Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-29-1990 PTRC Meeting Minutes DUNLTI'ES OF THE ARDEN HILLS RDGULAR COUNCIL MMEEI".ING `T'UESDAY, MAY 29, 1990, 6:30 P.M. - CITY HALL • CLOSED SESSION; Council held a closed meeting to discuss labor LABOR NEGOTIATIONS negotiations between 6:30 and 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Sather called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL The roll being called the following members were present: Mayor Thomas Sather, Councilmembers Nancy Hansen, Paul Malone and JoAnn Growe. Absent: Councilmember Thomas Mahowald. Also present: Engineer Terry Maurer, Park Director John Buckley, Public Works Supervisor Daniel Winkel, Clerk Administrator Gary Berger and Deputy Clerk Catherine Iago. ADOPT REVISED Mayor Sather asked if there were any additions to the AGENDA 5-29-90 May 29 Agenda. Councilmember Malone requested Item 4 b. , Approval of Bergerson-Caswell Change Order, under Consent Calendar, be moved to Unfinished and New Business for discussion. Clerk Administrator Berger requested an additional item be placed on the Consent Calendar, Approve Payment to HRS Construction for Removal of Underground Storage Tanks. Growe moved, seconded by Hansen, to adopt the May 29 Council Agenda as amended to remove Item 4 b. , Bergerson-Caswell Change Order, • from the Consent Agenda for discussion and to add Item 4 c. Approve Payment to HRS Construction for removal of Underground Storage Tanks. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) APPROVE MINUTES Mayor Sather asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of May 14. Councilmember Malone requested the following wording be included for clarification purposes: Page 5: Paragraph #1: Delete the words "sump pump" and add "sanitary sewer". Page 7: Paragraph #6: Add the word "move" at the end of the first sentence. Hansen moved, seconded by Growe, to approve the minutes of the May 14 Council Meeting, as amended. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) CONSENT Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to approve the Consent CALENDAR Calendar, as amended, and authorize execution of all necessary docLunents contained therein: a. Appoint Firm to Prepare Citizen Survey. b. Approve List of Claims and Payroll. c. Approve Partial Payment, HRS Construction, for Removal of Underground Storage Tanks. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) . CHANGE ORDER; Council was referred to a letter from Delta Environmental BERGERSON-CAS'W Consultants, dated 5-24-90, regarding agreements for WELL ABANDONMENT change orders at the Kem Milling site discussed at the Council worksession on 5-21-90. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 2 CHANGE ORDER (Cont'd) Councilmember Malone stated it was his understanding from the worksession discussion that Bergerson-Caswell agreed to charge the City for the entire well abandonment project on a time and materials basis. Council concurred with Malone's assessment of the worksession discussion. Malone moved, seconded by Hansen, to amend and approve the agreement with Delta Environmental Consultants, per their letter dated May 24, 1990, and for well abandonment at the Kem Milling site with Bergerson-Caswell conditioned upon the entire project closing costs being billed to the City on a time and materials basis and approval of the change order, not to exceed $8,000.00 for the project. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) PUBLIC COMMIIV'I'S ARDEN TRAIL Council was referred to a memorandum from Park Director IMPROVEMENT Buckley dated 5-24-90, relative to the notice sent to property owners regarding the Arden Trail Improvements and a memorandum from residents along the trail dated 5-23-90, requesting this matter be placed on the agenda. Mayor Sather requested persons wishing to speak in favor of or opposed to the proposed improvement to speak at the microphone, identify themselves by name and address and briefly state their concerns. Gary Niemczyk, 1918 Noble Road, stated the trail improvement has been discussed • for several years and he remains opposed to the improvement. He expressed concern that the existing trail is currently in good condition and will become full of debris, similar to the north part of the trail system, if improved. Charlie Chenoweth, 1898 Noble Road, did not favor the improvement and expressed concern that the motorized vehicles currently using the trails will increase with the improvement. He also expressed concern at the lack of privacy that will be experienced by residents; currently persons using the trail walk through his yard. Bob Johnson, 1902 Noble Road, stated there is currently a drainage problem along the north and south sides of Noble Road. He expressed concern that the problem will occur along the pathway; displayed pictures of the problem. Dave Haney, 1889 Grant Road, stated his principal concern is loss of privacy due to increased pedestrian traffic. Virginia Haney, 1889 Grant Road, expressed concern relative to the change in the type of people that will utilize the trail if bituminous surface is installed; currently the trail is used by bikers, walkers and joggers. Haney stated once the bituminous surface is installed the trail will be used for skateboards, roller blades and motorized vehicles. Shannon Johnson, 1902 Noble Road, commented that the bituminous surface contradicts the "flower power" image currently being promoted by the City. She stated the trail is very appealing in its natural state. • Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 3 TRAIL (Cont Id) Herman Friesen, 3370 New Brighton Road, expressed concern for the safety of small children biking in the area; stated the asphalt surface will attract motorcycles and snowmobiles. He agreed a nature trail better serves the area. Jane Pream, 1886 Grant Road, stated the trail will decrease property values in this area. Tom Pream, 1886 Grant Road, agreed safety is the major concern, especially with children biking in the area and crossing New Brighton Road. He was of the opinion the trail improvement will not be beneficial to Arden Hills. Pream also expressed his dissatisfaction that residents had very little input into the planning of the trail improvement. rlp�nis Dee, 1880 Grant Road; expressed concern relative to the lack of notice to residents regarding the improvement. He stated he is opposed to the trail and questioned future plans for upgrading the path and surrounding area. Resident, 1895 Noble Road, advised all the