Chick-fil-A | Arden Hills | Traffic Study HR Green | Land Development | City of Arden Hills, Minnesota H:\Projects\14324\TS\Figures\Figure4 02114324 March 2021 Lexington Avenue Red Fox Road Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 10 Trip Generation To account for traffic impacts associated with the proposed development, trip generation estimates for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours and a daily basis were developed. The trip generation estimates, shown in Table 5, were developed using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Note that no pass-by or diverted trip reductions were applied to provide a conservative estimate. Table 5. Trip Generation Estimates Land Use Type (ITE Code) Size A.M. Trips P.M. Trips Daily Trips In Out In Out Fast Food Restaurant w/Drive-Thru (934) 4,995 sf 102 98 85 78 2,352 Results of the trip generation estimates indicate that the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 200 a.m. peak hour, 163 p.m. peak hour and 2,352 daily trips. Trips generated were distributed throughout the area based on the directional distribution shown in Figure 5, which was developed based on existing travel patterns and engineering judgement. The resultant year 2023 traffic forecasts, which include trips generated by the development, are shown in Figure 6. Intersection Operations Analysis To understand how the adjacent roadway network is expected to operate under year 2023 build conditions, a detailed intersection capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic computer model. Similar to 2023 no build conditions, the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project was assumed to be completed and signal timing was optimized. Results of the year 2023 build intersection capacity analysis, shown in Table 6, indicate that all intersections are expected to operate at a LOS C or better during peak hours. With the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project, the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to continue to operate at an overall LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. Table 6. 2023 Build Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection LOS (Delay) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Lexington Avenue / Red Fox Road B (12 sec) C (26 sec) Red Fox Road / Chick-fil-A East Site Access [Enter Only] (1) A/B (10 sec) A/B (11 sec) Red Fox Road / Chick-fil-A West Site Access [Exit Only] (1) A/B (12 sec) A/C (18 sec) (1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay. The following information summarizes the operational issues that warrant consideration under year 2023 build conditions and as development occurs: Figure 5 Site-Generated Trip Directional Distribution Chick-fil-A | Arden Hills | Traffic Study HR Green | Land Development | City of Arden Hills, Minnesota H:\Projects\14324\TS\Figures\Figure5 02114324 March 2021 N Lexington Avenue Red Fox Road Target Road Proposed Site 55% 30% 5% 10% Figure 6 Year 2023 Build Conditions Chick-fil-A | Arden Hills | Traffic Study HR Green | Land Development | City of Arden Hills, Minnesota H:\Projects\14324\TS\Figures\Figure6 02114324 March 2021 N Lexington Avenue Red Fox Road Target Road Proposed Site Lexington Ave Red Fox Rd Red Fox Rd Red Fox Rd West Site Access East Site Access 95 (80) 365 (245) 365 (245) 5 (5) 95 (75) (480) 195 (5) 10 (550) 280 (350) 165 (55) 25 (145) 90 25 (25) (95) 75 360 (205) Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 13 x Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road: o Eastbound left-turn queues may extend beyond the Chick-fil-A west site access approximately 50 percent of the p.m. peak hour, potentially blocking the access for very brief periods of time. x Red Fox Road/Chick-fil-A East Site Access: o Chick-fil-A generated eastbound left-turning traffic entering at the east site access (very modest forecast volumes) would operate at a LOS B or better and not experience significant delay since (as observed in the traffic simulation) there would be adequate acceptable gaps in the westbound traffic flow on Red Fox Road to complete this left-turn. x Red Fox Road/Chick-fil-A West Site Access: o Chick-fil-A generated southbound left-turning traffic exiting at the west site access would operate at a LOS C or better and not experience significant delay since (as observed in the traffic simulation) there would be adequate acceptable gaps in the traffic flow on Red Fox Road to complete this left-turn either before blocking queues develop or after they clear. o Southbound left-turning traffic exiting the site at the west site access would develop an average queue of two vehicles and a maximum queue of four vehicles. Site Plan Review A review of the proposed site plan (see Figure 4) was completed to identify any issues and recommend potential improvements in regard to access, circulation, and parking. In general, the following should be considered when designing internal traffic controls and roadways: x Incorporate traffic controls, signing, and striping based on guidelines established in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) x Special consideration should be made to limit any sight distance impacts from future structures, landscaping, and signing. Access to the development is proposed at the general location of the two existing site access driveways on Red Fox Road. The East Site Access driveway will operate as an “Enter Only” (due to its proximity to Lexington Avenue) with the West Site Access driveway operating as an “Exit Only”. Proposed on-site parking, traffic circulation, signing and traffic control appear generally reasonable and well configured. The west site access approach to Red Fox Road may infrequently and for very brief periods of time, experience minor congestion from southbound left-turning traffic exiting the site (average queue of two and a maximum queue of four vehicles exiting the site at Red Fox Road). The maximum drive-thru queue of 30 vehicles and average drive-thru queue of 15 vehicles were estimated based on observations at a Chick-Fil-A in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Results indicate that the proposed 40-vehicle drive-thru queue capacity will adequately provide for the expected queues. Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 14 Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations The following information provides a summary of the analysis and review performed as part of the Chick-fil-A Traffic Study: 1. Results of the existing operations analysis indicate that all study intersections currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Queuing issues were identified during the p.m. peak hour on the southbound and eastbound approaches to the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox intersection. 2. Eastbound left-turn queues currently extend beyond the subject west site access approximately 25 percent of the p.m. peak hour. 3. Ramsey County is planning to reconstruct Lexington Avenue from County Road E to I-694 by year 2023. Therefore, these improvements were assumed in the year 2023 no build and build conditions. 4. Results of the year 2023 no build operations analysis indicate that Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to have improved operations and reduced queuing as a result of the County’s reconstruction project. 5. The current development proposal consists of a 4,995 square foot fast food restaurant with drive- thru. The development is expected to be fully constructed by year 2022. Access to the development is proposed at the general location of the two existing site access driveways on Red Fox Road. The East Site Access driveway will operate as an “Enter Only” (due to its proximity to Lexington Avenue) with the West Site Access driveway operating as an “Exit Only”. 6. The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 200 a.m. peak hour, 163 p.m. peak hour and 2,352 daily trips. 7. Results of the year 2023 build intersection capacity analysis indicate that all intersections are expected to operate at a LOS C or better during peak hours. With the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project, the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to continue to operate at an overall LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. 8. Eastbound left-turn queues from the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road traffic signal-controlled intersection, may extend beyond the subject Chick-fil-A west site access approximately 50 percent of the p.m. peak hour, potentially blocking this access for very brief periods of time. The Red Fox Road/West Site Access intersection would operate at LOS C or better and not experience significant delay since there would be adequate acceptable gaps in the traffic flow on Red Fox Road to complete exiting left-turns either before blocking queues develop or after they clear. 9. Chick-fil-A generated eastbound left-turning traffic entering at the east site access (very modest forecast volumes) would operate at a LOS B or better and not experience significant delay since there would be adequate acceptable gaps in the westbound traffic flow on Red Fox Road to complete this left-turn. Chick-fil-A - Arden Hills, MN | Traffic Study March 26, 2021 Page 15 10. Chick-fil-A generated southbound left-turning traffic exiting at the west site access would operate at a LOS C or better and not experience significant delay since there would be adequate acceptable gaps in the traffic flow on Red Fox Road to complete this left-turn either before the blocking queues develop or after they clear. 11. Proposed on-site parking, traffic circulation, signing and traffic control appear generally reasonable and well configured. 12. Monitor traffic operations on the west site access approach to Red Fox Road. Should on-site traffic operations issues become apparent, further review of the on-site approach area traffic control could be considered. 13. The maximum drive-thru queue of 30 vehicles was estimated based on observations at a Chick- Fil-A in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Analysis results indicate that the proposed 40-vehicle drive- thru queue capacity will adequately provide for the expected queues. 14. Based on the findings in this report, it is concluded that the proposed development would not result in a significant degradation in peak period traffic operations and levels of service. Therefore, the City may consider the proposed Chick-fil-A development without concern that it would represent a significant negative traffic impact to the supporting study area roadway system. H:\Projects\14000\14324\TraffStudy\Reports\Report\14324_Chick-fil-A_TS_210326.docx _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 1 of 12 Requested Action HR Green, on behalf of Chick-fil-A has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development. The Applicant is requesting to construct single story fast food restaurant with a drive-through. The property is located at 3855 Lexington Avenue and is zoned B-3, Service Business District, and is designated for Commercial Uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Background 1. Existing Site Conditions: The proposed development site is the location of the former Perkins and is approximately 66,853 square feet (1.535 acres) in size. At their March 15, 2021 meeting the City Council reviewed a concept plan for this development. 2. Surrounding Area: Direction 2040 Comp. Plan Land Use Zoning Existing Land Uses North Right-of-Way (I-694) Right-of-Way (I-694) Right-of-Way (I-694) South Red Fox Road ROW Commercial Red Fox Road ROW B-3 Service Business District Red Fox Road ROW Mixed use commercial building East Right-of-Way (Lexington Ave) Right-of-Way (Lexington Ave) Right-of-Way (Lexington Ave) West Commercial B-3 Service Business District Hotel PC Agenda Item - 3B MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5, 2021 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Planning Consultant SUBECT: Planning Case # 21-011 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Chick-fil-A, represented by HR Green Property Location: 3855 Lexington Avenue Request: Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 2 of 12 3. Site Data: 2040 Future Land Use Plan: COM – Commercial Existing Land Use: Vacant restaurant building Zoning: B-3 Business Service District Lot Size: 1.54 acres Topography: The site is relatively flat, as a result of previous development. The site is approximately 9’ lower than Lexington Avenue. Approvals: 1. Planned Unit Development A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required for all new development and redevelopment in the B-3 District. In addition, a PUD would allow for performance standard flexibility. This proposal involves both the initial Master Plan PUD and the Final PUD. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 3 of 12 2. Conditional Use Permit A Conditional Use Permit is required for drive-up windows in the B-3 district. City Code Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. 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 and the community, 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; 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. Proposed Use: The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building on this site and construct a 4,995 square foot fast food restaurant, with dual drive-through lanes. There are two canopies, totaling approximately 3,654 square feet covering the ordering and pick-up areas. There is also a 50-stall parking lot. The Chick-fil-A building is proposed to be located on the west side of the site, with the storefront facing Lexington Avenue. The applicant is choosing to face the store front towards Lexington Avenue to attract potential new customers that are traveling along the major arterial roadway. Positioning the building in the given layout allows the applicant to begin the drive-thru lane at the north end of the lot and run it along the west property line. The proposed patio will feature 6 tables for a total of 24 outdoor seats. A more detailed description of the use is included in Attachment A. Plan Evaluation 1. Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review Section 1320 – District Provisions A. Floor Area Ratio (FAR), Building Coverage, and Landscaping – Meets Requirements The Zoning Code requirements for properties in the B-3 District allows a maximum FAR of 0.8, a maximum building footprint of 40% and a minimum landscaped lot area of 25 percent. Landscaping is defined as all plantings, including trees, grass, and shrubs. The table below identifies the proposed percentages. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 4 of 12 Proposed Master PUD (Sq. Ft.) Proposed Master PUD (PCT) Permitted (B-3 District) Floor Area Ratio 4,995 sq. ft. 0.07 0.8 Building Coverage 8,649 sq. ft. 12.9% Max. of 40% Landscape Coverage 20,080 sq. ft. 30% Min. of 25% B. Height – Meets Requirements The maximum building height in the B-3 District is 35 feet. The proposed building is a flat roof building approximately 21’ in height. C. Setbacks – Meets Requirements Setbacks in the B-3 District are 50 feet for the front yard, 20 feet for the side yard with minimum of 40 feet total for both side yards, and 50 feet for the rear yard. The table below identifies the required and proposed setbacks. Ordinance Requirements B-3 District Standards Proposed Development Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 feet 62’ (patio)/84’ (building) Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet 160’ Minimum Side Yard Setback 20 feet (min)/40 feet (total) 30’/150’ Minimum Side Yard Setback – Corner 50 feet 120’ Section 1325 – General Regulations A. Accessory Structures – Section 1325.01 – Flexibility Requested The applicant is proposing to install two free-standing canopies over the drive-thru lane: An order point canopy to be located north of the building, setback 14.7 feet from the property line; and an order meal delivery canopy to be located on the west side of the building, over the pick-up window, setback 2.3 feet from the property line. The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 10 feet from the property line in the B-3 District. B. Drive-Through Facilities – Section 1325.04 – Flexibility Requested Chick-fil-A’s drive-thru operation consists of two lanes of customer ordering and two lanes of meal fulfillment. This dual flex lane concept allows the restaurant operator to use the outer lane as either a second meal fulfillment lane or as a by-pass lane at their discretion to properly support the operational needs of the business. If/when the outer lane is not in use, a series of magnetic delineators will be used to merge cars back into one lane for meal fulfillment at the window. The pick-up window will be a multi-function door that can also function as a window. The purpose of the drive thru door is to allow team members to stage more meals and beverages indoors while they are delivering meals outside, directly to vehicle windows. The door allows easier access to the meals without passing them through a small window. During non-peak times or periods of inclement weather, the door can be closed and will function as a standard pickup window. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 5 of 12 The applicant is requesting flexibility of setback requirements for the two canopies proposed on the site. A dual drive-thru lane is proposed to start on the north side of the parking lot, curl around to the west side of building, and end on the south side of the building. The drive thru lane has been positioned in a way to promote circulation on the exterior of the site in order to prevent backups within the parking lot. The applicant is proposing to install two free-standing canopies over the drive-thru lane: An order point canopy to be located north of the building, setback 14.7 feet from the property line; and an order meal delivery canopy to be located on the west side of the building, over the pick-up window, setback 2.3 feet from the property line. The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 10 feet from the property line in the B-3 District. Section 1325.04 of the Zoning Code lists special requirements for drive-up facilities. One of these requirements states no drive up facility shall be located within 1,320’ of another facility. The nearest drive-up facility is the Starbucks, located to the south across Red Fox Road. Section 1320.09 allows this requirement to be waived if the following conditions are met: A. The operation consists of one or more drive-up windows and is an integral part of a building containing one or more other allowed uses, or the operation is part of an architecturally unified complex containing two or more businesses using drive-up windows B. Shared access drives and shared parking are utilized by all such businesses using drive-up windows in said building or complex. C. Only one building or architecturally unified complex containing two or more businesses using drive-up windows will be allowed in addition to one freestanding business using a drive-up window. D. The architecture and the site, grading, circulation, landscaping, screening and signage plans shall unify the appearance and function of the complex or building. E. An architecturally unified complex may consist of one or more buildings on one or more parcels if the intent of providing a unified appearance and function is not compromised. F. The applicant shall submit a circulation plan that demonstrates that the use will not interfere or reduce the safety of non-motorized movements, specifically pedestrian and bicyclists. Section 1325.04 also requires any electronic devices, including loudspeakers, be located at least 50’ from any lot line. The nearest order box on the west side of the site is located approximately 20’ from the west property boundary. The applicant is requesting flexibility from this requirements. C. Landscaping and Tree Preservation – Section 1325.05 Subd. 1 and 1325.055 Minimum Caliper Inches – Meets Requirements The Zoning Code requires that a minimum number of caliper inches of trees be provided based on the gross square footage of the building on the property. The proposed building includes 4,995 gross square feet. This requires a minimum of 15.6 caliper inches. Section 1325.055, Subd. 6, 3, e, of the Zoning Code allows preserved trees on the site to count towards the required landscaping. There are 183 existing caliper inches of significant trees on the site. At least 117 significant caliper inches will remain after tree removal. This meets the minimum caliper inches required. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 6 of 12 Tree Mitigation –Meets Requirements The existing site has 183 caliper inches of significant trees. The Applicant is proposing to remove 66 caliper inches. The applicant is allowed to remove 10% (18.3 caliper inches) without replacement. The removal of the other 47.7 caliper inches requires replacement at one caliper inch per every two caliper inches lost or 23.85 caliper inches. The applicant is proposing to plant 14 deciduous trees, with a total of 35 caliper inches, as well as 16 evergreen trees equaling 42.1 caliper inches. This meets the minimum requirements. Trees along Street Frontage – Meets Requirements The Applicant is proposing to plant 5 new trees along the right-of-way in addition to the preserved 5 trees. This meets the minimum requirement of 1 tree per each 50’ of street frontage. Perennials and Shrubberies – Meets Requirements The Zoning Code requires a minimum of 10 percent of the total landscaped area to be covered with perennials and/or shrubbery. The total landscaped area on the site is 20,080 square feet, resulting in the need for a minimum of 2,080 square feet of perennial and shrubbery cover. The proposed landscape plan includes new landscaping along the perimeter of the drive-through lanes. The proposed perennial and shrub planting beds exceeds the minimum 10 percent of the total landscaped area. Planting Islands – Meets Requirements The parking area is located to the south and to the east of the building. There are planting islands located at the ends of the parking rows. Tree Selection – Meets Requirements The proposed landscape plan includes a variety of tree species, including maples, northern catalpas and evergreens, ranging in size from 2-3 caliper inches. This is consistent with ordinance requirements. Drive-Through Landscaping – Flexibility Requested Section 1325.04, Subdivision 2, requires landscaping on lots used for drive-up windows to the minimum widths: Front Lot Line 20’ Side Lot Line 10’ Rear Lot Line 15’ The parking and drive-thru lane on the east side of the property will be located approximately 11’ from the property line, which is consistent with the existing pavement. On the west side of the property, the curb of the drive thru lane is proposed to be located about 5’ from the west lot line. Along the front lot line, the applicant is proposing the parking lot be setback 20’ from the lot line. The applicant is requesting flexibility in the side and rear yard setbacks to allow for the dual drive- through lanes. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 7 of 12 D. Drainage Wetlands and Flood Plain – Section 1325.05 Subd. 2 – Meets Requirements The city code requires stormwater management be provided to meet water quantity, infiltration, and water quality requirements. The application identifies the construction of a stormwater pond located to the north of the building. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater facilities. E. Lighting – Section 1325.05 Subd. 3 – Meets Requirements The Applicant has submitted a lighting plan that identifies general pole heights and lumen levels; however, the lumen levels are not extended to the property lines. As a condition of approval, all lighting shall be downward directed shoebox style with flush lenses. Details about the proposed lighting are found in Attachment E. During review of the concept plan, the Council expressed concern about the lighting along the west side of the building, and how that might impact the adjacent hotel. The applicant has indicated they are working with the adjacent property owner to mitigate concerns. Additional information on what this involves should be provided. F. Screening – Section 1325.05 Subd. 4 - Meets Requirements The Zoning Code requires mechanical operating equipment located on the ground or roof to be screened from adjacent streets. The mechanical equipment is location on the roof and is screened by a short parapet wall. G. Requirements for Parking, Loading, and Circulation – Section 1325.06 – Flexibly Requested Parking requirements for fast food restaurants include 15 stacking spaces for each customer pick- up window plus one space for each 2 seats. This use requires a total of 58 parking spaces and 15 stacking spaces. The applicant is proposing a total of 50 parking spaces and 40 stacking spaces. The parking lot has been configured to maximize circulation and minimize backups given the drive-thru facility. Access to the parking lot will be provided via a one-way entrance off Red Fox Road and a one-way exit onto Red Fox Road. H. Aesthetics - Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 – Meets Requirements At least seventy-five (75) percent of the exterior building materials should be made of brick masonry, tile masonry, natural stone or its synthetic equivalent, decorative concrete plank, transparent glass or any combination thereof. Trim and other accent or decorative features may be metal, wood, split faced block, EIFS, or stucco. Undesirable materials 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, and mirrored or reflective glass. The proposed building elevations consist of brick veneer with metal coping. During the concept plan discussion, the applicant stated the material finish would be brick. The applicant must clarify the building materials. The Planning Commission should make a determination about whether or not brick veneer meets the City Code requirements. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 8 of 12 2. Sign Code – Chapter 12 – Meets Requirements This property is located in Sign District 5. This district allows freestanding signs 16’ in height and up to 100 square feet in area and wall signs not to exceed 80 square feet. Up to two drive-through menu board signs are permitted per drive-through lane. The total surface area of the two signs shall not exceed forty (40) square feet. The height of the menu boards shall not exceed 8 feet. Freestanding Signs The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing Perkins sign on the north side of the property by changing the sign face. A freestanding sign is also proposed at the corner of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road. This sign is 16’ in height and includes 57 square feet of sign area. Wall Signs The applicant is proposing two styles of wall signs, one 35 square feet in area and one 57 square feet in area. Both styles are internally lit. One of these signs will be located on each face of the building, as shown in the Sign Plan (Attachment F). _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 9 of 12 Drive-Through Menu Boards There are two drive-through menu boards located along the northwest side of the drive-through lane. The menu board is 6.5’ in height and approximately 32.5 square feet in area. 3. Traffic Study A traffic study has been prepared (see Attachment G). The study reviewed existing operations within the area, evaluated traffic impacts to the roadway network, and recommended improvements to the proposed development site. In summary, the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 200 a.m. peak hour, 163 p.m. peak hour, and 2,352 daily site trips. Results of the year 2023 build operations analysis indicate that all intersections are expected to operate at a LOS C or better during peak hours. With the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project, the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to continue to operate at a LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. The report concludes the proposed development would not result in significant degradation in peak period traffic operations and level of service. Suggested Findings of Fact Staff offers the following findings of fact for consideration: 1. The property located at 3855 Lexington Avenue is designated for Commercial uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a fast food restaurant with drive-through lanes. 3. The Final PUD substantially conforms with the requirements of the City Code. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 10 of 12 4. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, flexibility has been requested by the applicant and/or conditions have been placed on an approval that would mitigate the nonconformity. 5. Flexibility through the PUD process has been requested in the following areas: lot size, minimum landscape coverage, building height and parking requirements. 6. The proposed development plan meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the City Code in the following areas: accessory structure setbacks, drive-through facility setbacks, drive-through facility landscaping setbacks, and number of parking spaces. 7. Fast food restaurants with drive-through facilities area allowed as a conditional use in the B-3 District. 8. All new developments or redevelopments in the B-3 district require a planned unit development. 9. The adjacent properties to the south and west are zoned B-3 and are guided for Commercial use in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 10. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. 1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21- 011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development approvals shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 5. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 11 of 12 6. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 7. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City right-of- way. 8. No exterior storage shall be permitted. 9. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water main to the City for review and approval. The Applicant will be responsible to carry out these operation and maintenance activities and to submit the appropriate documentation to the City as specified. 10. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize wooden gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping shall be submitted. Landscape financial security is held for two full growing seasons. 12. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree preservation plan and approved by staff in writing. 13. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. 14. All fencing and retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City. 15. Prior to City Council, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to be approved in writing by staff. 16. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 18. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing. 2. Recommend Approval without Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and _____________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 5, 2021 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2021\21-011 - Chick-Fil-A CUP. Master Plan PUD, Final PUD\PC Packets Page 12 of 12 a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans in the May 5, 2021, Report to the Planning Commission. 3. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the following findings of fact: the Planning Commission should identify findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 4. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue for the following reasons: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Notice and Public Comments Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on April 23, 2021. Notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or residents. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on April 19, 2021. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 19, 2021 (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. Project Narrative B. Location Map C. 11x17 Civil Plan Sets D. Architectural Plans E. Lighting and Photometric Plan F. Signage Plans G. Traffic Study Approved: April 12, 2021 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MARCH 15, 2021 5:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Grant called to order the City Council Work Session at 5:00 p.m. Note: On March 20th, the Mayor signed a determination allowing Councilmembers to participate in City Council meetings via telephone pursuant to State Statute 13D.021 Present via telephone: Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave McClung and Steve Scott Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Dave Perrault, Interim Public Works Director David Swearingen, and Deputy City Clerk Jolene Trauba Also present via telephone: Bolton & Menk Planning Consultants Jane Kansier and Corrin Bemis, HR Green Consultant Joe Vavrina, Chick-fil-A Principal Development Leader Justin Lurk, Boston Scientific Facilities Director Lorne Rothbauer, Boston Scientific Facility Engineer Jeff Hejl, Boston Scientific Environmental Health and Safety Specialists Nicole Lancaster and Sue Thompson, RSP Architects Project Managers John Larson and Joe Ford 1. AGENDA ITEMS A. Planning Case 21-003 – 3855 Lexington Ave N Redevelopment Concept Plan (Old Perkins Site) Planning Consultant Bemis stated that Chick-fil-A has submitted an application for Concept Plan Review, proposing to redevelop a 1.535-acre parcel located at 3855 Lexington Avenue. The Concept Plan Review process is an opportunity for the City Council to provide comments and have an informal discussion regarding the proposed site plan. Planning Consultant Bemis said the applicant is proposing to raze the building and redevelop the site with a new single story approximately 5,000 square foot free-standing restaurant, dual ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MARCH 15, 2021 2 drive-thru facility with free-standing canopies, 50-stall parking lot, and associated utilities. The property is currently zoned B-3 (Service Business District), which permits restaurants with drive- thru facilities via a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is looking for flexibility in a few areas. The City Code requires a total of 58 parking spaces for a restaurant use containing 116 indoor and outdoor seating spaces and the applicant is proposing a total of 50 parking spaces on the site. The applicant is also requesting flexibility on the drive-thru facilities, specifically of setback requirements for the two canopies proposed on the site. The applicant is proposing to install two free-standing canopies over the drive-thru lane: An order point canopy to be located north of the building, setback 14.7 feet from the property line; and an order meal delivery canopy to be located on the west side of the building, over the pick-up window, setback 2.3 feet from the property line. The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 10 feet from the property line in the B-3 District. The Zoning Code lists special requirements for drive-up facilities. One of these requirements states no drive-up facility shall be located within 1,320’ of another facility. The nearest drive-up facility is the Starbucks, located to the south across Red Fox Road. The Zoning Code also requires any electronic devices, including loudspeakers, be located at least 50’ from any lot line. The nearest order box on the west side of the site is located approximately 20’ from the west property boundary. Finally, the applicant is requesting flexibility on landscaping. The parking and drive-thru lane on the east side of the property will be located approximately 11’ from the property line. On the west side of the property, the drive thru lane is proposed to be located about 2.3’ from the west lot line. The Zoning code requires a 20’ setback from the front lot line and a 10’ setback from the side lot line. Chick-fil-A Principal Development Leader Justin Lurk said they are a family owned franchise business where franchisees are only awarded one location. Franchisees live in the community and their main priority is to have a great operation at their location. There are over 2,500 locations nationwide. Mr. Lurk explained the two-lane drive-thru that continues as two lanes to the pick-up door. Councilmember Holden stated her concern about the 2.3’ setback from the property line. She wondered about a car jumping the curb and how they would handle snow plowing. Mr. Lurk said they are requesting flexibility on that requirement and the 2.3’ from the west property line is the distance to the edge of the drive-thru canopy, the columns are about 4.5’ away from the property line, and the drive through lane is 5’ from the property line. HR Green Consultant Joe Vavrina added that from the property line to drive-thru lane is 5.5’ because the curb is 6”. Also, from the back of the Quality Inn property line to the curb is 6’. Mr. Lurk stated that from the back of the curb line at the Quality Inn to the back of the curb line at the drive through will be about 9.5’. Planning Consultant Jane Kansier shared an aerial of the property to further illustrate the property lines and distance from curbs. Mr. Vavrina explained there are two areas to store snow, there will be a basin behind the building and another on the north side of the property. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MARCH 15, 2021 3 Councilmember Holden asked how they would stop the snow from going into the neighboring parking lot. Mr. Vavrina explained they would start plowing on the outer edge and plow toward the building and the catch basin and not pushed out beyond the curb to the neighbor’s property. Councilmember Holden asked how much parking they need. Mr. Vavrina expressed they would like to have more parking spaces but there isn’t room for more. Councilmember Holden stated she would like a sidewalk from the property line on the east to the property line on the west and an agreement with the Quality Inn that they would provide extra parking space if needed. Mr. Lurk said they are proposing a sidewalk along Red Fox Road from Lexington to the property line and they are in discussions with the Quality Inn regarding a shared parking agreement. Councilmember Scott asked if the edge of the current parking for the Perkins lot coincides with the drive-up lanes. Mr. Vavrina responded that the drive thru lanes will be approximately 6” further to the east. Councilmember Scott asked if the canopy would be lit but not on the outside edge, so the residents of the hotel wouldn’t be exposed to any light pollution. Mr. Lurk confirmed the lighting would be pointing down. And noted the new drive-thru design is in response to COVID-19 and dining rooms not being open. It’s hard to predict what customers will do post COVID-19. Mayor Grant asked about exterior building materials. Mr. Vavrina said it will be brick on all four sides of the building, with 2 variations of brick color. Mayor Grant asked if they would be asking for any variances for construction materials. Planning Consultant Bemis replied that she didn’t think so at this time but staff would have to look more closely as the application moves forward. Mayor Grant wanted to know the setback of the building from the Lexington Avenue property line. Mr. Vavrina responded that it will be 84’ from the property line. The grade is steep from east to west and a preliminary grading plan shows the drive-thru lanes will work. They are also proposing to add a sidewalk on Red Fox Road. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MARCH 15, 2021 4 Mr. Vavrina explained further how snowplowing would be handled to bring snow to the stormwater management area north of the building. They will work with Rice Creek Water District on water quality, but they are reducing the amount of impervious that is there. Councilmember Holmes wondered if the Quality Inn parking lot was part of the issue with the setbacks. Mr. Vavrina responded yes, the hotel parking lot setback is at 5’6” so even in today’s conditions they don’t meet the setbacks. Councilmember Holmes asked if they could flip the plans so the driveway was on the east side. Councilmember Scott said the traffic can only go counter clockwise through the drive-thru in order to have the drivers on the correct side of the vehicle. Councilmember Holden suggested they move the monument sign closer to Lexington Avenue for better visibility. She said she was opposed to have signage on the west side of the building because of the hotel and the small amount of traffic coming from that direction. Councilmember Holden asked how many customers could be inside the building. Mr. Lurk said there are 92 interior seats and 24 patio seats. A typical number is staff is 10-15 during the largest shift. Councilmember Holden asked how they would control the sound from the drive-thru speakers. Mr. Lurk said there would be landscaping between the order points and the property lines, and would clarify sound control at the next meeting. Mr. Lurk noted their typical hours of operation are 6:30 am to 10 pm. Councilmember McClung said he is concerned with the proposed order board facing the hotel. He wondered if they could shift the building to the east five feet to allow for a larger space between the order boards and the hotel. Mr. Lurk mentioned that the real estate broker has been in discussions with the Quality Inn for shared parking and said they will contact the hotel owner to address his other concerns. Mayor Grant asked if all the glass on the building would be transparent. Mr. Lurk replied that the majority of the glass is transparent with the exception of the small windows near the back of the building where the kitchen will be located, they will be glazed glass. Councilmember Holmes asked for clarification of the proposed canopy. Mr. Lurk explained that during peak hours associates will be in the drive-thru lanes taking orders face to face under the canopy, giving the kitchen longer to prepare the food. During non-peak hours the customer would order from the order boards. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MARCH 15, 2021 5 Mr. Lurk noted the follow up items of signage, noise, consider moving the monument sign, distance between the Quality Inn and to discuss issues with the hotel owner. They will address as many as possible before the next meeting. Councilmember Scott wondered if they would have a flag pole. Mr. Lurk said yes, there will be a new flag pole on the property. B. Boston Scientific JCF Resolution and Neighborhood Concerns City Administrator Perrault said at the March 8, 2021 City Council meeting Boston Scientific asked the Council to consider an application for their Job Creation Fund. Council also asked to discuss a letter from residents and address their concerns. Boston Scientific Facility Engineer Jeff Hejl said he is the lead project manager for the Arden Hills Building 14 expansion. He stated they had a neighborhood review meeting on December 14, 2020. RSP Architects Project Manager John Larson presented the information that was shown at the neighborhood meeting, including a map of the site and proposed expansion, explanation of the materials, equipment, landscape and tree preservation plan, artists’ renderings and site photos. Councilmember Holden wondered what trees would be take down. Mr. Hejl stated buckthorn and one or two trees of substance will be taken out but replaced with more caliper inches than what is removed. Some trees will also be relocated. RSP Architects Project Manager and Joe Ford added the range of trees being removed start at four caliper inches and go up to 14 caliper inches. Mr. Hjel said they would like to respond to the letter received by the Council from Mr. Mills and other neighbors. The first concern was regarding noise. They are aware that there has been instances of garbage collection between 5:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., Boston Scientific has been in touch with the hauler and has started to physically block off the refuse containers between 5:00 p.m. and 7 a.m. A noise study was done in January 2021 in regard to HVAC equipment noise. Results indicated that noise levels did not exceed the night time noise limits. The argon and nitrogen gas storage delivery company has been contacted regarding delivery times and the gate will be locked during the same hours as refuse containers. In regard to previous noise studies, a study done 15 years ago did show they were above PCA levels but steps were taken to reduce the noise and they are in compliance now. They are working with a consultant to ensure the design of the new building stays within the limits. Councilmember Holmes asked if the equipment could be at ground level instead of in the penthouse. Mr. Ford said there were a number of constraints, one being the slope of the property. He didn’t feel the sound trajectory would change being on the roof or the ground given the planned screening. Operationally the equipment works better being overhead. From:Ankit Bhakta To:Dave Perrault; David Grant; Brenda Holden; Fran Holmes; Dave McClung; Steve Scott Subject:Quality Inn Impact (Perkins Redevelopment) Date:Monday, March 15, 2021 3:54:23 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. Hello, I would like to voice my concerns regarding the proposal and the impact it will have on my property, the Quality Inn & Suites. - The initial proposal is asking for a setback of 2.3' for the dual lane drive thru which will have a severe impact with noise on my property. As vehicles wait in line, guest rooms adjacent to Chick fil A will have deteriorated experience with an increase in decibel levels. This may further void my franchise agreement with Choice Hotels, as they have stringent guest room noise requirements affecting my asset value. - City zoning requirements for a loudspeaker of 50 feet within my boundary line should be honored. Chick fil A's operating hours from 6 AM - 10:30 PM will again affect my customer's hotel stay. - Chick fil A signage should not reduce the visibility of my Quality Inn monument signage, as well as my physical building. I am not opposed to any new development at the old Perkins site and would love to see Chick fil A in Arden Hills, but I cannot have my property negatively affected. Regards, Ankit Bhakta Planning Case #21-011 –Public Hearing Required Applicant: Chick-fil-A Property Location: 3855 Lexington Avenue Request: Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development Zoning: B-3 Service Business District Land Use: Commercial Uses Acreage: 1.535 1 2 •The Applicant is requesting to construct single story fast food restaurant with a drive-through. •The property is located at 3855 Lexington Avenue and is •Zoned B-3, Service Business District, •Designated for Commercial Uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. •The proposed development site is the location of the former Perkins and is approximately 66,853 square feet (1.535 acres) in size. Background Proposed Use •The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building on this site and construct a 4,995 square foot fast food restaurant, with dual drive -through lanes. •The Applicant is proposing two canopies covering the ordering and pick-up areas. •The Applicant is proposing a 50-stall parking lot. •The Chick-fil-A building is proposed to be located on the west side of the site, with the storefront facing Lexington Avenue. •The proposed patio will feature 6 tables for a total of 24 outdoor seats. 3 Approvals •A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required for all new development and redevelopment in the B-3 District. •A Conditional Use Permit is required for drive-up windows in the B-3 district. 4 Comprehensive Plan •The Subject Property is guided Commercial (COM) in the Land Use Plan. •The COM designation includes areas designated for a broad range of retail, shopping, and services to meet the needs of the community and region. 5 Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •Meets Requirements 6 Ordinance Requirements B-3 District Standard Proposed Development Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)0.8 0.07 Maximum Structure Coverage 40%12.9% Minimum Landscape Lot Area 25%30% Minimum Front Yard Setback 50 ft 62 ft (patio)/84 ft (building) Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 ft 160 ft Minimum Side Yard Setback 20 ft (min) 40 ft (total) 30 ft (min) 150 ft (total) Minimum Side Yard Setback -Corner 50 ft 120 ft Minimum Lot Area 13,000 sf 66,853 sf Maximum Building Height 35 ft 21 ft 7 Design Standards Accessory Structures –Flexibility Requested •Two free -standing canopies over the drive-thru lane are proposed: 1.An order point canopy north of the building: setback 14.7’ 2.An order meal delivery canopy on the west side of the building: setback 2.3’ •The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 10 feet from the property line in the B-3 District. 8 1 2 Design Standards Drive-Through Facilities –Flexibility Requested •A dual drive-thru lane is proposed to start on the north side of the parking lot, curl around to the west side of building, and end on the south side of the building. •Section 1325.04 states: •no drive up facility shall be located within 1,320’ of another facility. The nearest drive-up facility is the Starbucks, located to the south across Red Fox Road. •electronic devices, including loudspeakers, shall be located at least 50’ from any lot line. The nearest order box on the west side of the site is located approximately 20’ from the west property boundary. 9 Design Standards Minimum Caliper Inches and Tree Mitigation – Meets Requirements •A minimum of 15.6 caliper inches are required on the site. •There are 183 existing caliper inches of significant trees on the site and at least 117 significant caliper inches will remain after tree removal. •The Applicant is proposing to remove 66 caliper inches, 47.7 of which they are required to replace at a rate of one caliper inch per every two inches lost (23.85 inches). •The applicant is proposing to plant 14 deciduous trees, with a total of 35 caliper inches, as well as 16 evergreen trees equaling 42.1 caliper inches. 10 Design Standards Other Landscaping Requirements –Meets Requirements •The Applicant is proposing to plant 5 new trees along the right-of-way in addition to the preserved 5 trees. This meets the minimum requirement of 1 tree per each 50’ of street frontage. •The proposed perennial and shrub planting beds exceeds the minimum 10 percent of the total landscaped area. •The Applicant is proposing planting islands at the ends of the parking rows. •The proposed landscape plan includes a variety of tree species, including maples, northern catalpas and evergreens, ranging in size from 2-3 caliper inches. This is consistent with ordinance requirements. 11 Design Standards Drive-Through Landscaping –Flexibility Requested •Section 1325.04, Subdivision 2, requires landscaping on lots used for drive-up windows to the minimum widths: •The applicant is requesting flexibility in the side and rear yard setbacks to allow for the dual drive-through lanes. 12 Required Setback Proposed Setback Front Lot Line 20’20’ Side Lot Line 10’5’ Rear Lot Line 15’11’ Design Standards Drainage Wetlands and Flood Plain –Meets Requirements •The city code requires stormwater management be provided to meet water quantity, infiltration, and water quality requirements. •The application identifies the construction of a stormwater pond located to the north of the building. •Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long -term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater facilities. 13 Design Standards Lighting –Meets Requirements •Plan includes: •General pole heights •Lumen levels (not extended to the property lines) •As a condition of approval, all lighting shall be downward directed shoebox style with flush lenses. •During review of the concept plan, the Council expressed concern about the lighting along the west side of the building, and how that might impact the adjacent hotel. The applicant has indicated they are working with the adjacent property owner to mitigate concerns. 14 Design Standards Requirements for Parking, Loading, and Circulation –Flexibility Requested •Code requires 15 stacking spaces for each customer pick-up window plus one space for each 2 seats (58 parking spaces and 15 stacking spaces) •The Applicant is proposing a total of 50 parking spaces and 40 stacking spaces. 15 Design Standards Exterior Materials –Meets Requirements •At least 75% must be a combination of brick, masonry, tile masonry, natural stone or equivalent, glass •The proposed building elevations consist of brick veneer with metal coping •The Planning Commission should make a determination about whether or not brick veneer meets the City Code requirements. 16 Design Standards Freestanding Signs –Meets Requirements •Code allows freestanding signs 16’ in height and up to 100 square feet in area •Applicant to utilize the existing Perkins sign on the north side of the property by changing the sign face. •A freestanding sign is also proposed at the corner of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road. This sign is 16’ in height and includes 57 square feet of sign area. 17 Design Standards Wall Signs –Meets Requirements •Code allows wall signs up to 80 square feet •Applicant is proposing: •One 35 square feet sign •One 57 square feet •Both styles are internally lit •One of these signs will be located on each face of the building 18 Design Standards Drive-Through Menu Boards –Meets Requirements •Code allows two drive-through menu board signs per drive -through lane. The total surface area of the two signs shall not exceed 40 square feet. The height of the menu boards shall not exceed 8 feet. •Applicant is proposing: •Two drive -through menu boards •6.5’ in height •32.5 square feet in area 19 Traffic Study •Traffic study completed in March, 2021 •Summary: •The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 200 a.m. peak hour, 163 p.m. peak hour, and 2,352 daily site trips. •Results of the year 2023 build operations analysis indicate that all intersections are expected to operate at a LOS C or better during peak hours. •With the Lexington Avenue reconstruction project, the Lexington Avenue/Red Fox Road intersection is expected to continue to operate at a LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. •The report concludes the proposed development would not result in significant degradation in peak period traffic operations and level of service. 