neighbors have been maintaining the path area by mowing. He stated if asphalt is installed, residents will have to purchase further equipment to maintain the area. Christine Poelzer, 1870 Indian Place, stated she did not receive notice of the improvement, although her rear yard abuts the existing trail. She expressed concern relative to safety with children biking on the path and crossing streets. . Poelzer stated safety is the main issue whether or not the bituminous surface is installed. Bruce Peterson, 1873 Grant Road, stated his opposition to the improvement due to decreased privacy, pedestrian traffic through his yard and safety concerns regarding crossing New Brighton Road. Jerry Gelao, 1911 Noble Road, agreed with all concerns expressed by the residents. He questioned the necessity for another improved trail in Arden Hills, as there are numerous paved trails throughout the City. Gelao stated the trail in its natural state is still highly functional and accessible for residents. He discussed some alternatives, such as, extending the bike path from New Brighton Road (where Hazelnut path ceases) and extend it ncrth along New Brighton Rcad to County Road E-2; access is still provided to Lake Johanna, via County Road E, and to Perry Park and access to other trails abutting New Brighton Road, along County Road E-2. Mayor Sather asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of the proposed trail improvement. There was no response. Mayor Sather stated Council has heard and understands all concerns expressed by residents this evening. He explained that a contract has been awarded for the improvement at the last Council meeting, however, it appears that some discussion of the improvement is warranted at this time. Sather suggested two residents be appointed to work with the Park Director and • City Engineer to discuss possible alternatives regarding the trail improvement, relating to the shape, form or development of the pathway. He requested residents prioritize their concerns prior to scheduling a meeting between the two appointees and staff. The Mayor suggested a thirty day time-frame for the discussions and the matter placed on the June 25 Regular Council meeting agenda. He directed the Park Director and Engineer to review recent trail improvements in other communities. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 4 TRAIL (Cont'd) There was discussion relative to the bid award and possible consequences if the improvement is postponed. Engineer Maurer explained Council has the option to advise the contractor when to begin the improvement. There was discussion regarding an alternative route for the trail along New Brighton Road. Council noted New Brighton Road is a County Road and the City would have to obtain permission to reroute the path from the County. Gelao advised he has spoken to planning personnel at the County and was advised the County usually cooperates with cities regarding trail improvements. Councilmember Hansen did not favor rerouting the bike path along New Brighton Road; stated it is an extremely dangerous roadway. She advised that past community surveys indicate residents place trails as a high priority and have indicated paved surfaces are preferable. Hansen also advised the County has not been cooperative in the past regarding City requests to reduce the speed limit on New Brighton Road. She expressed concern that citizens were not notified earlier of the proposed irprovement and favored the citizens working with staff to resolve their concerns. Hansen stated the City should mark the trail near dangerous intersections, such as the railroad bridge across New Brighton Road. Council concurred with the recommendation of Mayor Sather regarding the citizens and staff meeting to discuss this matter and return June 25 with recommendations. • AWARD BID; 1990 Council was referred to a letter from Engineer Maurer OVERLAY & SEAL dated 5-17-90, relative to the bid award for the 1990 COATING IMPRVMT- overlay and seal coating improvement. Engineer Maurer reviewed the bids received and recommended the bid be awarded to Bituminous Consulting and Contracting, Inc. , as the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $74,822.55. Councilmember Malone questioned if the additional funds budgeted in 1990 will be utilized to complete other improvement projects outlined in the Pavement Management Plan. Maurer advised language was placed in the specifications for additional work and those may be added with change orders. He advised he is reviewing areas of the City with the Public Works Supervisor to determine where the additional monies would be utilized. Malone moved, seconded by Groove, to award the bid for the 1990 Overlay and Seal Coating Project to Bituminous Consulting and Contracting, Inc. , in the amount of $74,822.55. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) APPOINTMENTS; Council was referred to a memorandum from the Clerk CITIZEN SURVEY Administrator dated 5-25-90, listing recommendations for VOLUNTEERS appointments to work with Decision Resources on the Citizen Survey. • Councilmember Hansen advised another member of the Public Safety/Works Committee had expressed interest in appointment, however, at this time she did not recall the person. She questioned if she make further recommendations at a later date. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 5 SURVEY (cont Id) There was discussion regarding the fact no recommendation for appointment from the City Hall Committee, Human Rights, or Planning Commission have been received and a Council liaison been not been recommended. Mayor Sather suggested ratification of the individuals listed in Berger's memorandum and other volunteers may be added at a later date. Council suggested that Councilmember Mahowald be appointed as Council liaison, since he was instrumental in initiating the survey. Malone moved, seconded by Growe, that Council ratify the Appointment of individuals listed in the Clerk Administrator's memorandum dated 5-25-90, to work with Decision Resources on a citizen survey and reserve further appointments for future consideration. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) APpO T; Councilmember Hansen recommended appointment of Eugene PUB. SAFETY/WORKS Novak, 1190 Tiller Lane, to the Public ,Safety/Works COMMITTEE committee. Mayor Sather concurred and recommended appointment of Novak to the Public Safety/Works Committee. Hansen moved, seconded by Malone, to ratify the appointment of Eugene Novak, 1190 Tiller Lane, to the Public Saf h�orks of the Committee and directed staff to send a letter to Novak notifying appointment. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) • COUNCIL COMMENTS CHARITABLE GAMBLING Councilmember Malone suggested Council consider a formula INACTIVE LICENSES whereby inactive licenses would not be eligible for renewal unless the taxes collected from the licensee are equal to approximately 80% of the average of the taxes collected from all the licenses in the same classification. He explained if the percentage of taxes are not paid to the City, when the licensee applies for renewal, the Council would have a basis for denial. Mayor Sather recalled that staff was directed at the last meeting to investigate some means to determine which licenses are active or inactive; Attorney Filly a nd stuff were requested to make recommendations as to how this may be acco Malone explained the proposed approach to licensing charitable gambling applicants will provide maximum benefit to the City, rather than considering the charitable organization by other criteria. EMERGENCY MGMT. Councilmember Malone questiion�why the City is plan Pam; ARSENAL responsible for compiling n for the arsenal. Clerk Administrator Berger advised staff is reviewing this matter; the request also states the City is responsible for appointing an Emergency Preparedness Director. There was discussion relative to citizens that have served in this position in . previous years and appointment of a volunteer to work on the emerg cy p Councilmember Malone questioned if the Federal Government could be held responsible for cost reimbursement for training personnel or developing the plan since the government has brought potentially dangerous conditions into the City. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 6 • EMERG. PLAN (Cont'd) Fire Chief Winkel stated the Arsenal representatives have been cooperative and kept the LJVFD advised of materials stored on this property, as well as providing safety data sheets to the City. METRO WASTE REPORT Councilmember Malone questioned if the City has a serious problem with the Infiltration/Inflow, as per the a substantial sewer Pam'ad will e u Metropolitan Waste Control report. He asked i'f be necessary. Clerk Administrator Berger advised he and Public Works Supervisor Winkel will be attending a series of meetings sponsored by the MWCC regarding this matter. SIFMS COURT; Councilmember Growe asked staff if further information ODOR PROBLEM is available regarding the odor complaint on Siems Court. Public Works Supervisor Winkel explained his staff has checked this area on two occasions and has found no problem. He noted the odor may be from stagnant water or composting; leaves have been dumped on the vacant lot. Winkel stated routine maintenance has been completed on the sewer lines in this area and no problems were found in the lines. Councilmember Malone requested Winkel refer to this matter as an "odor or noxious odor complaint", rather than a "sewer odor" in all future correspondence. Winkel explained the complaint was received as "sewer gas odor" and that was the reason it was documented as such; agreed that in future correspondence he will classify complaints as "odor complaint". He stated no further complaints have been received. SCBEDULE WKSESSION; Clerk Administrator Berger advised the Audit Report is AUDIT REPORT DISC. being distributed this evening for Council review. He suggested Council schedule a worksession prior to the Regular Council meeting held June 11 to discuss the report with the auditor. Malone moved, seconded by Growe, that Council schedule a worksession on Monday, June 11, 1990, at 6:30 p.m. , for the purpose of discussion of the Audit Report. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) Council requested staff invite the auditor and members of the Finance Committee to attend this meeting. ACCEPT RESIGNATION; Malone moved, seconded by Growe, that Council accept the WILLIAM WRIGLEY resignation of William Wrigley from the City Hall CITY HALL COMMITTEE Committee, as per his letter dated 5-18-90. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) ADJOURN Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) Gary R. Berger Thomas R. Sather Clerk Administrator Mayor NOTICE OF MEETING There will be a Council Wcrksession held Monday, June 11, 1990, at 6:30 p.m. , at City Hall for the purpose of discussing the audit report. The Regular Council �• r •r� 1 I-- held at 7:30 p.m mnroiay. June 11 San at Cite ua.1-' Decision JIM Ltd. Resources EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study contains the results of a telephone survey of 403 randomly selected residents of the City of Arden Hills. Survey responses were gathered by professional interviewers across the community between September 18 , and October 4 , 1990 . The average interview took twenty-one minutes. In general , random samples such as this yield results projectable to the entire universe of adult Arden Hills residents within + 5 . 0 percentage points in 95 out of 100 cases. Arden Hills is a mature, upscale, stable, and well-educated community. The median longevity of adult residents was 8 . 5 years . Thirteen percent of the sample reported moving to the city during the past two years, while forty-six percent had been there over a decade. Over one-half of the sample came from two locations prior to moving to the community: twenty percent reported moving from Saint Paul , while thirty-one percent moved • from other Northern Ramsey County suburbs. A majority either had no plans to move, or felt they would remain in Arden Hills for at least ten years. Forty-five percent of the households contained school-aged children; seventeen percent reported pre-schoolers. Ninety-four percent owned their current residences, with eighty- seven percent residing in single family homes. The average age of respondents was 45 . 3 years old. Over half of the sample fell into the 35-54 year age range. A very high sixty-seven percent reported heads-of-households working in either Professional-Technical or Owner-Manager jobs. Twenty- three percent reported working in Arden Hills. Blue Collar households were only seven percent, and retirees accounted for fifteen percent. The median educational achievement was college graduation; in fact, almost eighty percent of the sample had at least some college experience. The median household yearly income was $55 , 875 . 