20 Traffic Study 21 Traffic Study 22 Public Notice •Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on May 13, 2021. Notice was prepared by the City and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. •Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or residents. 23 •Approval with Conditions:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the ten (18) conditions. •Approval without Conditions: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans in the May 24, 2021, Report to the City Council. 2 Proposed Motion Language •Denial:Motion to deny Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the following findings of fact: the City Council should identify findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. •Table:Motion to table Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue for the following reasons: the City Coucnil should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. 3 Proposed Motion Language Questions? Planning Case 21-011 –Chick-fil-A CUP and PUD Page 1 of 4 PUBLIC HEARING – 9B MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-005 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Grove Church (Everyday Church) Request: Zoning Code Amendment – Chapter 13 – Section 1320-District Provisions – Land Use Chart Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider • Hold the required public hearing for Planning Case 21-005, an application for an amendment to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the Arden Hills City Code to allow for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District in City Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. The City Council will be asked to make a formal decision regarding the application under Agenda Item 10B. Approval of a Zoning Code Amendment requires an affirmative vote of three councilmembers. Background Grove Church, otherwise known as Everyday Church, (“The Applicant”) is interested in developing the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road (“Subject Property”) as a House of Worship. The Property is currently owned by ET Arden Hills LLC and is developed with a two- story office building and associated parking lot. The office building is no longer in use. The Subject Property includes two access points off of Red Fox Road. The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. Page 2 of 4 At a special work session on March 22, 2021, the Council discussed the Applicant’s proposal to develop a House of Worship in the I-FLEX District. Following the discussion, the City Council directed staff to review and propose a zoning code amendment to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. The amendment will impact Zoning Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. At their meeting on May 5, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-005 to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. The I-FLEX District is guided as Mixed Business (MB) and Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. The MB area is designated for a variety of businesses, including commercial, certain light industrial uses, warehousing, office, general business, and retail. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 0% to 50% Light Industrial; 0% to 50% Retail; and 25% to 100% Office. A development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. The IND area is designated for a broad range of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, processing, and warehousing. This land use may also include offices. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 50% to 100% Light Industrial and 0% to 100% Office. A Development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. According to the Comprehensive Plan the total area of the MB land use is 55 acres, or 0.9% of the total land area in the City, the total area of the IND land use is 346 acres, or 5.7% of the total land area in the City. The entire I-FLEX District is within the Red Fox/Grey Fox/Lexington Avenue Business Area which is discussed in the Land Use Chapter. This area includes Red Fox and Grey Fox roads and is bounded by Lexington Avenue, Highway 51, Interstate 694, and the Canadian Pacific railway. This area is used by a number of small and large businesses for a variety of retail, manufacturing, distribution, warehousing, and office uses. This area was largely developed between the 1950s and 1970s, though the retail area along Lexington Avenue has had some new development and Page 3 of 4 redevelopment in the last 15 years. This area is marked as an area of possible redevelopment in 2040. Plan Evaluation Zoning code amendments are required when an applicant seeks to classify a specific use as allowable (either as a permitted or conditional use) in a district that otherwise does not allow it. It may also be used to permanently change other requirements of the Zoning Code. In this case, the Applicant is requesting a zoning code amendment to allow for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District. A full evaluation of the proposal was presented to the Planning Commission on May 5, 2021. The memo to the Planning Commission on this case is provided in Attachment D. Draft minutes from the meeting are included in Attachment E. Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review Under City Code Section 1320.04, the purposes of I-FLEX Zoning District are: 1. To preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate existing development in the district. 2. To attract new development that is compatible with existing development in the district in terms of use, performance, character, quality and appearance of buildings and sites. 3. To permit only those uses that will have traffic generation characteristics that are compatible with existing development in the district and that will ensure reasonable traffic operation on streets in the vicinity. 4. To encourage new site development that will be compatible with existing site development standards of existing development in the district. 5. To promote flexibility in land uses and site development standards to achieve the objectives of the I-FLEX District. Permitted, conditional, and accessory uses in the I-FLEX District include: I-FLEX District Uses Permitted Conditional Accessory Business Services Hotel Or Motel Antenna, Dish Or Tower Clinics And Medical Offices Micro Brewery Personal Services Sport And Fitness Clubs Micro Distillery Retail Sales And Services Daycare Facilities – Over 10 Multiple Occupancy Building Financial Institutions Public Use Class 1 Manufacturing And Processing Thrift Store Offices Utility Transmission Research And Development Facilities Warehousing Utility Line Distribution Special requirements exist in the I-FLEX District. To further accomplish the stated purpose of the I-FLEX District, proposals for new construction, redevelopment of a site, and significant Page 4 of 4 modifications to existing sites shall use the Planned Unit Development (PUD) or the Conditional use Permit (CUP) process. The proposal shall identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning requirements as well as the reasons why the modifications would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the purpose of the I-FLEX District. Modifications to these requirements may be granted by the City without a variance through the PUD process. Section 1320.12 also states that the provisions in this Section may be modified by the City Council to allow planning flexibility without the need for a variance to encourage cooperative dialogue between the applicant and the City. The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the I-FLEX Zoning District to allow House of Worship as a Conditional Use. If the zoning change is approved, the applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at this site. Discussion The City Council should consider RLUIPA: • Would the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) allow the applicant to mount a serious challenge to the City’s denial of their application? • RLUIPA prohibits a government from imposing a land use regulation in a way that substantially burdens the religious exercise of a religious assembly unless the government can show that the burden: o is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and o is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.” Further, a government also may not impose a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly. The proposed amendments have been provided in Attachments B and C. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the proposed changes. Public Notice and Comments A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on May 13, 2021. Staff has not received any public comments on this application as of May 19, 2021. Attachments A. Applicant’s Narrative B. Redlined Land Use Chart C. Clean Land Use Chart D. Planning Commission Memo E. Draft Planning Commission Minutes F. City Council Presentation ZONING AMENDMENT TO ALLOW PLACES OF WORSHIP IN THE I-FLEX ZONING DISTRICT Grove Community Church is requesting a zoning code amendment to allow Places of Worship to be allowed as a conditional use permit in the I-Flex zoning district. The zoning amendment will allow our church to buy and occupy the building at 1275 Red Fox Road. We have been looking for the right building to purchase since 2018 and are very excited about the opportunity to be part of the Arden Hills community. The dream of Grove Community Church originated in 2009 and became a reality when we officially launched the church in 2015. Our mission as a community is to empower everyday people to live a holistic lifestyle of following Jesus. The property at 1275 Red Fox is the church home that we hope to see future generations experience spiritual development. We reviewed the city zoning codes and comprehensive plan to determine the allowance and standards required for a church. We learned that although places of worship are allowed as a conditional use permit (CUP) in the neighboring B Districts, they are not designated within the I-Flex zoning district. However, other public uses such as: hotels microbreweries, club sports and daycares are allowed in both the I- Flex and B-Districts. Further, in looking at the Comprehensive Plan we noticed that the neighboring B districts and the northern area of the I-Flex district, which includes 1227 Red Fox Road, are guided Mixed Business. With both areas guided for the same purpose we believe it is reasonable for them to share similar land uses, especially a CUP use that must meet specific standards and are subject to conditions that uphold public safety and compatibility. To further justify the zoning amendment request we considered the benefits of having a Place of Worship within the I-Flex district. We wish to point out the following observations: ●The building has been vacant for over 2 years and showing signs of maintenance. ●The industrial park could benefit with new activity. ●The park is a natural extension of the neighboring B districts as they share the same streets and traffic patterns. ●Places of worship tend to have compatible traffic volumes with mixed-use industrial/businesses parks as services are on weekends and/or evenings while most businesses commonly have weekday am/pm traffic volumes. ●A place of worship provides patrons to surrounding local businesses during typical non-business hours. (weekday evenings and weekends) Attachment A ●Places of worship are destination places thus people coming to the church will be accustomed to the traffic and parking patterns within the industrial park. ●A CUP will ensure that the any request will be reviewed by city staff, planning commission, the city council and the public to ensure that the request is appropriate and compatible. ●Places of Worship are vibrant and energetic creating activity and fellowship to a neighborhood. We understand that this request is not specific to our site or our desire to be in Arden Hills but will be considered as a change for all land within the I-Flex zoning district. We strongly believe that the addition of Places of Worship as a CUP in the I-Flex district is appropriate and reasonable. The industrial park appears to be in a transition from an older traditional industrial park to a more mixed-use business park. This transition is recognized by the city under the newly designation of Mixed-Use in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, blending the Mixed-Use designation into both the I-Flex and B districts to the west and south. With the transitioning of industrial parks throughout the country and the metropolitan area it is common to see places of worship as an allowed use in similar type industrial/business parks. For example, the Westwood Community Church in Bloomington was approved as a CUP in an Industrial Park in 2018. Similar to this request, the Church (Places of Assembly) requested to move into a vacant office/ warehouse building within a I-2 zoning district. The site is adjacent Interstate 494 to the south, Office/Warehouse zoning to the north and west and Office CO--1 zoning to the east. The vacant office/warehouse building is 71,798 square feet in size with Westwood Community Church occupying the southern half and the remaining space to be leased. The Church is located at 6301 Cecilia Circle, Bloomington. (see attached photos) As part of our congregation fellowship and community outreach our plan is to serve coffee and light snacks after services and during other church activities. We would like the opportunity to provide this same fellowship to the general public as a retail sales and service accessory use to our Church. Our intent is to welcome the community to the church by providing them an opportunity to visit our building while enjoying a beverage and/or light snack. We look forward to being a part of Arden Hills. Thank you for your consideration. STOWE AVE L A K E V A L E N TIN E R D RED FOX RD GREY FOX RD INGERSON RDROUND LAKE RD WAMBLE DRSIEMS CTSNELLING AVE NCOLLEEN AVE GLEN PAUL AVE TILLER LN HA M LINE VENUS AVE THOM DR ARDEN VIEW DR GLENARDEN RDCHATHAM AVEAMBLE RD NOBLE RD GRAMSIE RD ARDEN PL GRANT RD OAK AVE EDGEWATER AVE JERROLD AVE DUNLAP ST NHARRIET AVE FLORAL DR W GLENVIEW AVE KARTH LAKE DR GATEWAY BLVD W Y N C R E S T CARLTON DR FO RE S T LN PRIOR AVE NCUMMINGS PARK DR ROYAL LN KATIE LN PINE TREE DRFAIRVIEW AVE NRIDGEWOOD RDCRYSTAL AVE PLEASANT DRA RDEN OAKS DR V A L E N T I N E AVE BENTON WAYINDIAN OAKS TRL SKILESLNBRIAR BECKMAN AVE LAMETTI LN M CC RA C KE N L N KEITHSON DRASBURY AVE NNURSERY HILL LN BUSSARD CT DAWN CIR W JAMES AVEJANET CT CANNONGLENHILL RDNORMA AVEARDENVIEWCTR O Y KATIE CT GLENARDENCTRIDGEWOOD CTKARTH LAKE C I RGALE CIRMCCLUNG DR WYNCREST LNS A N D E E N R D PA RKSHORE DR EIDE CIR NORTH-WOODS DRNURSERY HILL CT C U M M I N G S L NVALENTINE CTINGERSON CT CO L L E EN CT GL EN VIE W CT HU N TERS CT SHORELINELNPASCAL AVE NLAKE LN NCONNELL Y AVE THO M CT AMBLE CIRCHATHAM CTCOLLEEN CIRROLLING HILLS RDARDEN OAKS CTNORMA CIRIND I AN PLEDGEWATER AVENORMAAVE TILLER LNSNELLING AVE NDUNLAP ST NARDENP L S K IL ES L N FAIRVIEW AVE NHAMLINE AVE NG L ENHILL R D WYN RIDGE PLEASANT CIR ARDEN INDIAN OAKS CT JAMES CIRDELLVIEW AVEDELLVIEW AVEDELLWOOD STGATEWAY CT VALENTINE CREST RD BRUEBERR Y LN BRIARKNOLL CIR DELLWOOD AVELAMETTI CIRWALDEN PLWEDGEWOOD CIRPRIOR A VEINDIAN OAKS CIR C H A T H A M CI R L A K E J O H A N N A B LV D LAKE JOHANNA BLVDRIDGEEDGEWATER AVEFAIRVIEW AVE NFERNWOOD STSNELLING AVE NSHORELINELNK A T IE LN COUNTY ROAD D W SHOREWOODDR LAKE LN COUNTY ROAD E W LAKEJOH A N N A BLVD GLEN PAUL AVECLEVELAND AVE NNEW BRIGH TON RDNEW BRIGHTON RDHUDSON RDTHOM DRCLEVELAND AVE NBRIGHTON WAYNEW BRIGHTON RDINTERSTATE 35WCOUNTY ROAD E2 W CO UN TY R OA D E 2 WLAKEVIEWCT C H A T H A M A V E SIEMS CTARDEN PL GLE N ARDENRDSNELLIN G AVE NARDEN OAKS DRSNELLING AVE NBETHEL DROLD HIGHWAY 10SNELLING AVE NVENUS AVEINTERSTATE 35WLAKE VALENTINE RDINTERSTATE 35WROUNDLA K E R D W O L D H I G H W A Y 1 0 LAKES HORE PL %&d( %&d( %&d( %&h( %&h( INTERSTATE 694 INTERSTATE 694 ?ÖA@ )m )m HI G H WA Y 1 0 ?÷A@?÷A@COUNTY ROAD 96 W COUNTY ROAD 96 W ABELE ST (Private)TODD DR (Private)TODD DR (Private) P RIO R A V E N(Pr i vate)LISA LN (Private)LIS A C T (Priv ate)PRIOR CT(Private)TODD DR (Priva t e)PRIOR AVE N(Private))m COUNTY ROAD I W COUNTY ROAD I W LEXINGTON AVE NLEXINGTON AVE NKNOLL DR VISTA CTDAWN CIR E C OLLEEN AV E ARDENVI EWDR COUNTY ROAD F W INNOVATION WAY (Private)FERNWOOD STPLEASANT DR A M B L E D R COUNTY ROAD 96 W LEXINGTON AVE NLEXINGTON AVE NDR CT BOSTON SCIENTIFIC DR (Private)BETHEL DRBET H EL DR COUNTY ROAD E W LEXINGTON AVE NBENTON WAYAVE INGERSON RD AVE NWOOD RDCOUNTY ROAD E W HAMLINE AVE NHAMLINE AVE NPrivateKATIE LNKEITHSON DR AL HILLS DRThe 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. Adopted: April 12, 1993 Updated: October 4, 2017 Zoning Map ¯0 1,750 3,500 Feet TRC CC- Campus Commercial TRC CO- Civil/Open Space TRC FO- Flex Office TRC RMU- Retail Mixed Use TRC NR-1- Residential TRC NR-2- Residential TRC NR-3- Residential TRC NR-4- Residential TRC OMU- Office Mixed Use TRC OS- Open Space TRC TC-1- Town Center TRC TC-2- Town Center TRC TC-3- Town Center TRC- Water Infrastructure R-1 - Single Family Residential District R-2 - Single & Two Family Residential District R-3 - Townhouse & Low Density Multiple Dwelling District R-4 - Multiple Dwelling District B-1 - Limited Business District B-2 - General Business District B-3 - Service Business District B-4 - Retail Center District NB - Neigborhood Business District CC - Civic Center District INST - Institutional District GB - Gateway Business I-1 - Limited Industrial District I-2 - General Industrial District I-FLEX District POS - Parks and Open Space District CD - Conservation District Railroad ROW WATER Project Site                     %07.5%-1)27%1)$%-2)!+ .5%-1)27%1)$%-2)!+ %$)3,%-1)27%1)$%-2)!+ )'(%-1)27%1)$%-2)!+ %)'(".0(..$%1)$%-2)!+ .5-%-2%0 %)'(".0(..$31)-%11 )6%$31)-%11 .,,%0#)!+ .,,3-)27)6%$1% !,/31.,,%0#)!+ %2!)+)6%$1% &&)#%)6%$1% +%6&&)#% )'(2-$3120)!+&&)#% 3"+)#-12)232).-!+ 2)+)27 !0*/%-/!#% !0*0%1%04% )'(2.& !7  !)+0.!$   )+%1 ²  .,/0%(%-1)4%+!- //0.4%$"7%2.3-#)+  //0.4%$"7)27.3-#)+%-$)-')1#+!),%0()1,!/)1)-2%-$%$&.00%&%0%-#%/30/.1%1.-+7!-$)1-.2!+%'!++70%#.0$%$,!/.01304%7 (%)27.&0$%-)++11(!++-.2"%+)!"+%&.0!-7$!,!'%1.0#+!),12(!2!0)1%$3%2.!##30!#7!4!)+!")+)27 31%.0,)131%.&2(%)-&.0,!2).-(%0%)-/3013!-22.2!232%  3"$  !-$1%+!- Project Site Project SiteArden Hills, Minnesota Westwood Church SiteBloomington, MinnesotaEXAMPLE: WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH EXAMPLE: WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH 1320.05 Land Use Chart. (revised 9/25/174/28/21) Note: To view this chart in PDF, please click HERE. You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed. Uses: Zoning Districts: R- 1 R- 2 R- 3 R- 4 NB B- 1 B- 2 B- 3 B- 4 CC GB I-1 I-2 I-FLEX CD POS INST Antenna, Dish or Tower CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA Boarding house C C C C == == == == == C == == == == == == == Brewpub == == == == == == C C C == == == == == == == == Business service == == == == == A P P P C P P P P == == == Clinic, medical office == == == == P P P P P C P P P P == == == Club or lodge (non-profit) == == == == == P P P == C == == == == == == == Club , sports & fitness == == == == == A P P P C P P == P == == == Commercial recreation - indoor == == == == == == P P P == == P == == == == == Daycare Facility, over 10 == == == == P P P P P == P P P P == == == Day care, family - 10 or less A A A A A == A == == == == == == == == == == Day care, group family - 14 or less CA CA CA CA CA == CA == == == == == == == == == == Dog kennel == == == == == == C C == == == == == == == == == Dog run A A A == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Drive -up windows == == == == == == C C C == A == == == == == == "Dry cleaning & laundry, pick-up station" == == == == C == A A == == A == == == == == == "Dry cleaning & laundry, self-service laundry" == == == == C == C C == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: density zoning D D D D == == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: multiple family == == C C C == C == == C C == == == == == == Dwelling: single-family attached C C D D == == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: single-family detached P P P P == == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: two-family C C P P C == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: live-work unit == == == == C == == == == == == == == == == == == Financial institution & service == == == == P P P P P C P P P P == == == Garage, truck == == == == == == == == == == == C C == == == == Higher Education, Campus == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == C Home occupation : Class I A A A A A == == == == A == == == == == == == Home occupation : Class II CA CA CA CA CA == == == == C == == == == == == == Hospital == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Hotel/motel == == == == == == C P C C C == == C == == == House of worship C C C C C C C C C C == == == ==C == == == Manufactured home park == == C == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Manufacturing & processing : Class I == == == == == == A A A == P P P P == == == Manufacturing & processing : Class II == == == == == == == == == == == == P == == == == Micro brewery == == == == == == C C C == C == == C == == == $WWDFKPHQW% Micro distillery == == == == == == C C C == C == == C == == == Mortuary, funeral home == == == == == == P P == C == == == == == == == Multiple occupancy building == == == == C C C C C C C C C C == == == Nursery C C C C == == == == == == == == == == == == == Nursing home and assisted living C C C C == == D == == C == == == == == == == Office == == == == P P P P P P P P P P == == == Pawn shop == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == P == Personal services == == == == C A P P P C P == == A == == == Public use C C C C C C C C C C C C C C == == == Research and development facility == == == == C P C C C == P P P P C C == Research animals == == == == == == C == == == == C C == == == == Residence Hall, dormitory == == == C == C D == == == == == == == == == == Residential facility, state licensed, serving 1- 6 P P P P P == P == == == == == == == == == == Residential facility, state licensed, serving 7- 16 C C C C C == C == == == == == == == == == == Restaurant and restaurant-fast food == == == == C A P P P C P C C == == == == Retail sales & service == == == == P A P P P C A A A A == == == School, general education C C C C == == == == == C == == == == == == == School, specialized education == == == == == C C C C C == == == == == == == Service station == == == == == == C C == == C C C == == == == Storage, exterior == == == == == == == == == == == == CA == == == == Studio == == == == C C P P P C == == == == == == == Theater, indoor == == == == A C P == C == == == == == == == Thrift Store == == == == == == == == C == == == == C == == == Utility distribution line P P P P P P P P P == P P P P A P == Utility substation == == == == == == == == == == == C C == == == == Utility transmission C C C C C C C C C == C C C C C C == Vehicle - motorized, leasing and rentals == == == == == == C C == == == == == == == == == Vehicle - motorized, service == == == == == == C C == == == == == == == == == Warehousing == == == == == A A A A == C P P C == == == "P" = Permitted; "D" = Planned Unit; "== " = Not Permitted; "C" = Conditional Use Permit; "A" = Accessory; "CA"= Conditional Accessory Use Permit, "I" = Interim Use Permit" 1320.05 Land Use Chart. (revised 4/28/21) Note: To view this chart in PDF, please click HERE. You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed. Uses: Zoning Districts: R- 1 R- 2 R- 3 R- 4 NB B- 1 B- 2 B- 3 B- 4 CC GB I-1 I-2 I-FLEX CD POS INST Antenna, Dish or Tower CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CA Boarding house C C C C == == == == == C == == == == == == == Brewpub == == == == == == C C C == == == == == == == == Business service == == == == == A P P P C P P P P == == == Clinic, medical office == == == == P P P P P C P P P P == == == Club or lodge (non-profit) == == == == == P P P == C == == == == == == == Club , sports & fitness == == == == == A P P P C P P == P == == == Commercial recreation - indoor == == == == == == P P P == == P == == == == == Daycare Facility, over 10 == == == == P P P P P == P P P P == == == Day care, family - 10 or less A A A A A == A == == == == == == == == == == Day care, group family - 14 or less CA CA CA CA CA == CA == == == == == == == == == == Dog kennel == == == == == == C C == == == == == == == == == Dog run A A A == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Drive -up windows == == == == == == C C C == A == == == == == == "Dry cleaning & laundry, pick-up station" == == == == C == A A == == A == == == == == == "Dry cleaning & laundry, self-service laundry" == == == == C == C C == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: density zoning D D D D == == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: multiple family == == C C C == C == == C C == == == == == == Dwelling: single-family attached C C D D == == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: single-family detached P P P P == == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: two-family C C P P C == == == == == == == == == == == == Dwelling: live-work unit == == == == C == == == == == == == == == == == == Financial institution & service == == == == P P P P P C P P P P == == == Garage, truck == == == == == == == == == == == C C == == == == Higher Education, Campus == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == C Home occupation : Class I A A A A A == == == == A == == == == == == == Home occupation : Class II CA CA CA CA CA == == == == C == == == == == == == Hospital == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Hotel/motel == == == == == == C P C C C == == C == == == House of worship C C C C C C C C C C == == == C == == == Manufactured home park == == C == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Manufacturing & processing : Class I == == == == == == A A A == P P P P == == == Manufacturing & processing : Class II == == == == == == == == == == == == P == == == == Micro brewery == == == == == == C C C == C == == C == == == Attachment C Micro distillery == == == == == == C C C == C == == C == == == Mortuary, funeral home == == == == == == P P == C == == == == == == == Multiple occupancy building == == == == C C C C C C C C C C == == == Nursery C C C C == == == == == == == == == == == == == Nursing home and assisted living C C C C == == D == == C == == == == == == == Office == == == == P P P P P P P P P P == == == Pawn shop == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == P == Personal services == == == == C A P P P C P == == A == == == Public use C C C C C C C C C C C C C C == == == Research and development facility == == == == C P C C C == P P P P C C == Research animals == == == == == == C == == == == C C == == == == Residence Hall, dormitory == == == C == C D == == == == == == == == == == Residential facility, state licensed, serving 1- 6 P P P P P == P == == == == == == == == == == Residential facility, state licensed, serving 7- 16 C C C C C == C == == == == == == == == == == Restaurant and restaurant-fast food == == == == C A P P P C P C C == == == == Retail sales & service == == == == P A P P P C A A A A == == == School, general education C C C C == == == == == C == == == == == == == School, specialized education == == == == == C C C C C == == == == == == == Service station == == == == == == C C == == C C C == == == == Storage, exterior == == == == == == == == == == == == CA == == == == Studio == == == == C C P P P C == == == == == == == Theater, indoor == == == == A C P == C == == == == == == == Thrift Store == == == == == == == == C == == == == C == == == Utility distribution line P P P P P P P P P == P P P P A P == Utility substation == == == == == == == == == == == C C == == == == Utility transmission C C C C C C C C C == C C C C C C == Vehicle - motorized, leasing and rentals == == == == == == C C == == == == == == == == == Vehicle - motorized, service == == == == == == C C == == == == == == == == == Warehousing == == == == == A A A A == C P P C == == == "P" = Permitted; "D" = Planned Unit; "== " = Not Permitted; "C" = Conditional Use Permit; "A" = Accessory; "CA"= Conditional Accessory Use Permit, "I" = Interim Use Permit" Page 1 of 5 PC Agenda Item – 3C MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5, 2021 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-005 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Grove Church (Everyday Church) Request: Zoning Code Amendment – Chapter 13 – Section 1320-District Provisions – Land Use Chart Requested Action Grove Church, otherwise known as Everyday Church, (“The Applicant”) is proposing an amendment to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the Arden Hills City Code to allow for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District in City Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. Background The applicant is interested in developing the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road (“Subject Property”) as a House of Worship. The Property is currently owned by ET Arden Hills LLC and is developed with a two-story office building and associated parking lot. The office building is no longer in use. The Subject Property includes two access points off of Red Fox Road. The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. At a special work session on March 22, 2021, the Council discussed the Applicant’s proposal to develop a House of Worship in the I-FLEX District. Following the discussion, the City Council directed staff to review and propose a zoning code amendment to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. The amendment will impact Zoning Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. Page 2 of 5 The I-FLEX District is guided as Mixed Business (MB) and Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. The MB area is designated for a variety of businesses, including commercial, certain light industrial uses, warehousing, office, general business, and retail. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 0% to 50% Light Industrial; 0% to 50% Retail; and 25% to 100% Office. A development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. The IND area is designated for a broad range of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, processing, and warehousing. This land use may also include offices. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 50% to 100% Light Industrial and 0% to 100% Office. A Development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. According to the Comprehensive Plan the total area of the MB land use is 55 acres, or 0.9% of the total land area in the City, the total area of the IND land use is 346 acres, or 5.7% of the total land area in the City. The entire I-FLEX District is within the Red Fox/Grey Fox/Lexington Avenue Business Area which is discussed in the Land Use Chapter. This area includes Red Fox and Grey Fox roads and is bounded by Lexington Avenue, Highway 51, Interstate 694, and the Canadian Pacific railway. This area is used by a number of small and large businesses for a variety of retail, manufacturing, distribution, warehousing, and office uses. This area was largely developed between the 1950s and 1970s, though the retail area along Lexington Avenue has had some new development and redevelopment in the last 15 years. This area is marked as an area of possible redevelopment in 2040. Page 3 of 5 Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review The Subject Property is within the I-FLEX Zoning District. Under City Code Section 1320.04, the purposes of this district are: 1. To preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate existing development in the district. 2. To attract new development that is compatible with existing development in the district in terms of use, performance, character, quality and appearance of buildings and sites. 3. To permit only those uses that will have traffic generation characteristics that are compatible with existing development in the district and that will ensure reasonable traffic operation on streets in the vicinity. 4. To encourage new site development that will be compatible with existing site development standards of existing development in the district. 5. To promote flexibility in land uses and site development standards to achieve the objectives of the I-FLEX District. Permitted, conditional, and accessory uses in the I-FLEX District include: I-FLEX District Uses Permitted Conditional Accessory Business Services Hotel Or Motel Antenna, Dish Or Tower Clinics And Medical Offices Micro Brewery Personal Services Sport And Fitness Clubs Micro Distillery Retail Sales And Services Daycare Facilities – Over 10 Multiple Occupancy Building Financial Institutions Public Use Class 1 Manufacturing And Processing Thrift Store Offices Utility Transmission Research And Development Facilities Warehousing Utility Line Distribution Special requirements exist in the I-FLEX District. To further accomplish the stated purpose of the I-FLEX District, proposals for new construction, redevelopment of a site, and significant modifications to existing sites shall use the Planned Unit Development (PUD) or the Conditional use Permit (CUP) process. The proposal shall identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning requirements as well as the reasons why the modifications would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the purpose of the I-FLEX District. Modifications to these requirements may be granted by the City without a variance through the PUD process. Section 1320.12 also states that the provisions in this Section may be modified by the City Council to allow planning flexibility without the need for a variance to encourage cooperative dialogue between the applicant and the City. Page 4 of 5 The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the I-FLEX Zoning District to allow House of Worship as a Conditional Use. If the zoning change is approved, the applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at this site. Discussion The Planning Commission should consider RLUIPA: • Would the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) allow the applicant to mount a serious challenge to the City’s denial of their application? • RLUIPA prohibits a government from imposing a land use regulation in a way that substantially burdens the religious exercise of a religious assembly unless the government can show that the burden: o is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and o is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.” Further, a government also may not impose a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly. The proposed amendments have been provided in Attachments B and C. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the proposed changes. 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 City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The Subject Property is located in the I-FLEX Zoning District. 3. Under City Code Section 1320.05, Houses of Worship are not allowed in the I-FLEX District. 4. The City is proposing to alter Section 1320.05 to allow Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District. 5. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 6. If this amendment is approved, the Applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at the Subject Property. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. Page 5 of 5 • Recommend Approval: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. • Recommend Approval with Amendments: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission with amendments. a specific reason should be included with amendments • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I- Flex District: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Public Notices A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on April 24, 2021. The City has not received any public comments regarding this case. Attachments A. Applicant’s Narrative B. Redlined Land Use Chart C. Clean Land Use Chart Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 5 , 2021 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Paul Vijums called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic this meeting was held virtually. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Paul Vijums, Commissioners Marcie Jefferys, Kurtis Weber, and Jonathan Wicklund. Absent: Commissioners Steven Jones, James Lambeth, Subbaya Subramanian, Clayton Zimmerman. Also present were: Planning Consultant Jane Kansier, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, City Administrator Dave Perrault, and Councilmember Fran Holmes. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – MAY 5 , 2021 Chair Vijums stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 7, 2021 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Wicklund moved, seconded by Commissioner Weber, to approve the April 7, 2021, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried 3-0-1 (Commissioner Jeffreys abstained). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 21-006; 4073 Valentine Court – Variance Request to Allow a 3rd Stall Garage Addition – Public Hearing Not Required Planning Consultant Bemis explained the Applicant is requesting a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of his single- family detached dwelling on the Subject Property from 40 feet to 7.82 feet for a proposed garage addition. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Family ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 2 Residential District, and is guided as Low Density Residential in the land use plan. Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code requires a side yard setback of 40 feet on corner lots. Planning Consultant Bemis stated according to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of his application, the Subject Property includes unique circumstances due to its nontraditional shape. The front of the property includes one curved section and three straight sections that make it difficult for the applicant to conform to current setback regulations. The Subject Property is a legal non- conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The Applicant is requesting the proposed garage addition to a llow for more storage space for his vehicles and additional space to store woodworking equipment. The proposed garage addition would meet applicable building codes and all other regulations in the R-1 District. The applicant would not be able to construct the proposed garage addition without a variance. Planning Consultant Bemis reported the Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility with the side yard setback of a corner lot should be approved. The sketches that have been submitted show the location of the proposed garage addition and the proposed driveway addition. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4. Planning Consultant Bemis reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to decrease the minimum side yard setback on a single family dwelling at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court. 2. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district. 3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 district’s standards for minimum side yard setbacks on a corner lot. 4. The proposed garage addition would be located 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. 5. The proposed garage addition of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-1 district. 6. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would cause the landowner practical difficulties. 7. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Planning Consultant Bemis recommended two conditions of approval for Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans: 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. Planning Consultant Bemis 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 3 Commissioner Jeffreys questioned if there were any other garages that would have a garage 10 feet or closer to the street. Planning Consultant Bemis explained she was uncertain if there were any homes in this neighborhood that had garages closer than seven feet to the street. Commissioner Weber reported the garage would be 27 feet from the street, seven feet from the right of way. He indicated he supported the proposed request and believed this was an appropriate use of the property. Commissioner Wicklund indicated he supported the proposed garage location. He commented the red pines are great for screening, but he feared in 20 to 30 years all screening would be lost and the garage would be visible from the street in the future. Chair Vijums asked if previous variances have been approved for garages in this neighborhood. Planning Consultant Bemis reported there have been three subdivision requests and one setback variance that have been requested in this neighborhood. She explained the variance and two of the subdivision requests were approved. Chair Vijums discussed the location of the proposed driveway noting it was getting closer to the property line. He questioned if this was another concern the Commission should be addressing. Planning Consultant Bemis stated the width of the driveway at the road would not be changing and therefore the driveway would be conforming. She indicated staff did not have any concerns with the proposed driveway. Chair Vijums asked if the new driveway would match the existing concrete driveway. Planning Consultant Bemis deferred this question to the applicant. Robert Kunze, 4073 Valentine Court, explained he had every intention of matching the driveway materials. He stated for the record that the red pines on the plans have been replaced with arborvitaes, hemlocks and catalpa yews. Chair Vijums opened the meeting for public comment at this time. There were no comments from the public. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would like to a third condition for approval requiring the applicant to plant coniferous screening vegetation along the property line between the driveway extending to the rear corner. He indicated this would assist with screening the driveway from the street. Commissioner Weber commented he did not believe it was necessary to add this condition. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2 ) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission adding Condition 3 which shall ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 4 require the applicant to plant coniferous screening vegetation along the property line between the driveway extending to the rear corner. Commissioner Wicklund explained he does not want to have the applicant to do anything differently, but he also did not want any future owner of the property to take down all of the vegetation because this would expose the larger garage to the street. Commissioner Weber reported the plantings were within the City right of way and the property owner could not cut them down. Commissioner Wicklund stated if this was the case, then Condition 3 would not be necessary. Commissioner Wicklund and Commissioner Jeffreys withdrew their motion and second from the floor. Commissioner Weber moved and Commissioner Wicklund seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B. Planning Case 21-011; 3855 Lexington Avenue – Chick-fil-A – Conditional Use Permit – Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Kansier stated HR Green, on behalf of Chick -fil-A has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development. The Applicant is requesting to construct single story fast food restaurant with a drive-through. The property is located at 3855 Lexington Avenue and is zoned B-3, Service Business District, and is designated for Commercial Uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the surrounding area, site data, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1. The property located at 3855 Lexington Avenue is designated for Commercial uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a fast food restaurant with drive-through lanes. 3. The Final PUD substantially conforms with the requirements of the City Code. 4. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, flexibility has been requested by the applicant and/or conditions have been placed on an approval that would mitigate the nonconformity. 5. Flexibility through the PUD process has been requested in the following areas: lot size, minimum landscape coverage, building height and parking requirements. 6. The proposed development plan meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the City Code in the following areas: accessory structure setbacks, drive-through facility setbacks, drive-through facility landscaping setbacks, and number of parking spaces. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 5 7. Fast food restaurants with drive-through facilities area allowed as a conditional use in the B- 3 District. 8. All new developments or redevelopments in the B-3 district require a planned unit development. 9. The adjacent properties to the south and west are zoned B-3 and are guided for Commercial use in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 10. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. Planning Consultant Kansier recommended approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development approvals shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. 3. Prior to the issuance of bu ilding permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 5. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. 6. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 7. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City right-of- way. 8. No exterior storage shall be permitted. 9. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water main to the City for review and approval. The Applicant will be responsible to carry out these operation and maintenance activities and to submit the appropriate documentation to the City as specified. 10. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize wooden gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping shall be submitted. Landscape financial security is held for two full growing seasons. 12. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 6 location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree preservation plan and approved by staff in writing. 13. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. 14. All fencing and retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City. 15. Prior to City Council, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to be approved in writing by staff. 16. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 18. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing. Planning Consultant Kansier 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Justin Lark, Chick -fil-A representative, thanked the Commission for their consideration. He reported he had met with the Council at a worksession meeting to discuss this proposal. He commented on the lighting on the west side of the building and explained he would be removing the sign on the western side of the building. He indicated he has moved the monument sign closer to Lexington Avenue per the Council’s recommendation. He discussed the buffer space that was located between the hotel and Chick -fil -A and noted this area would be relandscaped. It was noted a gentleman’s agreement would be pursued with the hotel for employee parking. He commented further on the parking situation and requested a variance from the City’s parking requirements. Commissioner Weber thanked the applicant for the additional information. He stated he was concerned with the double drive thru given how close this property was to Lexington Avenue. Mr. Lark discussed how vehicles would access and exit the property. It was noted all cars exiting would be pulled further from Lexington Avenue to assist with proper vehicle queuing. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 7 Joseph Vavrina, HR Green, commented on the traffic study and reported the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road had a service level of B during the AM peak and was at level C during the PM peak. Commissioner Jeffreys asked if the areas of flexibility were typical for new developments. Planning Consultant Kansier reported each site and PUD was unique. She did not believe this applicant was requesting more flexibility than any other applicant. Councilmember Holmes commented the main concern was how close the drive thru lane was to the hotel. She indicated other requests did not have this concern. She stated she would be happy to hear from the Quality Inn regarding this matter. Commissioner Jeffreys questioned what the hours of operation would be for Chick-fil-A. Mr. Lark stated Chick -fil-A would be open Monday through Saturday from 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and would be closed on Sundays. Commissioner Jeffreys explained the traffic surprised her because she thought this business would have had more of an impact on the adjacent intersection. Chair Vijums inquired if the canopy was an approved building structure. Planning Consultant Kansier reported this was the case, noting the canopy would require a building permit. Chair Vijums stated his main concerns were noise considerations given the fact this restaurant would be so close to the Quality Inn. He feared how noise would travel from the fast food speakers towards the hotel. He recommended that all speakers be faced away from the hotel. In addition, he was concerned about the noise that would be coming from the coolers and HVAC units on the roof. Mr. Lark commented this restaurant would have two menu boards, one for each of the drive thru lanes. He stated these speakers would face due west, but were located north of the hotel. He reported the speaker boxes were 50 feet away from any of the closest parking spaces. He discussed the trees that were located at the northeast corner of the hotel property and explained these would remain in place. He indicated he has never had any concerns raised about the equipment on the roof and stated he would have to investigate the sound coming from these units and could report back to the City. Chair Vijums suggested a noise study be completed once the building is constructed to ensure the noise coming from the rooftop units was not disruptive to the adjacent properties. Mr. Lark reiterated that his building was meeting all City setback requirements for the Commercial zoning district. Mr. Vavrina discussed the landscaping that would be put in place between the hotel and Chick-fil- A noting this would assist in providing a year round screen, while also helping to block noise. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the City of Arden Hills was required to follow State guidelines and could not have noise requirements that were more restrictive than the State. She indicated the hotel was considered to be in a noise area Classification 1. She stated this meant the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 8 maximum night time noise level between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is 50 decibels. She anticipated this property would be similar. She discussed the ambient noise that was already coming from I-694 and other adjacent roadways. She indicated the Commission could require a noise study once the building was completed to see if additional screening was necessary for the rooftop mechanicals. Chair Vijums stated he was satisfied with the location of the drive thru mechanicals. He explained he would be interested in adding a condition for approval that would require the applicant to complete a noise study once the structure was built. Commissioner Wicklund indicated this location, which was formerly a Perkins that ran 24 hours a day, sits adjacent to I-694. He did not believe noise would be a concern for this property. He supported the Commission leaning on staff’s expertise on whether or not a noise study should be completed. He was of the opinion this was a great repurposing of this property. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Ankit Bhakta, owner of the Quality Inn, stated he had concerns about the proposed Chick -fil-A. He indicated he was concerned about the drive-thru, noise that would be generated by the drive-thru speakers, as well as the noise that would be generated by the rooftop HVAC units. He discussed how the cars waiting for the drive thru would also be generating extra noise. He feared how this would impact his customers given the fact Chick -fil-A would be open until 10:00 p.m. He stated he was also concerned with where Chick -fil -A would store snow in the winter months and did not want snow being pushed onto his property. Commissioner Weber explained Chick -fil-A was requesting to be closer to the property line than was allowed. He stated he now had concerns with the application given the fact the adjacent property owner had concerns with the amount of noise that would be generated by the drive thru. He indicated he did not support allowing the restaurant and drive thru moving closer to the hotel. Chair Vijums asked if the drive thru speakers could be adjusted so that they faced away from the hotel. Mr. Lark sta ted this would not be possible. He reported the drive thru speakers were 50 feet from the closest parking lot and over 100 feet from the corner of the hotel. He explained if the drive thru speakers were moved closer to Lexington Avenue this could back up traffic onto Red Fox Road. Chair Vijums commented he supported the proposed plan, but noted he was also concerned about how the restaurant and drive thru would impact the adjacent hotel. He stated this use was different from Perkins, because there would be a drive thru. He supported a noise study being completed. Commissioner Wicklund reported the business model for this company had Chick -fil-A closed on Sundays meaning the hotel guests would not be impacted by the drive thru on Sundays. Chair Vijums suggested a condition for approval be added to address the noise concerns. He recommended a noise study be completed after the restaurant was completed or that the noise boxes be moved. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 9 Commissioner Jeffreys commented on the amount of noise cars make when waiting in the drive thru line and noted this was a concern to her. Chair Vijums indicated he had less concerns about the noise coming from the cars because there were only a few months out of the year that drivers could drive with their windows down. He stated he was more concerned about the noise that would be coming from the rooftop units. Mr. Lark reported this was a commercially zoned property and he was meeting the City’s setback requirements. He was hopeful that the noise issue would be less of a concern from a building standpoint. He explained he wanted to be a good neighbor and noted Chick -fil-A would be open only till 10:00 p.m. and would be closed on Sundays, where Perkins was open 24/7. There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Chair Vijums stated he would like to add several conditions for approval. He proposed Chick -fil-A move the order stations from the west side of the drive through to the northeast side. In addition, he supported the applicant completing a noise study once the building is constructed to see what type of noise is being generated by the use. Commissioner Wicklund expressed concern with forcing Chick -fil-A to change their drive thru. He reported Chick -fil-A had more expertise with the operation of a drive thru than the City did and he supported Chick -fil-A’s proven business model. Mr. Lark reported he spends a great deal of time testing and planning for sites. He explained the proposed location for the order stations would maximize the efficiency and flow on the site. Chair Vijums questioned if some sort of structure should be required along the property line to block the menu boards and speaker sound from the hotel. Commissioner Weber asked if a sound wall would be allowed along the property line. Mr. Lark stated in other locations a wind screen has been installed to create a buffer between the drive thru and the adjacent property. Chair Vijums supported some sort of noise screening being put in place between the drive thru and the hotel property. He suggested a condition be made for approval stating some sort of noise screening be required between the ordering station and the hotel. Commissioner Wicklund stated he could support this recommendation. Chair Vijums stated he also supported the applicant being required to complete a noise study on the building after constructed. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the building would have to follow MPCA decibel level requirements. Commissioner Wicklund indicated he did not support the City making this requirement. Rather, he recommended the noise concerns be brought to the Council given the fact they would have the final say in the matter. He suggested that if a condition was drafted that it read: Noise levels must meet MPCA guidelines for this Planning Case. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 10 Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Weber seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the eighteen (18) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission adding Condition 19: The Applicant must meet MPCA noise guidelines and Co ndition 20: Noise screening must be approved by City staff that addresses the ordering stations. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). C. Planning Case 21-005; Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Bemis stated the applicant is interested in developing the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road (“Subject Property”) as a House of Worship. The Property is currently owned by ET Arden Hills LLC and is developed with a two-story office building and associated parking lot. The office building is no longer in use. The Subject Property includes two access points off of Red Fox Road. The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. Planning Consultant Bemis reported at a special work session on March 22, 2021, the Council discussed the Applicant’s proposal to develop a House of Worship in the I-FLEX District. Following the discussion, the City Council directed staff to review and propose a zoning code amendment to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. The amendment will impact Zoning Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. Planning Consultant Bemis indicated the I-FLEX District is guided as Mixed Business (MB) and Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. The MB area is designated for a variety of businesses, including commercial, certain light industrial uses, warehousing, office, general business, and retail. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 0% to 50% Light Industrial; 0% to 50% Retail; and 25% to 100% Office. A development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. The IND area is designated for a broad range of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, processing, and warehousing. This land use may also include offices. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 50% to 100% Light Industrial and 0% to 100% Office. A Development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. According to the Comprehensive Plan the total area of the MB land use is 55 acres, or 0.9% of the total land area in the City, the total area of the IND land use is 346 acres, or 5.7% of the total land area in the City. Planning Consultant Bemis explained the entire I-FLEX District is within the Red Fox/Grey Fox/Lexington Avenue Business Area which is discussed in the Land Use Chapter. This area includes Red Fox and Grey Fox roads and is bounded by Lexington Avenue, Highway 51, Interstate 694, and the Canadian Pacific railway. This area is used by a number of small and large businesses for a variety of retail, manufacturing, distribution, warehousing, and office uses. This area was largely developed between the 1950s and 1970s, though the retail area along Lexington Avenue has had some new development and redevelopment in the last 15 years. This area is marked as an area of possible redevelopment in 2040. Planning Consultant Bemis reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 11 General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The Subject Property is located in the I-FLEX Zoning District. 3. Under City Code Section 1320.05, Houses of Worship are not allowed in the I-FLEX District. 4. The City is proposing to alter Section 1320.05 to allow Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I -FLEX District. 5. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 6. If this amendment is approved, the Applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at the Subject Property. Planning Consultant Bemis recommended approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I -Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. Planning Consultant Bemis 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Chair Vijums reported more and more places of worship were working their way into these types of zoning districts. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Tom Goodrum, planning consultant for the applicant, thanked staff for their guidance and thorough staff report. He stated this church was excited to be a part of Arden Hills. He explained he was conducting a traffic study and it appears the church would have a minimal impact on the area. There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Commissioner Jeffreys asked how many people would be attending this church on Sunday mornings. Mr. Goodrum reported the congregation currently had 600 parishioners and noted services were held at 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Sundays. Pastor Josh Krehbiel thanked the Commission for considering his application. He explained he had 600 members part of his church commu nity. He explained these members would be split up between the two Sunday services. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 12 Chair Vijums questioned what led this church to seek space in the I-Flex zoning district. Pastor Josh indicated his church has been on a building search journey for several years. He reported he has a desire to have a building that was close to the freeway, with high ceilings and adequate parking. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Chair Vijums seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4 -0). D. Planning Case 21-008; Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Kansier stated in September of 2020, Kye Samuelson (“Applicant”) requested a Variance in order to construct an accessory structure near the shoreline of 3493 Siems Court (“Subject Property”) within the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The Applicant requested a variance to build a 120 square foot accessory storage structure that encroached eighteen (18) inches into the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The proposed structure exceeded the eight (8) foot height limitation at ten (10) feet, six (6) inches. The rational for the variance was that the structure would be used for the storage of modern day recreational water equipment and the hardship was due to the rear yard topography. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Residential District, is located in the Shoreland Management District, and is guided as Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan. Planning Consultant Kansier reported at its October 7, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to table the request to allow the Applicant to revise their plans to better conform to the Shoreland Ordinance provisions. The Applicant took the Planning Commissions comments under consideration and submitted revised plans for a smaller structure that would not encroach into the Shore Impact Zone. The Applicant then proposed to construct an accessory structure that would be nine and a half (9.5) feet tall and ninety-three and a half (93.5) square feet in size. However, the proposed structure still required a variance due to the proposed height and area that exceeded current ordinance standards. At its December 9, 2020 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the updated application. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve the planning case. Planning Consultant Kansier explained at its January 11, 2021 meeting the City Council reviewed Planning Case 20-017. The City Council voted unanimously to table this planning case to allow them to review the existing OHWL accessory structure size standards. The Applicant signed a 6-month Extension Form, requiring the City Council to take action on the variance request by July 12, 2021. At its February 16, 2021 meeting the City Council discussed increasing the permitted size of accessory structures within the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) setback. The City Council directed staff to draft ordinance language to increase the size of accessory structures located within the OHWL. The City Council did not support increase the height of accessory structures located within the OHWL. Planning Consultant Kansier reported following this meeting, staff has drafted ordinance language and sent the language to the DNR for review. At its April 19, 2021 Work Session, the City ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 13 Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning code and directed staff to bring the draft language to the Planning Commission for review. Staff has not received written comments from the DNR as of April 28, 2021. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. 3. Amendments to the Shoreland Regulations require approval from the Minnesota DNR. 4. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council Planning Consultant Kansier recommended approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. Planning Consultant Kansier 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Wicklund asked why the City wouldn’t want to model its Shoreland Ordinance based off of neighboring cities, specifically Shoreview. Planning Consultant Kansier reported it was her understanding there was some review of other ordinances. She noted the language that was used in this Ordinance was similar to the City of Roseville. Commissioner Weber stated he was anticipating this code change, but questioned if 100 square feet was adequate. He questioned why the City Council landed on this number. Commissioner Jeffreys commented on the inconsistences between the shoreland regulations #1 and #5. She questioned how the Commission should address this concern. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the Commission could set a minimum setback of 10 feet or the Commission could eliminate this language altogether. Commissioner Jeffreys recommended Shoreland Regulation #5 be eliminated. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 14 Chair Vijums stated it was nice to see the Council was working to amend the Shoreland Ordinance. He indicated he supported the removal of Regulation #5. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 8:59 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Steven Nelson, 3475 Siems Court, explained he has been a resident of Arden Hills for the past 34 years. He discussed the DNR rules noting they typically applied to rural lakes and not urban lakes. He questioned what the nature of this building was, stating it was his understanding it was an accessory structure to hold waterfront items. He was of the opinion a 64 square foot building was adequate. He did not want to see 100 square foot buildings on every property along the lake. He discussed how small some of the lakeshore lots were and how these buildings would be an eyesore. He suggested the buildings be proportioned to the width of the lot versus a one size fits all approach for these structures. He recommended that these structures be allowed to be electrified. Gregg Larson, 3377 North Snelling Avenue, reported he was a lakeshore owner. He encouraged the City to rethink how it notifies the residents living on Lake Johanna about public hearings. He indicated there were a lot of properties owners on Lake Johanna that did not receive notice of this meeting. He was of the opinion the proposed Ordinance has an error stating Lake Johanna has been classified by the DNR as a recreational development lake since 2014. He discussed the setbacks for recreational development lakes (35 feet) versus a general development lake (25 feet). He was of the opinion that amending the Shoreland Ordinance due to one request was not sound government. He questioned how the City Council came to determine 64 feet of accessory storage space was not adequate. He discussed topography that was in place that would make it impossible for some lakeshore owners to have an accessory structure at the lakeshore. He reported these lakeshore owners had to manage their storage needs within their garage or rental storage units. He believed the current limits have served the City well and noted he did not want to see excessively large structures along the lakeshore as this would block views. He recommended the character of Lake Johanna be preserved. He suggested the City amend the Ordinance to properly classify Lake Johanna as a recreational development lake and that the City add a provision regarding proper notice for lakeshore matters. He recommended a 35 foot setback be required for the applicant’s structure and that the City retain the current structure area limit with minimum setbacks without the 10 foot exception with a sliding scale for accessory structures based on lot width as was proposed by Mr. Nelson. Kye Samuelson, 3493 Siems Court, stated he was not new to this dialogue. He commented he was hoping to work with the City to manage beautification, security and storage for lakeshore properties. He indicated there were some interesting things said regarding proportional dimensions for accessory structures for lake lot sizes. He explained it made sense to consider Lake Johanna was a recreational development lake. He reported he was looking at this issue from a bigger perspective and he wanted to address how to manage modern waterfront items. He stated 100 square feet made sense to him, noting he would like a higher building height to be considered. He liked the idea of making these structures both aesthetically pleasing and functional. He discussed how these structures were an immaterial improvement to the overall beautification, security, storage, properties cleanliness and order for multiple neighborhoods that are on the lake and the guests of the City that come to enjoy these natural resources. Matthew ____________ had difficulty with his audio. Staff encouraged Mr. _____________ to submit his comments to City staff prior to the City Council meeting. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 15 There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. Commissioner Jeffreys requested comment from staff regarding the letter from the DNR. Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff received a letter from the DNR and this was forwarded to the Planning Commission. She explained the DNR had concerns with resolving the inconsistencies between Regulations #1 and #5. Commissioner Wicklund recalled why this item was brought to the Planning Commission originally and that had to do with storage and beautification by the lake. He feared that over the past decade, the toys along the water have gotten larger. He understood that for some people 64 square feet was plenty of space and for others 100 square feet was just enough space. He suggested holding a conversation where Arden Hills would model its Shoreland Ordinance to Shoreview’s Ordinance. He wanted to see Arden Hills leading with relevant codes that were designed to address the real issues at hand. He commented his preference would be to model this Ordinance after Shoreview and not Roseville. He asked if the Commission would consider stretching the accessory square feet size and structure height. Chair Vijums sta ted he was not clear on what the City of Shoreview allowed within its Shoreland Ordinance. He indicated the Commission would have to do more review and study of the Ordinance prior to having a discussion. Commissioner Wicklund explained Shoreview allows accessory structures that do not exceed 250 square feet in area, were not wider than 12 feet as viewed from the water, is not higher than 10 feet above grade, and has a 20 foot setback from the side lot line. Chair Vijums reported these numbers would create much larger structures. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would support 120 square foot structures. Chair Vijums indicated he was thinking about the lakes in Arden Hills versus the lakes in Shoreview, noting the lakes in Arden Hills were smaller and the lakeshore lot widths were smaller. For this reason, he supported keeping the structures smaller versus trying to meet what another City allows. He believed the City was already raising the standards going from 64 to 100 square feet. Commissioner Jeffreys agreed she did not want to see the structures becoming any larger than what was being proposed. Commissioner Weber questioned how the City came up with 100 square feet for the accessory structures. Councilmember Holmes stated the Council weighed the interest of the residents to what other cities were doing. She explained some things were taken from Roseville’s ordinance, but explained the Council was very concerned about the aesthetics along the lakeshore. For this reason, the Council did not support allowing structures as large as Shoreview or other communities. She understood the City would have to make a correction within the regulations to comply with DNR guidelines. Chair Vijums asked if the City received any comments in opposition to the Ordinance. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 16 Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff received a letter from Mr. Larson objecting to the Ordinance. Chair Vijums summarized the comments made by the Commission thus far and recommended Shoreland Regulation #5 be removed. Commissioner Weber questioned if this would be the last time the Commission sees this Ordinance. Chair Vijums reported this would be the last time the Commission sees this Ordinance. Commissioner Weber commented he would like to see this Ordinance again if the Council makes large changes to it. Councilmember Holmes stated the Ordinance would go back to the Commission if there were major changes made by the City Council. Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to amend the Shoreland Regulations Amendment removing Amendment #5. A roll call vote was taken. The amendment carried unanimously (4-0). A roll call vote was taken. The amended motion carried unanimously (4-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Planning Consultant Kansier reported the City has hired a new City Planner and noted this new planner would be attending the June Planning Commission meeting. Chair Vijums thanked Planning Consultant Kansier and Planning Consultant Bemus for all of their assistance. Councilmember Holmes provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. She thanked the Planning Commission for all of their efforts on behalf of the community. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests None. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 17 ADJOURN Chair Vijums moved, seconded by Commissioner Jeffreys, to adjourn the May 5, 2021, Planning Commission Meeting at 9:43 p.m. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Planning Case #21-005 –Public Hearing Required Applicant: Grove Church (Everyday Church) Request: Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District Zoning: I-Flex District 1 I-Flex District 2 •Grove Church is looking to develop 1275 Red Fox Road as a House of Worship. •The Property is currently developed as a vacant two-story office building and associated parking lot. •The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. Background Background •On March 22, 2021, the City Council discussed the applicant’s request and directed staff to propose a zoning code amendment to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. •The amendment will impact Zoning Code Section 1320.05 –Land Use Chart. •On May 5, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of PC 21 -005. 3 Approvals •The Applicant is requesting an amendment to the I-FLEX Zoning District to allow House of Worship as a Conditional Use. •If the zoning change is approved, the applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at this site. 4 Comprehensive Plan •The I-FLEX District is guided as Mixed Business (MB) and Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. •The I-FLEX District is within the Red Fox/Grey Fox/Lexington Avenue Business Area which is used by a number of small and large businesses for a variety of retail, manufacturing, distribution, warehousing, and office uses. 5 Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •The Subject Property is within the I-FLEX Zoning District. Under City Code Section 1320.04, the purposes of this district are: •To preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate existing development in the district. •To attract new development that is compatible with existing development in the district in terms of use, performance, character, quality and appearance of buildings and sites. •To permit only those uses that will have traffic generation characteristics that are compatible with existing development in the district and that will ensure reasonable traffic operation on streets in the vicinity. •To encourage new site development that will be compatible with existing site development standards of existing development in the district. •To promote flexibility in land uses and site development standards to achieve the objectives of the I-FLEX District. 6 Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •Permitted, conditional, and accessory uses in the I-FLEX District include: 7 I-FLEX District Uses Permitted Conditional Accessory Business Services Hotel Or Motel Antenna, Dish Or Tower Clinics And Medical Offices Micro Brewery Personal Services Sport And Fitness Clubs Micro Distillery Retail Sales And Services Daycare Facilities – Over 10 Multiple Occupancy Building Financial Institutions Public Use Class 1 Manufacturing And Processing Thrift Store Offices Utility Transmission Research And Development Facilities Warehousing Utility Line Distribution Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •Special requirements exist in the I-FLEX District. •New development shall use PUD or CUP process. •The proposal shall identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning requirements as well as the reasons why the modifications would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the purpose of the I -FLEX District. •Modifications to these requirements may be granted by the City without a variance through the PUD process. 8 RLUIPA •The Planning Commission should consider the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). •Would the act allow the applicant to mount a serious challenge to the City’s denial of their application? •RLUIPA prohibits a government from imposing a land use regulation in a way that substantially burdens the religious exercise of a religious assembly unless the government can show that the burden: •is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and •is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. •Further, a government also may not impose a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly. 9 Public Notice •A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on May 13, 2021. The City has not received any public comments regarding this case. 10 •Approval:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council. •Approval with Amendments:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council with amendments. A specific reason should be included with amendments. 2 Proposed Motion Language •Denial:Motion to deny Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. •Table:Motion to table Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. 3 Proposed Motion Language Questions? Planning Case 21-005 –Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District Page 1 of 4 PUBLIC HEARING – 9C MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-008 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Zoning Code Amendment – Chapter 13 – Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider • Hold the required public hearing for Planning Case 21-008, an application for an amendment to the language in Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. The City Council will be asked to make a formal decision regarding the application under Agenda Item 10C. Background In September of 2020, Kye Samuelson (“Applicant”) requested a Variance in order to construct an accessory structure near the shoreline of 3493 Siems Court (“Subject Property”) within the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The Applicant requested a variance to build a 120 square foot accessory storage structure that encroached eighteen (18) inches into the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The proposed structure exceeded the eight (8) foot height limitation at ten (10) feet, six (6) inches. The rationale for the variance was that the structure would be used for the storage of modern day recreational water equipment and the hardship was due to the rear yard topography. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Residential District, is located in the Shoreland Management District, and is guided as Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan. Page 2 of 4 At its October 7, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to table the request to allow the Applicant to revise their plans to better conform to the Shoreland Ordinance provisions. The Applicant took the Planning Commissions comments under consideration and submitted revised plans for a smaller structure that would not encroach into the Shore Impact Zone. The Applicant then proposed to construct an accessory structure that would be nine and a half (9.5) feet tall and ninety-three and a half (93.5) square feet in size. However, the proposed structure still required a variance due to the proposed height and area that exceeded current ordinance standards. At its December 9, 2020 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the updated application. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve the planning case. At its January 11, 2021 meeting the City Council reviewed Planning Case 20-017. The City Council voted unanimously to table this planning case to allow them to review the existing accessory structure size standards for the Shoreland District. The Applicant signed a 6-month Extension Form (Attachment B), requiring the City Council to take action on the variance request by July 12, 2021. At its February 16, 2021 meeting the City Council discussed increasing the permitted size of accessory structures within the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) setback. The City Council directed staff to draft ordinance language to increase the size of accessory structures located within the OHWL setback. The City Council did not support increase the height of accessory structures located within the OHWL setback. Following this meeting, staff drafted ordinance language and sent the language to the DNR for review. At its April 19, 2021 Work Session, the City Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning code and directed staff to bring the draft language to the Planning Commission for review. Staff received written comments from the DNR prior to the Planning Commission meeting (Attachment H). A full evaluation of the proposal was presented to the Planning Commission on May 5, 2021. At this meeting, the Planning Commission voted to approve Planning Case 21-008 with some amendments. The memo to the Planning Commission on this case is provided in Attachment D. Draft minutes from the meeting are included in Attachment E. During the May 5, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting, a resident noted that the classification of Lake Johanna in the Arden Hills City Code as a general development lake is inconsistent with the classification of Lake Johanna on the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource’s website as a recreational development lake. Since this meeting, staff has been in contact with the DNR to discuss this inconsistency. The DNR noted that this inconsistency was identified in 1984 and the City of Arden Hills passed a resolution requesting the DNR to change their classification to Lake Johanna to a general development lake to match the classification in the Arden Hills City Code. Unfortunately, the resolution was never sent to the DNR, and the classification was never changed. With consent of the Arden Hills City Council, the DNR is willing to accept the 1985 resolution and update their classification of the lake to match that of Arden Hills. Correspondence between staff and the DNR is included in Attachment I. The 1985 Arden Hills Resolution is included in Attachment J. Page 3 of 4 Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E of the Arden Hills City Code states that lakeshore lots are permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the OHWL, provided that it is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. The Shore Impact Zone is the land located between the OHWL and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the structure setback. The structure setback standards vary depending on the lake classification as established by Minnesota Regulations, Part 6120.3300, and the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Ramsey County. The table below breaks down the setback standards for Arden Hills lakes. Lake OHWL Lake Classification Structure Setback Shore Impact Zone Width Lake Johanna 878 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Little Johanna NA Recreational 75 ft. 35ft. Lake Josephine 884.4 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Karth Lake 934.95 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E also states that accessory structures within the OHWL shall not exceed sixty-four (64) square feet in size or eight (8) feet by eight (8) feet and eight (8) feet in height measured to the highest point of the structure; and is not used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. It’s worth noting that no more than two (2) accessory structures shall be permitted on a lot primarily used for residential uses and the structures shall not exceed seven hundred and twenty- eight (728) square feet in floor area. The accessory structures shall not occupy more than 25 percent of the rear yard. The exterior finish of accessory structures shall be compatible in appearance and material used with the principal structure. These requirements will continue to apply. Discussion As a result of previous discussions, the staff has drafted the following language revising Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E. This language increases the size of an accessory storage shed currently permitted under the Arden Hills City Code. However, the size and height are still less that what is permitted under the State model ordinance (Section 7.3). E. Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: 1. The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. 2. The structure or facility does not exceed 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. Page 4 of 4 3. The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. 4. The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. 5. The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 6. The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. 7. The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. 8. The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. Public Notice and Comments A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on May 13, 2021. As of May 19, 2021, Staff has received three public comments regarding this case. Redacted versions of the two written public comments are included in Attachment G. The third public comment was received via phone. This resident expressed concern about maximum height will be measured and about the maximum width of the structure viewed from the water. Staff was able to address both concerns by referencing definitions from the Arden Hills City Code. Attachments A. Redlined Shoreland Regulations Amendment B. Clean Shoreland Regulations Amendment C. Minnesota DNR Shoreland Management Model Ordinance D. Signed 6-Month Extension Form E. Planning Commission Memo F. Draft Planning Commission Minutes G. Redacted Public Comments H. DNR Comments I. DNR Reclassification Letter J. Resolution No. 85-22 K. City Council Presentation 1330.03 General Provisions. (revised 4/28/21) Subd. 1 District Requirements. The following standards shall apply to all shorelands of the protected waters listed in this Section. Where the requirements of the underlying zoning district as shown on the official zoning map are more restrictive than those set forth in this Section, then the more restrictive standards shall apply: Natural Environmental Waters Recreational Development Waters General Development Waters Lot Area (square feet): Riparian Lot 40,000 20,000 14,000 Lot Area (square feet): Non- Riparian Lot 14,000 14,000 14,000 (for District R-1) 11,000 (for Districts R-2, R-3, R-4) Minimum Water Frontage and Width at Building Line (feet) 125 75 75 Structure Minimum Setback from Ordinary High Water Level (feet) 150* 75* 50* Structure Minimum Setbacks from Streets and Highways (feet) 40 for Districts R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 50 for Districts B-1, B-2, I-2 55 for District I-1 Structure Maximum Height (feet) 35 for District R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, B-1, B-2, I-1 45 for District I-2 Maximum Lot Area Covered by Impervious Surface (%) 35 for District R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 65 for District I-1 75 for District B-1, B-2, I-2 *See Section 1330.03, Subd. 4 for Exceptions to the Structure Setback Requirement Subd. 2 Roads and Parking Areas. Roads and parking areas shall be located to retard the runoff of surface waters and nutrients in accordance with the following criteria: A. All roads and parking areas shall meet the setback requirements established for structures of this Section. B. Natural vegetation or other natural materials shall be used to screen parking areas when viewed from the water. Subd. 3 Elevation of Lowest Floor. A. Structures shall be placed at an elevation consistent with the City's flood plain management controls as set forth in Section 1335 of this Code. B. In areas not regulated by flood plain management controls, the elevation to which the lowest floor, including basements, shall be placed shall be determined as follows: 1. For lakes, ponds, and flowages, by (a) an elevation of available flood information and consistent with "Statewide Standards and Criteria for Management of Flood Plain Areas of Minnesota," or (b) placing the lowest floor at a level at least three (3) feet above the highest known water level. In those instances where sufficient data on known high water levels are not available, the ordinary high water level shall be used. 2. For streams, by an evaluation of available flood information and consistent with "Statewide Standards and Criteria for Management of Flood Plain Areas of Minnesota." Subd. 4 Adjacent Lots. On any shoreland lot where the adjacent lots have existing dwellings that exceed the minimum setback from the OHW level, the shoreline setback for a new dwelling unit or an addition to an existing dwelling unit shall not be less than the average of the setbacks from the OHW level for such adjacent dwellings minus ten (10) feet subject to the following: A. In no case shall the new structure or addition be within the minimum setback from the OWH level as stated in Section 1330.03 Subd 1. Attachment A B. In no case shall the new structure or addition be nearer to the OHW level than the nearest adjacent structure. C. The minimum structure setback in Section1330.03 Subd. 1 shall be used for the adjacent lot when calculating the setback if an adjacent lot is: 1. Vacant; 2. Has a use other than single or two-family residential; or, 3. Has a dwelling unit that encroaches on the minimum structure setback. Subd. 5 Exceptions to Structure Setback Requirements. No structure shall be placed within the structure setback requirements of the shoreland management district. The following are not classified as structures for the purposes of this section: A. Docks and Boatlifts. Setback requirements from the ordinary high water level shall not apply to docks and boatlifts. Location of docks and boatlifts shall be controlled by applicable State and local regulations. B. Stairways, access lifts, and landings. Setback requirements from the ordinary high water level shall not apply to stairways, access lifts, or landings. Stairways and access lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, access lifts and landings located within the Shore Impact Zone shall meet the following design standards: 1. Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 40 square feet in area. 2. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, access lifts, docks, or landings. C. Uncovered patios. At grade uncovered patios that have an underside surface that is entirely in contact with and wholly supported by the ground may be placed within the structure setback requirements from the ordinary high water level but shall not be placed within the Shore Impact Zone. Uncovered patios shall not be considered landscaped area when calculating lot coverage. D. Fences. Chain link, or other types of fences with a transparency of at least 75 percent, may be placed within the structure setback requirements from the ordinary high water level but shall not be placed within the Shore Impact Zone. E. E. Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: The structure or facility is Is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. The structure or facility is Does not exceed 100 64 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. The structure or facility is Is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment fac ilities. The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of buildingpermits. The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three wallsseen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes,Section 103G.245. 1330.03 General Provisions. (revised 4/28/21) Subd. 1 District Requirements. The following standards shall apply to all shorelands of the protected waters listed in this Section. Where the requirements of the underlying zoning district as shown on the official zoning map are more restrictive than those set forth in this Section, then the more restrictive standards shall apply: Natural Environmental Waters Recreational Development Waters General Development Waters Lot Area (square feet): Riparian Lot 40,000 20,000 14,000 Lot Area (square feet): Non- Riparian Lot 14,000 14,000 14,000 (for District R-1) 11,000 (for Districts R-2, R-3, R-4) Minimum Water Frontage and Width at Building Line (feet) 125 75 75 Structure Minimum Setback from Ordinary High Water Level (feet) 150* 75* 50* Structure Minimum Setbacks from Streets and Highways (feet) 40 for Districts R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 50 for Districts B-1, B-2, I-2 55 for District I-1 Structure Maximum Height (feet) 35 for District R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, B-1, B-2, I-1 45 for District I-2 Maximum Lot Area Covered by Impervious Surface (%) 35 for District R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 65 for District I-1 75 for District B-1, B-2, I-2 *See Section 1330.03, Subd. 4 for Exceptions to the Structure Setback Requirement Subd. 2 Roads and Parking Areas. Roads and parking areas shall be located to retard the runoff of surface waters and nutrients in accordance with the following criteria: A. All roads and parking areas shall meet the setback requirements established for structures of this Section. B. Natural vegetation or other natural materials shall be used to screen parking areas when viewed from the water. Subd. 3 Elevation of Lowest Floor. A. Structures shall be placed at an elevation consistent with the City's flood plain management controls as set forth in Section 1335 of this Code. B. In areas not regulated by flood plain management controls, the elevation to which the lowest floor, including basements, shall be placed shall be determined as follows: 1. For lakes, ponds, and flowages, by (a) an elevation of available flood information and consistent with "Statewide Standards and Criteria for Management of Flood Plain Areas of Minnesota," or (b) placing the lowest floor at a level at least three (3) feet above the highest known water level. In those instances where sufficient data on known high water levels are not available, the ordinary high water level shall be used. 2. For streams, by an evaluation of available flood information and consistent with "Statewide Standards and Criteria for Management of Flood Plain Areas of Minnesota." Subd. 4 Adjacent Lots. On any shoreland lot where the adjacent lots have existing dwellings that exceed the minimum setback from the OHW level, the shoreline setback for a new dwelling unit or an addition to an existing dwelling unit shall not be less than the average of the setbacks from the OHW level for such adjacent dwellings minus ten (10) feet subject to the following: A. In no case shall the new structure or addition be within the minimum setback from the OWH level as stated in Section 1330.03 Subd 1. $WWDFKPHQW% B. In no case shall the new structure or addition be nearer to the OHW level than the nearest adjacent structure. C. The minimum structure setback in Section1330.03 Subd. 1 shall be used for the adjacent lot when calculating the setback if an adjacent lot is: 1. Vacant; 2. Has a use other than single or two-family residential; or, 3. Has a dwelling unit that encroaches on the minimum structure setback. Subd. 5 Exceptions to Structure Setback Requirements. No structure shall be placed within the structure setback requirements of the shoreland management district. The following are not classified as structures for the purposes of this section: A. Docks and Boatlifts. Setback requirements from the ordinary high water level shall not apply to docks and boatlifts. Location of docks and boatlifts shall be controlled by applicable State and local regulations. B. Stairways, access lifts, and landings. Setback requirements from the ordinary high water level shall not apply to stairways, access lifts, or landings. Stairways and access lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, access lifts and landings located within the Shore Impact Zone shall meet the following design standards: 1. Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 40 square feet in area. 2. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, access lifts, docks, or landings. C. Uncovered patios. At grade uncovered patios that have an underside surface that is entirely in contact with and wholly supported by the ground may be placed within the structure setback requirements from the ordinary high water level but shall not be placed within the Shore Impact Zone. Uncovered patios shall not be considered landscaped area when calculating lot coverage. D. Fences. Chain link, or other types of fences with a transparency of at least 75 percent, may be placed within the structure setback requirements from the ordinary high water level but shall not be placed within the Shore Impact Zone. E. E. Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. The structure or facility is not exceed 100 s quare feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water s upply or sewage treatment fac ilities. The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of buildingpermits. The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes,Section 103G.245. Revised 10/03/2019 Shoreland Management Model Ordinance Introduction This model is intended to help local governments develop new shoreland ordinances and amend existing ordinances. This model ordinance is consistent with Minnesota’s shoreland management rules (6120.2500 – 6120.3800). The model ordinance includes some provisions that differ from those in rule. This is because the model is periodically updated to be consistent with changes made to statute and other agency rules since the rules were published in 1989. The model also contains administrative language not in rule to help clarify and administer provisions in the ordinance. Clarifications & Higher Standards Blue bold text in the “Ordinance Language” column indicates any language that provides clarity on topics not sufficiently addressed in rule, or reflects a higher standard than the minimum in rule. This text is optional and is identified as such in the “Commentary” column. (Note that higher standards may be additions to or deletions from the rules.) There are many higher standards that communities can consider besides those mentioned in this model. Please see the Innovative Standards Webpage for examples of what other communities are doing. Implementation Flexibility Some shoreland ordinance provisions provide greater levels of shoreland protection than other provisions. Many of these provisions deal with dimensional standards such as lot area/width, setbacks, impervious surface, etc. In general, they must be as strict as the model language, otherwise deviations must be approved by the DNR consistent with the implementation flexibility criteria in rule (6120.2800 Subp. 3). Approval to deviate from these provisions usually requires some type of offsetting higher standard on another provision in the ordinance, and must be negotiated and documented in an agreement with the DNR before the DNR will provide conditional approval of the ordinance or ordinance amendment. Attachment C Revised 10/03/2019 Contents 1.0 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION AND POLICY _____________________________________________________________________________ 1 2.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS _______________________________________________________________________________ 1 3.0 ADMINISTRATION _________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 4.0 SHORELAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND LAND USES __________________________________________________________________ 11 5.0 SPECIAL LAND USE PROVISIONS _____________________________________________________________________________________ 15 6.0 DIMENSIONAL AND GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS _______________________________________________________________ 17 7.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES _________________________________________________________ 25 8.0 VEGETATION AND LAND ALTERATIONS _______________________________________________________________________________ 27 9.0 SUBDIVISION/PLATTING PROVISIONS _________________________________________________________________________________ 30 10.0 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS (PUDs) _____________________________________________________________________________ 31 1 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 1.0 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION AND POLICY 1.1 Statutory Authorization. This shoreland ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103F, Minnesota Rules, Parts 6120.2500 - 6120.3900, and the planning and zoning enabling legislation in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 394 (for counties) or Chapter 462 (for municipalities). 1.2 Policy. The Legislature of Minnesota has delegated responsibility to local governments of the state to regulate the subdivision, use and development of the shorelands of public waters and thus preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise use of waters and related land resources. This responsibility is hereby recognized by (insert name of Community). 2.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS 2.1 Jurisdiction. The provisions of this ordinance apply to the shorelands of the public water bodies as classified in Section 4.1 of this ordinance, and to the shorelands of public water bodies greater than 10 acres in unincorporated areas in which the city has, by ordinance, extended the application of its zoning regulations as provided by Minnesota Statute, Chapter 462.357 Subd 1. Pursuant to Minnesota Rules, Parts 6120.2500 - 6120.3900, no lake, pond, or flowage less than 10 acres in size in municipalities or 25 acres in size in unincorporated areas need be regulated in a local government’s shoreland regulations. A body of water created by a private user where there was no previous shoreland may, at the discretion of the governing body, be exempt from this ordinance. 2.2 Enforcement. The (insert name of local government or designated official) is responsible for the administration and enforcement of this ordinance. Any violation of the provisions of this ordinance or failure to comply with any of its requirements (including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variances or conditional uses constitutes a misdemeanor and is punishable as defined by law. Violations of this ordinance can occur regardless of whether or not a permit is required for a regulated activity listed in Section 3.2 of this ordinance. 2.3 Severability. If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this ordinance is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected thereby. 2.4 Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not intended by this ordinance to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this ordinance imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this ordinance shall prevail. All other ordinances inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency only. 2.5 Definitions. Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this ordinance shall be interpreted to give them the same meaning they have in common usage and to give this ordinance its most reasonable 1.1. Ensures that LGU authority to administer and enforce the ordinance is connected to state regulatory policy. 1.2. Reinforces the responsibility of local governments to regulate shorelands in their jurisdiction. 2.1. Identifies the size of waterbodies that must be included in the ordinance as directed by rule. Water bodies meeting these thresholds must be listed in Section 4.0. Optional provision for cities that have extra-territorial zoning authority. 2.2 – 2.4. If these provisions are already included in the zoning ordinance, they are not needed. 2.5. These definitions are the minimum necessary for a compliant ordinance. Some definitions may not be needed if a given feature or land use is not present or not allowed in the community. 2 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary application. For the purpose of this ordinance, the words “must” and “shall” are mandatory and not permissive. All distances, unless otherwise specified, are measured horizontally. 2.511 Accessory structure or facility. Any building or improvement subordinate to a principal use. 2.512 Animal feedlot. A facility as defined by Minnesota Rules, part 7020.0300. 2.513 Bluff. A topographic feature such as a hill, cliff, or embankment having the following characteristics: A. Part or all of the feature is located in a shoreland area; B. The slope must drain toward the waterbody. C. The slope rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level; D. The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point 25 feet or more above the ordinary high water level averages 30 percent or greater (see Figure 1), except that an area with an average slope of less than 18 percent over a distance of at least 50 feet shall not be considered part of the bluff (see Figure 2). Figure 1. Illustration of Bluff 2.513. The DNR’s bluff mapping tool, a GIS script, is available for download from the Minnesota Geospatial Commons. This tool is helpful for identifying bluffs for general mapping and planning purposes. 2.513.D. The phrase “except that an area with an average slope of less than 18 percent over a distance of at least 50 feet shall not be considered part of the bluff,” identifies terraces or large relatively flat areas that separate bluff features above and below the terrace. According to the Shoreland Rules SONAR, these areas are buildable if setback standards can be met. This phrase is not to be used in conjunction with the top of bluff definition to reduce the size of the bluff. 