00, approximately $171000 higher than the current Metropolitan Area suburban norm. In general , then, Arden Hills must be classified as a maturing "gold collar" community. Location, high quality schools, and available housing were the major reasons offered for settling in the community; forty percent mentioned the first reason, while nineteen percent cited schools and twenty percent pointed to housing. Small town ambience, peacefulness, strong neighborhoods, and parks were also positive attributes. A very strong ninety-eight percent rated • the quality of life as either "excellent" or "good; " the fifty- four percent rating it as "excellent" is the strongest rating 1 within the Metropolitan Area. Residents are extremely satisfied 3128 Dean Court • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 0 (612) 920-0337 • with their lives in the city. Location within the Metropolitan Area was the most liked feature of the city. At thirty-eight percent it dwarfed all other responses. Quiet, strong neighborhoods, open spaces, small town ambience, and friendly people were each cited by between nine and five percent, each. On the other hand, inadequate city services and property taxes were the most unpopular feature of the community, cited by twenty-one percent. Growth, traffic, and city government all scored above five percent. But, it is note- worthy that thirty-two percent reported there was "nothing" they disliked about the community; this "booster" segment is one of the highest in the Metropolitan Area. The trade-off between services and property taxes, as well as concerns about future growth and development, appear to be the greatest concerns cur- rently facing residents. Seventy-eight percent rated the sense of community among Arden Hills citizens as "excellent" or "good." However, when queried about a focal point in the city, fifty-five percent could suggest no focus. County Road E was the most popular candidate, pointed to by twenty-six percent of the citizenry. At present, then, there is no existing city "center. " Residents do feel empowered within the community. Seventy- eight percent reported they could have a say in the way the City • of Arden Hills runs things, if they wanted. An unusually small seventeen percent thought they could not. This group of alienated citizens is one of the smallest present in any Metropolitan Area suburb. AeAf,, µ'lls Frde residents are moderately strong "fiscal conservatives. " By a forty-five percent to forty-four percent split, they would support a property tax increase to maintain city services at their current level. Forty-two percent reported their current property taxes as either "relatively high" or "excessively high; " forty-eight percent viewed them as "about average. Even though the City' s tax rate has remained relatively stable during the past few years, forty-two percent felt it had increased and twenty-two percent were unsure. The median estimate of the City' s share of the property tax was sixteen percent, equal to the current rate. Residents, then, appear to be in a "cautious" mood with respect to their taxes, and would require proponents to clearly justify any proposals to raise them. City services were, however, viewed by seventy-four percent as "excellent" or "good" values for the property taxes paid. In fact, city services evaluations were moderately positive, with a few notable exceptions. Police protection, sewers and water, and snow plowing scored approval ratings of eighty percent or higher. • City street repair and maintenance, street sweeping, and summer park maintenance topped seventy percent approval marks. Fire protection, animal control, winter park maintenance, and enforcement of selected city codes received approval ratings of 2 over sixty percent. Street lighting was viewed positively by only • fifty-five percent. In most cases, city service approval ratings were at least ten percent lower than the suburban norm. Fairly high disapproval levels were also encountered: city street repair and maintenance, animal control, and enforcement . of selected city codes earned negative ratings in the middle-to-high twenty percent range. Street lighting was viewed critically by a very high forty-three percent. The generally lower ratings of city services may be the cause of concerns expressed in other parts of the survey; but, in any case, the City may wish to re- examine the latter four services for effectiveness and responsiveness. Forty-five percent reported observing or participating in a situation where a member of the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department was present in an official capacity. Eighty-nine percent of these participant-observers thought the police handled the situation in a "good" or "excellent" manner. Eighty-four percent also felt the police responded promptly to the call . Changing emphasis somewhat, sixty-eight percent of the residents felt the amount of police patrolling in their neighborhood was "about right; " twenty-five percent -- the suburban norm labeled it "not enough. " Overall , the Ramsey County Sheriff' s Department obtains solid evaluations from Arden Hills citizens . Only ten percent of the sample reported being involved in or observing a situation where the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire • Department was present in an official capacity. All of them rated the handling of the situation by the fire fighters as either "good" or "excellent, " and seventy percent felt they responded promptly. Turning to fire safety, ninety-six percent of the surveyed households reported the presence of at least one smoke detector; seventy-four percent also said they had a mounted fire extinguisher in their home. In general, like the Sheriff's Department, the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Department gains the overwhelming endorsement of the citizenry. Arden Hills residents are outdoor enthusiasts: sixty-one percent prefer outdoor leisure time activities, while sixteen percent opt for the indoors. A very high seventy-five percent also feel at least "somewhat informed" about the Arden Hills park system and its facilities. Seventy-three percent of the citizenry use the parks or recreational facilities at least "occasionally, " and a solid eighty-one percent rate them as either "excellent" or "good. " The basis for good evaluations is that they are clean and kept up, as well as being good and fun to use; lower evaluations were motivated by the perception that improvements could be made. On one aspect of the park system, trails, residents expressed no consensus over the materials to be used in their construction, but a majority wanted a dual purpose trail system. Facilities, then, are viewed fairly positively by • most residents. Eighty-four percent of the residents thought the current mix of recreational opportunities met the needs of their households. 