3 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary Figure 2. Exception to Bluff 2.514 Bluff impact zone. A bluff and land located within 20 feet of the top of a bluff. 2.515 Bluff, Toe of. The lower point of a 50-foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent or the ordinary high water level, whichever is higher. 2.516 Bluff, Top of. For the purposes of measuring setbacks, bluff impact zone, and administering vegetation management standards, the higher point of a 50-foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. 2.517 Boathouse. A facility as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. 2.518 Buffer. A vegetative feature as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 103F.48. 2.519 Building line. A line parallel to a lot line or the ordinary high water level at the required setback beyond which a structure may not extend. 2.520 Controlled access lot. A lot used to access public waters or as a recreation area for owners of nonriparian lots within the same subdivision containing the controlled access lot. 2.521 Commercial planned unit developments. Developments that provide transient, short-term lodging spaces, rooms, or parcels and their operations are essentially service-oriented. For example, hotel/motel accommodations, resorts, recreational vehicle and camping parks, and other primarily service-oriented activities are commercial planned unit developments. 2.522 Commercial use. The principal use of land or buildings for the sale, lease, rental, or trade of products, goods, and services. 2.523 Commissioner. The commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. 2.524 Conditional use. A land use or development as defined by ordinance that would not be appropriate generally but may be allowed with appropriate restrictions upon a finding that certain conditions as 2.516 Optional language helps to clarify that the top of bluff is used for administering other provisions in addition to bluff setbacks. 2.517. Boathouses are prohibited by statute, and are different than water-oriented accessory structures (2.558) which are allowed in the rules. 4 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary detailed in the zoning ordinance exist, the use or development conforms to the comprehensive land use plan of the community, and the use is compatible with the existing neighborhood. 2.525 Deck. A horizontal, unenclosed platform with or without attached railings, seats, trellises, or other features, attached or functionally related to a principal use or site and at any point extending more than three feet above ground. 2.526 Duplex, triplex, and quad. A dwelling structure on a single lot, having two, three, and four units, respectively, attached by common walls and each unit equipped with separate sleeping, cooking, eating, living, and sanitation facilities. 2.527 Dwelling site. A designated location for residential use by one or more persons using temporary or movable shelter, including camping and recreational vehicle sites. 2.528 Dwelling unit. Any structure or portion of a structure, or other shelter designed as short- or long-term living quarters for one or more persons, including rental or timeshare accommodations such as motel, hotel, and resort rooms and cabins. 2.529 Extractive use. The use of land for surface or subsurface removal of sand, gravel, rock, industrial minerals, other nonmetallic minerals, and peat not regulated under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 93.44 to 93.51. 2.530 Forest land conversion. The clear cutting of forested lands to prepare for a new land use other than reestablishment of a subsequent forest stand. 2.531 Guest cottage. A structure used as a dwelling unit that may contain sleeping spaces and kitchen and bathroom facilities in addition to those provided in the primary dwelling unit on a lot. 2.532 Height of building. The vertical distance between the highest adjoining ground level at the building or ten feet above the lowest adjoining ground level, whichever is lower, and the highest point of a flat roof or average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof (see Figure 3). Figure 3. Height of Building 2.525. Any feature meeting this definition is also a structure (see structure definition) and must meet structure setbacks. Decks must meet floodplain standards. Decks that are accessory to a residential use are prohibited in floodways. Optional language. Make all decks a structure subject to permitting by eliminating the “three-feet above ground” language. 5 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 2.533 Impervious surface. A constructed hard surface that prevents or retards entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than prior to development, including rooftops; decks; sidewalks; patios; swimming pools; parking lots; concrete, asphalt, gravel driveways, or permeable pavers; and other similar surfaces. 2.534 Industrial use. The use of land or buildings for the production, manufacture, warehousing, storage, or transfer of goods, products, commodities, or other wholesale items. 2.535 Intensive vegetation clearing. The complete removal of trees or shrubs in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block. 2.536 Lot. A parcel of land designated by plat, metes and bounds, registered land survey, auditors plot, or other accepted means and separated from other parcels or portions by said description for the purpose of sale, lease, or separation. 2.537 Lot width. The minimum distance between: A. Side lot lines measured at the midpoint of the building line; and B. Side lot lines at the ordinary high water level, if applicable (see Figure 4). Figure 4. Lot Width 2.538 Metallic minerals and peat. “Metallic minerals and peat” has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 93.44 to 93.51. 2.539 Nonconformity. Any legal use, structure or parcel of land already in existence, recorded, or authorized before the adoption of official controls or amendments to those controls that would not have been permitted to become established under the terms of the official controls as now written. 2.533. Optional definition. An impervious surface definition is not in rule, but is very helpful for administering the required impervious surface standards in Section 8.4 of this model. Gravel driveways are defined as impervious since soils become compacted after use and impair infiltration of water, and they are often eventually paved over by property owners and such work doesn’t usually require a permit. Permeable pavers are also included to eliminate their use as a “work around” to meeting impervious coverage standards in Section 8.4. Permeable pavement can reduce stormwater runoff, if maintained, but as a hard surface they remove habitat/vegetation and thus also impact shoreland aesthetics, both of which are shoreland protection goals. 6 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 2.540 Ordinary high water level. The boundary of public waters and wetlands, and shall be an elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape, commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. For watercourses, the ordinary high water level is the elevation of the top of the bank of the channel. For reservoirs and flowages, the ordinary high water level is the operating elevation of the normal summer pool. 2.541 Planned unit development. A type of development characterized by a unified site design for a number of dwelling units or dwelling sites on a parcel, whether for sale, rent, or lease, and also usually involving clustering of these units or sites to provide areas of common open space, density increases, and a mix of structure types and land uses. These developments may be organized and operated as condominiums, time-share condominiums, cooperatives, full fee ownership, commercial enterprises, or any combination of these, or cluster subdivisions of dwelling units, residential condominiums, townhouses, apartment buildings, dwelling grounds, recreational vehicle parks, resorts, hotels, motels, and conversions of structures and land uses to these uses. 2.542 Public waters. Any water as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.005, Subd. 15, 15a. 2.543 Residential planned unit development. A use where the nature of residency is nontransient and the major or primary focus of the development is not service-oriented. For example, residential apartments, manufactured home parks, time-share condominiums, townhouses, cooperatives, and full fee ownership residences would be considered as residential planned unit developments. To qualify as a residential planned unit development, a development must contain at least five dwelling units or sites. 2.544 Resort. “Resort” has the meaning in Minnesota Statute, Section 103F.227. 2.545 Semipublic use. The use of land by a private, nonprofit organization to provide a public service that is ordinarily open to some persons outside the regular constituency of the organization. 2.546 Setback. The minimum horizontal distance between a structure, sewage treatment system, or other facility and an ordinary high water level, sewage treatment system, top of a bluff, road, highway, property line, or other facility. 2.547 Sewage treatment system. “Sewage treatment system” has the meaning given under Minnesota Rules, part 7080.1100, Subp. 82. 2.548 Sewer system. Pipelines or conduits, pumping stations, and force main, and all other construction, devices, appliances, or appurtenances used for conducting sewage or industrial waste or other wastes to a point of ultimate disposal. 2.549 Shore impact zone. Land located between the ordinary high water level of a public water and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the structure setback (see Figure 5). 2.540. This is the same definition as 103G.005 Subd. 14. 7 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary Figure 5. Shore Impact Zone 2.550 Shoreland. “Shoreland” means land located within the following distances from public waters: A. 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water level of a lake, pond, or flowage; and B. 300 feet from a river or stream, or the landward extent of a floodplain designated by ordinance on a river or stream, whichever is greater (see Figure 6). Figure 6. Definition of Shoreland 2.551 Shore recreation facilities. Swimming areas, docks, watercraft mooring areas and launching ramps and other water recreation facilities. 8 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 2.552 Significant historic site. Any archaeological site, standing structure, or other property that meets the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or is listed in the State Register of Historic Sites, or is determined to be an unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 307.08. A historic site meets these criteria if it is presently listed on either register or if it is determined to meet the qualifications for listing after review by the Minnesota state archaeologist or the director of the Minnesota Historical Society. All unplatted cemeteries are automatically considered to be significant historic sites. 2.553 Steep slope. Land where agricultural activity or development is either not recommended or described as poorly suited due to slope steepness and the site’s soil characteristics, as mapped and described in available county soil surveys or other technical reports, unless appropriate design and construction techniques and farming practices are used in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. Where specific information is not available, steep slopes are lLands having average slopes over 12 percent, as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more, which are not bluffs. 2.554 Structure. Any building or appurtenance, including decks, except aerial or underground utility lines, such as sewer, electric, telephone, telegraph, gas lines, towers, poles, and other supporting facilities. 2.555 Subdivision. Land that is divided for the purpose of sale, rent, or lease, including planned unit developments. 2.556 Suitability analysis. An evaluation of land to determine if it is appropriate for the proposed use. The analysis considers factors relevant to the proposed use and may include the following features: susceptibility to flooding; existence of wetlands; soils, erosion potential; slope steepness; water supply, sewage treatment capabilities; water depth, depth to groundwater and bedrock, vegetation, near-shore aquatic conditions unsuitable for water-based recreation; fish and wildlife habitat; presence of significant historic sites; or any other relevant feature of the natural land. 2.557 Variance. “Variance” means the same as that defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 394.27 Subd. 7 (for counties) or Section 462.357 Subd. 6 (2) (for municipalities). 2.558 Water-oriented accessory structure or facility. A small, above ground building or other improvement, except stairways, fences, docks, and retaining walls, which, because of the relationship of its use to surface water, reasonably needs to be located closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Examples of such structures and facilities include, watercraft and watercraft equipment storage structures, gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses, saunas, patios, and detached decks. Boathouses and boat storage structures given the meaning under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245 are not a water-oriented accessory structures. 2.559 Water-dependent use. The use of land for commercial, industrial, public or semi-public purposes, where access to and use of a public water is an integral part of the normal conduct of operation. Marinas, 2.553. Optional deletion. This is a difficult definition to administer. Simplifying this definition to include only average slopes over 12% will make administration easier and improve resource protection. 2.558. Optional addition. Local governments may consider saunas, decks, and patios as water-oriented accessory structures (WOAS). This may help clarify administration. The treatment of patios, specifically, in the shore impact zone (SIZ) is a common source of confusion. As a WOAS, patios could be allowed in the SIZ and counted towards the size limitation of WOAS in Section 7.3. 9 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary resorts, and restaurants with transient docking facilities are examples of commercial uses typically found in shoreland areas. 2.559 Wetland. “Wetland” has the meaning given under Minnesota Rule, part 8420.0111. 3.0 ADMINISTRATION 3.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to identify administrative provisions to ensure the ordinance is administered consistent with its purpose. 3.2 Permits. 3.21 A permit is required for the construction of buildings or building additions (including construction of decks and signs), the installation and/or alteration of sewage treatment systems, and those grading and filling activities not exempted by Section 8.3 of this ordinance. 3.22 A certificate of compliance, consistent with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7082.0700 Subp. 3, is required whenever a permit or variance of any type is required for any improvement on or use of the property. A sewage treatment system shall be considered compliant if the only deficiency is the system’s improper setback from the ordinary high water level. 3.3 Application materials. Application for permits and other zoning applications such as variances shall be made to the (insert designated official) on the forms provided. The application shall include the necessary information so that the (insert designated official) can evaluate how the application complies with the provisions of this ordinance. 3.4 Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The (insert designated official) shall issue a certificate of zoning compliance for each activity requiring a permit as specified in Section 3.2 of this ordinance. This certificate will specify that the use of land conforms to the requirements of this ordinance. Any use, arrangement, or construction at variance with that authorized by permit shall be deemed a violation of this ordinance and shall be punishable as provided in Section 2.2 of this ordinance. 3.5 Variances. Variances may only be granted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 394.27 (for counties) or Section 462.357 (for municipalities) and are subject to the following: 3.51 A variance may not circumvent the general purposes and intent of this ordinance; and 3.52 For properties with existing sewage treatment systems, a certificate of compliance, consistent with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7082.0700 Subp. 3, is required for variance approval. A sewage treatment system shall be considered compliant if the only deficiency is the system’s improper setback from the ordinary high water level. 3.6 Conditional Uses. All conditional uses in the shoreland area are subject to a thorough evaluation of the waterbody and the topographic, vegetation, and soil conditions to ensure: 3.1. All purpose statements in the model are optional but strongly encouraged. They help explain the intent of zoning provisions, which is useful to local governments for explaining provisions to property owners and developing findings for variance decisions. 3.5. The statutory criteria for evaluating variance applications are broad, one-size-fits-all, for use with all variances. Variances to shoreland protection standards affect public waters, resources to be protected for all state residents. Because of the special status of these waters, communities may want to establish special criteria for evaluating shoreland variances to ensure variances do not adversely affect public water resources. 10 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 3.61 The prevention of soil erosion or other possible pollution of public waters, both during and after construction; 3.62 The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; 3.63 There is adequate water supply and on-site sewage treatment; and 3.64 The types, uses, and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercrafts. 3.7 Mitigation. 3.71 In evaluating all variances, conditional uses, zoning and building permit applications, the zoning authority shall require the property owner to address, when appropriate, the following conditions, when related to and proportional to the impact, to meet the purpose of this ordinance, to protect adjacent properties, and the public interest: A. Advanced storm water runoff management treatment; B. Reducing impervious surfaces; C. Increasing setbacks from the ordinary high water level; D. Restoration of wetlands; E. Limiting vegetation removal and/or riparian vegetation restoration; F. Provisions for the location, design, and use of structures, sewage treatment systems, water supply systems, watercraft launching and docking areas, and parking areas; and G. Other conditions the zoning authority deems necessary. 3.72 In evaluating plans to construct sewage treatment systems, roads, driveways, structures, or other improvements on steep slopes, conditions to prevent erosion and to preserve existing vegetation screening of structures, vehicles, and other facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters assuming summer, leaf-on vegetation shall be attached to permits. 3.8 Nonconformities. 3.81 All legally established nonconformities as of the date of this ordinance may continue, but will be managed according to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 394.36 Subd. 5 (for counties) and 462.357 Subd. 1e (for cities) and other regulations of this community for alterations and additions; repair after damage; discontinuance of use; and intensification of use. 3.82 All additions or expansions to the outside dimensions of an existing nonconforming structure must meet the setback, height, and other requirements of Sections 5.0 to 8.0 of this ordinance. Any deviation from these requirements must be authorized by a variance. 3.71. This language is consistent with Minnesota Statute, sections 394.36 Subd. 5(f) (counties) and 462.357 Subd. 1e(i)(municipalities). Conditions come verbatim from statute or are a slight modification of statutory conditions and those from 6120.3900 Subp. 3A (b). Optional deletion provides stronger authority to apply conditions. The phrase “when related to and proportional to the impact” makes clear that conditions will be appropriately applied. 3.81. Variances to statutory requirements (394.36 Subd. 5 (d) or 462.357 Subd. 1e (g)) to combine contiguous nonconforming lots under common ownership are prohibited. See “Considerations in Managing Nonconforming Lots in Shoreland Areas.” 3.82. Consistent with Minnesota Statutes, sections 394.36, Subd. 4 (counties) and 462.357, Subd. 1e (municipalities). 11 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 3.9 Notifications to the Department of Natural Resources. 3.91 All amendments to this shoreland ordinance must be submitted to the Department of Natural Resources for review and approval for compliance with the statewide shoreland management rules. The (insert local government name) will submit the proposed ordinance amendments to the commissioner or the commissioner’s designated representative at least 30 days before any scheduled public hearings. 3.92 All notices of public hearings to consider variances, ordinance amendments, or conditional uses under shoreland management controls must be sent to the commissioner or the commissioner’s designated representative at least ten (10) days before the hearings. Notices of hearings to consider proposed subdivisions/plats must include copies of the subdivision/plat. 3.93 All approved ordinance amendments and subdivisions/plats, and final decisions approving variances or conditional uses under local shoreland management controls must be sent to the commissioner or the commissioner’s designated representative and postmarked within ten days of final action. When a variance is approved after the Department of Natural Resources has formally recommended denial in the hearing record, the notification of the approved variance shall also include the summary of the public record/testimony and the findings of facts and conclusions which supported the issuance of the variance. 3.94 Any request to change the shoreland management classification of public waters within (insert local government name) must be sent to the commissioner or the commissioner’s designated representative for approval, and must include a resolution and supporting data as required by Minnesota Rules, part 6120.3000, subp.4. 3.95 Any request to reduce the boundaries of shorelands of public waters within (insert local government name) must be sent to the commissioner or the commissioner’s designated representative for approval and must include a resolution and supporting data The boundaries of shorelands may be reduced when the shoreland of water bodies with different classifications overlap. In these cases, the topographic divide between the water bodies shall be used for adjusting the boundaries. 3.10 Mandatory EAW. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet consistent with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 must be prepared for projects meeting the thresholds of Minnesota Rules, part 4410.4300, Subparts 19a, 20a, 25, 27, 28, 29, and 36a. 4.0 SHORELAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND LAND USES 4.1 Shoreland Classification System. 4.11 Purpose. To ensure that shoreland development on the public waters of (insert local government name) is regulated consistent with the classifications assigned by the commissioner under Minnesota Rules, part 6120.3300. 3.9. DNR’s preferred notification method is via email to the appropriate DNR Area Hydrologist. 3.91. Submittal of ordinances and amendments to the DNR is required under statute. The optional language provides for submittal of amendments earlier than the 10-day notification required of public hearings (Section 3.92). Submittal of amendments 30 days prior to public hearing is mutually beneficial; it provides DNR with sufficient time to complete a review and make an approval decision in time for public hearings, thus minimizing delays in the local government’s adoption schedule. Amendments involving rezonings or zoning map changes that affect shorelands (e.g. changes to underlying zoning when shoreland provisions refer to underlying zoning) also require DNR review and approval. 3.94. Reclassifications require a formal request, and are usually only approved to correct an error in the original classification. Provisions for implementation flexibility (6120.2800, Subp. 3), rather than reclassification, may be used for requesting changes in standards for certain areas. Local governments may also adopt special protection classifications, a useful approach for applying higher standards around waters in need of greater protection. 3.10. Mandatory EAWs are required for many projects in shorelands. In most cases, the local government is the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) for completing the EAW. 4.1. The ordinance must list all public water shoreland within the community’s jurisdiction including public waters not in the jurisdiction but with surrounding shoreland that is in the jurisdiction. 12 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 4.12 The shoreland area for the waterbodies listed in Sections 4.13 to 4.15 are defined in Section 2.550 and are shown on the Official Zoning Map. 4.13 Lakes are classified as follows: A. General development (GD); General Development Lake Name DNR Public Waters I.D. # (Insert lake name) (Insert DNR Public Waters I.D. #) (Insert lake name) (Insert DNR Public Waters I.D. #) B. Recreational development (RD); and Recreational Development Lake Name DNR Public Waters I.D. # (Insert lake name) (Insert DNR Public Waters I.D. #) (Insert lake name) (Insert DNR Public Waters I.D. #) C. Natural environment (NE). Natural Environment Lake Name DNR Public Waters I.D. # (Insert lake name) (Insert DNR Public Waters I.D. #) (Insert lake name) (Insert DNR Public Waters I.D. #) 4.14 Rivers and Streams are classified as follows: A. Urban; Urban River Name Legal Description (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) Agriculture; Agriculture River Name Legal Description (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) 4.12. Optional provision. It is helpful to show the shoreland areas for lakes and rivers on the zoning map along with their classifications. 4.13. Cities must list lakes that are 10 or more acres, and counties 25 or more acres (Minnesota Rules, part 6120.2500, Subp. 13). Cities that annex land or townships that incorporate with lakes that are 10 acres or more must amend their ordinances to include those lakes. List lakes along with the DNR public waters ID number. 4.14. List river names here along with township, range and section number of the river reach. Optional. Communities with sensitive shorelines or waters that are at risk to degradation due to nonpoint source nutrient pollution may designate those waters (lakes and rivers) with a special protection classification and regulate the shoreland of those waters with more restrictive development standards such as lot area, setback, riparian buffers, etc. 13 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary B. Transition; Transition River Name Legal Description (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) C. Forested; and Forested River Name Legal Description (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) D. Remote. Remote River Name Legal Description (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) (Insert river name) (Insert legal description) 4.15 All public rivers and streams shown on the Public Waters Inventory Map for (insert name of county), a copy of which is adopted by reference, not given a classification in Section 4.14 shall be considered “Tributary.” 4.2 Land Uses. 4.21 Purpose. To identify land uses that are compatible with the protection and preservation of shoreline resources in order to conserve the economic and environmental values of shoreland and sustain water quality. 4.22 Shoreland district land uses listed in Sections 4.23 and 4.24 are regulated as: A. Permitted uses (P). These uses are allowed, provided all standards in this ordinance are followed; B. Conditional uses (C). These uses are allowed through a conditional use permit. The use must be evaluated according to the criteria in Section 3.6 of this ordinance and any additional conditions listed in this ordinance; and C. Not permitted uses (N). These uses are prohibited. 4.15. Instead of this provision, local governments may list all tributaries in the table in Section 4.14, and/or provide a map of all watercourses subject to the tributary class. This is a practical alternative if the number of tributaries is relatively small. 4.22. Land uses in the shoreland district are listed as permitted, not permitted, or conditional for each water body classification. Land uses for each lake classification are in Section 4.23, and uses for each river classification are in 4.24. Local governments may further clarify if the listed “permitted” uses are allowed with or without a permit. Uses listed as “conditional” require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Underlying zoning 14 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 4.23 Land uses for lake classifications: Land Uses General Development Recreational Development Natural Environment Single residential P P P Duplex, triplex, quad residential P P C Residential PUD C C C Water-dependent commercial - Accessory to residential PUD C C C Commercial P P C Commercial PUD - Expansion of PUD involving up to six additional units or sites allowed as a permitted use provided the provisions of Section 10.0 are satisfied. C C C Solar Power Facilities (principal land use) C C C Parks & historic sites C C C Public, semipublic P P C Industrial C C N Agricultural: cropland and pasture P P P Agricultural feedlots: New N N N Agricultural feedlots: Expansion or resumption of existing C C C Forest management P P P Forest land conversion C C C Extractive use C C C Mining of metallic minerals and peat P P P should be consistent with these uses to alleviate potential conflicts. Optional. Add solar power as a conditional use including criteria or conditions of approval. See “Consideration in Siting Solar Power Facilities in Shoreland Areas” for ideas for conditions. New feedlots are prohibited in shorelands per Minnesota Rules, part 7020. Minnesota statute 116.0711 allows the resumption of existing feedlots. 15 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 4.24 Land uses for river and stream classifications: Land Uses Remote Forested Transition Agriculture Urban Tributary Single residential P P P P P P Duplex, triplex, quad residential C P P P P P Residential PUD C C C C C C Water-dependent commercial - Accessory to residential PUD C C C C C C Commercial C C C C P P Commercial PUD - Expansion of PUD involving up to six additional units or sites allowed as a permitted use provided the provisions of Section 10.0 are satisfied. C C C C C C Solar Power Facilities (principal land use) C C C C C C Parks & historic sites C C C C C C Public, semipublic C C C C P P Industrial N C N N C C Agricultural: cropland and pasture P P P P P P Agricultural feedlots: New N N N N N N Agricultural feedlots: Expansion or resumption of existing C C C C C C Forest management P P P P P P Forest land conversion C C C C C C Extractive use C C C C C C Mining of metallic minerals and peat P P P P P P 5.0 SPECIAL LAND USE PROVISIONS 5.1 Commercial, Industrial, Public, and Semipublic Use Standards. 5.11 Water-dependent uses may be located on parcels or lots with frontage on public waters provided that: A. The use complies with provisions of Section 7.0; Optional. Add solar power as a conditional use including criteria or conditions of approval. See “Consideration in Siting Solar Power Facilities in Shoreland Areas” for ideas for conditions. New feedlots are prohibited in shorelands per Minnesota Rules, part 7020. Minnesota statute 116.0711 allows the resumption of existing feedlots. 5.0. The uses and their special conditions in this section must be in the shoreland ordinance if the use is allowed. If not, the provision may be excluded from this section, however, it should be added to the land use tables in 4.23 and 4.24 and listed as “N.” Note that some of these uses are conditional uses and must be identified as such in use tables 4.23 and 4.24. 16 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary B. The use is designed to incorporate topographic and vegetative screening of parking areas and structures; C. Uses that require short-term watercraft mooring for patrons must centralize these facilities and design them to avoid obstructions of navigation and to be the minimum size necessary to meet the need; and D. Uses that depend on patrons arriving by watercraft may use signs and lighting, provided that: (1) Signs placed in or on public waters must only convey directional information or safety messages and may only be placed by a public authority or under a permit issued by the county sheriff; and (2) Signs placed within the shore impact zone are: (a) No higher than ten feet above the ground, and no greater than 32 square feet in size; and (b) If illuminated by artificial lights, the lights must be shielded or directed to prevent illumination across public waters; and (3) Other lighting may be located within the shore impact zone or over public waters if it is used to illuminate potential safety hazards and is shielded or otherwise directed to prevent direct illumination across public waters. This does not preclude use of navigational lights. 5.12 Commercial, industrial, public, and semi-public uses that are not water-dependent must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the ordinary high water level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. 5.2 Agriculture Use Standards. 5.21 Buffers. A. The shore impact zone for parcels with permitted agricultural land uses is equal to a line parallel to and 50 feet from the ordinary high water level. B. General cultivation farming, grazing, nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting are permitted uses if steep slopes and shore and bluff impact zones are maintained in perennial vegetation or operated under an approved conservation plan that includes alternative riparian water quality practices consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation district or the Natural Resource Conservation Service, and as approved by the local soil and water conservation district. 5.22 New animal feedlots are not allowed in shoreland. Modifications or expansions to existing feedlots or resumption of old feedlots are conditional uses and must meet the following standards: A. Feedlots must be designed consistent with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7020; 5.11.D. This provision was modified from rules for consistency with the Supreme Court decision in Reed vs Town of Gilbert regarding the first amendment and signage. 5.21. The DNR will consider a 50-foot average, 30-foot minimum buffer and language defining alternative water quality practices consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 103F.48 as being consistent with 6120.3300, Subp. 7. Please see guidance and model language for acceptable language. 5.21.B. Optional deletion. Eliminating the option to use alternative practices instead of the required buffer will reduce nutrient runoff and improve surface water quality. 17 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary B. Feedlots must not further encroach into the existing ordinary high water level setback or the bluff impact zone and must not expand to a capacity of 1,000 animal units or more; and, C. Old feedlots not currently in operation may resume operation consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Section 116.0711. 5.3 Forest Management Standards. 5.31 The harvesting of timber and associated reforestation must be conducted consistent with the applicable provisions of the Sustaining Minnesota Forest Resources: Voluntary Site-Level Forest Management Guidelines for Landowners, Loggers and Resource Managers. 5.32 Intensive vegetation clearing for forest land conversion to another use is a conditional use subject to an erosion control and sedimentation plan developed and approved by the soil and water conservation district. 5.4 Extractive Use Standards. Extractive uses are conditional uses and must meet the following standards: 5.41. Site Development and Restoration Plan. A site development and restoration plan must be developed, approved, and followed over the course of operation. The plan must: A. Address dust, noise, possible pollutant discharges, hours and duration of operation, and anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations; B. Identify actions to be taken during operation to mitigate adverse environmental impacts, particularly erosion; and C. Clearly explain how the site will be rehabilitated after extractive activities end. 5.42 Setbacks for Processing Machinery. Processing machinery must meet structure setback standards from ordinary high water levels and from bluffs. 5.5 Metallic Mining Standards. Mining of metallic minerals and peat is a permitted use provided the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 93.44 to 93.51, are satisfied. 6.0 DIMENSIONAL AND GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 6.1 Purpose. To establish dimensional and performance standards that protect shoreland resources from impacts of development. 6.2 Lot Area and Width Standards. After the effective date of this ordinance, all new lots must meet the minimum lot area and lot width requirements in Sections 6.25 and 6.26, subject to the following standards: 6.21 Only lands above the ordinary high water level can be used to meet lot area and width standards; 6.22 Lot width standards must be met at both the ordinary high water level and at the building line; 18 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 6.23 The sewer lot area dimensions can only be used if publicly owned sewer system service is available to the property; 6.24 Residential subdivisions with dwelling unit densities exceeding those in Sections 6.25 and 6.26 are allowed only if designed and approved as residential PUDs under Section 10.0 of this ordinance; and 6.25 Lake Minimum Lot Area and Width Standards: A. General development lake – No sewer. B. General development lake – Sewer C. Recreational development lake – No sewer Lot Type Riparian Lot Area (sf) Riparian Lot Width (ft) Nonriparian Lot Area (sf) Nonriparian Lot Width (ft) Single 20,000 100 40,000 150 Duplex 40,000 180 80,000 265 Triplex 60,000 260 120,000 375 Quad 80,000 340 160,000 490 Lot Type Riparian Lot Area (sf) Riparian Lot Width (ft) Nonriparian Lot Area (sf) Nonriparian Lot Width (ft) Single 15,000 75 10,000 75 Duplex 26,000 135 17,500 135 Triplex 38,000 195 25,000 190 Quad 49,000 255 32,500 245 Lot Type Riparian Lot Area (sf) Riparian Lot Width (ft) Nonriparian Lot Area (sf) Nonriparian Lot Width (ft) Single 40,000 150 40,000 150 Duplex 80,000 225 80,000 265 Triplex 120,000 300 120,000 375 Quad 160,000 375 160,000 490 6.25. Local governments may want to require larger lot area and width standards than those listed. Larger lots reduce density and risk of surface water use overcrowding and preserve lakeshore character. Larger lots also reduce the amount of development and impervious surfaces along sensitive shorelines providing protection to waters sensitive to nutrient pollution. 19 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary D. Recreational development lake – Sewer E. Natural environment lake – No sewer F. Natural environment lake – Sewer Lot Type Riparian Lot Area (sf) Riparian Lot Width (ft) Nonriparian Lot Area (sf) Nonriparian Lot Width (ft) Single 20,000 75 15,000 75 Duplex 35,000 135 26,000 135 Triplex 50,000 195 38,000 190 Quad 65,000 255 49,000 245 Lot Type Riparian Lot Area (sf) Riparian Lot Width (ft) Nonriparian Lot Area (sf) Nonriparian Lot Width (ft) Single 80,000 200 80,000 200 Duplex 120,000 300 160,000 400 Triplex 160,000 400 240,000 600 Quad 200,000 500 320,000 800 Lot Type Riparian Lot Area (sf) Riparian Lot Width (ft) Nonriparian Lot Area (sf) Nonriparian Lot Width (ft) Single 40,000 125 20,000 125 Duplex 70,000 225 35,000 220 Triplex 100,000 325 52,000 315 Quad 130,000 425 65,000 410 20 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 6.26 River/Stream Minimum Lot Width Standards. There are no minimum lot area requirements for rivers and streams. The lot width standards in feet are: Lot Type Remote Forested Transition Agriculture Urban & Tributary No Sewer Urban & Tributary Sewer Single 300 200 250 150 100 75 Duplex 450 300 375 225 150 115 Triplex 600 400 500 300 200 150 Quad 750 500 625 375 250 190 6.3 Special Residential Lot Provisions. 6.31 Subdivisions of duplexes, triplexes, and quads are conditional uses on Natural Environment Lakes and must also meet the following standards: A. Each building must be set back at least 200 feet from the ordinary high water level; B. Each building must have common sewage treatment and water systems in one location and serve all dwelling units in the building; C. Watercraft docking facilities for each lot must be centralized in one location and serve all dwelling units in the building; and D. No more than 25 percent of a lake’s shoreline can be in duplex, triplex, or quad developments. 6.32. One guest cottage may be allowed on lots meeting or exceeding the duplex lot area and width dimensions presented in Sections 6.25 and 6.26, provided the following standards are met: A. For lots exceeding the minimum lot dimensions of duplex lots, the guest cottage must be located within an area equal to the smallest duplex-sized lot that could be created including the principal dwelling unit; B. A guest cottage must not cover more than 700 square feet of land surface and must not exceed 15 feet in height; and C. A guest cottage must be located or designed to reduce its visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks or color, assuming summer leaf-on conditions. 6.33 Controlled access lots are permissible if created as part of a subdivision and in compliance with the following standards: 6.26. Local governments may want to establish minimum lot area requirements and require larger lot width and area standards than those listed. 6.31. If a community does not have NE lakes this provision may be omitted. If a community has NE lakes but prohibits duplex, triplex or quads on NE lakes, this provision may be omitted. However, duplex, triplex or quad structures must be listed in the land use tables 4.23 and 4.24 as “N.” 6.32. If a community does not allow guest cottages or secondary dwelling units, this provision may be omitted. However, guest cottages must be listed in the land use tables 4.23 and 4.24 as “N.” 6.33. Controlled access lots are the only method to allow riparian access for non-riparian property and are only allowed at the time of subdivision. Communities concerned about overcrowding of surface waters may choose to prohibit controlled 21 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary A. The lot must meet the area and width requirements for residential lots, and be suitable for the intended uses of controlled access lots as provided in item D; B. If docking, mooring, or over-water storage of more than six (6) watercraft is to be allowed at a controlled access lot, then the width of the lot (keeping the same lot depth) must be increased by a percentage of the requirements for riparian residential lots for each watercraft beyond six, consistent with the following table: Ratio of lake size to shore length (acres/mile) Required percent increase in frontage Less than 100 25% 100 – 200 20% 201 – 300 15% 301 – 400 10% Greater than 400 5% C. The lot must be jointly owned by all purchasers of lots in the subdivision or by all purchasers of nonriparian lots in the subdivision who are provided riparian access rights on the access lot; and D. Covenants or other equally effective legal instruments must be developed that: (1) Specify which lot owners have authority to use the access lot; (2) Identify what activities are allowed. The activities may include watercraft launching, loading, storage, beaching, mooring, docking, swimming, sunbathing, or picnicking; (3) Limit the total number of vehicles allowed to be parked and the total number of watercraft allowed to be continuously moored, docked, or stored over water; (4) Require centralization of all common facilities and activities in the most suitable locations on the lot to minimize topographic and vegetation alterations; and (5) Require all parking areas, storage buildings, and other facilities to be screened by vegetation or topography as much as practical from view from the public water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. 6.34 Access Easements. Easements providing access to boat docking and mooring facilities to non-riparian property owners are prohibited. access lots. If a community does not allow controlled access lots, this provision may be omitted. However, controlled access lots must be listed in the land use tables in 4.23 and 4.24 as “N.” 6.34. Optional. Communities concerned about crowding of surface waters may want to prohibit access easements and the additional boats that result from their use. 22 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 6.4 Placement, Height, and Design of Structures. 6.41 OHWL Setback for Structures and Sewage Treatment Systems. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks, and comply with the following OHWL setback provisions. The structure setback standards for sewered properties can only be used if publicly owned sewer system service is available. Waterbody Classification Structures with No Sewer Structures with Sewer Sewage Treatment Systems Natural Environment Lakes 150 150 150 Recreational Development Lakes 100 75 75 General Development Lakes 75 50 50 Remote Rivers 200 200 150 Forested and Transition Rivers 150 150 100 Agriculture, Urban, & Tributary Rivers 100 50 75 A.OHWL Setbacks. Structures, impervious surfaces, and sewage treatment systems must meet setbacks from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL), except that one water-oriented accessory structure or facility, designed in accordance with Section 7.3 of this ordinance, may be set back a minimum distance of ten (10) feet from the OHWL: B.Setback averaging. Where structures exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building site, structure setbacks may be altered without a variance to conform to the adjoining setbacks from the OHWL, provided the proposed structure is not located in a shore impact zone or in a bluff impact zone (see Figure 7); Figure. 7 Structure Setback Averaging 6.4. Local governments may apply stricter standards than those listed here. Increasing structure setbacks can help reduce the risk of erosion in near shore areas and enhance the aesthetic character of lakes and shorelands. Larger setbacks also allow room for larger riparian buffers. Increasing septic system setbacks increases reduces the risk of subsurface effluent reaching surface waters. 6.41 Optional addition. This language clarifies that the ”sewer” standards only apply if a publicly owned sewer system is available to the property to be consistent with similar language in Section 6.23 which is specified in rule. 6.41.A. Optional language. Keeping impervious surfaces away from the riparian edge is important for reducing the risk of erosion in the near shore area and nutrient loading into surface waters due to runoff. Section 7.3 of this ordinance allows for some exceptions for impervious surfaces in the near shore area. ALL accessory structures must meet floodplain standards and are prohibited in floodways. 6.41.B. Local governments may choose to exclude this provision from their ordinance or only apply it to nonconforming lots. 23 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary C.Setbacks of decks. Deck additions may be allowed without a variance to a structure not meeting the required setback from the ordinary high water level if all of the following criteria are met: (1) The structure existed on the date the structure setbacks were established; (2) A thorough evaluation of the property and structure reveals no reasonable location for a deck meeting or exceeding the existing ordinary high water level setback of the structure; (3) The deck encroachment toward the ordinary high water level does not exceed 15 percent of the existing setback of the structure from the ordinary high water level or is no closer than 30 feet from the OHWL, whichever is more restrictive; and (4) The deck is constructed primarily of wood, and is not roofed or screened (see Figure 8). Figure 8. Deck Encroachment D.Additional structure setbacks. Structures must also meet the following setbacks, regardless of the waterbody classification: Setback from: Setback (ft) Top of bluff 30 Unplatted cemetery 50 Right-of-way line of federal, state, or county highway 50 Right-of-way line of town road, public street, or other roads not classified 20 E.Bluff Impact Zones. Structures, impervious surfaces, and accessory facilities, except stairways and landings, must not be placed within bluff impact zones. 6.41.C. Local governments may choose to exclude this provision from their ordinance. 6.41.D. Local governments may apply stricter standards than those listed. The presence of permeable soils on top of bedrock, combined with steep slopes or bluffs, can increase risk of septic effluent leakage out the sides of slopes or bluffs. Establishing septic system setbacks from the top of bluffs can reduce this risk. 6.41.E. Optional. Keeping impervious surfaces out of the bluff impact zone is important for reducing the risk of slope erosion and failure and nutrient loading into surface waters due to runoff. 24 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 6.42 Height of Structures. All structures in residential districts in cities, except churches and nonresidential agricultural structures, must not exceed 25 feet in height. 6.43 Lowest Floor Elevation. A. Determining elevations. Structures must be placed at an elevation consistent with the applicable floodplain regulatory elevations. Where these controls do not exist, the elevation to which the lowest floor, including basement, is placed or flood-proofed must be determined as follows: (1) For lakes, by placing the lowest floor at a level at least three feet above the highest known water level, or three feet above the ordinary high water level, whichever is higher (see Figure 9); (2) For rivers and streams, by placing the lowest floor at least three feet above the highest known flood elevation. If highest known flood elevation is not available, by placing the lowest floor at least three feet above the ordinary high water level (see Figure 9), or by conducting a technical evaluation to establish a flood protection elevation. Technical evaluations must be done by a qualified engineer or hydrologist consistent with Minnesota Rules, parts 6120.5000 to 6120.6200. B. Methods for placement. (1) In addition to the lowest floor, all service utilities must be elevated or water-tight to the elevation determined in part A. (2)If elevation methods involving fill would result in filling in the SIZ, then structures must instead be elevated through floodproofing methods in accordance with 6.43(B)(3) below; (3) If the structure is floodproofed, then it must be built to resist hydrostatic pressure through elevation methods such as blocks, pilings, filled stem walls, elevated concrete pad, internally flooded enclosed areas, or through other accepted engineering practices consistent with FEMA technical bulletins 1, 2 and 3. Figure 9. Lowest Floor Elevation 6.42. Height standards only apply to residential districts in cities (MR 6120.3300 Subp. 3.G.). 6.43. These provisions apply to areas where there are no mapped floodplains or floodplain studies for determining elevations. If ALL shoreland areas in a community have been mapped/have studies, these provisions may be omitted. 6.43.B(2) Optional. Do not allow fill to raise structures in the SIZ, only elevation through floodproofing. This minimizes land alteration and vegetation removal in a highly sensitive area. 25 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 6.44 Significant Historic Sites. No structure may be placed on a significant historic site in a manner that affects the values of the site unless adequate information about the site has been removed and documented in a public repository. 6.5 Water Supply and Sewage Treatment. 6.51 Water supply. Any public or private supply of water for domestic purposes must meet or exceed standards for water quality of the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 6.52 Sewage treatment. Any premises used for human occupancy must be connected to a publicly-owned sewer system, where available or comply with Minnesota Rules, Chapters 7080 – 7081. 7.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES 7.1 Placement and Design of Roads, Driveways, and Parking Areas. Public and private roads and parking areas must be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screening as viewed from public waters and comply with the following standards: 7.11 Roads, driveways, and parking areas must meet structure setbacks and must not be placed within bluff and shore impact zones, when other reasonable and feasible placement alternatives exist. If no alternatives exist, they may be placed within these areas, and must be designed to minimize adverse impacts; 7.12 Watercraft access ramps, approach roads, and access-related parking areas may be placed within shore impact zones provided the vegetative screening and erosion control conditions of this subpart are met; 7.13 Private facilities must comply with the grading and filling provisions of Section 8.3 of this ordinance; and 7.14 For public roads, driveways and parking areas, documentation must be provided by a qualified individual that they are designed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to public waters consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation district, or other applicable technical materials. 7.2 Stairways, Lifts, and Landings. Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, lifts, and landings must meet the following design requirements: 7.21 Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width on residential lots. Wider stairways may be used for commercial properties, public recreational uses, and planned unit developments; 7.22 Landings for stairways and lifts on residential lots must not exceed 32 square feet in area. Landings larger than 32 square feet may be used for commercial properties, public-space recreational uses, and planned unit developments; 26 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 7.23 Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings; 7.24 Stairways, lifts, and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings, or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion; 7.25 Stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, whenever practical; and 7.26 Facilities such as ramps, lifts, or mobility paths for physically handicapped persons are also allowed for achieving access to shore areas, if they are consistent with the dimensional and performance standards of sub items 7.21 to 7.25 and the requirements of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1341. 7.3 Water-oriented Accessory Structures or Facilities. Each residential lot may have one water-oriented accessory structure or facility if it complies with the following provisions: 7.31 The structure or facility must not exceed ten feet in height, exclusive of safety rails, and cannot occupy an area greater than 250 square feet. The structure or facility may include detached decks not exceeding eight feet above grade at any point or at-grade patios; 7.32 The structure or facility is not in the Bluff Impact Zone; 7.33 The setback of the structure or facility from the ordinary high water level must be at least ten feet; 7.34 The structure is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245; 7.35 The structure or facility must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks or color, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions; 7.36 The roof may be used as an open-air deck with safety rails, but must not be enclosed with a roof or sidewalls or used as a storage area; 7.37 The structure or facility must not be designed or used for human habitation and must not contain water supply or sewage treatment facilities; 7.38 As an alternative for general development and recreational development waterbodies, water-oriented accessory structures used solely for storage of watercraft and boating-related equipment may occupy an area up to 400 square feet provided the maximum width of the structure is 20 feet as measured parallel to the shoreline; and 7.39 Water-oriented accessory structures may have the lowest floor placed lower than the elevation specified in Section 6.43 if the structure is designed to accommodate internal flooding, constructed of flood-resistant materials to the elevation, electrical and mechanical equipment is placed above the elevation 7.3. If a community does not allow water-oriented accessory structures or facilities (WOAS), this provision may be omitted. However, such structures and facilities must be listed in the land use tables in 4.23 and 4.24 as “N.” 7.31. Optional addition. Including “patios” as a water-oriented accessory structure (WOAS) or facility makes patios subject to the limitations of this provision. This helps to simplify administration and limit the amount of impervious surfaces within the shore impact zone. “Patios” should only be included here if they are also included in the definition of WOAS in Section 2.558. It’s acceptable to allocate the 250 SF limit between multiple structures and facilities. 7.36. Optional addition. The additional language helps to clarify structure design and keep such structures smaller and less noticeable. Rules don’t specifically prohibit roofs but they do say “must not be enclosed” A reasonable interpretation is that roofs constitute and enclosure. 27 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary and, if long duration flooding is anticipated, the structure is built to withstand ice action and wind-driven waves and debris. 8.0 VEGETATION AND LAND ALTERATIONS 8.1 Purpose. Alterations of vegetation and topography are regulated to prevent erosion into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping, sustain water quality, and protect fish and wildlife habitat. 8.2 Vegetation Management. 8.21 Removal or alteration of vegetation must comply with the provisions of this subsection except for: A. Vegetation alteration necessary for the construction of structures and sewage treatment systems under validly issued permits for these facilities; B. The construction of public roads and parking areas if consistent with Section 7.1 of this ordinance; C. Forest management uses consistent with Section 5.3 of this ordinance; and D. Agricultural uses consistent with Section 5.2 of this ordinance. 8.22 Intensive vegetation clearing in the shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes is prohibited. Intensive clearing outside of these areas is allowed if consistent with the forest management standards in Section 5.3 of this ordinance. 8.23 Limited clearing and trimming of trees and shrubs in the shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes, is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling and to accommodate the placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, livestock watering areas, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted water-oriented accessory structures or facilities, provided that: A. The screening of structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced; B. Existing shading of water surfaces along rivers is preserved; C. Cutting debris or slash shall be scattered and not mounded on the ground; and D. Perennial ground cover is retained. E. Picnic areas, access paths, livestock watering areas, beaches and watercraft access areas are prohibited in bluff impact zones. 8.24 Removal of trees, limbs, or branches that are dead, diseased, dying, or pose safety hazards is allowed without a permit. 8.0. These standards prohibit or limit vegetation removal in specified areas. These are difficult to administer and enforce, and once vegetation has been removed there are no requirements to restore it. Communities concerned about the loss of riparian vegetation and habit, erosion control and aesthetics may consider establishing a requirement to maintain a riparian buffer and restoration to the required standard as a condition of any permit approval. This is one of the most important actions any community can take – See the Innovative Standards Webpage . 8.23 C, D, and E. Optional. These standards provide additional protection for vegetation and reduce land disturbance in bluff impact areas that enhance habitat and protect water quality. 28 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 8.25 Fertilizer and pesticide runoff into surface waters must be minimized through use of vegetation, topography or both. 8.3 Grading and Filling. 8.31 Grading and filling activities must comply with the provisions of this subsection except for the construction of public roads and parking areas if consistent with Section 7.1 of this ordinance. 8.32 Permit Requirements. A. Grading, filling and excavations necessary for the construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, and driveways, if part of an approved permit, do not require a separate grading and filling permit. However, the standards in Section 8.33 of this ordinance must be incorporated into the permit. B. For all other work, including driveways not part of another permit, a grading and filling permit is required for: (1) the movement of more than 10 cubic yards of material on steep slopes or within shore or bluff impact zones; and (2) the movement of more than 50 cubic yards of material outside of steep slopes and shore and bluff impact zones. 8.33 Grading, filling and excavation activities must meet the following standards: A. Grading or filling of any wetland must meet or exceed the wetland protection standards under Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8420 and any other permits, reviews, or approvals by other local state, or federal agencies such as watershed districts, the DNR or US Army Corps of Engineers; B. Land alterations must be designed and implemented to minimize the amount of erosion and sediment from entering surface waters during and after construction consistently by: (1) Limiting the amount and time of bare ground exposure; (2) Using temporary ground covers such as mulches or similar materials; (3) Establishing permanent, deep-rooted and dense vegetation cover as soon as possible; (4) Using sediment traps, vegetated buffer strips or other appropriate techniques; (5) Stabilizing altered areas to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the soil and water conservation district; (6) Not placing fill or excavated material in a manner that creates unstable slopes. Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by qualified professionals for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30 percent or greater; 8.3. Note that Minnesota Rules, part 4410.4300, Subp. 36a provides thresholds for mandatory EAWs for certain land conversions and alterations in shoreland. The local government is the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) unless otherwise specified. 8.32.A. The1999 model ordinance included driveways in this provision even though they are not included in rule. If ordinances include driveways in this provision they should also include the driveway language in 8.32.B. to communicate that driveways, as a stand-alone project, do need a permit if they meet the stated disturbance thresholds. 8.32.B. Optional. In addition to a cubic yard threshold for permitting, also include a square footage threshold that is comparable to the disturbance of the required 10 cubic yard threshold. Most property owners can visualize square footage area better than a cubic yard volume and will thus aid in permitting compliance. A land disturbance of 1,000 square feet (an approximate 32 X 32-foot area) in the SIZ/BIZ or on a steep slope is a significant area that could cause erosion/sedimentation into surface waters and worthy of management through a permit. A commensurate area for the 50 cubic yard threshold is 5,000 square feet. 8.32.B.(1).Optional. Consider prohibiting filling in the SIZ or if filling is allowed, require conditions of approval that, at a minimum, require vegetation restoration. 8.33.B.(3). Optional addition of deep-rooted and dense vegetation to improve soil stability. 29 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary (7) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in bluff impact zones; (8) Any alterations below the ordinary high water level of public waters must first be authorized by the commissioner under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G; (9) Alterations of topography are only allowed if they are accessory to permitted or conditional uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby properties; and (10)Placement of natural rock riprap, including associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, is permitted if: (a) the finished slope does not exceed three feet horizontal to one-foot vertical; (b) the landward extent of the riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level; and (c) the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet (see Figure 10). Figure 10. Riprap Guidelines 8.34 Connections to public waters. Excavations to connect boat slips, canals, lagoons, and harbors to public waters require a public waters permit and must comply with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6115. 8.4 Stormwater Management. 8.41 General Standards: A. When possible, existing natural drainageways, and vegetated soil surfaces must be used to convey, store, filter, and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters. B. Development must be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of disturbed areas, runoff velocities, erosion potential, and reduce and delay runoff volumes. Disturbed areas 8.34. DNR permits for public water excavations require that the local government have a DNR-approved shoreland zoning ordinance (Minnesota Statute, Section 103G.245, Subd. 8(1)) as a condition of a public water permit approval. The DNR may deny a permit for public waters excavations if there is no shoreland ordinance or if the current ordinance is not consistent with the ordinance the DNR has approved. 8.41. These are common stormwater management BMPs. If any of these specific provisions exist elsewhere in a local ordinance and are similar, they may be omitted here. 30 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary must be stabilized as soon as possible and appropriate facilities or methods used to retain sediment on the site. C. When development density, topography, soils, and vegetation are not sufficient to adequately handle stormwater runoff, constructed facilities such as settling basins, skimming devices, dikes, waterways, ponds and infiltration may be used. Preference must be given to surface drainage, vegetation, and infiltration rather than buried pipes and man-made materials and facilities. 8.42 Specific Standards: A. Impervious surfaces of lots must not exceed 25 percent of the lot area. B. When constructed facilities are used for stormwater management, documentation must be provided by a qualified individual that they are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district or the Minnesota Stormwater Manual, as applicable. C. New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters must be consistent with Minnesota Rules, part 6115.0231. 9.0 SUBDIVISION/PLATTING PROVISIONS 9.1 Purpose. To ensure that new development minimizes impacts to shoreland resources and is safe and functional. 9.2 Land suitability. Each lot created through subdivision, including planned unit developments authorized under Section 10.0 of this ordinance, must be suitable in its natural state for the proposed use with minimal alteration A suitability analysis must be conducted for each proposed subdivision, including planned unit developments, to determine if the subdivision is suitable in its natural state for the proposed use with minimal alteration and whether any feature of the land is likely to be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of future residents of the proposed subdivision or of the community. 9.3 Consistency with other controls. Subdivisions and each lot in a subdivision shall meet all official controls so that a variance is not needed later to use the lots for their intended purpose. 9.4 Water and Sewer Design Standards. 9.41 A potable water supply and a sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, Chapters 7080 – 7081 must be provided for every lot. 9.42 Each lot must include at least two soil treatment and dispersal areas that support systems described in Minnesota Rules, parts 7080.2200 to 7080.223 or site conditions described in part 7081.0270, subparts 3 to 7, as applicable. 9.43 Lots that would require use of holding tanks are prohibited. 8.42.A. Local governments may reduce the maximum amount of impervious surface allowed. Reducing the amount of allowed impervious surface will reduce the runoff volume and rate reducing the risk of erosion and nutrient loading into surface waters. Requiring a lower minimum (15% or 20%) only on new lots avoids the creation of nonconformities. 31 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 9.5 Information requirements. 9.51 Topographic contours at ten-foot intervals or less from United States Geological Survey maps or more current sources, showing limiting site characteristics; 9.52 The surface water features required in Minnesota Statutes, section 505.021, Subd. 1, to be shown on plats, obtained from United States Geological Survey quadrangle topographic maps or more current sources; 9.53 Adequate soils information to determine suitability for building and sewage treatment capabilities for every lot from the most current existing sources or from field investigations such as soil borings, percolation tests, or other methods; 9.54 Information regarding adequacy of domestic water supply; extent of anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations; near-shore aquatic conditions, including depths, types of bottom sediments, and aquatic vegetation; and proposed methods for controlling stormwater runoff and erosion, both during and after construction activities; 9.55 Location of 100-year flood plain areas and floodway districts from existing adopted maps or data; and 9.56 A line or contour representing the ordinary high water level, the “toe” and the “top” of bluffs, and the minimum building setback distances from the top of the bluff and the lake or stream. 9.6 Dedications. When a land or easement dedication is a condition of subdivision approval, the approval must provide easements over natural drainage or ponding areas for management of stormwater and significant wetlands. 9.7 Platting. All subdivisions that cumulatively create five or more lots or parcels that are 2-1/2 acres or less in size shall be processed as a plat in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462.358 Subd. 3a (cities) and 505. No permit for construction of buildings or sewage treatment systems shall be issued for lots created after the adoption of this ordinance unless the lot was previously approved as part of a formal subdivision. 9.8 Controlled Access Lots. Controlled access lots within a subdivision must meet or exceed the lot size criteria in Section 6.33 of this ordinance. 10.0 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS (PUDs) 10.1 Purpose. To protect and enhance the natural and scenic qualities of shoreland areas during and after development and redevelopment of high density residential and commercial uses. 10.2 Types of PUDs Permissible. Planned unit developments (PUDs) are allowed for new projects on undeveloped land, redevelopment of previously built sites, or conversions of existing buildings and land. Deviation from the minimum lot size standards of Section 6.2 of this ordinance is allowed if the standards in this Section are met. 9.51. In addition to paper based topographic information, MnTOPO is a web-based application for viewing, printing and downloading high-resolution elevation data. It can also be used to generate elevation profiles for locating bluffs, watershed boundaries or other topographical features of interest. 9.7. Optional. “Cumulatively” is recommended to close a loophole where a parcel is subdivided at different times, each time creating fewer than 5 parcels to avoid the requirement to plat. Both Minnesota Statutes, sections 462 and 394 say official controls are to provide for “orderly” development. Applying this provision cumulatively to parcels supports this purpose. 10.0 Shoreland PUDs require a conditional use permit (CUP) and are best thought of as a conditional use to allow higher density in shoreland areas. Provisions in this section are conditions of approval that are required to approve a Shoreland PUD (CUP) and cannot be weakened through the negotiation process of a local government’s general PUD ordinance. 32 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 10.3 Processing of PUDs. Planned unit developments in the shoreland district must be processed as a conditional use and comply with the provisions of this section in addition to those standards outlined elsewhere in the zoning and subdivision regulations. When there is a conflict in requirements, the more stringent of the requirements shall be applied. An expansion to an existing commercial PUD involving 6 or less new dwelling units or sites since the date this ordinance was adopted is permissible as a permitted use provided the total project density does not exceed the allowable densities calculated in the project density evaluation procedures in Section 10.5. Approval cannot occur until all applicable environmental reviews are complete. 10.4 Application for a PUD. The applicant for a PUD must submit the following documents prior to final action on the application request: 10.41 Site plan and/or plat showing: A. Locations of property boundaries; B. Surface water features; C. Existing and proposed structures and other facilities; D. Land alterations; E. Sewage treatment and water supply systems (where public systems will not be provided); F. Topographic contours at ten-foot intervals or less; and G. Identification of buildings and portions of the project that are residential, commercial, or a combination of the two (if project combines commercial and residential elements). 10.42 A property owner’s association agreement (for residential PUD’s) with mandatory membership, and consistent with Section 10.6 of this ordinance. 10.43 Deed restrictions, covenants, permanent easements or other instruments that: A. Address future vegetative and topographic alterations, construction of additional buildings, beaching of watercraft, and construction of commercial buildings in residential PUDs; and B. Ensure the long-term preservation and maintenance of open space in accordance with the criteria and analysis specified in Section 10.6 of this ordinance. 10.44 A master plan/site plan describing the project and showing floor plans for all commercial structures. 10.45 Additional documents necessary to explain how the PUD will be designed and will function. 10.5 Density Determination. Proposed new or expansions to existing planned unit developments must be evaluated using the following procedures. 10.3. Optional addition to ensure that a community’s “general PUD” ordinance isn’t used to undermine the shoreland standards in theses shoreland PUD provisions. If a community does not allow PUDs in shoreland, Section 10.0 should be omitted. However, PUDs must be listed in the land use tables in 4.23 and 4.24 as “N.” If the local government does not have DNR-approved shoreland PUD provisions in its ordinance but still allows PUDs in shoreland, Minnesota Rules, part 6120.3800, Subp. 1 gives the DNR authority to review PUDs in shoreland for compliance with state rules. In this case, the ordinance must have a provision that states “The DNR must approve all PUDs located in shorelands.” 10.5. Determining and evaluating proposed project density may be complex depending on the project. Please review the Residential PUD Guidance Document for determining density and/or contact your Area Hydrologist for assistance. 33 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary 10.51 Step 1. Identify Density Analysis Tiers. Divide the project parcel into tiers by drawing one or more lines parallel to the ordinary high water level at the following intervals, proceeding landward: Waterbody Classification No Sewer (ft) Sewer (ft) General Development Lakes – 1st tier 200 200 General Development Lakes – all other tiers 267 200 Recreational Development Lakes 267 267 Natural Environment Lakes 400 320 All Rivers 300 300 10.52 Step 2. Calculate Suitable Area for Development. Calculate the suitable area within each tier by excluding all wetlands, bluffs, or land below the ordinary high water level of public waters. 10.53 Step 3. Determine Base Density: A. For residential PUDs, divide the suitable area within each tier by the minimum single residential lot area for lakes to determine the allowable number of dwelling units, or base density, for each tier. For rivers, if a minimum lot area is not specified, divide the tier width by the minimum single residential lot width. B. For commercial PUDs: (1) Determine the average area for each dwelling unit or dwelling site within each tier. Include both existing and proposed dwelling units and sites in the calculation. (a) For dwelling units, determine the average inside living floor area of dwelling units in each tier. Do not include decks, patios, garages, or porches and basements, unless they are habitable space. (b) For dwelling sites (campgrounds), determine the area of each dwelling site as follows: For manufactured homes, use the area of the manufactured home, if known, otherwise use 1,000 sf. For recreational vehicles, campers or tents, use 400 sf. 10.53.A. For LGUs that have specified a minimum lot area for river lots, the process for determining base density for lakes and rivers will be the same – tier area divided by lot area. 34 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary (2) Select the appropriate floor area/dwelling site area ratio from the following table for the floor area or dwelling site area determined in Section 10.53 B. 1. Inside Living Floor Area or Dwelling Site Area (sf) General Development Lakes w/Sewer – all tiers General Development Lakes w/no sewer – 1st tier Agricultural, Urban and Tributary Rivers General Development Lakes w/no sewer – all other tiers Recreational Development Lakes Forested and Transition Rivers Natural Environment Lakes Remote Rivers < 200 .040 .020 .010 300 .048 .024 .012 400 .056 .028 .014 500 .065 .032 .016 600 .072 .038 .019 700 .082 .042 .021 800 .091 .046 .023 900 .099 .050 .025 1,000 .108 .054 .027 1,100 .116 .058 .029 1,200 .125 .064 .032 1,300 .133 .068 .034 1,400 .142 .072 .036 > 1,500 .150 .075 .038 (3) Multiply the suitable area within each tier determined in Section 10.52 by the floor area or dwelling site area ratio to yield the total floor area or dwelling site area for each tier to be used for dwelling units or dwelling sites. (4) Divide the total floor area or dwelling site area for each tier calculated in Section 10.53 B. 3 by the average inside living floor area for dwelling units or dwelling site area determined in 10.53 B 1. This yields the allowable number of dwelling units or dwelling sites, or base density, for each tier. 35 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary C. Allowable densities may be transferred from any tier to any other tier further from the waterbody, but must not be transferred to any tier closer to the waterbody. D. All PUDs with densities at or below the base density must meet the design standards in Section 10.6 10.54 Step 4. Determine if the Site can Accommodate Increased Density: A. The following increases to the dwelling unit or dwelling site base densities determined in Section 10.53 are allowed if the design criteria in Section 10.6 of this ordinance are satisfied as well as the standards in Section 10.54, item B: Shoreland Tier Maximum density increase within each tier (percent) 1st 50 2nd 100 3rd 200 4th 200 5th 200 B. Structure setbacks from the ordinary high water level: (1) Are increased to at least 50 percent greater than the minimum setback; or (2) The impact on the waterbody is reduced an equivalent amount through vegetative management, topography, or additional acceptable means and the setback is at least 25 percent greater than the minimum setback. 10.6 Design Criteria. All PUDs must meet the following design criteria. 10.61 General Design Standards. A. All residential planned unit developments must contain at least five dwelling units or sites. B. On-site water supply and sewage treatment systems must be centralized and meet the standards in Section 6.5 of this ordinance. Sewage treatment systems must meet the setback standards of Section 6.41, item A of this ordinance. C. Dwelling units or dwelling sites must be clustered into one or more groups and located on suitable areas of the development. D. Dwelling units or dwelling sites must be designed and located to meet the dimensional standards in Sections 6.41, 6.42, and 6.43: 10.54. This provision allows very high densities leading to overcrowding of surface waters and increases the risk to phosphorus sensitive lakes and sensitive shoreline areas. Even without this density bonus provision, the Shoreland PUD allows for significantly greater density over standard lot and block subdivisions due to design flexibility of not requiring a minimum lot size. Local governments concerned about overuse of surface waters, degradation of water quality, compatibility with adjacent development, and overall community character should omit or reduce this density bonus provision. 10.61.D MR 6120.3800 Subp. 5.B.3.(b) states that dwelling units must be designed to meet/exceed the dimensional standards for OHWL setback, elevation, height. 36 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary E. Shore recreation facilities: (1) Must be centralized and located in areas suitable for them based on a suitability analysis. (2) The number of spaces provided for continuous beaching, mooring, or docking of watercraft must not exceed one for each allowable dwelling unit or site in the first tier (notwithstanding existing mooring sites in an existing commercially used harbor). (3) Launching ramp facilities, including a small dock for loading and unloading equipment, may be provided for use by occupants of dwelling units or sites located in other tiers. F. Structures, parking areas, and other facilities must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks, color, or other means acceptable to the local unit of government, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. Vegetative and topographic screening must be preserved, if existing, or may be required to be provided. G. Accessory structures and facilities, except water oriented accessory structures, must meet the required structure setback and must be centralized. H. Water-oriented accessory structures and facilities may be allowed if they meet or exceed design standards contained in Section 7.3 of this ordinance and are centralized. 10.62 Open Space Requirements. A. Open space must constitute at least 50 percent of the total project area and must include: (1) Areas with physical characteristics unsuitable for development in their natural state; (2) Areas containing significant historic sites or unplatted cemeteries; (3) Portions of the shore impact zone preserved in its natural or existing state as follows: (a) For existing residential PUD’s, at least 50 percent of the shore impact zone (b) For new residential PUDs, at least 70 percent of the shore impact zone. (c) For all commercial PUD’s, at least 50 percent of the shore impact zone. B. Open space may include: (1) Outdoor recreational facilities for use by owners of dwelling units or sites, by guests staying in commercial dwelling units or sites, and by the general public; (2) Subsurface sewage treatment systems if the use of the space is restricted to avoid adverse impacts on the systems; and (3) Non-public water wetlands. 10.62. Open space provides significant ecological, recreational, and economic benefits. Local governments may want to add additional specifications for its design and maintenance. This could include specifying the amount and type of native vegetation, its long-term maintenance, and connectivity to adjacent natural areas. Other options include limiting the amount of open space that may be used for high intensity recreational areas (trails, playgrounds, etc.), stormwater and sewage treatment, etc. 10.62.B.(3). WCA or other non-public water wetlands may be included in open space. Public waters, including public water wetlands, are already public open space and cannot be counted as open space. 37 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary C. Open space shall not include: (1) Dwelling sites or lots, unless owned in common by an owners association; (2) Dwelling units or structures, except water-oriented accessory structures or facilities; (3) Road rights-of-way or land covered by road surfaces and parking areas; (4) Land below the OHWL of public waters; and (5) Commercial facilities or uses. 10.63 Open Space Maintenance and Administration Requirements. A. Open space preservation. The appearance of open space areas, including topography, vegetation, and allowable uses, must be preserved and maintained by use of deed restrictions, covenants, permanent easements, public dedication, or other equally effective and permanent means The instruments must prohibit: (1) Commercial uses (for residential PUD’s); (2) Vegetation and topographic alterations other than routine maintenance; (3) Construction of additional buildings or storage of vehicles and other materials; and (4) Uncontrolled beaching of watercraft. B. Development organization and functioning. Unless an equally effective alternative community framework is established, all residential planned unit developments must use an owners association with the following features: (1) Membership must be mandatory for each dwelling unit or dwelling site owner and any successive owner; (2) Each member must pay a pro rata share of the association’s expenses, and unpaid assessments can become liens on units or dwelling sites; (3) Assessments must be adjustable to accommodate changing conditions; and (4) The association must be responsible for insurance, taxes, and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities. 10.64 Erosion Control and Stormwater Management. A. Erosion control plans must be developed and must be consistent with the provisions of Section 8.3 of this ordinance. Erosion control plans approved by a soil and water conservation district may be required if project size and site physical characteristics warrant. 10.62.C.(1). Optional. “Dwelling sites” are not the same as lots (see definition in Section 2). Dwelling sites in a residential subdivision is the area within a lot not covered by a dwelling unit or structure (plus a buffer area around the sites or structures) that can be included as open space. Privately owned residential “open space” is very difficult to manage and maintain for ecological benefits, even with the required conservation easements. Communities concerned about developing and maintaining valuable habitat and water quality through open space preservation or about the ability to “administer” protection of open space on residential lots, may choose to add “lots, unless owned in common by an owner’s association.” 10.62.C.(4) clarifies that open space cannot include land below the OHWL of public waters. Use of the water above this land is already a “public” open space. The purpose of the open space is to set-aside and permanently protect private land for recreation, habitat, and water quality purposes and to offset higher development densities allowed. 38 Revised 10/03/2019 Ordinance Language Commentary B. Stormwater management facilities must be designed and constructed to manage expected quantities and qualities of stormwater runoff. (1)For residential PUDs, impervious surface for the entire project site must not exceed 25%. (2) For commercial PUDs, impervious surfaces within any tier must not exceed 25 percent of the tier area, except that 35 percent impervious surface coverage may be allowed in the first tier of general development lakes with an approved stormwater management plan and consistency with Section 8.0 of this ordinance. 10.7 Conversions. Local governments may allow existing resorts or other land uses and facilities to be converted to residential PUDs if all of the following standards are met: 10.71 Proposed conversions must be evaluated using the same procedures for residential PUDs involving new construction. Inconsistencies between existing features of the development and these standards must be identified; 10.72 Deficiencies involving water supply and sewage treatment, structure color, impervious coverage, open space, and shore recreation facilities must be corrected as part of the conversion or as specified in the conditional use permit; 10.73 Shore and bluff impact zone deficiencies must be evaluated and reasonable improvements made as part of the conversion. These improvements must include, where applicable, the following: A. Removal of extraneous buildings, docks, or other facilities that no longer need to be located in shore or bluff impact zones; B. Remedial measures to correct erosion, improve vegetative cover and improve screening of buildings and other facilities as viewed from the water; and C. Conditions attached to existing dwelling units located in shore or bluff impact zones that preclude exterior expansions in any dimension or substantial alterations. The conditions must also provide for future relocation of dwelling units, where feasible, to other locations, meeting all setback and elevation requirements when they are rebuilt or replaced. 10.74 Existing dwelling unit or dwelling site densities that exceed standards in Section 10.5 of this ordinance may be allowed to continue but must not be allowed to be increased, either at the time of conversion or in the future. Efforts must be made during the conversion to limit impacts of high densities by requiring seasonal use, improving vegetative screening, centralizing shore recreation facilities, installing new sewage treatment systems, or other means. 10.64.B.(1) Optional higher standard to ensure that the impervious surface for the entire development does not exceed 25% 10.64.B.(2) Optional deletion. Local governments may choose to require a 25% impervious surface limit in all tiers for commercial PUDs by deleting the provisions that allows a 35% impervious surface limit. This spreads out the impervious surface and limits it in near shore areas thus preserving habitat and shoreland aesthetics. January 12, 2021 Mike Mrosla City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 I, Kye Samuelson, herby request a six (6) month or Monday, July 12, 2021 extension of my application for a variance at 3493 Siems Court, under 15.99, Timeline Deadline for Agency Action. Thank you, Kye Samuelson Page 1 of 5 PC Agenda Item – 3D MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5, 2021 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-008 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Zoning Code Amendment – Chapter 13 – Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E Requested Action The City of Arden Hills is proposing an amendment to the language Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. Background In September of 2020, Kye Samuelson (“Applicant”) requested a Variance in order to construct an accessory structure near the shoreline of 3493 Siems Court (“Subject Property”) within the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The Applicant requested a variance to build a 120 square foot accessory storage structure that encroached eighteen (18) inches into the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The proposed structure exceeded the eight (8) foot height limitation at ten (10) feet, six (6) inches. The rational for the variance was that the structure would be used for the storage of modern day recreational water equipment and the hardship was due to the rear yard topography. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Residential District, is located in the Shoreland Management District, and is guided as Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan. At its October 7, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to table the request to allow the Applicant to revise their plans to better conform to the Shoreland Ordinance provisions. The Applicant took the Planning Commissions comments under consideration and submitted revised plans for a smaller structure that would not encroach into the Shore Impact Zone. The Applicant then proposed to construct an accessory structure that would be nine and a half (9.5) feet tall and ninety-three and a half (93.5) square feet in size. However, the proposed structure still required a Page 2 of 5 variance due to the proposed height and area that exceeded current ordinance standards. At its December 9, 2020 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the updated application. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve the planning case. At its January 11, 2021 meeting the City Council reviewed Planning Case 20-017. The City Council voted unanimously to table this planning case to allow them to review the existing OHWL accessory structure size standards. The Applicant signed a 6-month Extension Form (Attachment B), requiring the City Council to take action on the variance request by July 12, 2021. At its February 16, 2021 meeting the City Council discussed increasing the permitted size of accessory structures within the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) setback. The City Council directed staff to draft ordinance language to increase the size of accessory structures located within the OHWL. The City Council did not support increase the height of accessory structures located within the OHWL. Following this meeting, staff has drafted ordinance language and sent the language to the DNR for review. At its April 19, 2021 Work Session, the City Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning code and directed staff to bring the draft language to the Planning Commission for review. Staff has not received written comments from the DNR as of April 28, 2021. Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E of the Arden Hills City Code states that lakeshore lots are permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the OHWL, provided that it is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. The Shore Impact Zone is the land located between the OHWL and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the structure setback. The structure setback standards vary depending on the lake classification as established by Minnesota Regulations, Part 6120.3300, and the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Ramsey County. The table below breakdown the setback standards for accessible Arden Hills lakes. Lake OHWL Lake Classification Structure Setback Shore Impact Zone Width Lake Johanna 878 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Little Johanna NA Recreational 75 ft. 35ft. Lake Josephine 884.4 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Karth Lake 934.95 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E also states that accessory structures within the OHWL shall not exceed sixty-four (64) square feet in size or eight (8) feet by eight (8) feet and eight (8) feet in height measured to the highest point of the structure; and is not used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. Page 3 of 5 It worth noting that no more than two (2) accessory structures shall be permitted on a lot primarily used for residential uses and the structures shall not exceed seven hundred and twenty- eight (728) square feet in floor area. The accessory structures shall not occupy more than 25 percent of the rear yard. The exterior finish of accessory structures shall be compatible in appearance and material used with the principal structure. Discussion As a result of previous discussions, the staff has drafted the following language revising Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E. This language increases the size of an accessory storage shed currently permitted under the Arden Hills City Code. However, the size and height are still less that what is permitted under the State model ordinance (Section 7.3). E. Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: 1. The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. 2. The structure or facility does not exceed 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. 3. The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. 4. The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. 5. The structure or facility is setback a minimum of ten (10) feet from the ordinary high water level. 6. The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. 8. The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. 9. The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. 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 City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. Page 4 of 5 2. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. 3. Amendments to the Shoreland Regulations require approval from the Minnesota DNR. 4. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. • Recommend Approval: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. • Recommend Approval with amendments: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission with amendments: a specific reason should be included with amendments. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Public Notices A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on April 24, 2021. The City has not received any public comments regarding this case. Page 5 of 5 Attachments A. Redlined Shoreland Regulations Amendment B. Clean Shoreland Regulations Amendment C. Minnesota DNR Shoreland Management Model Ordinance D. Signed 6-Month Extension Form Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 5 , 2021 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Paul Vijums called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic this meeting was held virtually. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Paul Vijums, Commissioners Marcie Jefferys, Kurtis Weber, and Jonathan Wicklund. Absent: Commissioners Steven Jones, James Lambeth, Subbaya Subramanian, Clayton Zimmerman. Also present were: Planning Consultant Jane Kansier, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, City Administrator Dave Perrault, and Councilmember Fran Holmes. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – MAY 5 , 2021 Chair Vijums stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 7, 2021 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Wicklund moved, seconded by Commissioner Weber, to approve the April 7, 2021, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried 3-0-1 (Commissioner Jeffreys abstained). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 21-006; 4073 Valentine Court – Variance Request to Allow a 3rd Stall Garage Addition – Public Hearing Not Required Planning Consultant Bemis explained the Applicant is requesting a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of his single- family detached dwelling on the Subject Property from 40 feet to 7.82 feet for a proposed garage addition. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Family ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 2 Residential District, and is guided as Low Density Residential in the land use plan. Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code requires a side yard setback of 40 feet on corner lots. Planning Consultant Bemis stated according to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of his application, the Subject Property includes unique circumstances due to its nontraditional shape. The front of the property includes one curved section and three straight sections that make it difficult for the applicant to conform to current setback regulations. The Subject Property is a legal non- conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The Applicant is requesting the proposed garage addition to a llow for more storage space for his vehicles and additional space to store woodworking equipment. The proposed garage addition would meet applicable building codes and all other regulations in the R-1 District. The applicant would not be able to construct the proposed garage addition without a variance. Planning Consultant Bemis reported the Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility with the side yard setback of a corner lot should be approved. The sketches that have been submitted show the location of the proposed garage addition and the proposed driveway addition. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4. Planning Consultant Bemis reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to decrease the minimum side yard setback on a single family dwelling at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court. 2. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district. 3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 district’s standards for minimum side yard setbacks on a corner lot. 4. The proposed garage addition would be located 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. 5. The proposed garage addition of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-1 district. 6. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would cause the landowner practical difficulties. 7. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Planning Consultant Bemis recommended two conditions of approval for Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans: 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. Planning Consultant Bemis 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 3 Commissioner Jeffreys questioned if there were any other garages that would have a garage 10 feet or closer to the street. Planning Consultant Bemis explained she was uncertain if there were any homes in this neighborhood that had garages closer than seven feet to the street. Commissioner Weber reported the garage would be 27 feet from the street, seven feet from the right of way. He indicated he supported the proposed request and believed this was an appropriate use of the property. Commissioner Wicklund indicated he supported the proposed garage location. He commented the red pines are great for screening, but he feared in 20 to 30 years all screening would be lost and the garage would be visible from the street in the future. Chair Vijums asked if previous variances have been approved for garages in this neighborhood. Planning Consultant Bemis reported there have been three subdivision requests and one setback variance that have been requested in this neighborhood. She explained the variance and two of the subdivision requests were approved. Chair Vijums discussed the location of the proposed driveway noting it was getting closer to the property line. He questioned if this was another concern the Commission should be addressing. Planning Consultant Bemis stated the width of the driveway at the road would not be changing and therefore the driveway would be conforming. She indicated staff did not have any concerns with the proposed driveway. Chair Vijums asked if the new driveway would match the existing concrete driveway. Planning Consultant Bemis deferred this question to the applicant. Robert Kunze, 4073 Valentine Court, explained he had every intention of matching the driveway materials. He stated for the record that the red pines on the plans have been replaced with arborvitaes, hemlocks and catalpa yews. Chair Vijums opened the meeting for public comment at this time. There were no comments from the public. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would like to a third condition for approval requiring the applicant to plant coniferous screening vegetation along the property line between the driveway extending to the rear corner. He indicated this would assist with screening the driveway from the street. Commissioner Weber commented he did not believe it was necessary to add this condition. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2 ) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission adding Condition 3 which shall ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 4 require the applicant to plant coniferous screening vegetation along the property line between the driveway extending to the rear corner. Commissioner Wicklund explained he does not want to have the applicant to do anything differently, but he also did not want any future owner of the property to take down all of the vegetation because this would expose the larger garage to the street. Commissioner Weber reported the plantings were within the City right of way and the property owner could not cut them down. Commissioner Wicklund stated if this was the case, then Condition 3 would not be necessary. Commissioner Wicklund and Commissioner Jeffreys withdrew their motion and second from the floor. Commissioner Weber moved and Commissioner Wicklund seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B. Planning Case 21-011; 3855 Lexington Avenue – Chick-fil-A – Conditional Use Permit – Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Kansier stated HR Green, on behalf of Chick -fil-A has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development. The Applicant is requesting to construct single story fast food restaurant with a drive-through. The property is located at 3855 Lexington Avenue and is zoned B-3, Service Business District, and is designated for Commercial Uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the surrounding area, site data, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1. The property located at 3855 Lexington Avenue is designated for Commercial uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a fast food restaurant with drive-through lanes. 3. The Final PUD substantially conforms with the requirements of the City Code. 4. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, flexibility has been requested by the applicant and/or conditions have been placed on an approval that would mitigate the nonconformity. 5. Flexibility through the PUD process has been requested in the following areas: lot size, minimum landscape coverage, building height and parking requirements. 6. The proposed development plan meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the City Code in the following areas: accessory structure setbacks, drive-through facility setbacks, drive-through facility landscaping setbacks, and number of parking spaces. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 5 7. Fast food restaurants with drive-through facilities area allowed as a conditional use in the B- 3 District. 8. All new developments or redevelopments in the B-3 district require a planned unit development. 9. The adjacent properties to the south and west are zoned B-3 and are guided for Commercial use in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 10. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. Planning Consultant Kansier recommended approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development approvals shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. 3. Prior to the issuance of bu ilding permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 5. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. 6. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 7. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City right-of- way. 8. No exterior storage shall be permitted. 9. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water main to the City for review and approval. The Applicant will be responsible to carry out these operation and maintenance activities and to submit the appropriate documentation to the City as specified. 10. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize wooden gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping shall be submitted. Landscape financial security is held for two full growing seasons. 12. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 6 location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree preservation plan and approved by staff in writing. 13. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. 14. All fencing and retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City. 15. Prior to City Council, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to be approved in writing by staff. 16. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 18. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing. Planning Consultant Kansier 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Justin Lark, Chick -fil-A representative, thanked the Commission for their consideration. He reported he had met with the Council at a worksession meeting to discuss this proposal. He commented on the lighting on the west side of the building and explained he would be removing the sign on the western side of the building. He indicated he has moved the monument sign closer to Lexington Avenue per the Council’s recommendation. He discussed the buffer space that was located between the hotel and Chick -fil -A and noted this area would be relandscaped. It was noted a gentleman’s agreement would be pursued with the hotel for employee parking. He commented further on the parking situation and requested a variance from the City’s parking requirements. Commissioner Weber thanked the applicant for the additional information. He stated he was concerned with the double drive thru given how close this property was to Lexington Avenue. Mr. Lark discussed how vehicles would access and exit the property. It was noted all cars exiting would be pulled further from Lexington Avenue to assist with proper vehicle queuing. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 7 Joseph Vavrina, HR Green, commented on the traffic study and reported the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road had a service level of B during the AM peak and was at level C during the PM peak. Commissioner Jeffreys asked if the areas of flexibility were typical for new developments. Planning Consultant Kansier reported each site and PUD was unique. She did not believe this applicant was requesting more flexibility than any other applicant. Councilmember Holmes commented the main concern was how close the drive thru lane was to the hotel. She indicated other requests did not have this concern. She stated she would be happy to hear from the Quality Inn regarding this matter. Commissioner Jeffreys questioned what the hours of operation would be for Chick-fil-A. Mr. Lark stated Chick -fil-A would be open Monday through Saturday from 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and would be closed on Sundays. Commissioner Jeffreys explained the traffic surprised her because she thought this business would have had more of an impact on the adjacent intersection. Chair Vijums inquired if the canopy was an approved building structure. Planning Consultant Kansier reported this was the case, noting the canopy would require a building permit. Chair Vijums stated his main concerns were noise considerations given the fact this restaurant would be so close to the Quality Inn. He feared how noise would travel from the fast food speakers towards the hotel. He recommended that all speakers be faced away from the hotel. In addition, he was concerned about the noise that would be coming from the coolers and HVAC units on the roof. Mr. Lark commented this restaurant would have two menu boards, one for each of the drive thru lanes. He stated these speakers would face due west, but were located north of the hotel. He reported the speaker boxes were 50 feet away from any of the closest parking spaces. He discussed the trees that were located at the northeast corner of the hotel property and explained these would remain in place. He indicated he has never had any concerns raised about the equipment on the roof and stated he would have to investigate the sound coming from these units and could report back to the City. Chair Vijums suggested a noise study be completed once the building is constructed to ensure the noise coming from the rooftop units was not disruptive to the adjacent properties. Mr. Lark reiterated that his building was meeting all City setback requirements for the Commercial zoning district. Mr. Vavrina discussed the landscaping that would be put in place between the hotel and Chick-fil- A noting this would assist in providing a year round screen, while also helping to block noise. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the City of Arden Hills was required to follow State guidelines and could not have noise requirements that were more restrictive than the State. She indicated the hotel was considered to be in a noise area Classification 1. She stated this meant the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 8 maximum night time noise level between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is 50 decibels. She anticipated this property would be similar. She discussed the ambient noise that was already coming from I-694 and other adjacent roadways. She indicated the Commission could require a noise study once the building was completed to see if additional screening was necessary for the rooftop mechanicals. Chair Vijums stated he was satisfied with the location of the drive thru mechanicals. He explained he would be interested in adding a condition for approval that would require the applicant to complete a noise study once the structure was built. Commissioner Wicklund indicated this location, which was formerly a Perkins that ran 24 hours a day, sits adjacent to I-694. He did not believe noise would be a concern for this property. He supported the Commission leaning on staff’s expertise on whether or not a noise study should be completed. He was of the opinion this was a great repurposing of this property. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Ankit Bhakta, owner of the Quality Inn, stated he had concerns about the proposed Chick -fil-A. He indicated he was concerned about the drive-thru, noise that would be generated by the drive-thru speakers, as well as the noise that would be generated by the rooftop HVAC units. He discussed how the cars waiting for the drive thru would also be generating extra noise. He feared how this would impact his customers given the fact Chick -fil-A would be open until 10:00 p.m. He stated he was also concerned with where Chick -fil -A would store snow in the winter months and did not want snow being pushed onto his property. Commissioner Weber explained Chick -fil-A was requesting to be closer to the property line than was allowed. He stated he now had concerns with the application given the fact the adjacent property owner had concerns with the amount of noise that would be generated by the drive thru. He indicated he did not support allowing the restaurant and drive thru moving closer to the hotel. Chair Vijums asked if the drive thru speakers could be adjusted so that they faced away from the hotel. Mr. Lark sta ted this would not be possible. He reported the drive thru speakers were 50 feet from the closest parking lot and over 100 feet from the corner of the hotel. He explained if the drive thru speakers were moved closer to Lexington Avenue this could back up traffic onto Red Fox Road. Chair Vijums commented he supported the proposed plan, but noted he was also concerned about how the restaurant and drive thru would impact the adjacent hotel. He stated this use was different from Perkins, because there would be a drive thru. He supported a noise study being completed. Commissioner Wicklund reported the business model for this company had Chick -fil-A closed on Sundays meaning the hotel guests would not be impacted by the drive thru on Sundays. Chair Vijums suggested a condition for approval be added to address the noise concerns. He recommended a noise study be completed after the restaurant was completed or that the noise boxes be moved. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 9 Commissioner Jeffreys commented on the amount of noise cars make when waiting in the drive thru line and noted this was a concern to her. Chair Vijums indicated he had less concerns about the noise coming from the cars because there were only a few months out of the year that drivers could drive with their windows down. He stated he was more concerned about the noise that would be coming from the rooftop units. Mr. Lark reported this was a commercially zoned property and he was meeting the City’s setback requirements. He was hopeful that the noise issue would be less of a concern from a building standpoint. He explained he wanted to be a good neighbor and noted Chick -fil-A would be open only till 10:00 p.m. and would be closed on Sundays, where Perkins was open 24/7. There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Chair Vijums stated he would like to add several conditions for approval. He proposed Chick -fil-A move the order stations from the west side of the drive through to the northeast side. In addition, he supported the applicant completing a noise study once the building is constructed to see what type of noise is being generated by the use. Commissioner Wicklund expressed concern with forcing Chick -fil-A to change their drive thru. He reported Chick -fil-A had more expertise with the operation of a drive thru than the City did and he supported Chick -fil-A’s proven business model. Mr. Lark reported he spends a great deal of time testing and planning for sites. He explained the proposed location for the order stations would maximize the efficiency and flow on the site. Chair Vijums questioned if some sort of structure should be required along the property line to block the menu boards and speaker sound from the hotel. Commissioner Weber asked if a sound wall would be allowed along the property line. Mr. Lark stated in other locations a wind screen has been installed to create a buffer between the drive thru and the adjacent property. Chair Vijums supported some sort of noise screening being put in place between the drive thru and the hotel property. He suggested a condition be made for approval stating some sort of noise screening be required between the ordering station and the hotel. Commissioner Wicklund stated he could support this recommendation. Chair Vijums stated he also supported the applicant being required to complete a noise study on the building after constructed. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the building would have to follow MPCA decibel level requirements. Commissioner Wicklund indicated he did not support the City making this requirement. Rather, he recommended the noise concerns be brought to the Council given the fact they would have the final say in the matter. He suggested that if a condition was drafted that it read: Noise levels must meet MPCA guidelines for this Planning Case. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 10 Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Weber seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the eighteen (18) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission adding Condition 19: The Applicant must meet MPCA noise guidelines and Co ndition 20: Noise screening must be approved by City staff that addresses the ordering stations. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). C. Planning Case 21-005; Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Bemis stated the applicant is interested in developing the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road (“Subject Property”) as a House of Worship. The Property is currently owned by ET Arden Hills LLC and is developed with a two-story office building and associated parking lot. The office building is no longer in use. The Subject Property includes two access points off of Red Fox Road. The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. Planning Consultant Bemis reported at a special work session on March 22, 2021, the Council discussed the Applicant’s proposal to develop a House of Worship in the I-FLEX District. Following the discussion, the City Council directed staff to review and propose a zoning code amendment to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. The amendment will impact Zoning Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. Planning Consultant Bemis indicated the I-FLEX District is guided as Mixed Business (MB) and Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. The MB area is designated for a variety of businesses, including commercial, certain light industrial uses, warehousing, office, general business, and retail. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 0% to 50% Light Industrial; 0% to 50% Retail; and 25% to 100% Office. A development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. The IND area is designated for a broad range of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, processing, and warehousing. This land use may also include offices. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 50% to 100% Light Industrial and 0% to 100% Office. A Development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. According to the Comprehensive Plan the total area of the MB land use is 55 acres, or 0.9% of the total land area in the City, the total area of the IND land use is 346 acres, or 5.7% of the total land area in the City. Planning Consultant Bemis explained the entire I-FLEX District is within the Red Fox/Grey Fox/Lexington Avenue Business Area which is discussed in the Land Use Chapter. This area includes Red Fox and Grey Fox roads and is bounded by Lexington Avenue, Highway 51, Interstate 694, and the Canadian Pacific railway. This area is used by a number of small and large businesses for a variety of retail, manufacturing, distribution, warehousing, and office uses. This area was largely developed between the 1950s and 1970s, though the retail area along Lexington Avenue has had some new development and redevelopment in the last 15 years. This area is marked as an area of possible redevelopment in 2040. Planning Consultant Bemis reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 11 General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The Subject Property is located in the I-FLEX Zoning District. 3. Under City Code Section 1320.05, Houses of Worship are not allowed in the I-FLEX District. 4. The City is proposing to alter Section 1320.05 to allow Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I -FLEX District. 5. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 6. If this amendment is approved, the Applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at the Subject Property. Planning Consultant Bemis recommended approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I -Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. Planning Consultant Bemis 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Chair Vijums reported more and more places of worship were working their way into these types of zoning districts. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Tom Goodrum, planning consultant for the applicant, thanked staff for their guidance and thorough staff report. He stated this church was excited to be a part of Arden Hills. He explained he was conducting a traffic study and it appears the church would have a minimal impact on the area. There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Commissioner Jeffreys asked how many people would be attending this church on Sunday mornings. Mr. Goodrum reported the congregation currently had 600 parishioners and noted services were held at 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Sundays. Pastor Josh Krehbiel thanked the Commission for considering his application. He explained he had 600 members part of his church commu nity. He explained these members would be split up between the two Sunday services. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 12 Chair Vijums questioned what led this church to seek space in the I-Flex zoning district. Pastor Josh indicated his church has been on a building search journey for several years. He reported he has a desire to have a building that was close to the freeway, with high ceilings and adequate parking. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Chair Vijums seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4 -0). D. Planning Case 21-008; Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Kansier stated in September of 2020, Kye Samuelson (“Applicant”) requested a Variance in order to construct an accessory structure near the shoreline of 3493 Siems Court (“Subject Property”) within the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The Applicant requested a variance to build a 120 square foot accessory storage structure that encroached eighteen (18) inches into the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The proposed structure exceeded the eight (8) foot height limitation at ten (10) feet, six (6) inches. The rational for the variance was that the structure would be used for the storage of modern day recreational water equipment and the hardship was due to the rear yard topography. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Residential District, is located in the Shoreland Management District, and is guided as Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan. Planning Consultant Kansier reported at its October 7, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to table the request to allow the Applicant to revise their plans to better conform to the Shoreland Ordinance provisions. The Applicant took the Planning Commissions comments under consideration and submitted revised plans for a smaller structure that would not encroach into the Shore Impact Zone. The Applicant then proposed to construct an accessory structure that would be nine and a half (9.5) feet tall and ninety-three and a half (93.5) square feet in size. However, the proposed structure still required a variance due to the proposed height and area that exceeded current ordinance standards. At its December 9, 2020 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the updated application. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve the planning case. Planning Consultant Kansier explained at its January 11, 2021 meeting the City Council reviewed Planning Case 20-017. The City Council voted unanimously to table this planning case to allow them to review the existing OHWL accessory structure size standards. The Applicant signed a 6-month Extension Form, requiring the City Council to take action on the variance request by July 12, 2021. At its February 16, 2021 meeting the City Council discussed increasing the permitted size of accessory structures within the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) setback. The City Council directed staff to draft ordinance language to increase the size of accessory structures located within the OHWL. The City Council did not support increase the height of accessory structures located within the OHWL. Planning Consultant Kansier reported following this meeting, staff has drafted ordinance language and sent the language to the DNR for review. At its April 19, 2021 Work Session, the City ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 13 Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning code and directed staff to bring the draft language to the Planning Commission for review. Staff has not received written comments from the DNR as of April 28, 2021. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. 3. Amendments to the Shoreland Regulations require approval from the Minnesota DNR. 4. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council Planning Consultant Kansier recommended approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. Planning Consultant Kansier 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Wicklund asked why the City wouldn’t want to model its Shoreland Ordinance based off of neighboring cities, specifically Shoreview. Planning Consultant Kansier reported it was her understanding there was some review of other ordinances. She noted the language that was used in this Ordinance was similar to the City of Roseville. Commissioner Weber stated he was anticipating this code change, but questioned if 100 square feet was adequate. He questioned why the City Council landed on this number. Commissioner Jeffreys commented on the inconsistences between the shoreland regulations #1 and #5. She questioned how the Commission should address this concern. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the Commission could set a minimum setback of 10 feet or the Commission could eliminate this language altogether. Commissioner Jeffreys recommended Shoreland Regulation #5 be eliminated. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 14 Chair Vijums stated it was nice to see the Council was working to amend the Shoreland Ordinance. He indicated he supported the removal of Regulation #5. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 8:59 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Steven Nelson, 3475 Siems Court, explained he has been a resident of Arden Hills for the past 34 years. He discussed the DNR rules noting they typically applied to rural lakes and not urban lakes. He questioned what the nature of this building was, stating it was his understanding it was an accessory structure to hold waterfront items. He was of the opinion a 64 square foot building was adequate. He did not want to see 100 square foot buildings on every property along the lake. He discussed how small some of the lakeshore lots were and how these buildings would be an eyesore. He suggested the buildings be proportioned to the width of the lot versus a one size fits all approach for these structures. He recommended that these structures be allowed to be electrified. Gregg Larson, 3377 North Snelling Avenue, reported he was a lakeshore owner. He encouraged the City to rethink how it notifies the residents living on Lake Johanna about public hearings. He indicated there were a lot of properties owners on Lake Johanna that did not receive notice of this meeting. He was of the opinion the proposed Ordinance has an error stating Lake Johanna has been classified by the DNR as a recreational development lake since 2014. He discussed the setbacks for recreational development lakes (35 feet) versus a general development lake (25 feet). He was of the opinion that amending the Shoreland Ordinance due to one request was not sound government. He questioned how the City Council came to determine 64 feet of accessory storage space was not adequate. He discussed topography that was in place that would make it impossible for some lakeshore owners to have an accessory structure at the lakeshore. He reported these lakeshore owners had to manage their storage needs within their garage or rental storage units. He believed the current limits have served the City well and noted he did not want to see excessively large structures along the lakeshore as this would block views. He recommended the character of Lake Johanna be preserved. He suggested the City amend the Ordinance to properly classify Lake Johanna as a recreational development lake and that the City add a provision regarding proper notice for lakeshore matters. He recommended a 35 foot setback be required for the applicant’s structure and that the City retain the current structure area limit with minimum setbacks without the 10 foot exception with a sliding scale for accessory structures based on lot width as was proposed by Mr. Nelson. Kye Samuelson, 3493 Siems Court, stated he was not new to this dialogue. He commented he was hoping to work with the City to manage beautification, security and storage for lakeshore properties. He indicated there were some interesting things said regarding proportional dimensions for accessory structures for lake lot sizes. He explained it made sense to consider Lake Johanna was a recreational development lake. He reported he was looking at this issue from a bigger perspective and he wanted to address how to manage modern waterfront items. He stated 100 square feet made sense to him, noting he would like a higher building height to be considered. He liked the idea of making these structures both aesthetically pleasing and functional. He discussed how these structures were an immaterial improvement to the overall beautification, security, storage, properties cleanliness and order for multiple neighborhoods that are on the lake and the guests of the City that come to enjoy these natural resources. Matthew ____________ had difficulty with his audio. Staff encouraged Mr. _____________ to submit his comments to City staff prior to the City Council meeting. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 15 There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. Commissioner Jeffreys requested comment from staff regarding the letter from the DNR. Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff received a letter from the DNR and this was forwarded to the Planning Commission. She explained the DNR had concerns with resolving the inconsistencies between Regulations #1 and #5. Commissioner Wicklund recalled why this item was brought to the Planning Commission originally and that had to do with storage and beautification by the lake. He feared that over the past decade, the toys along the water have gotten larger. He understood that for some people 64 square feet was plenty of space and for others 100 square feet was just enough space. He suggested holding a conversation where Arden Hills would model its Shoreland Ordinance to Shoreview’s Ordinance. He wanted to see Arden Hills leading with relevant codes that were designed to address the real issues at hand. He commented his preference would be to model this Ordinance after Shoreview and not Roseville. He asked if the Commission would consider stretching the accessory square feet size and structure height. Chair Vijums sta ted he was not clear on what the City of Shoreview allowed within its Shoreland Ordinance. He indicated the Commission would have to do more review and study of the Ordinance prior to having a discussion. Commissioner Wicklund explained Shoreview allows accessory structures that do not exceed 250 square feet in area, were not wider than 12 feet as viewed from the water, is not higher than 10 feet above grade, and has a 20 foot setback from the side lot line. Chair Vijums reported these numbers would create much larger structures. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would support 120 square foot structures. Chair Vijums indicated he was thinking about the lakes in Arden Hills versus the lakes in Shoreview, noting the lakes in Arden Hills were smaller and the lakeshore lot widths were smaller. For this reason, he supported keeping the structures smaller versus trying to meet what another City allows. He believed the City was already raising the standards going from 64 to 100 square feet. Commissioner Jeffreys agreed she did not want to see the structures becoming any larger than what was being proposed. Commissioner Weber questioned how the City came up with 100 square feet for the accessory structures. Councilmember Holmes stated the Council weighed the interest of the residents to what other cities were doing. She explained some things were taken from Roseville’s ordinance, but explained the Council was very concerned about the aesthetics along the lakeshore. For this reason, the Council did not support allowing structures as large as Shoreview or other communities. She understood the City would have to make a correction within the regulations to comply with DNR guidelines. Chair Vijums asked if the City received any comments in opposition to the Ordinance. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 16 Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff received a letter from Mr. Larson objecting to the Ordinance. Chair Vijums summarized the comments made by the Commission thus far and recommended Shoreland Regulation #5 be removed. Commissioner Weber questioned if this would be the last time the Commission sees this Ordinance. Chair Vijums reported this would be the last time the Commission sees this Ordinance. Commissioner Weber commented he would like to see this Ordinance again if the Council makes large changes to it. Councilmember Holmes stated the Ordinance would go back to the Commission if there were major changes made by the City Council. Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to amend the Shoreland Regulations Amendment removing Amendment #5. A roll call vote was taken. The amendment carried unanimously (4-0). A roll call vote was taken. The amended motion carried unanimously (4-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Planning Consultant Kansier reported the City has hired a new City Planner and noted this new planner would be attending the June Planning Commission meeting. Chair Vijums thanked Planning Consultant Kansier and Planning Consultant Bemus for all of their assistance. Councilmember Holmes provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. She thanked the Planning Commission for all of their efforts on behalf of the community. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests None. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 17 ADJOURN Chair Vijums moved, seconded by Commissioner Jeffreys, to adjourn the May 5, 2021, Planning Commission Meeting at 9:43 p.m. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). 4/29/2021 Corrin – I appreciated the time you took yesterday to discuss the proposed changes to the “Accessory Structures” on lake front homes. Unfortunately, I did not see that this was going to be discussed at the upcoming planning commission meeting until recently, so I apologize for the lateness in getting this to you. It would really be nice to have items with such significant impact on so many homes included in your monthly newsletter or a notice sent to the impacted residents. My wife luckily saw the notice in the St. Paul paper by chance. For your information, the last time a major issue that would impact all of the homeowners on Lake Johanna came up (Planning Commission Case No. 02-15), I received a Notice of the upcoming public hearing on the proposed change because it impacted all homeowners on the lake. At the time, there was a limit to Accessory Structures of 25 sf with an 8’ height. After the variance request was denied, the city looked at the size of the building and I participated in two meeting on the amendment to the ordinance and the size was increased from 25 sf to 64 sf with an 8’ height after a lot of input from many of the owners. At that time there were several residents on the council who lived on Lake Johanna. I believe the change was adopted in November of 2006. I read through some of the previous information that had been provided to the city council. I recall reading where someone had informed the council that there were no properties with less than 60’ of shoreline. This is not true. I own a property at 3280 Sandeen Rd. on the west side of the lake and the house directly to the north of my property has only 32’ of frontage. There are properties in my neighborhood (Siems Court/Arden Place/Skiles) that also have substandard lake frontage (e.g. 15’, 20’. 41’, 51’ and 51’ of lake frontage). There are other properties with only 57’ of frontage. I believe there might be several other properties with less than 60’ on the west side as well and I know there is one on the north side with limited frontage. Thus, when the city council gave the planning commission direction, I do not believe they had been informed as to the fact that the lot sizes vary significantly. The size of the structure should be limited by the lot’s lakeshore front footage. I also believe I read where there was discussion that the DNR had standards less restrictive than what Arden Hills currently has in place. However, the DNR is dealing with more rural lakes and with lot sizes that are generally significantly wider than what you find in an urban setting. Under the DNR guidelines you are now required to have a minimum width in many areas of the state with a minimum width of 100’ or more of shoreline which is considerably larger than most lots on Lake Johanna and upwards of 20,000 sf. Very few houses on Lake Johanna meet the DNR minimum requirement and that is only because the sites incorporate multiple lots. Using the DNR rules as a guideline may not be appropriate because they are based on a much larger lots than you will find on Lake Johanna and most lakes in a more rural setting. A 10’ wide structure would not work well on many of the lots around the lake. If my neighbor on Sandeen Road were to be able to construct a 10’ wide structure it would take up almost one-third of the width of her lot down by the water. Thus, I would recommend that a one size fits all should not be adopted. I would suggest considering a minimum structure size of 6’ with a maximum width of 10’ based on the amount of front footage a lot has on Lake Johanna provided the structure complies with the sideline setback requirements for the zoning of the lot (i.e. combined 15’ for R-2, combined 25’ for R-1, etc.). It could be addressed by allowing an owner to construct an accessory storage shed say 12.5% of the width of the lot with a maximum width of 10’ and a minimum width of 6’ provided the structure will meet the sideline setback requirements for the zoning district. In regards to the size of an accessory structure, a structure/building consisting of a 100 sf is a very large accessory structure. If the structure is designed to hold water toys and items used down by the lake, how much room do you need to hold those items? The city council has indicated that it is not to be used for watercraft/boat storage. Before increasing the size of the building, what is it that cannot be stored in a 64 sf building? Thus, this leaves you with items used in or behind boats and other objects on the water (water skis, wakeboards, tow ropes, life jackets, paddles, oars, fishing gear, etc.) in the summer and winter. You can fit a lot of this gear into a 64 sf building unless you are just throwing the items into the structure. Most people will have hanging racks, shelving, etc. to set things and organize them. There would be room left over to hold other items used on a deck that are light weight and will blow away, cushions for chairs, etc. If someone wants to have room to store other non watercraft items there is a provision within the code to allow owners to build a second storage facility on their property that is outside of the shoreland management district (i.e. beyond 50’ from the shoreline). The idea I thought was to provide for storage of items used on the lake and not for other yard equipment, etc. As we discussed, the “shore impact zone” is defined in the city code (1305.04) as 50% of the structure setback from the Ordinary High Water (“OHW”) level. As I understand Lake Johanna has a 50’ setback for all dwellings structures from the OHW level so that the first 25’ from the OHW level is considered to be the Shore Impact Zone. The accessory storage shed can then be built between 25’ from the OHW level and the 50’ dwelling level. If someone wants a larger structure they can request permission to build further back from the lake. As I read the code, the “Setback” definition says that “The minimum horizontal distance between a structure and the OHW level or between a structure and a road, well, highway, or property lines.” This means the distance is measured “horizontally rather than measured along the ground because if you have a slope, measuring along the ground will place the structure closer to the water or the side lot lines. Thus, as I read the ordinance any new accessory structure has to be located more than 25’ from the OHW level. The other matter we discussed was the sideline setback. There is no mention as to what the sideline setback should be for the accessory storage shed. Should it be the minimum required for the type of zoning (i.e. minimum is 10’ with a combined of 25’ for R-1, minimum of 5’ and a combined of 15’ for R-2, etc.) or should the sideline setback match the sideline setback of the main dwelling on the same side of the lot? The reason this should be addressed is because you have some lots that have lake access that cannot comply with these rules. Another point I would like to make is that the draft of the ordinance I have seen has at least two provisions that definitely conflict with each other. Item No. 1 requires that a structure or facility is not to be located within the Shore Impact Zone. The shore Impact Zone is the first 25’ of the lot from the ordinary high water level. Item No. 5 states that the structure facility is setback a minimum of 10’ from the OHW level. If the accessory storage shed is setback outside of the Shore Impact Zone then the second requirement of 10’ is not necessary because it will always be beyond the 10’ if built according to the requirements of this ordinance. Thus, item No. 5 should be completely removed because it is contrary to the intent and the language of item No. 1. One thing that would be nice to clarify is the right to have electricity in the accessory structure so at night you can see where you are putting away things, have a fan to help dry out items, etc. I have enclosed a redraft of your ordinance language for consideration. I have tried to incorporate some of the above items to consider with some additional wording added. I changed the reference to Structure or facility to refer to the building as the “accessory storage shed” so the wording is consistent. I marked all of the suggested deletions with strike through and all of the insertions with red. SUGGESTED REVISIONS TO DRAFT OF ACCESSORY STORAGE SHED ORDINANCE IN SHORELAND IMPACT ZONE Section 1303.03 Subd. 5. Exceptions to Structure Setback Requirements. No structure shall be placed within the structure setback requirements of the shoreland management district. The following are not classified as structures for the purposes of this section: Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions; 1. The structure or facility accessory storage shed is beyond not located within outside the Shore Impact Zone as defined in Ordinance Section 1305.04. 2. The structure or facility accessory storage shed shall does not exceed 64 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured from the ground closest to the water to the highest point of the structure. 3. The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. The width of the accessory storage shed on the lake side of the structure shall not exceed Twelve and one-half percent (12.5%) of the lot’s shoreline footage or Ten feet (10’) on the lake side. An owner of a lot with less than 50’ of shoreline may build a structure up to Six feet (6’) in width facing the lake provided the structure can comply with the sideline setback requirements for a dwelling in the zoning district. 4. The structure or facility accessory storage shed is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. The accessory storage shed may have electricity run into it. 5. The structure or facility is setback a minimum of ten (10) feet from the ordinary high water mark. (The remaining items would be renumbered.) 6. The structure or facility accessory storage shed shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. The structure accessory storage shed shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent (50%) by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen visible from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping between landward of the ordinary high water level from of the lake and the accessory storage shed. 8. The roof of the accessory storage shed shall not be used as a deck or storage area. 9. The structure or facility accessory storage shed shall not be used as a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under in Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245 to store watercraft. m, May 5, 2021 Corrin Bemis D E PARTM E NT OF NATURAL R ES OURCE S Planning Consultant 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Re: Conditional Approval of Arden Hills Shoreland Ordinance Amendment Dear Ms. Bemis: Thank you for sending your proposed shoreland ordinance amendment to the DNR for conditional approval review. I am pleased to inform you that the proposed amendment is substantially compliant with the statewide rules and hereby approved, provided all of the conditions of approval in this letter are met. Ordinance Evaluation We have reviewed the sections that you propose to amend in your ordinance, received on April 28, 2021, for compliance with state shoreland rules (MR 6120.2500 -6120.3900). We specifically reviewed the proposed amendment to City Code Section 1330.03, subd. 5, E. Our conditional approval only applies to the proposed amendment to this specific section. Most provisions in the proposed amendment regulating accessory storage sheds improve upon the existing ordinance. Item 6 and Item 7, in particular, add important provisions ensuring architectural compatibility and ensuring screening of the structure as viewed from the lake, respectively. However, Item 5 is problematic. This item states the structure is setback at least 10 feet from the ordinary high water level. This item is problematic because it contradicts Item 1, which states that the structure is not located within the shore impact zone. The minimum size of the shore impact zone is 25 feet from the ordinary high water level. I suggest you eliminate Item 1 if you intend to allow water- oriented accessory structures near the water, o r Item 5 if you do not intend to allow such structures near water. Conditions of Approval The following conditions must be met before the DNR will issue final approval: 1. Resolve the contradiction between Item 1 and Item 5. While a minimum setback for accessory storage sheds of 10 feet is acceptable to DNR, we recommend that the City consider excluding accessory storage sheds within the shore impact zone. 2. Return the attached "Ordinance Processing Checklist" and documents identified on the checklist. Next Steps Following are the steps for completing and receiving final DNR approval for your amendment: 1. Revise the amendment based on the conditions listed above under conditional approval. 2. The city council adopts the amendment revised according to the listed conditions. 3. Email the completed Ordinance Processing Checklist (attached) and the documents identified on the checklist within 10 days of city council adoption to: a. Dan Scollan, East Metro Area Hydrologist (daniel.scollan@state.mn.us) b. Ordinance.review.dnr@state.mn.us 4. We will review the amendment adopted by the city council for consistency with the above conditions. 5. If the adopted amendments are consistent with the conditions, I will send you a "final approval" letter. State rules require DNR final approval of shoreland ordinances and amendments for those ordinances to be effective. A shoreland ordinance is an important land use regulation that helps to protect surface water quality, near shore habitat, and shoreland aesthetics of Minnesota's public waters. We appreciate your efforts to protect these resources for all present and future Minnesotans. Dan Scollan is available to assist with ordinance technical guidance and to consult with you on other land and water-related projects. 7Y, ~,C~ Tim Crocker District Manager, Ecological & Water Resources Division Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Ordinance Processing Checklist c: Dan Scollan, DNR East Metro Area Hydrologist Jack Gleason, DNR Hydrologist Supervisor Ord inance .review .dnr@state.mn.us City of Arden Hills ▪1245 West Highway 96 ▪ Arden Hills Minnesota 55112 Phone 651.792.7800 ▪ Fax 651.634.5137 ▪ www.cityofardenhills.org April 28, 2021 Minnesota DNR Metro East Area Hydrologist Attn: Daniel Scollan 1200 Warner Road St Paul, MN 55106 RE: DNR Response to Shoreland Regulations Amendment APPLICANT: City of Arden Hills CASE NO.: PC 21-008 Shoreland Ordinance Amendment The City of Arden Hills is proposing a text amendment to the Arden Hills City Code. The proposed amendment will permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. The proposed language below will be located in Section 1330.03, Subd. 5, E. “Section 1330.03 – Shoreland Regulations: General Provisions Subdivision 5. Exceptions to Structure Setback Requirements. No structure shall be placed within the structure setback requirements of the shoreland management district. The following are not classified as structures for the purposes of this section: Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: 1. The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. 2. The structure or facility does not exceed 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. 3. The maximum width of the structure, as view from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. 4. The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. 5. The structure or facility is setback a minimum of ten (10) feet from the ordinary high water level. 6. The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. 8. The roof shall not be used as a deck or used as a storage area. 9. The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245.” In order to facilitate the review by Arden Hills Planning Commission and City Council, we respectfully request that you provide us written feedback as soon as possible. City of Arden Hills ▪1245 West Highway 96 ▪ Arden Hills Minnesota 55112 Phone 651.792.7800 ▪ Fax 651.634.5137 ▪ www.cityofardenhills.org (Check Applicable Box) ☐ The amendment aligns with the goals and requirements of the Minnesota DNR. No comments on the proposed amendment will be forthcoming. ☐ The Minnesota DNR will submit written comments on the proposed application. ☐ Other: (may attach separate sheet) ______________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Name (print) Title _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Name (signature) Date Dan Scollan East Metro Area Hydrologist 2021-05-04 ORDINANCE PROCESSING CHECKLIST Please complete, sign and return this checklist and all required documents by email to the DNR: Ordinance.review.dnr@state.mn.us, and your Area Hydrologist 1. _______________ Date(s) of published public hearing notice(s). Email the notice with this checklist. _______________ 2. _______________ Date(s) of public hearing(s). _______________ 3. _______________ Date of ordinance adoption. Email the adopted ordinance/ amendment with the signature of the chief elected official in PDF format with this checklist. 4. _______________ Date of newspaper publication of adopted ordinance/ amendment or ordinance amendment summary. 5. Email a zoning map showing the “district” corresponding to the adopted ordinance at the time of adoption, if one exists, and the underlying zoning districts if the adopted ordinance refers to them. _______________________________________________ Signature of Clerk/Auditor _______________________________________________ Name of Community CENTRAL REGION 1200 WARNER ROAD SAINT PAUL, MN 55106 651-259-5800 Page 1 October 9, 2019 Mike Mrosla Community Development Manager/City Planner 1245 W Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Shoreland Classification Status of Johanna, Little Johanna, and Karth Lakes Mike, You contacted me recently by email concerning a discrepancy between the City’s and DNR’s shoreland classification for Lake Johanna (62007800). The City lists the classification of this lake as General Development (GD) and has treated it as such in its shoreland ordinances since the 1980s, while DNR has had it classified as Recreational Development (RD). You wanted to know why this discrepancy existed. In looking through our records, I discovered that in 1984 the City had requested that the shoreland classification for Lake Johanna, as well as Little Johanna Lake (62005800) and Karth Lake (62007200), be changed from their original RD classifications to GD. At that time, the City presented evidence and arguments in support of the reclassification to GD. DNR agreed with the City’s reasoning, and responded with a letter to the City informing them that the request would be approved when DNR received notice of a resolution from the City requesting the reclassification, as required by Minnesota Rule Part 6120.3000 Subpart 3. Unfortunately, DNR has no record of ever receiving the resolution, and therefore DNR did not finalize the classification changes. DNR still concurs with the reasoning supporting the requested reclassifications of these three lakes made in 1984 and is ready to officially adopt the new classifications. However, in order to do so we still require a resolution from the City requesting the change and summarizing the rationale for the reclassification decision. It is possible that the City of Arden Hills passed a resolution and DNR did not receive it or we did and it did not get filed properly. If the City can submit a copy of a past resolution, we would regard that as sufficient. If the City never passed a resolution, we request that the City of Arden Hills do so now as an official statement of its position on this subject, and submit it to DNR. We will then officially change the shoreland classifications of all three lakes to GD. Attached please find copies of the original correspondence, as well as a resolution from another City as an example. Please feel free to contact me if you have additional questions on this. Sincerely, Jenifer Sorensen, East Metro Area Hydrologist MN Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 651-259-5754; jenifer.sorensen@state.mn.us Attachment I Page 2 Attachments: Letter, Wehrman Counsultants Associated Inc. to DNR, 12/26/1984 Letter, DNR to City of Arden Hills, 02/26/1985 Sample Shoreland Reclassification Resolution, City of Cohasset, 12/14/2017 c: Jeanne Daniels, DNR EWR Region 3-South District Manager Kathy Metzker, DNR Land Use Program Hydrologist Dan Petrik, DNR Land Use Program Specialist STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Resolution No. 85-22 REQUEST FOR LAKE RECLASSIFICATION AND MODIFICATION TO SHORELAND MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, the Department of Natural Resources DNR) has evaluated the lakes In Arden Hills and assigned preliminary classifications; and WHEREAS, the DNR has requested the City of Arden Hills <CITY) to review and respond to these classifications and the development controls which accompany them; and WHEREAS, the City has completed such a review and has determined that certain classifications and the accomp~ny- Ing development controls do not coincide with the City's evaluation of existing and future shoreland development; and WHEREAS, the City believes that the intent of the shoreland management requirements can be accomplished within the community, even if certain development controls are modified to reduce the administrative complexity, the number of non-conformities created on existing development, and the potential adverse effect upon undeveloped parcels; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Arden Hills submits documentation In support of and requests DNR approval of certain modifications to the lake classifica- tions and shore land development controls, as contained In the attached document. Passed by the Arden Hill s Council th I s 13th day of May, 1985. R~)~ Robert L. Woodburn Mayo r ATTEST: WALdU <<liiYA;-A j Charlotte McNlesh Clerk Administrator Planning Case #21-008 –Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures 1 2 •September 2020 –Kye Samuelson requested a Variance to construct an accessory structure within the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. •October 2020 –the Planning Commission voted to table the request to allow the Applicant to revise their plans to better conform to the Shoreland Ordinance. •December 2020 –the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the updated application. The Commission voted 4 -3 to approve the planning case. •January 2021 –the City Council voted unanimously to table this planning case to allow them to review the existing OHWL accessory structure size standards. •February 2021 –the City Council directed staff to draft ordinance language to increase the size of accessory structures located within the OHWL. •April 2021 –the City Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning code and directed staff to bring the draft language to the Planning Commission for review. •May 2021 –the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval with and amendment. Background Approvals •The Applicant is requesting an amendment to Section 1355 of the Zoning Code (Shoreland Regulations) Regarding Accessory Structures. 3 Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E states: •Lakeshore lots are permitted 1 accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the OHWL, provided that it is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. •The Shore Impact Zone is the land located between the OHWL and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the structure setback. 4 Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •The structure setback standards vary depending on the lake classification as established by Minnesota Regulations, Part 6120.3300, and the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Ramsey County. 5 Lake OHWL Lake Classification Structure Setback Shore Impact Zone Width Lake Johanna 878 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Little Johanna NA Recreational 75 ft. 35ft. Lake Josephine 884.4 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Karth Lake 934.95 ft. General 50 ft. 25 ft. Chapter 13, Zoning Code Review •Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E states: •Accessory structures within the OHWL shall not exceed 64 square feet in size or 8’ by 8’ and 8’ in height measured to the highest point of the structure •Accessory structures shall not used for human habitation or contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. •No more than 2 accessory structures shall be permitted and the structures shall not exceed 728 square feet in floor area. •Accessory structures shall not occupy more than 25 percent of the rear yard. •The exterior finish of accessory structures shall be compatible in appearance and material used with the principal structure. 6 Redlined Shoreland Regulations Amendment E.Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: 1.The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. 