3 Only two additions were offered with any frequency: trails were supported by six percent, and more youth activities were supported by four percent. Like facilities, programming also appears to satisfy the needs of most residents. By a fifty-five percent to thirty-nine percent margin, residents would support a property tax increase to maintain and improve the park system. Proponents would support anfrom average yearly property tax increase of about $20. 00 . But, standpoint of electoral success, the odds are very small that a bond referendum would pass in a special election: total opposition is almost twice as high as strong support. Fifty-one percent of Arden Hills residents disapprove of charitable gambling amblin within the city; thirty-six percent feel strongly that way. But, if an elimination of these activities would lead to a property tax increase or city services cut, a sixty-four percent majority would oppose taking that action. Economic consequences outweigh philosophical tenets on this issue. A very high eighty-six percent of the sample participated in the curbside pick-up recycling program; this level of participation is about ten percent higher than the suburban norm. A fifty-four percent majority recycle weekly, while another twenty-five percent do so twice monthly. Seventy-seven percent were satisfied with the program. Of those expressing dissatisfaction, two major complaints were leveled: the need to pick-up plastics and the need for more frequent on-schedule • services. Providing further information to residents _could increase participation by another seven percent. The Arden Hills program is clearly a success. On related waste management issues, fifty-one percent of the respondents composted grass clippings and yard waste on their property, while twenty-one percent used a drop-off site. And, almost two-thirds of the community prefer the present "free- market" refuse hauling system over designation of one company by the City or assignment of haulers to exclusive zones. The Mayor and Council were awarded a job approval rating of seventy-seven percent and a disapproval rating of eight percent. The level of the approval rating is very high in comparison with other Metropolitan Area suburbs, and the almost ten-to-one approval-to-disapproval rating is exceptionally strong. But, nearly fifty percent of the community felt they knew very little about the Mayor and the City Council, thus many of the ratings were based upon generalized feelings that things were "going well . " The City may wish to consider highlighting more . fully City Council actions and activities in the city newsletter. The City Staff received a job approval rating of seventy percent and a disapproval rating of twelve percent. Both the . absolute level of approval and the almost six-to-one ratio of • approval-to-disapproval are much higher than the suburban norm. The forty-three percent of the residents reporting first-hand 4 contact with the staff is much higher than comparable suburban areas. The approval ratings of staff stemmed primarily from good experiences with them; the negative ratings resulted from feelings that the staff could improve. Contact with City Hall during the past year was reported eprobl ortedms aby fifty-four percent of the sample. nd information requests, complaints, and park information prompted the overwhelming majority of contacts. About fifty percent of those making contact were unsure with whom they talked, but many residents mentioned a specific department. Thirteen percent were dissatisfied with their contact, an average percentage; but further probing indicated the source of the dissatisfaction was the content of the response rather than the process, itself. Sixty-two percent of the sample also reported visiting the Arden Hills City Hall during the past two years. Sixty-two percent of the sample felt the condition of the structure was at least "adequate, " while only eighteen percent disagreed. A solid fifty-nine percent also felt the facility was adequate for providing service to the residents of the community. A large majority of residents, then, are unfamiliar with existing limitations in the current City Hall . Seventy-three percent of the sample felt the pace of �► economic development was about right; " thirteen percent described it as "too rapid, " while ten percent viewed it as "too slow. " Most residents thought city actions to date had resulted in a good mix of development projects. The most - support was evidenced for future office development, at twenty-five percent. Residential scored second, at nineteen percent, and light industrial ran third, at seventeen percent. Seventy-five percent . of the sample supported the City taking an active and aggressive role in attracting targeted development, but fifty-one percent oppose offering financial incentives as part of that package. Equal support was found for three development priorities: increasing the tax base, providing housing opportunities for young families and retirees, and providing recreational and leisure time offerings. Balanced future growth is clearly the theme underlying these results. While residents possessed very definite views about the appropriate city action on several types of development opportunities, a lack of consensus was also clear in several key areas. Citizens thought the City should act aggressively to attract single family homes for moderate income families, senior citizens housing, commercial office buildings, and parks and recreational open spaces. They also thought the City should act aggressively to discourage apartment buildings and mobile homes. Residents offered no unified view of action to take on low income family housing, townhouses, condominiums, retail shopping • centers, and light industrial parks. Projects falling into those categories will garner either citizen support or opposition after review of their specific parameters. 