2.The structure or facility does not exceed 64 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. 3.The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed 10 feet. 4.The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. 5.The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 6.The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. 7.The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. 8.The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245.7 Clean Shoreland Regulations Amendment E.Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: 1.The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. 2.The structure or facility does not exceed 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. 3.The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed 10 feet. 4.The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. 5.The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 6.The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. 7.The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. 8.The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. 8 Public Notice •A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. A public hearing notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on May 13, 2021. •The City has received three public comments regarding this case. •Concern about increase in maximum square footage •Inquiry about how maximum height will be measured •Concern about the maximum width of the structure viewed from the water •Concern about conflicting statement is provisions 1 and 5 9 •Approval : Motion to approve Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council. •Approval with amendments:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council with amendments: a specific reason should be included with amendments. 10 Proposed Motion Language •Denial:Motion to deny Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. •Table:Motion to table Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: the City Council should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. 11 Proposed Motion Language Questions? Planning Case 21-008 –Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures Page 1 of 6 NEW BUSINESS – 10A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-011 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Chick-fil-A, represented by HR Green Request: Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider • Adopting motions to approve, table or deny Planning Case 21-011 for the Chick-fil-A Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan PUD and Final PUD Approval of a PUD requires an affirmative vote of four councilmembers. Background HR Green, on behalf of Chick-fil-A has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development. The proposed development site is the location of the former Perkins and is approximately 66,853 square feet (1.535 acres) in size. The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building on this site and construct a 4,995 square foot fast food restaurant, with dual drive-through lanes. There are two canopies, totaling approximately 3,654 square feet covering the ordering and pick-up areas. There is also a 50-stall parking lot. The Chick-fil-A building is proposed to be located on the west side of the site, with the storefront facing Lexington Avenue. The applicant is choosing to face the store front towards Lexington Avenue to attract potential new customers that are traveling along the major arterial roadway. Positioning the building in the given layout allows Page 2 of 6 the applicant to begin the drive-thru lane at the north end of the lot and run it along the west property line. The proposed patio will feature 6 tables for a total of 24 outdoor seats. Requested Action 1. Planned Unit Development A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required for all new development and redevelopment in the B-3 District. In addition, a PUD would allow for performance standard flexibility. This proposal involves both the initial Master Plan PUD and the Final PUD. 2. Conditional Use Permit A Conditional Use Permit is required for drive-up windows in the B-3 district. City Code Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit. 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 and the community, in general, including but not limited to the following factors: 1. Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; A traffic study was completed by SRF. The proposed development should not generate much additional traffic and is not expected to impact overall traffic operations within the study area. The use does not add enough traffic to require any geometric or traffic control changes. 2. Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics; The proposed use does not conflict with the business functions of the surrounding uses and will not pose a significant detrimental risk or nuisance to the health, safety, and general welfare of occupants of adjacent lands. The potential impacts to the adjacent hotel can be mitigated with screening. 3. Drainage; The proposed site plan does not negatively impact drainage on adjacent properties and the submitted stormwater onsite meets the quantity and quality standards. The Applicant is currently going through the Rice Creek Watershed approval process. 4. Population density; The Subject Property is guided as Commercial (COM) in the Land Use Plan. The area is designated for a broad range of retail, shopping, services, and office space to meet the needs of the community and region. 5. Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; Page 3 of 6 The proposed building materials are consistent with the B-3 material requirement as identified in the Design Standards. The ordinance requires 75 percent of the building exterior be constructed of brick masonry, tile masonry, natural stone (or synthetic equivalent), decorative concrete plank (cement board siding), transparent glass or any combination thereof. 6. Adjoining land values; The proposed development is not anticipated to negatively impact adjacent property values. 7. Park dedications where applicable; No park dedication is required. 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. Planning Case 21-011 for Chick-fil-A proposed development at 3855 Lexington Avenue is consistent with the purpose and intent with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the B-3 Zoning District. Suggested Findings of Fact: The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021 meeting and have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration: 1. The property located at 3855 Lexington Avenue is designated for Commercial uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a fast food restaurant with drive-through lanes. 3. The Final PUD substantially conforms with the requirements of the City Code. 4. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, flexibility has been requested by the applicant and/or conditions have been placed on an approval that would mitigate the nonconformity. 5. Flexibility through the PUD process has been requested in the following areas: lot size, minimum landscape coverage, building height and parking requirements. 6. The proposed development plan meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the City Code in the following areas: accessory structure setbacks, drive-through facility setbacks, drive-through facility landscaping setbacks, and number of parking spaces. 7. Fast food restaurants with drive-through facilities area allowed as a conditional use in the B-3 District. 8. All new developments or redevelopments in the B-3 district require a planned unit development. Page 4 of 6 9. The adjacent properties to the south and west are zoned B-3 and are guided for Commercial use in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 10. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. Options and Motion Language The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021 meeting. At that time, they recommended approval of the Chick-fil-A application for a Conditional Use Permit, Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development by a 4-0 vote. The following are motion language options for the City Council to consider. A Conditional Use Permit is required for drive-up windows in the B-3 District. 1. Approval: Motion to adopt Resolution 2021-029, approving the Conditional Use for Planning Case 21-011 at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and the submitted materials. 2. Denial: Motion to deny Resolution 2021-029, approving the Conditional Use for Planning Case 21-011 at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the following findings of fact: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 3. Table: Motion to table Resolution 2021-029, approving the Conditional Use for Planning Case 21-011 at 3855 Lexington Avenue for the following reasons: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development 1. Approve with Conditions: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development and a Final Planned Unit Development at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development approvals shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 5. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and Page 5 of 6 flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. 6. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 7. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City right-of- way. 8. No exterior storage shall be permitted. 9. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water main to the City for review and approval. The Applicant will be responsible to carry out these operation and maintenance activities and to submit the appropriate documentation to the City as specified. 10. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize wooden gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping shall be submitted. Landscape financial security is held for two full growing seasons. 12. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree preservation plan and approved by staff in writing. 13. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. 14. All fencing and retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City. 15. Prior to City Council, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to be approved in writing by staff. 16. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Page 6 of 6 Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 18. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing. 19. The Applicant must meet MPCA noise guidelines. 20. Noise screening must be approved by City staff that addresses the ordering stations. 2. Denial: Motion to deny Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the following findings of fact: the Planning Commission should identify findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 3. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue for the following reasons: the Planning Commission should identify 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 April 19, 2021. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 19, 2021 (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. Budget Impact NA Attachments A. Conditional Use Permit – Resolution 2021-029 B. Presentation To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 1 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2021-029 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 3855 LEXINGTON AVENUE WHEREAS, City Staff received a land use application for 3855 Lexington Avenue (“Subject Property”) for a Conditional Use Permit on April 19, 2021; WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located in the B-3 – Service Business Zoning District and is guided as Commercial in the Land Use plan; WHEREAS, a Conditional Use Permit Amendment is required for drive-up window in the B-3 Zoning District; WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit Amendment in order to allow drive-up windows as part of a fast food restaurant; WHEREAS, the City Council directed Staff to prepare a Land Use Application Public Policy Notification to notify all property owners within 500 feet of Subject Property when a request for the Planning Commission is to occur related to a land use application that requires a public hearing; WHEREAS, the City’s obligation has been met where the Arden Hills Planning Commission duly held a public hearing on May 5, 2021. All persons present at said meeting were given an opportunity to be heard and present written statements; and WHEREAS the Planning Commission considered the Applicant’s request for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and, as such voted 4-0 in favor of recommending approval with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS: Hereby adopts Resolution 2021-029 approving Planning Case 21-011 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment at the Subject Property 3855 Lexington Avenue to allow drive-up windows as part of a fast food restaurant. To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council approves Planning Case 21-011 for a Conditional Use Permit on the Subject Property 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council, as amended by the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development approvals shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 5. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. 6. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 7. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City right-of- way. 8. No exterior storage shall be permitted. 9. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water main to the City for review and approval. The Applicant will be responsible to carry out these operation and maintenance activities and to submit the appropriate documentation to the City as specified. 10. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize wooden gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping shall be submitted. Landscape financial security is held for two full growing seasons. 12. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree preservation plan and approved by staff in writing. 13. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 3 14. All fencing and retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City. 15. Prior to City Council, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to be approved in writing by staff. 16. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 18. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing. 19. The Applicant must meet MPCA noise guidelines. 20. Noise screening must be approved by City staff that addresses the ordering stations. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 24th DAY OF MAY, 2021. ________________________________ David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk Planning Case #21-011 –Public Hearing Required Applicant: Chick-fil-A Property Location: 3855 Lexington Avenue Request: Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development Zoning: B-3 Service Business District Land Use: Commercial Uses Acreage: 1.535 1 •Approval with Conditions:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the ten (18) conditions. •Approval without Conditions: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans in the May 24, 2021, Report to the City Council. 2 Proposed Motion Language •Denial:Motion to deny Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the following findings of fact: the City Council should identify findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. •Table:Motion to table Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue for the following reasons: the City Coucnil should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. 3 Proposed Motion Language Questions? Planning Case 21-011 –Chick-fil-A CUP and PUD Page 1 of 3 NEW BUSINESS – 10B MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-005 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: Grove Church (Everyday Church) Request: Zoning Code Amendment – Chapter 13 – Section 1320-District Provisions – Land Use Chart Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Planning Case 21-005 for an amendment to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the Arden Hills City Code to allow for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I- FLEX District in City Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. Approval of a Zoning Code Amendment requires an affirmative vote of three councilmembers. Background Grove Church, otherwise known as Everyday Church, (“The Applicant”) has submitted an application for an amendment to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the Arden Hills City Code to allow for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District in City Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. The applicant is interested in developing the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road (“Subject Property”) as a House of Worship. The Property is currently owned by ET Arden Hills LLC and is developed with a two-story office building and associated parking lot. The office building is no longer in use. The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. Page 2 of 3 The City Council was asked to hold the required public hearing for Planning Case 21-005 under Agenda Item 9B. A full evaluation of the proposed redevelopment and supporting attachments are included in the staff report under Agenda Item 9B. The remainder of this memo focuses on the requested approvals, findings of fact and the staff recommended conditions if a motion to approve is made. Suggested Findings of Fact The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021, meeting and have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The Subject Property is located in the I-FLEX Zoning District. 3. Under City Code Section 1320.05, Houses of Worship are not allowed in the I-FLEX District. 4. The City is proposing to alter Section 1320.05 to allow Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District. 5. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 6. If this amendment is approved, the Applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at the Subject Property. Options and Motion Language The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021 meeting. At that time, they recommended approval of Planning Case 21-005 for an amendment to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the Arden Hills City Code to allow for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District in City Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart by a 4-0 vote. The following are motion language options for the City Council to consider. • Approval: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. • Approval with Amendments: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission with amendments. a specific reason should be included with amendments. • Denial: Motion to deny Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I- Flex District: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. Page 3 of 3 • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I- Flex District: the Planning Commission should identify 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 April 21, 2021. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 20, 2021 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. With consent of the applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Budget Impact N/A Attachments A. Draft Ordinance 2021-003 B. Presentation To view the final document, access adopted Ordinances via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 210956v1 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-003 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13, ZONING CODE, SECTION 1320, SUBSECTION 1320.05 OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 13 - Zoning Code, Section 1320 – District Provisions, Subsection 1320.05 – Land Use Chart, is hereby amended by allowing for Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-FLEX District as follows: 1320.05 Land Use Chart. (revised 05/24/21) Uses: Zoning Districts: R- 1 R- 2 R- 3 R- 4 NB B- 1 B- 2 B- 3 B- 4 CC GB I-1 I-2 I- FLEX CD POS INST C C C C C C C C C C == == == C == == == SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. PASSED and ADOPTED this 24th day of May, 2021, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By _______________________________ David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk Published in the Pioneer Press on May 27, 2021. Planning Case #21-005 –Public Hearing Required Applicant: Grove Church (Everyday Church) Request: Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District Zoning: I-Flex District 1 I-Flex District •Approval:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council. •Approval with Amendments:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council with amendments. A specific reason should be included with amendments. 2 Proposed Motion Language •Denial:Motion to deny Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. •Table:Motion to table Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. 3 Proposed Motion Language Questions? Planning Case 21-005 –Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District Page 1 of 2 NEW BUSINESS – 10C MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-008 – Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Zoning Code Amendment – Chapter 13 – Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Planning Case 21-008 for an amendment to the language Section 1330.03 Subd. 5, E of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. Approval of a Zoning Code Amendment requires an affirmative vote of three councilmembers. Background The City Council was asked to hold the required public hearing for Planning Case 21-008 under Agenda Item 9C. A full evaluation of the proposed redevelopment and supporting attachments are included in the staff report under Agenda Item 9C. The remainder of this memo focuses on the requested approvals, findings of fact and the staff recommended conditions if a motion to approve is made. Suggested Findings of Fact The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021, meeting and have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. Page 2 of 2 2. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. 3. Amendments to the Shoreland Regulations require approval from the Minnesota DNR. 4. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Options and Motion Language The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021 meeting. At that time, they recommended approval with amendments of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level by a 4-0 vote. The following are motion language options for the City Council to consider. •Approval: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. •Approval with Amendments: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission with amendments. a specific reason should be included with amendments. •Denial: Motion to deny Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. •Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: the Planning Commission should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Budget Impact N/A Attachments A.Draft Ordinance 2021-004 B.Presentation 1 210956v1 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-004 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13, ZONING CODE, SECTION 1330, SUBSECTION 1330.03, SUBD. 5E OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 13 - Zoning Code, Section 1330 – Shoreland Regulations, Subsection 1330.03 – General Provisions, is hereby amended to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. as follows: 1330.03 General Provisions. (revised 05/24/21) Subd. 5 Exceptions to Structure Setback Requirements. No structure shall be placed within the structure setback requirements of the shoreland management district. The following are not classified as structures for the purposes of this section: E. Lakeshore lots may be permitted one (1) accessory storage shed within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level, provided that it complies with the following provisions: 1. The structure or facility is not located within the Shore Impact Zone. 2. The structure or facility does not exceed 100 square feet in size and eight (8) feet in height, measured to the highest point of the structure. 3. The maximum width of the structure, as viewed from the water, does not exceed ten (10) feet. 4. The structure or facility is not designed or used for human habitation and does not contain a water supply or sewage treatment facilities. 5. The structure or facility shall be constructed of material architecturally similar in design, texture, and color to the principal structure on the lot; the design shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 6. The structure shall be screened a minimum of 50 percent by opaque vegetation or topography on the three walls seen from the lake with ecologically suited landscaping landward of the ordinary high water level from the lake. 7. The roof shall not be used as a deck or storage area. 8. The structure or facility is not a boathouse or boat storage structure as defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. 2 To view the final document, access adopted Ordinances via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 210956v1 SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. PASSED and ADOPTED this 24th day of May, 2021, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By ________________________________ David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk Published in the Pioneer Press on May 27, 2021. Planning Case #21-008 –Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures 1 •Approval: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council. •Approval with amendments:Motion to approve Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council with amendments: a specific reason should be included with amendments. 2 Proposed Motion Language •Denial:Motion to deny Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. •Table:Motion to table Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level: the City Council should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. 3 Proposed Motion Language Questions? Planning Case 21-008 –Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures Page 1 of 7 NEW BUSINESS – 10D MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2021 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-006 – No Public Hearing Required Applicant: Robert Kunze Property Location: 4073 Valentine Court Request: Variance Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Planning Case 21-006 for a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of the single-family detached dwelling located at 4073 Valentine Court (“Subject Property”), Approval of a Variance requires an affirmative vote of three councilmembers. Background Robert Kunze (“Applicant”) is requesting a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of his single-family detached dwelling on the Subject Property from 40 feet to 7.82 feet for a proposed garage addition. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential District, and is guided as Low Density Residential in the land use plan. Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code requires a side yard setback of 40 feet on corner lots. According to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of his application, the Subject Property includes unique circumstances due to its nontraditional shape. The front of the property includes one curved section and three straight sections that make it difficult for the applicant to Page 2 of 7 conform to current setback regulations. The Subject Property is a legal non-conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The Applicant is requesting the proposed garage addition to allow for more storage space for his vehicles and additional space to store woodworking equipment. The proposed garage addition would meet applicable building codes and all other regulations in the R-1 District. The applicant would not be able to construct the proposed garage addition without a variance. The City Council is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility with the side yard setback of a corner lot should be approved. The sketches that have been submitted show the location of the proposed garage addition and the proposed driveway addition. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4. At their meeting on May 5, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 with conditions to allow at side yard setback variance at the Subject Property. A full evaluation of the proposal was presented to the Planning Commission at the May 5th meeting. The memo to the Planning Commission on this case is provided in Attachment E. Draft minutes from the meeting are included in Attachment F. Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review 1. District Provisions (R-1 Single Family Residential District) – Section 1320.06 Lot Size and Dimensions The Subject Property has a lot area of 37,541 square feet (Attachment D). Section 1320 – District Provisions of the Zoning Code requires a minimum lot size of 14,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Section 1320 allows for a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.3 in the R-1 District. With the proposed garage addition, the FAR on the Subject Property would increase from 0.04 to 0.05. Section 1320 requires a minimum landscape coverage of 65% and a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25% in the R-1 District. With the proposed garage addition, the impervious surface coverage on the lot would increase from 6.02% to 7.56%. According to the Applicant, the proposed garage addition on the Subject Property will meet all district provisions for the R-1 district besides the side yard setback requirement. Page 3 of 7 Structure Setbacks – Flexibility Requested In the R-1 District, the minimum front and rear setback requirements for a property are forty (40) feet and thirty (30) feet, respectively. The minimum side yard setback on a corner lot is forty (40) feet. The current structure is located approximately twenty (20) feet from the side yard property line. The Subject Property is a legal non-conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The proposed garage addition would be setback 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. According to the applicant, the proposed addition would be setback approximately twenty- seven (27) feet from the existing curb line. There is an approximately 20’ boulevard between the edge of Valentine Court and the property line at this location. The proposed garage addition would conform to front and rear setback requirements. According to the Applicant, this request for a decreased side yard setback minimum would have no impact on the neighborhood character because the existing neighborhood includes a number of garage additions and has a variety of different garage and housing styles. In their application, they cite the challenges of building the proposed garage addition on a non-traditionally shaped lot as a practical difficulty and argue that the decreased side yard setback will be used in a reasonable manner consistent with the purposed and intent of the City Code. 2. Variance Review The role of the City Council is to determine and consider how the facts presented to them compare with the city’s articulated standards. The Council should base their decision on the facts presented Page 4 of 7 and then apply those facts to the legal standards contained in city ordinances and relevant state law. Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a variance request. While the City Council may feel their decision should reflect the overall will of the residents, the task in considering a variance request is limited to evaluating how the variance application meets the statutory practical difficulties factors. Residents can often provide important facts that may help in addressing these factors, however, unsubstantiated opinions and reactions to a request do not form a legitimate basis for a variance decision. The City Council may impose conditions when granting variances as long as the conditions are directly related and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. For instance, if a variance is granted to exceed the front setback limit, any conditions attached should presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the encroachment. 3. Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 The Applicant requests a variance to construct a third stall addition to the side of their existing garage that would impede on the require side yard setback on a corner lot in the R-1 Residential District. The City Council will need to make a determination utilizing the following variance findings and criteria on whether there are practical difficulties with complying with the zoning regulations. If the applicant does not meet all the factors of the statutory test, then a variance should not be granted. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. 1. Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The variance request for 4073 Valentine Court is consistent with the purpose and intent of the R-1 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan; 2. Practical Difficulties. The Applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. According to the Applicant’s application, a third car garage stall for a single family home is a reasonable use of the Subject Property in the R-1 Zoning District; b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. According to the Applicant, the lot has a very odd shape. In the front of the house, along the road, there is one curved section and 3 straight sections. The structure is currently nonconforming as to setbacks. The setback requirements were different when the house Page 5 of 7 was built in 1953. On the side, the closest distance from the curb to the proposed garage addition is approximately 27 feet. It is unlikely the city would want to make use of that property. There are significant small screening trees in that area, partly blocking the view from the street. Other areas on the property were considered for a freestanding garage. Any of the other areas in the front yard, or anywhere close to the house in the rear, would involve cutting down big 100+ year old Oaks. Adding behind the existing garage would involve significant drainage issues and would require major regrading under the drip line of some of the 100+ year old oaks. c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. According to the Applicant, the existing neighborhood has homes with a variety of different garages and housing styles. The proposed variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Many garages have been added to the road side of existing homes in the neighborhood. The topography and odd lot shapes make the neighborhood quite varied. The homes are not in straight lines, all the same distance from the road or each other. 3. Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical difficulty. The proposed variance is not based on economic consideration. 4. Access to Sunlight. Inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems shall be considered a practical difficulty. A solar energy system is not proposed. Suggested Findings of Fact The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021, meeting and have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration: General Findings: 1. City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to decrease the minimum side yard setback on a single family dwelling at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court. 2. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district. 3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 district’s standards for minimum side yard setbacks on a corner lot. 4. The proposed garage addition would be located 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. 5. The proposed garage addition of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-1 district. 6. A variance ma y be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would cause the landowner practical difficulties. Page 6 of 7 7. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Options and Motion Language The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May 5, 2021 meeting. At that time, they recommended approval with conditions of Planning Case 21-006 for a side yard setback variance at 4073 Valentine Court by a 4-0 vote. The following are motion language options for the City Council to consider. • Approval: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. • Approval with Conditions: Motion to approve Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission as amended by the conditions below: 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. • Denial: Motion to deny Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court: the City Council should identify a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Public Notice and Comments Although a variance does not require a public hearing, a public meeting notice was prepared by the City and mailed to properties within 500 feet of the Subject Property on May 13, 2021. A meeting notice for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on May 13, 2021. Minnesota statute does not clearly require a public hearing before a variance is granted or denied, however, after consulting with the City Attorney, staff agree that the best practice is to allow public forum on all variance requests. A public forum allows the city to establish a record and elicit facts to help determine if the application meets the practical difficulties factors. Staff has received seven public comments, all via email, in support of this request as of May 19, 2021. Redacted public comments are included in Attachment G. During the May 5, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting, the Commission opened the meeting to allow for public comment. The Commission did not receive any public comments at that time. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on March 31, 2021. Page 7 of 7 Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by May 30, 2021 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. With consent of the applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Budget Impact N/A Attachments A. Land Use Application B. Location Map C. Variance Request Letter D. Site Survey E. Planning Commission Memo F. Draft Planning Commission Minutes G. Redacted Public Comments H. City Council Presentation I. Resolution 2021-030   )0>?423B,D =/09477> 4990>:?,  &070;3:90    ,C    BBB.4?D:1,=/093477>:=2 %( )$"- #7,99492,>0!:  %@-84??,7,?0 ;;74.,?4:9:8;70?0/,?0 ..0;?0/-D $0.04;?!@8-0= :@9.470.4>4:9 :@9.470.4>4:9,?0       &&" $* $%(#* %$ ;;74.,9? //=0>> &070;3:90!: "?30= ,C!: 8,47//=0>> (%&(*- $%(#* %$ #=:;0=?D"B90= "B90=//=0>> "B90=&070;3:90!: "?30= //=0>>:1#=:;0=?D9A:7A0/ 02,70>.=4;?4:9 #=:;0=?D!: &D;0:1'>0 *:90 #=:;0=?D.=0,20 -&%'+)* ‰:8;=0309>4A0#7,9809/809?00  >.=:B   ‰:9/4?4:9,7 '>0 :=9?0=48'>0#0=84? '# := '# 809/809?00 >.=:B   ‰#=074849,=D#7,?00 >.=:B ‰49,7#7,?00 >.=:B ‰:9.0;?#7,9$0A40B00 >.=:B  ‰ ,>?0=#7,990/'94?0A07:;809?:= ,>?0=%;0.4,70A07:;809?#7,900 >.=:B   ‰49,7#7,990/'94?0A07:;809?:=49,7%;0.4,70A07:;809?#7,900  >.=:B  ‰#7,990/'94?0A07:;809?809/809?:=%;0.4,70A07:;809?#7,9809/809?00 >.=:B   ‰%4?0#7,9$0A40B00 >.=:B   ‰$0E:9492:=&#$02@7,?492#7,9809/809?00 >.=:B   ‰*:9492:/0:=&#$0/0A07:;809?:/0809/809?00 >.=:B   ‰4?D:/0809/809?00  >.=:B   ‰:?%;74? 49:=%@-/4A4>4:9$ ,9/$ 4>?=4.?> "97D00  >.=:B  ‰(,=4,9.0:=#0=84??0//5@>?809?00  >.=:B   ‰(,.,?4:9:1,>0809?:=$423?:1),D00  >.=:B   ‰;;0,7:1/8494>?=,?4A00.4>4:900  >.=:B   ‰,9/'>0$0<@0>?> F!:? 7=0,/D%;0.4140/00  >.=:B  ROBERT KUNZE 4073 VALENTINE CT ARDEN HILLS, MN 55112 651 269 7649 RJKUNZE1@UMN.EDU ROBERT KUNZE 4073 VALENTINE CT 651 269 7649 4073 VALENTINE CT ARDEN HILLS, MN 55112 ‰ VALENTINE HILLS LOT 11 BLK 2 283023110013 2517 From tax records: 1A-Residential Homestead From County records: 0.64 Acres 510 R - SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, PLATTED LOT R1 Attachment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x 0=?,49,;;74.,?4:9>,=0>@-50.??:=0A40B,9/,;;=:A,7-D?30$4.0=006),?0=>30/ 4>?=4.?:9?,.?$)/4=0.?7D,?    1:=,//4?4:9,7491:=8,?4:9 x &307,9/@>0,;;74.,?4:9100>/:9:?.:A0=-@47/492>429:=:?30=;0=84?100>?3,? 8,D-0=0<@4=0/@;:9,;;=:A,7:1,7,9/@>0,;;74.,?4:9 x 77,;;74.,?4:9>B477-0>@-50.??:,//4?4:9,7100>1:==048-@=>0809?:1.:9>@7?,9?.:>?> ,>>:.4,?0/ B4?3 147492 =0A40B492 ,9/ ;=:.0>>492 :1 ,;;74.,?4:949?301:=8:1,9 0>.=:B?:?304?D Proposed addition of a third stall to side of existing garage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isclaimer: This map is intended for reference purposes only and is not a legally recorded map or survey. The City of Arden Hills shall not be liable for any damages or claims that arise due to accuracy,availability, use or misuse of the information herein pursuant to MNStatute 466.03 Subd 21. Location Map Lake Johanna BoulevardSa n d e e n R o a d ± Park and Open Space Subject Parcel §¨¦35W §¨¦694 £¤10Lake Valentine RoadOld Highway 10 NValentine Avenue 69§¨¦694 Robert Kunze 4073 Valentine Ct Arden Hills MN 55112 To: Arden Hills Planning Commission I'd like to add a 3rd stall to the side of my exiting garage. I worked with Mike Mrosla over the last few months. He, at first, thought there was a way to use some other hardship method to allow construction in this location, but after going over the details came to the conclusion I would need a variance. He thought the variance would likely be granted due to the conditions explained below. 1.   Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.   The variance request for 4073 VALENTINE CT is consistent with the purpose and intent of the R-1 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan.   2.   Practical Difficulties. The Applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means:   a.   Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance.   A third car garage stall is a reasonable use of the Subject Property in the R-1 Zoning District.   b.   Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner.   The lot has a very odd shape. In the front of the house, along the road, there is one curved section and 3 straight sections. The structure is currently nonconforming as to setbacks. The setback requirements were different when the house was built in 1953. On the side, the closest distance from the curb to the proposed garage addition is approximately 27 feet. It is unlikely the city would want to make use of that property. There are significant small screening trees in that area, partly blocking the view from the street. Other areas on the property were considered for a freestanding garage. Any of the other areas in the front yard, or anywhere close to the house in the rear, would involve cutting down big 100+ year old Oaks. Adding behind the existing garage would involve significant drainage issues and would require major regrading under the drip line of some of the 100+ year old oaks.   c.   Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.   The existing neighborhood has homes with a variety of different garages and housing styles. The proposed variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Many garages have been added to the road side of existing homes in the neighborhood. The topography and odd lot shapes make the neighborhood quite varied. The homes are not in straight lines, all the same distance from the road or each other.   3.   Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical difficulty.   The proposed variance is not based on economic consideration. It would be much less expensive to build a freestanding garage.   4.   Access to Sunlight. Inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems shall be considered a practical difficulty.   A solar energy system is not proposed. The proposed location would not involve any tree removal except one pyramidal arborvitae on the corner of the existing garage that is well past it's prime. It is the last of the original 60+ year old foundation plantings. It should have been replaced years ago. Part of it is currently held up by rope. Site drainage. This location would necessitate only very minor changes to site drainage. Half the water from behind the house currently runs through about where the outside edge of the new garage would sit. A small amount of soil would need to be removed from the new path for the water and this would be added next to the new construction. This would keep the water away from the new foundation. The addition would be constructed to match the existing house. The siding, windows, doors, and garage door were all replaced a few years ago, and are still available. The height of the existing house peak is 23 ft, and the existing garage peak is 12.5 ft. Sincerely, Robert Kunze RJKUNZE1@UMN.EDU 651-269-7649 Attachment D Page 1 of 6 PC Agenda Item – 3A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5, 2021 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jane Kansier, AICP, Bolton & Menk Corrin Bemis, Bolton & Menk SUBJECT: Planning Case #21-006 – No Public Hearing Required Applicant: Robert Kunze Property Location: 4073 Valentine Court Request: Variance Requested Action Robert Kunze (“Applicant”) has requested a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of their single-family detached dwelling for a proposed garage addition located at 4073 Valentine Court (“Subject Property”), ordinance requires a forty (40) foot side yard setback on corner lots. Background 1. Overview of Request The Applicant is requesting a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of his single- family detached dwelling on the Subject Property from 40 feet to 7.82 feet for a proposed garage addition. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential District, and is guided as Low Density Residential in the land use plan. Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code requires a side yard setback of 40 feet on corner lots. According to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of his application, the Subject Property includes unique circumstances due to its nontraditional shape. The front of the property includes one curved section and three straight sections that make it difficult for the applicant to conform to current setback regulations. The Subject Property is a legal non-conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The Applicant is requesting the proposed garage addition to allow for more storage space for his vehicles and additional space to store woodworking equipment. The proposed garage addition would meet applicable building codes and all other regulations in the R-1 District. The applicant would not be able to construct the proposed garage addition without a variance. Page 2 of 6 The Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility with the side yard setback of a corner lot should be approved. The sketches that have been submitted show the location of the proposed garage addition and the proposed driveway addition. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4. Plan Evaluation Chapter 13, Zoning Regulations Review 1. District Provisions (R-1 Single Family Residential District) – Section 1320.06 Lot Size and Dimensions The Subject Property has a lot area of 37,541 square feet (Attachment D). Section 1320 – District Provisions of the Zoning Code requires a minimum lot size of 14,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Section 1320 allows for a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.3 in the R-1 District. With the proposed garage addition, the FAR on the Subject Property would increase from 0.04 to 0.05. Section 1320 requires a minimum landscape coverage of 65% and a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25% in the R-1 District. With the proposed garage addition, the impervious surface coverage on the lot would increase from 6.02% to 7.56%. According to the Applicant, the proposed garage addition on the Subject Property will meet all district provisions for the R-1 district besides the side yard setback requirement. Structure Setbacks – Flexibility Requested In the R-1 District, the minimum front and rear setback requirements for a property are forty (40) feet and thirty (30) feet, respectively. The minimum side yard setback on a corner lot is forty (40) Page 3 of 6 feet. The current structure is located approximately twenty (20) feet from the side yard property line. The Subject Property is a legal non-conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The proposed garage addition would be setback 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. According to the applicant’s application, the proposed addition would be setback approximately twenty-seven (27) feet from the existing curb line. The proposed garage addition would conform to front and rear setback requirements. According to the Applicant, this request for a decreased side yard setback minimum would have no impact on the neighborhood character because the existing neighborhood includes a number of garage additions and has a variety of different garage and housing styles. In their application, they cite the challenges of building the proposed garage addition on a non-traditionally shaped lot as a practical difficulty and argue that the decreased side yard setback will be used in a reasonable manner consistent with the purposed and intent of the City Code. 2. Variance Review The role of the Planning Commission is to determine and consider how the facts presented to them compare with the city’s articulated standards. The Commission should base their decision on the facts presented and then apply those facts to the legal standards contained in city ordinances and relevant state law. Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a variance request. While the Planning Commission may feel their decision should reflect the overall will of the residents, the task in considering a variance request is limited to evaluating how the variance application meets the statutory practical difficulties factors. Residents can often provide important facts that may help in addressing these factors, however, unsubstantiated opinions and reactions to a request do not form a legitimate basis for a variance decision. The Planning Commission may impose conditions when granting variances as long as the conditions are directly related and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. For instance, if a variance is granted to exceed the front setback limit, any conditions attached should presumably relate to mitigating the effect of the encroachment. 3. Variance Requirements – Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 The Applicant requests a variance to construct a third stall addition to the side of their existing garage that would impede on the require side yard setback on a corner lot in the R-1 Residential District. The Planning Commission will need to make a determination utilizing the following variance findings and criteria on whether there are practical difficulties with complying with the zoning regulations. If the applicant does not meet all the factors of the statutory test, then a variance should not be granted. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. 1. Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Page 4 of 6 The variance request for 4073 Valentine Court is consistent with the purpose and intent of the R-1 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan; 2. Practical Difficulties. The Applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. According to the Applicant’s application, a third car garage stall for a single family home is a reasonable use of the Subject Property in the R-1 Zoning District; b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. According to the Applicant’s application, the lot has a very odd shape. In the front of the house, along the road, there is one curved section and 3 straight sections. The structure is currently nonconforming as to setbacks. The setback requirements were different when the house was built in 1953. On the side, the closest distance from the curb to the proposed garage addition is approximately 27 feet. It is unlikely the city would want to make use of that property. There are significant small screening trees in that area, partly blocking the view from the street. Other areas on the property were considered for a freestanding garage. Any of the other areas in the front yard, or anywhere close to the house in the rear, would involve cutting down big 100+ year old Oaks. Adding behind the existing garage would involve significant drainage issues and would require major regrading under the drip line of some of the 100+ year old oaks.; c. Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. According to the Applicant’s application, the existing neighborhood has homes with a variety of different garages and housing styles. The proposed variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Many garages have been added to the road side of existing homes in the neighborhood. The topography and odd lot shapes make the neighborhood quite varied. The homes are not in straight lines, all the same distance from the road or each other. 3. Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical difficulty. The proposed variance is not based on economic consideration. 4. Access to Sunlight. Inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems shall be considered a practical difficulty. A solar energy system is not proposed. Page 5 of 6 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. City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to decrease the minimum side yard setback on a single family dwelling at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court. 2. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district. 3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 district’s standards for minimum side yard setbacks on a corner lot. 4. The proposed garage addition would be located 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. 5. The proposed garage addition of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-1 district. 6. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would cause the landowner practical difficulties. 7. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. • Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions below: 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. • Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21- 006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted materials. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Page 6 of 6 Notice Notice of a public meeting for this planning case was published in the Pioneer Press on April 24, 2021 and a public meeting notice was prepared by the City and mailed to properties within 500 feet of the Subject Property on April 23, 2021. Minnesota statute does not clearly require a public hearing before a variance is granted or denied, however, after consulting with the City Attorney, staff agree that the best practice is to allow public comment on all variance requests. A public comment period allows the city to establish a record and elicit facts to help determine if the application meets the practical difficulties factors. Public Comments Staff have not received written or verbal comments in regards to this proposal as of April 28, 2021. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on March 25, 2021. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by May 24, 2021 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. With consent of the Applicant, the City may extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A. Land Use Application B. Location Map C. Variance Request Letter D. Site Survey Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 5 , 2021 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Paul Vijums called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic this meeting was held virtually. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Paul Vijums, Commissioners Marcie Jefferys, Kurtis Weber, and Jonathan Wicklund. Absent: Commissioners Steven Jones, James Lambeth, Subbaya Subramanian, Clayton Zimmerman. Also present were: Planning Consultant Jane Kansier, Planning Consultant Corrin Bemis, City Administrator Dave Perrault, and Councilmember Fran Holmes. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – MAY 5 , 2021 Chair Vijums stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 7, 2021 – Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Wicklund moved, seconded by Commissioner Weber, to approve the April 7, 2021, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried 3-0-1 (Commissioner Jeffreys abstained). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 21-006; 4073 Valentine Court – Variance Request to Allow a 3rd Stall Garage Addition – Public Hearing Not Required Planning Consultant Bemis explained the Applicant is requesting a variance to decrease the required side yard setback of his single- family detached dwelling on the Subject Property from 40 feet to 7.82 feet for a proposed garage addition. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Family ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 2 Residential District, and is guided as Low Density Residential in the land use plan. Section 1320.06 of the Arden Hills City Code requires a side yard setback of 40 feet on corner lots. Planning Consultant Bemis stated according to the Applicant’s narrative submitted as a part of his application, the Subject Property includes unique circumstances due to its nontraditional shape. The front of the property includes one curved section and three straight sections that make it difficult for the applicant to conform to current setback regulations. The Subject Property is a legal non- conforming lot, as the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet when the property was built in 1953. The Applicant is requesting the proposed garage addition to a llow for more storage space for his vehicles and additional space to store woodworking equipment. The proposed garage addition would meet applicable building codes and all other regulations in the R-1 District. The applicant would not be able to construct the proposed garage addition without a variance. Planning Consultant Bemis reported the Planning Commission is being asked to determine if a variance request for flexibility with the side yard setback of a corner lot should be approved. The sketches that have been submitted show the location of the proposed garage addition and the proposed driveway addition. The evaluation of the proposal should be based on the District Provisions in Section 1320 and the Requirements for a Variance in Section 1355.04, Subd. 4. Planning Consultant Bemis reviewed the surrounding area, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to decrease the minimum side yard setback on a single family dwelling at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court. 2. A single-family detached dwelling is a permitted use in the R-1 district. 3. The Subject Property is non-conforming with the R-1 district’s standards for minimum side yard setbacks on a corner lot. 4. The proposed garage addition would be located 7.82 feet from the Northwest side yard property line. 5. The proposed garage addition of the subject parcel would conform to all other requirements and standards of the R-1 district. 6. A variance may be granted if enforcement of a provision in the zoning ordinance would cause the landowner practical difficulties. 7. Variances are only permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Planning Consultant Bemis recommended two conditions of approval for Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans: 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. Planning Consultant Bemis 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 3 Commissioner Jeffreys questioned if there were any other garages that would have a garage 10 feet or closer to the street. Planning Consultant Bemis explained she was uncertain if there were any homes in this neighborhood that had garages closer than seven feet to the street. Commissioner Weber reported the garage would be 27 feet from the street, seven feet from the right of way. He indicated he supported the proposed request and believed this was an appropriate use of the property. Commissioner Wicklund indicated he supported the proposed garage location. He commented the red pines are great for screening, but he feared in 20 to 30 years all screening would be lost and the garage would be visible from the street in the future. Chair Vijums asked if previous variances have been approved for garages in this neighborhood. Planning Consultant Bemis reported there have been three subdivision requests and one setback variance that have been requested in this neighborhood. She explained the variance and two of the subdivision requests were approved. Chair Vijums discussed the location of the proposed driveway noting it was getting closer to the property line. He questioned if this was another concern the Commission should be addressing. Planning Consultant Bemis stated the width of the driveway at the road would not be changing and therefore the driveway would be conforming. She indicated staff did not have any concerns with the proposed driveway. Chair Vijums asked if the new driveway would match the existing concrete driveway. Planning Consultant Bemis deferred this question to the applicant. Robert Kunze, 4073 Valentine Court, explained he had every intention of matching the driveway materials. He stated for the record that the red pines on the plans have been replaced with arborvitaes, hemlocks and catalpa yews. Chair Vijums opened the meeting for public comment at this time. There were no comments from the public. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would like to a third condition for approval requiring the applicant to plant coniferous screening vegetation along the property line between the driveway extending to the rear corner. He indicated this would assist with screening the driveway from the street. Commissioner Weber commented he did not believe it was necessary to add this condition. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2 ) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission adding Condition 3 which shall ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 4 require the applicant to plant coniferous screening vegetation along the property line between the driveway extending to the rear corner. Commissioner Wicklund explained he does not want to have the applicant to do anything differently, but he also did not want any future owner of the property to take down all of the vegetation because this would expose the larger garage to the street. Commissioner Weber reported the plantings were within the City right of way and the property owner could not cut them down. Commissioner Wicklund stated if this was the case, then Condition 3 would not be necessary. Commissioner Wicklund and Commissioner Jeffreys withdrew their motion and second from the floor. Commissioner Weber moved and Commissioner Wicklund seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B. Planning Case 21-011; 3855 Lexington Avenue – Chick-fil-A – Conditional Use Permit – Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Kansier stated HR Green, on behalf of Chick -fil-A has submitted an application for Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development. The Applicant is requesting to construct single story fast food restaurant with a drive-through. The property is located at 3855 Lexington Avenue and is zoned B-3, Service Business District, and is designated for Commercial Uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the surrounding area, site data, the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: 1. The property located at 3855 Lexington Avenue is designated for Commercial uses on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The applicant has proposed a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, Final Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a fast food restaurant with drive-through lanes. 3. The Final PUD substantially conforms with the requirements of the City Code. 4. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City Code, flexibility has been requested by the applicant and/or conditions have been placed on an approval that would mitigate the nonconformity. 5. Flexibility through the PUD process has been requested in the following areas: lot size, minimum landscape coverage, building height and parking requirements. 6. The proposed development plan meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the City Code in the following areas: accessory structure setbacks, drive-through facility setbacks, drive-through facility landscaping setbacks, and number of parking spaces. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 5 7. Fast food restaurants with drive-through facilities area allowed as a conditional use in the B- 3 District. 8. All new developments or redevelopments in the B-3 district require a planned unit development. 9. The adjacent properties to the south and west are zoned B-3 and are guided for Commercial use in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 10. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole. Planning Consultant Kansier recommended approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Plan Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development, and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue, based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development approvals shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the City Council. 3. Prior to the issuance of bu ilding permits, the Applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4. All areas of the site, where practical, shall be sodded or seeded and maintained. The property owner shall mow and maintain all site boulevards to the curb line of the public streets. 5. All light poles, including base, shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be shoebox style, downward directed, with high-pressure sodium lamps or LED and flush lenses. Other than wash or architectural lighting, attached security lighting shall be shoebox style, downward directed with flush lenses. If complaints are received the lighting adjacent to residential uses shall utilize house shields as directed by the City. In addition, any lighting under canopies (building entries) shall be recessed and use a flush lens. 6. The Applicant shall be financially responsible for all applicable water and sanitary charges. Rates applied shall be those in effect at the time of Final Plat approval and shall be memorialized in the Development Agreement. 7. A right-of-way permit shall be required for work performed within the City right-of- way. 8. No exterior storage shall be permitted. 9. Prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the long-term care of all on-site and off-site stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water main to the City for review and approval. The Applicant will be responsible to carry out these operation and maintenance activities and to submit the appropriate documentation to the City as specified. 10. Any future trash enclosures shall utilize wooden gates and be constructed on three sides using the same materials and patterns used on the building. Locations shall be approved by the Planning Department. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape financial security in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping shall be submitted. Landscape financial security is held for two full growing seasons. 12. Before construction, grading, or land clearing begins, trees or tree areas that are to be preserved shall be visibly marked and city-approved tree protection fencing or other method shall be installed and maintained at the critical root zones of the trees to be protected. The ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 6 location of the fencing shall be in conformance with the approved tree preservation plan and approved by staff in writing. 13. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with the same materials used on the building in accordance with City Code requirements. 14. All fencing and retaining wall materials shall be complementary to the building materials and shall be approved in writing by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Retaining walls greater than four (4) feet in height shall be engineered and detailed calculations shall be submitted to the City. 15. Prior to City Council, the Applicant shall submit a materials board to be approved in writing by staff. 16. A Grading and Erosion permit shall be obtained from the city’s Engineering Division prior to commencing any grading, land disturbance or utility activities. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits necessary from other agencies, including but not limited to, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Ramsey County, MNDOT prior to the start of any site activities. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for protecting the proposed on-site storm sewer infrastructure and components and any existing storm sewer from exposure to any and all stormwater runoff, sediments and debris during all construction activities. Temporary stormwater facilities shall be installed to protect the quality aspect of the proposed and existing stormwater facilities prior to and during construction activities. Maintenance of any and all temporary stormwater facilities shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 18. Prior to the issuance Grading and Erosion permit, the Engineering Department shall review and approve final grading and utility plans in writing. Planning Consultant Kansier 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Justin Lark, Chick -fil-A representative, thanked the Commission for their consideration. He reported he had met with the Council at a worksession meeting to discuss this proposal. He commented on the lighting on the west side of the building and explained he would be removing the sign on the western side of the building. He indicated he has moved the monument sign closer to Lexington Avenue per the Council’s recommendation. He discussed the buffer space that was located between the hotel and Chick -fil -A and noted this area would be relandscaped. It was noted a gentleman’s agreement would be pursued with the hotel for employee parking. He commented further on the parking situation and requested a variance from the City’s parking requirements. Commissioner Weber thanked the applicant for the additional information. He stated he was concerned with the double drive thru given how close this property was to Lexington Avenue. Mr. Lark discussed how vehicles would access and exit the property. It was noted all cars exiting would be pulled further from Lexington Avenue to assist with proper vehicle queuing. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 7 Joseph Vavrina, HR Green, commented on the traffic study and reported the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Red Fox Road had a service level of B during the AM peak and was at level C during the PM peak. Commissioner Jeffreys asked if the areas of flexibility were typical for new developments. Planning Consultant Kansier reported each site and PUD was unique. She did not believe this applicant was requesting more flexibility than any other applicant. Councilmember Holmes commented the main concern was how close the drive thru lane was to the hotel. She indicated other requests did not have this concern. She stated she would be happy to hear from the Quality Inn regarding this matter. Commissioner Jeffreys questioned what the hours of operation would be for Chick-fil-A. Mr. Lark stated Chick -fil-A would be open Monday through Saturday from 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and would be closed on Sundays. Commissioner Jeffreys explained the traffic surprised her because she thought this business would have had more of an impact on the adjacent intersection. Chair Vijums inquired if the canopy was an approved building structure. Planning Consultant Kansier reported this was the case, noting the canopy would require a building permit. Chair Vijums stated his main concerns were noise considerations given the fact this restaurant would be so close to the Quality Inn. He feared how noise would travel from the fast food speakers towards the hotel. He recommended that all speakers be faced away from the hotel. In addition, he was concerned about the noise that would be coming from the coolers and HVAC units on the roof. Mr. Lark commented this restaurant would have two menu boards, one for each of the drive thru lanes. He stated these speakers would face due west, but were located north of the hotel. He reported the speaker boxes were 50 feet away from any of the closest parking spaces. He discussed the trees that were located at the northeast corner of the hotel property and explained these would remain in place. He indicated he has never had any concerns raised about the equipment on the roof and stated he would have to investigate the sound coming from these units and could report back to the City. Chair Vijums suggested a noise study be completed once the building is constructed to ensure the noise coming from the rooftop units was not disruptive to the adjacent properties. Mr. Lark reiterated that his building was meeting all City setback requirements for the Commercial zoning district. Mr. Vavrina discussed the landscaping that would be put in place between the hotel and Chick-fil- A noting this would assist in providing a year round screen, while also helping to block noise. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the City of Arden Hills was required to follow State guidelines and could not have noise requirements that were more restrictive than the State. She indicated the hotel was considered to be in a noise area Classification 1. She stated this meant the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 8 maximum night time noise level between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is 50 decibels. She anticipated this property would be similar. She discussed the ambient noise that was already coming from I-694 and other adjacent roadways. She indicated the Commission could require a noise study once the building was completed to see if additional screening was necessary for the rooftop mechanicals. Chair Vijums stated he was satisfied with the location of the drive thru mechanicals. He explained he would be interested in adding a condition for approval that would require the applicant to complete a noise study once the structure was built. Commissioner Wicklund indicated this location, which was formerly a Perkins that ran 24 hours a day, sits adjacent to I-694. He did not believe noise would be a concern for this property. He supported the Commission leaning on staff’s expertise on whether or not a noise study should be completed. He was of the opinion this was a great repurposing of this property. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Ankit Bhakta, owner of the Quality Inn, stated he had concerns about the proposed Chick -fil-A. He indicated he was concerned about the drive-thru, noise that would be generated by the drive-thru speakers, as well as the noise that would be generated by the rooftop HVAC units. He discussed how the cars waiting for the drive thru would also be generating extra noise. He feared how this would impact his customers given the fact Chick -fil-A would be open until 10:00 p.m. He stated he was also concerned with where Chick -fil -A would store snow in the winter months and did not want snow being pushed onto his property. Commissioner Weber explained Chick -fil-A was requesting to be closer to the property line than was allowed. He stated he now had concerns with the application given the fact the adjacent property owner had concerns with the amount of noise that would be generated by the drive thru. He indicated he did not support allowing the restaurant and drive thru moving closer to the hotel. Chair Vijums asked if the drive thru speakers could be adjusted so that they faced away from the hotel. Mr. Lark sta ted this would not be possible. He reported the drive thru speakers were 50 feet from the closest parking lot and over 100 feet from the corner of the hotel. He explained if the drive thru speakers were moved closer to Lexington Avenue this could back up traffic onto Red Fox Road. Chair Vijums commented he supported the proposed plan, but noted he was also concerned about how the restaurant and drive thru would impact the adjacent hotel. He stated this use was different from Perkins, because there would be a drive thru. He supported a noise study being completed. Commissioner Wicklund reported the business model for this company had Chick -fil-A closed on Sundays meaning the hotel guests would not be impacted by the drive thru on Sundays. Chair Vijums suggested a condition for approval be added to address the noise concerns. He recommended a noise study be completed after the restaurant was completed or that the noise boxes be moved. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 9 Commissioner Jeffreys commented on the amount of noise cars make when waiting in the drive thru line and noted this was a concern to her. Chair Vijums indicated he had less concerns about the noise coming from the cars because there were only a few months out of the year that drivers could drive with their windows down. He stated he was more concerned about the noise that would be coming from the rooftop units. Mr. Lark reported this was a commercially zoned property and he was meeting the City’s setback requirements. He was hopeful that the noise issue would be less of a concern from a building standpoint. He explained he wanted to be a good neighbor and noted Chick -fil-A would be open only till 10:00 p.m. and would be closed on Sundays, where Perkins was open 24/7. There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Chair Vijums stated he would like to add several conditions for approval. He proposed Chick -fil-A move the order stations from the west side of the drive through to the northeast side. In addition, he supported the applicant completing a noise study once the building is constructed to see what type of noise is being generated by the use. Commissioner Wicklund expressed concern with forcing Chick -fil-A to change their drive thru. He reported Chick -fil-A had more expertise with the operation of a drive thru than the City did and he supported Chick -fil-A’s proven business model. Mr. Lark reported he spends a great deal of time testing and planning for sites. He explained the proposed location for the order stations would maximize the efficiency and flow on the site. Chair Vijums questioned if some sort of structure should be required along the property line to block the menu boards and speaker sound from the hotel. Commissioner Weber asked if a sound wall would be allowed along the property line. Mr. Lark stated in other locations a wind screen has been installed to create a buffer between the drive thru and the adjacent property. Chair Vijums supported some sort of noise screening being put in place between the drive thru and the hotel property. He suggested a condition be made for approval stating some sort of noise screening be required between the ordering station and the hotel. Commissioner Wicklund stated he could support this recommendation. Chair Vijums stated he also supported the applicant being required to complete a noise study on the building after constructed. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the building would have to follow MPCA decibel level requirements. Commissioner Wicklund indicated he did not support the City making this requirement. Rather, he recommended the noise concerns be brought to the Council given the fact they would have the final say in the matter. He suggested that if a condition was drafted that it read: Noise levels must meet MPCA guidelines for this Planning Case. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 10 Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Weber seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-011 for a Master Planned Unit Development, a Final Planned Unit Development and a Conditional Use Permit at 3855 Lexington Avenue based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the eighteen (18) conditions in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission adding Condition 19: The Applicant must meet MPCA noise guidelines and Co ndition 20: Noise screening must be approved by City staff that addresses the ordering stations. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). C. Planning Case 21-005; Zoning Code Amendment to Allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Bemis stated the applicant is interested in developing the property located at 1275 Red Fox Road (“Subject Property”) as a House of Worship. The Property is currently owned by ET Arden Hills LLC and is developed with a two-story office building and associated parking lot. The office building is no longer in use. The Subject Property includes two access points off of Red Fox Road. The property is zoned I-FLEX, which does not permit houses of worship, or other assembly uses. Planning Consultant Bemis reported at a special work session on March 22, 2021, the Council discussed the Applicant’s proposal to develop a House of Worship in the I-FLEX District. Following the discussion, the City Council directed staff to review and propose a zoning code amendment to allow Houses of Worship in the I-FLEX District as a Conditional Use. The amendment will impact Zoning Code Section 1320.05 – Land Use Chart. Planning Consultant Bemis indicated the I-FLEX District is guided as Mixed Business (MB) and Light Industrial & Office (IND) in the Arden Hills 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. The MB area is designated for a variety of businesses, including commercial, certain light industrial uses, warehousing, office, general business, and retail. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 0% to 50% Light Industrial; 0% to 50% Retail; and 25% to 100% Office. A development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. The IND area is designated for a broad range of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, processing, and warehousing. This land use may also include offices. The expected share of uses within this area are as follows: 50% to 100% Light Industrial and 0% to 100% Office. A Development intensity of up to 0.8 FAR may be allowed. According to the Comprehensive Plan the total area of the MB land use is 55 acres, or 0.9% of the total land area in the City, the total area of the IND land use is 346 acres, or 5.7% of the total land area in the City. Planning Consultant Bemis explained the entire I-FLEX District is within the Red Fox/Grey Fox/Lexington Avenue Business Area which is discussed in the Land Use Chapter. This area includes Red Fox and Grey Fox roads and is bounded by Lexington Avenue, Highway 51, Interstate 694, and the Canadian Pacific railway. This area is used by a number of small and large businesses for a variety of retail, manufacturing, distribution, warehousing, and office uses. This area was largely developed between the 1950s and 1970s, though the retail area along Lexington Avenue has had some new development and redevelopment in the last 15 years. This area is marked as an area of possible redevelopment in 2040. Planning Consultant Bemis reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 11 General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The Subject Property is located in the I-FLEX Zoning District. 3. Under City Code Section 1320.05, Houses of Worship are not allowed in the I-FLEX District. 4. The City is proposing to alter Section 1320.05 to allow Houses of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I -FLEX District. 5. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 6. If this amendment is approved, the Applicant will submit a Conditional Use Permit application for the permitting of Grove Community Church (Everyday Church) at the Subject Property. Planning Consultant Bemis recommended approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I -Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. Planning Consultant Bemis 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Chair Vijums reported more and more places of worship were working their way into these types of zoning districts. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Tom Goodrum, planning consultant for the applicant, thanked staff for their guidance and thorough staff report. He stated this church was excited to be a part of Arden Hills. He explained he was conducting a traffic study and it appears the church would have a minimal impact on the area. There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Commissioner Jeffreys asked how many people would be attending this church on Sunday mornings. Mr. Goodrum reported the congregation currently had 600 parishioners and noted services were held at 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Sundays. Pastor Josh Krehbiel thanked the Commission for considering his application. He explained he had 600 members part of his church commu nity. He explained these members would be split up between the two Sunday services. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 12 Chair Vijums questioned what led this church to seek space in the I-Flex zoning district. Pastor Josh indicated his church has been on a building search journey for several years. He reported he has a desire to have a building that was close to the freeway, with high ceilings and adequate parking. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Chair Vijums seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-005 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to allow Places of Worship as a Conditional Use in the I-Flex District as presented in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4 -0). D. Planning Case 21-008; Zoning Code Amendment to Section 1355 (Shoreland) Regarding Accessory Structures – Public Hearing Required Planning Consultant Kansier stated in September of 2020, Kye Samuelson (“Applicant”) requested a Variance in order to construct an accessory structure near the shoreline of 3493 Siems Court (“Subject Property”) within the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The Applicant requested a variance to build a 120 square foot accessory storage structure that encroached eighteen (18) inches into the Shore Impact Zone of Lake Johanna. The proposed structure exceeded the eight (8) foot height limitation at ten (10) feet, six (6) inches. The rational for the variance was that the structure would be used for the storage of modern day recreational water equipment and the hardship was due to the rear yard topography. The Subject Property is zoned R-1, Single Residential District, is located in the Shoreland Management District, and is guided as Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan. Planning Consultant Kansier reported at its October 7, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to table the request to allow the Applicant to revise their plans to better conform to the Shoreland Ordinance provisions. The Applicant took the Planning Commissions comments under consideration and submitted revised plans for a smaller structure that would not encroach into the Shore Impact Zone. The Applicant then proposed to construct an accessory structure that would be nine and a half (9.5) feet tall and ninety-three and a half (93.5) square feet in size. However, the proposed structure still required a variance due to the proposed height and area that exceeded current ordinance standards. At its December 9, 2020 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the updated application. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve the planning case. Planning Consultant Kansier explained at its January 11, 2021 meeting the City Council reviewed Planning Case 20-017. The City Council voted unanimously to table this planning case to allow them to review the existing OHWL accessory structure size standards. The Applicant signed a 6-month Extension Form, requiring the City Council to take action on the variance request by July 12, 2021. At its February 16, 2021 meeting the City Council discussed increasing the permitted size of accessory structures within the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) setback. The City Council directed staff to draft ordinance language to increase the size of accessory structures located within the OHWL. The City Council did not support increase the height of accessory structures located within the OHWL. Planning Consultant Kansier reported following this meeting, staff has drafted ordinance language and sent the language to the DNR for review. At its April 19, 2021 Work Session, the City ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 13 Council reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning code and directed staff to bring the draft language to the Planning Commission for review. Staff has not received written comments from the DNR as of April 28, 2021. Planning Consultant Kansier reviewed the Plan Evaluation and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing amendments to the language of Chapter 13 – Zoning Code of the City Code. 2. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to permit accessory storage sheds within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height. 3. Amendments to the Shoreland Regulations require approval from the Minnesota DNR. 4. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council Planning Consultant Kansier recommended approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission. Planning Consultant Kansier 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 Vijums opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Wicklund asked why the City wouldn’t want to model its Shoreland Ordinance based off of neighboring cities, specifically Shoreview. Planning Consultant Kansier reported it was her understanding there was some review of other ordinances. She noted the language that was used in this Ordinance was similar to the City of Roseville. Commissioner Weber stated he was anticipating this code change, but questioned if 100 square feet was adequate. He questioned why the City Council landed on this number. Commissioner Jeffreys commented on the inconsistences between the shoreland regulations #1 and #5. She questioned how the Commission should address this concern. Planning Consultant Kansier reported the Commission could set a minimum setback of 10 feet or the Commission could eliminate this language altogether. Commissioner Jeffreys recommended Shoreland Regulation #5 be eliminated. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 14 Chair Vijums stated it was nice to see the Council was working to amend the Shoreland Ordinance. He indicated he supported the removal of Regulation #5. Chair Vijums opened the public hearing at 8:59 p.m. Chair Vijums invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Steven Nelson, 3475 Siems Court, explained he has been a resident of Arden Hills for the past 34 years. He discussed the DNR rules noting they typically applied to rural lakes and not urban lakes. He questioned what the nature of this building was, stating it was his understanding it was an accessory structure to hold waterfront items. He was of the opinion a 64 square foot building was adequate. He did not want to see 100 square foot buildings on every property along the lake. He discussed how small some of the lakeshore lots were and how these buildings would be an eyesore. He suggested the buildings be proportioned to the width of the lot versus a one size fits all approach for these structures. He recommended that these structures be allowed to be electrified. Gregg Larson, 3377 North Snelling Avenue, reported he was a lakeshore owner. He encouraged the City to rethink how it notifies the residents living on Lake Johanna about public hearings. He indicated there were a lot of properties owners on Lake Johanna that did not receive notice of this meeting. He was of the opinion the proposed Ordinance has an error stating Lake Johanna has been classified by the DNR as a recreational development lake since 2014. He discussed the setbacks for recreational development lakes (35 feet) versus a general development lake (25 feet). He was of the opinion that amending the Shoreland Ordinance due to one request was not sound government. He questioned how the City Council came to determine 64 feet of accessory storage space was not adequate. He discussed topography that was in place that would make it impossible for some lakeshore owners to have an accessory structure at the lakeshore. He reported these lakeshore owners had to manage their storage needs within their garage or rental storage units. He believed the current limits have served the City well and noted he did not want to see excessively large structures along the lakeshore as this would block views. He recommended the character of Lake Johanna be preserved. He suggested the City amend the Ordinance to properly classify Lake Johanna as a recreational development lake and that the City add a provision regarding proper notice for lakeshore matters. He recommended a 35 foot setback be required for the applicant’s structure and that the City retain the current structure area limit with minimum setbacks without the 10 foot exception with a sliding scale for accessory structures based on lot width as was proposed by Mr. Nelson. Kye Samuelson, 3493 Siems Court, stated he was not new to this dialogue. He commented he was hoping to work with the City to manage beautification, security and storage for lakeshore properties. He indicated there were some interesting things said regarding proportional dimensions for accessory structures for lake lot sizes. He explained it made sense to consider Lake Johanna was a recreational development lake. He reported he was looking at this issue from a bigger perspective and he wanted to address how to manage modern waterfront items. He stated 100 square feet made sense to him, noting he would like a higher building height to be considered. He liked the idea of making these structures both aesthetically pleasing and functional. He discussed how these structures were an immaterial improvement to the overall beautification, security, storage, properties cleanliness and order for multiple neighborhoods that are on the lake and the guests of the City that come to enjoy these natural resources. Matthew ____________ had difficulty with his audio. Staff encouraged Mr. _____________ to submit his comments to City staff prior to the City Council meeting. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 15 There being no additional comment Chair Vijums closed the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. Commissioner Jeffreys requested comment from staff regarding the letter from the DNR. Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff received a letter from the DNR and this was forwarded to the Planning Commission. She explained the DNR had concerns with resolving the inconsistencies between Regulations #1 and #5. Commissioner Wicklund recalled why this item was brought to the Planning Commission originally and that had to do with storage and beautification by the lake. He feared that over the past decade, the toys along the water have gotten larger. He understood that for some people 64 square feet was plenty of space and for others 100 square feet was just enough space. He suggested holding a conversation where Arden Hills would model its Shoreland Ordinance to Shoreview’s Ordinance. He wanted to see Arden Hills leading with relevant codes that were designed to address the real issues at hand. He commented his preference would be to model this Ordinance after Shoreview and not Roseville. He asked if the Commission would consider stretching the accessory square feet size and structure height. Chair Vijums sta ted he was not clear on what the City of Shoreview allowed within its Shoreland Ordinance. He indicated the Commission would have to do more review and study of the Ordinance prior to having a discussion. Commissioner Wicklund explained Shoreview allows accessory structures that do not exceed 250 square feet in area, were not wider than 12 feet as viewed from the water, is not higher than 10 feet above grade, and has a 20 foot setback from the side lot line. Chair Vijums reported these numbers would create much larger structures. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would support 120 square foot structures. Chair Vijums indicated he was thinking about the lakes in Arden Hills versus the lakes in Shoreview, noting the lakes in Arden Hills were smaller and the lakeshore lot widths were smaller. For this reason, he supported keeping the structures smaller versus trying to meet what another City allows. He believed the City was already raising the standards going from 64 to 100 square feet. Commissioner Jeffreys agreed she did not want to see the structures becoming any larger than what was being proposed. Commissioner Weber questioned how the City came up with 100 square feet for the accessory structures. Councilmember Holmes stated the Council weighed the interest of the residents to what other cities were doing. She explained some things were taken from Roseville’s ordinance, but explained the Council was very concerned about the aesthetics along the lakeshore. For this reason, the Council did not support allowing structures as large as Shoreview or other communities. She understood the City would have to make a correction within the regulations to comply with DNR guidelines. Chair Vijums asked if the City received any comments in opposition to the Ordinance. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 16 Planning Consultant Kansier reported staff received a letter from Mr. Larson objecting to the Ordinance. Chair Vijums summarized the comments made by the Commission thus far and recommended Shoreland Regulation #5 be removed. Commissioner Weber questioned if this would be the last time the Commission sees this Ordinance. Chair Vijums reported this would be the last time the Commission sees this Ordinance. Commissioner Weber commented he would like to see this Ordinance again if the Council makes large changes to it. Councilmember Holmes stated the Ordinance would go back to the Commission if there were major changes made by the City Council. Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 21-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment to Chapter 13 of the Arden Hills City Code to permit accessory storage sheds of up to 100 square feet in size and 8 feet in height within the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level as presented in the May 5, 2021, report to the Planning Commission. Chair Vijums moved and Commissioner Jeffreys seconded a motion to amend the Shoreland Regulations Amendment removing Amendment #5. A roll call vote was taken. The amendment carried unanimously (4-0). A roll call vote was taken. The amended motion carried unanimously (4-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Planning Consultant Kansier reported the City has hired a new City Planner and noted this new planner would be attending the June Planning Commission meeting. Chair Vijums thanked Planning Consultant Kansier and Planning Consultant Bemus for all of their assistance. Councilmember Holmes provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. She thanked the Planning Commission for all of their efforts on behalf of the community. B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests None. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – May 5, 2021 17 ADJOURN Chair Vijums moved, seconded by Commissioner Jeffreys, to adjourn the May 5, 2021, Planning Commission Meeting at 9:43 p.m. A roll call vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). From:Corrin Bemis To:Corrin Bemis Subject:Fw: Bob Kunze Variance Request Date:Wednesday, May 5, 2021 1:43:15 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. From: Date: Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 5:19 PM Subject: Bob Kunze Variance Request To: <planning@cityofardenhills.org> Hello. We live at and are neighbors of Bob Kunze, who is requesting a variance to add a third stall to his existing garage at 4073 Valentine Court. We have no objection whatsoever to Bob doing this. Sent from my iPad From:Therese To:AH Planning Cc: Subject:PC# 21-006: Zoning Variance for 4073 Valentine Court Date:Monday, April 26, 2021 7:08:36 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. We are writing to express our support for the requested variance by Bob Kunze at 4073 Valentine Court to add a third stall to the existing garage. Thanks for your consideration, From:Corrin Bemis To:Corrin Bemis Subject:Fw: Bob Kunze Date:Wednesday, May 5, 2021 1:43:56 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. From: Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 3:58 PM To: Corrin Bemis <Corrin.Bemis@bolton-menk.com> Subject: Bob Kunze I live at , across the street from Bob. I have no objection to him adding on to his garage. He has Canadian hemlock along the street and you really can’t see the side he would be adding onto. From , Sent from my iPad •Planning Case #21-006 – No Public Hearing Required •Applicant: Robert Kunze •Property Location: 4073 Valentine Court •Request: Variance Background •R-1 Single Family Residential District •Single-family residence •Nonconforming parcel •Nonconforming side yard setback for a corner parcel Subject Lot Proposed R1 District Minimum Standards Lot area 37,541 Sq. Ft. 37,541 Sq. Ft. 14,000 Sq. Ft. Side Yard Setback for Corner Lots ~20 Ft. 7.82 Ft.40 Ft. Overview Request •Applicant requests flexibility for the side yard setback requirement to build a third car garage addition on the side of his house. •The minimum side yard setback for a corner parcel in the R-1 District is 40 feet. •The parcel is currently nonconforming to side yard setbacks. •The primary structure was built in 1953 before the side yard setbacks for corner and interior parcels was differentiated. •The primary structure is currently located approximately 20 feet from the property line. •The applicant is requesting a variance to build a garage addition 7.82 feet from the northwest side yard property line. Approvals •The application requires a setback variance on the subject property. 4 Variance Requirements –Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 1.Purpose and Intent. The variance request shall comply with the purpose and intent of the provisions of the City’s Zoning Regulations and with the policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The variance request is consistent with the purpose and intent of the R -1 Zoning District and with the policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Variance Requirements –Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 2.Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: •Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. A third car garage stall for a single family home is a reasonable use of the Subject Property in the R-1 Zoning District. Variance Requirements –Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 2.Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: •Unique Circumstances. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The subject parcel is an odd shape. The curved sections of the property line create difficulty in meeting setback requirements. While the structure is currently nonconforming as to setbacks, the parcel was conforming when the house was built in 1953. Other areas on the property were considered for a freestanding garage. Any of the other areas in the front yard, or anywhere close to the house in the rear, would involve cutting down big 100+ year old oak trees that provide screening from the street. Adding a garage addition behind the existing garage would involve significant drainage issues and would require major regrading under the drip line of some of the 100+ year old oak trees. Variance Requirements –Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 2.Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions of the Arden Hills Zoning Regulations. The term “Practical Difficulties” as used in the granting of a variance means: •Character of Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The existing neighborhood has homes with a variety of different garages and housing styles. The proposed variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Many garages have been added to the road side of existing homes in the neighborhood. The topography and odd lot shapes make the neighborhood quite varied. The homes are not in straight lines, all the same distance from the road or each other. Variance Requirements –Section 1355.04, Subd. 4 3.Economic Consideration. Economic consideration alone does not constitute a practical difficulty. The proposed variance is not based on economic consideration. Public Notice A public notice was mailed to nearby property owners as per the Land use Application Public Notification Policy on May 13, 2021. City staff received feedback from seven nearby residents as of May 19, 2021. Each neighboring resident spoke out in favor of the Applicant’s request. Conditions of Approval 1.A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2.The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. Proposed Motion Language •Approval with Conditions : Motion to approve Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the two (2) conditions in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council. •Approval as Submitted : Motion to approve Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the May 24, 2021 Report to the City Council. Proposed Motion Language •Denial: Motion to deny Planning Case Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. •Table : Motion to table Planning Case Planning Case 21-006 for a Variance at 4073 Valentine Court : a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Questions? Planning Case 21-006 –4073 Valentine Court Variance To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 1 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2021-030 RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 4073 VALENTINE COURT WHEREAS, City Staff received a land use application for a variance request to decrease the required side yard setback of a single-family detached dwelling located at 4073 Valentine Court (“Subject Property”) from 40 feet to 7.82 feet for a proposed garage addition; WHEREAS, the Subject Property is a non-conforming lot that does not meet the R-1 district standards for side yard setback on a corner lot; WHEREAS, the residential dwelling on the Subject Property was constructed in 1953, when the required side yard setback for corner lots was ten (10) feet from the property line; WHEREAS, a variance may be granted when it is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance if enforcement of a provision in the ordinance would cause the landowner practical difficulties; WHEREAS, the City Council directed Staff to prepare a Land Use Application Public Policy Notification to notify all property owners within 500 feet of Subject Property when a request for the Planning Commission is to occur related to a land use application that does not require a public hearing; WHEREAS, the City’s obligation has been met where the Arden Hills Planning Commission duly held a hearing on May 5, 2021. All persons present at said meeting were given an opportunity to be heard and present written statements; WHEREAS the Planning Commission considered the recommendation of the City Staff that this request be approved and, as such voted 4-0 in favor of the request; and, To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS: Hereby adopts Resolution 2021-030 approving Planning Case 21-006 for a variance request at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court to enable a side yard setback of 7.82 feet. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council approves Planning Case 21-006 for a variance request at the Subject Property 4073 Valentine Court, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the May 6, 2021 Report to the Planning Commission, as amended by the following conditions: 1. A Building Permit shall be issued prior to commencement of construction. 2. The proposed building shall conform to all other standards and regulations in the City Code. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 24th DAY OF MAY, 2021. ________________________________ David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Julie Hanson, City Clerk