5 While sixty-four percent favor the City initiating action to speed up the sale of the Arsenal property, sixty-five percent also feel the community should regulate its use instead of outright purchasing it. In fact, seventy-four percent would oppose a referendum to increase property taxes to fund the Arsenal property purchase and redevelopment; fifty-one percent indicated "strong opposition. " Forty-seven percent would favor the City buying parts of the property; but, again, the fate of a referendum to issue bonds is indeed pessimistic. If that property is developed, though, residents lean toward a mixed use, featuring single family dwellings, light industry, and recreational and park areas. After being informed of the inadequacies of the present City Hall, a fifty-eight percent to twenty-nine percent margin favored the construction of a new one. A majority would support a multi- use facility containing space to be rented to other government bodies. The current site for this new facility was favored by sixty-four percent of the sample; no other site generated much enthusiasm. A popularly supported community center addition would contain only meeting rooms for community groups; athletic facilities and an indoor swimming pool were opposed by strong majorities. The residents split, though, in their support for a stand-alone City Hall versus one with a community center addition: thirty-seven percent prefer the former, while thirty- nine percent opted for the latter. By a . narrow forty-seven percent to forty-five percent margin, residents would support a • bond referendum for a new City Hall. They would oppose a combination City Hall-Community Center bond referendum by a fifty-eight percent to thirty six percent margin. Neither , of these margins bode well for a successful special election bond referendum. Under these circumstances, the City may wish to investigate funding alternatives which do not require a bond referendum election. The issue of financial responsibility for neighborhood improvements found residents arriving at different conclusions for each type of project. sixty-one percent felt the entire city should pay for street reconstruction. Forty-seven percent felt similarly about the addition of street lighting. . on sidewalks, though, citizens were split: Forty-one percent felt the area of the city under construction should bear the costs, while thirty- eight percent felt it should be shared citywide. A consensus has developed, though, around the appropriate formula for a cost- sharing arrangement between impacted residents and city as a whole: strong support existed for a one-third/two-thirds split, with the City paying the larger portion. The City has a very well developed and focused communications system. Majorities look to the "Town Crier" as their principal source of information about community events and City government activities. The "Focus" and the "New Brighton Bulletin" ranked in the distant second tier. Even so, the two newspapers were read by approximately eighty-seven percent of the residents. An incredibly high ninety-four percent of the 6 residents reported both receiving and reading the quarterly , "Town Crier Newsletter. " Suggestions for changes included small numbers feeling that it should be longer, published more often, and better formatted. Given the unusually great impact of the "Town Crier" the City should take the additional effort and resource allocation to insure it is one of the finest newsletters - in the Metropolitan Area. Electronic media ran a distant second. Forty-six percent of the sampled households reported currently .subscribing , to cable television. Thirteen percent occasionally watched local government access Channel 16. But, a majority of those occasional viewers criticized the quality of the sound and picture. An up-grading of the cable television programming of the City would seem in order, but it should take second priority to current print media outlets. In general , Arden Hills citizens are very highly satisfied with the community. The key issue facing decision-makers in the future is balancing the needs and wants of citizens with the concerns of taxpayers, particularly in the provision of city services. While residents are not reflexively anti-taxation, they are inclined to view proposals critically; the burden of proof is clearly on proponents. The City has managed so far to mitigate many of development's most undesirable consequences. So long as development is targeted, most residents will accept growth as an inevitable part of the evolution of the city. • "Gold collar" communities, such as Arden Hills, have high expectations about their government and its services -- though there are signs of some unrest due to rising expectations, they have not yet reached a critical level . But, there is a realization that the community is changing. Even so, there is also a concrete sense of optimism about the future direction of the city and its ability to meet the challenges ahead. 7 DECISION RESOURCES , LTD. ARDEN HILLS RESIDENTIAL • 3128 Dean Court QUESTIONNAIRE Minneapolis, Minnesota 55414 September, 1990 Hello, . I'm of Decision Resources , Ltd. , a nationwide polling firm located in Minneapolis . We've been retained by the City of Arden Hills to speak with a random sample of residents about issues facing the city. The survey is being taken because your city representatives and staff are interested in your opinions and suggestions. I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential ; only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE) 1 . Approximately how many years LESS THAN ONE YEAR. . . . . 3% have you lived in Arden Hills? ONE OR TWO YEARS . . . . . . 10% THREE TO FIVE YEARS . . . 20% SIX TO TEN YEARS . . . . . . 20% ELEVEN - TWENTY YEARS . 24% OVER TWENTY YEARS . . . . . 22% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 2 . In what city and/or state was your immediately prior residence located? ARDEN HILLS , 3% ; ST. PAUL, 20% ; OUT OF STATE, 16% ; OUT OF • METRO AREA, 7% ; MINNEAPOLIS , 10% ; NEW BRIGHTON, 5% ; ROSE- VILLE, 12% ; SHOREVIEW, 7% ; REST RAMSEY, 7% ; REST HENNEPIN, 6% ; REST METRO, 8% . 3 . As things now stand, how long LESS THAN ONE YEAR. . . . . 2% in the future do you expect to ONE TO TWO YEARS . . . . . . . 4% live in Arden Hills? THREE TO FIVE YEARS . . . 12% SIX TO TEN YEARS . . . . . . 10% OVER TEN YEARS . . . . . . . . 54% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 18% 4 . How would you rate the quality of EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 54% life in Arden Hills -- excellent, GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44% good, only fair, or poor? ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 1% 5 . Thinking back to when you moved to Arden Hills, what factors were most important to you in selecting the city? NO ANSWER, 4% ; NEIGHBORHOOD, 5% ; "SMALL TOWN, " 6% ; SCHOOLS , 19% ; LOCATION, 40% ; PARKS , 3% ; HOUSING, 20% ; PEACE - QUIET, 3% ; SIZE, 2% . 6 . What do you like MOST about living in Arden Hills? • NO ANSWER, 4% ; SMALL TOWN AMBIENCE, 9% ; PEOPLE, 6% ; LOCA- TION, 38% ; QUIET, 13% ; SCHOOLS , 5% ; NICE SUBURB, 2% ; OPEN SPACES , 8% ; NEIGHBORHOOD, 9% ; WELL RUN, 3%. 1 14 . When you consider the property EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18% • alit taxes you pay and the quality GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56% of city services you receive, ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 21% would you rate the general value POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% of city services as excellent, DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 3% good, only fair, or poor? I would like to read you a list of a few city services. For each one, please tell me whether you would rate the quality of the service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor? EXC GOOD FAIR POOR D.K. 15 . Police protection? 19% 61% 12% 3% 5% 16. Fire protection? 21% 57% 3% 1% 19% 17 . City street repair and maintenance? 130-. 58% 22% 7% 1% 18 . Sewers and water? 17% 69% 4% 3% 8% 19 . Snow plowing? 29% 55% 10% 3% 3% 20 . Animal control? 10% 58% 17% 7% 9% • 21. Street sweeping? 10% 64% 15% 3% 8% 22 . Winter park maintenance? 12% 55% 8% 2% 23% 23 . Summer park maintenance? 16% 60% 10% 5% 10% 24 . Street lighting? 10% 45% 27% 16% 3% 25 . Enforcement of city codes on off-street parking, weeds and un- sightly yards, and building regulations. 8% 59% 15% 10% 9% IF "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR" IN QUESTIONS #15-25 , ASK FOR EACH: 26 . Why did you rate as (only fair/poor) ? NO ANSWER, 21% ; POTHOLES , 9% ; LOOSE ANIMALS , 8% ; SLOW SERVICE, 6% ; THREE OR MORE, 27% ; NO LIGHTS , 19% ; SWEEPING, 3% ; CODES, 7% ; SEWERS, 2% . 27 . Other than voting, do you feel YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78% that if you wanted to, you could NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17% have a say about the way the City DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 6% of Arden Hills runs things? 3 36. Would you say the time PROMPT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38% • it took the police to re- NOT PROMPT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% spond was prompt, or not? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 4% 37 . How would you rate the amount of TOO MUCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% patrolling the police department ABOUT RIGHT. . . . . . . . . . . 68% does in your neighborhood -- NOT ENOUGH. . . . . . . . . . . . 25% would you say they do too much, DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 4% about right, or not enough? 38 . During the past year, have you YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% been involved in or observed a NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90% situation in which a member of DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Department was present in an official capacity? IF "YES , " ASK: 39 . Would you say the way the EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% firefighters handled the GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% situation was excellent, ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% good, only fair, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 40 . Would you say the time PROMPT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7% • it took the fire department NOT PROMPT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% to respond was prompt, or DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 2% not? 41. Do you have a working smoke YES/MORE THAN ONE. . . . . 78% detector installed in your home? YES/ONLY ONE. . . . . . . . . . 18% (IF "YES , " ASK: ) Do you have NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4% more than one? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 42 . Do you have a fire extinguisher YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74% mounted in your home? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% Moving on. . . . 43 . During the past twelve months, YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54% have you contacted anyone working NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46% for the City of Arden Hills, other DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% than the police or fire depart- ments, whether to obtain informa- tion, to get service, or make a complaint of any kind? IF "YES , " ASK: 44 . What was the nature of your most recent inquiry; that • is , what information or service did you need? PERMIT, 7% ; COMPLAINT, 17%; PARK QUESTION, 8% ; GEN- ERAL INFO, 14%; RECYCLING, 5% ; TREE REMOVAL, 3% . 5 54 . Do you support or oppose the City STRONGLY SUPPORT. . . . . . 27% • taking an active and aggressive SUPPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48% role in attracting targeted devel- OPPOSE. . 12% opment to Arden Hills? (WAIT FOR STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 14% you feel strong-RESPONSE) And, do y - DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 11%g ly that way? 55 . Do you favor or oppose the City STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . . 9% offering financial incentives to FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28% attract various types of devel- OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24% opment to the community? (WAIT STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 27% FOR RESPONSE) And, do you feel DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 13% strongly that way? The City could undertake many different initiatives to attract or discourage various types of future development. For each of the following categories , please tell me if you feel the City of Arden Hills should act aggressively to attract that type of growth, act aggressively to discourage that type of growth, or take no action one way or the other. If you have no opinion, just say so. AGG AGG NO DK/ ATT DIS ACT REF 56 . Single family homes for moderate income families. 56% 8% 30% 5% 57 . Low income family housing. 20% 40% 33% 8% • 58 . Apartment buildings. 16% 52% 27% 5% 59 . Townhouses. 44% 25% 26% 5% 60 . Condominiums. 32% 36% 27% 5% 61 . Senior citizen housing. 64% 14% 19% 4% 62 . Mobile homes. 7% 77% 13% 3% 63 . Retail shopping centers. 33% 43% 21% 3% 64 . Commercial office buildings. 49% 26% 21% 3% 65 . Light industrial plants. 44% 36% 15% 5% 66 . Parks and recreational open spaces. 75% 10% 12% 3% 67 . Should the TOP priority for devel- TAX BASE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29% opment in this city be on increa- JOBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% sing the tax base, providing head- HOUSING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20% of-household jobs, providing hou- RECREATION. . . . . . . . . . . . 19% sing opportunities for young RETAIL SHOPPING. . . . . . . . 6% families and retirees, providing COMBINATION (VOL) . . . . . . 6% recreational and leisure time NONE OF ABOVE. . . . . . . . . . 4% offerings, or attracting more re- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 5% tail shopping opportunities? 68 . What should be the second prior- TAX BASE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13% ity? (RE-READ ABOVE LIST, IF JOBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19% NECESSARY. ) HOUSING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21% RECREATION. . . . . . . . . . . . 20% . RETAIL SHOPPING. . . . . . . . 8% COMBINATION (VOL) . . . . . . 6% NONE OF ABOVE. . . . . . . . . . 6% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8% 7 74 . If the City cannot procure all of YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47% • the Arsenal property, should it NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39% attempt to purchase parts of it? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 14% There has been some discussion about the need for a new City Hall and Public Works Building. The present City Hall is about forty years old, provides inadequate office space, needs major repairs, and has been cited for building code violations. 75 . Do you favor or oppose the cons- STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . 22% truction of a new City Hall? FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36% (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And, do you OPPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11% feel strongly that way? STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 18% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 14% 76 . Should a new City Hall just con- JUST CITY OFFICES . . . . . 34% tain city offices or should it be MULTI-USE FACILITY . . . . 55% a multi-use facility in which DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 11% space can be rented to other government bodies, such as the School District? 77 . Should a new City Hall be placed CURRENT SITE. . . . . . . . . . 64% at the current site or in some OTHER SITE. . . . . . . . . . . . 16% other part of the community? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 20% . IF "OTHER PART OF COMMUNITY, " ASK: 78 . Where would you like to see a new City Hall built? BY ARSENAL, 3% ; "E" & LEXINGTON, 4% ; OTHER CENTRAL LOCATION, 4% ; LEXINGTON & 694 , 2% . Several cities in the Metropolitan Area have built community centers adjoining their city halls. Would you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose, a community center addition which contained. . . . StF SmF Sm0 St0 DKR 79 . Meeting rooms for community groups? 16% 39% 20% 22% 3% 80 . Athletic facilities, such as a gymnasium or exercise rooms? 10% 28% 27% 31% 5% 81. An indoor swimming pool? 11% 23% 30% 32% 4% 82 . Would you be most likely to favor CITY HALL ALONE. . . . . . . 37% a new City Hall if it stood alone, INCLUDE COM CENTER. . . . 39% included a community center addi- OPPOSE IT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 16% tion, or would you oppose it under DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8% either condition? The building of a new City Hall and/or Community Center would 9 88 . In general, how well informed are VERY WELL INFORMED. . . . 22% • you about the Arden Hills park SOMEWHAT INFORMED. . . . . 53% system and facilities. Would you NOT TOO WELL INFORMED. 22% say you are very well informed, NOT AT ALL INFORMED. . . . 3% somewhat informed, not too well DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% informed, or not at all informed? The Arden Hills park system is composed of neighborhood parks and trails. 89 . How often do you visit or use an FREQUENTLY. . . . . . . . . . . . 35% Arden Hills park or recreational OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . . 38% facility -- frequently, occasion- RARELY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20% ally, rarely, or never? NEVER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 90 . How would you rate park and rec- EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 23% reational facilities in Arden GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58% Hills -- excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11% fair, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7% IF RATING IS GIVEN, ASK: 91. Why do you feel that way? CLEAN - KEPT UP, 45% ; GOOD - FUN TO USE, 29% ; COULD IMPROVE, 15% ; NEED MORE OF THEM, 4% . 92 . If you could choose, would you PAVED/ASPHALT. . . . . . . . . 33% prefer trails in the city to be UNPAVED/WOODCHIPS . . . . . 38% paved surfaces, with materials DON'T CARE. . . . . . . . . . . . 24% such as asphalt, or unpaved DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 4% surfaces, with materials such as woodchips , or don't you care? 93 . Should trails in the City serve PEDESTRIANS ONLY. . . . . . 26% pedestrians only or pedestrians PEDESTR + BICYCL. . . . . . 53% and bicyclists? SOME OF BOTH (VOL) . . . . 17% DON'T CARE (VOL) . . . . . . . 2% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 2% 94 . Do you feel that the current mix YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84% of recreational opportunities NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16% sufficiently meets the needs of DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% members of your household? IF "NO, " ASK: 95 . What additional recreational opportunities would you like to see the City of Arden Hills offer residents? TRAILS , 6% ; FOR YOUTH, 4%. BALLFIELDS, 1% ; SWIMMING, 1% ; SCATTERED, 3%. The Arden Hills Park System has been constructed and maintained 11 Suppose the City decided to use a cost-sharing formula to pay for these types of improvements. Residents directly affected by neighborhood improvement would pay a certain percentage of the costs, while general city funds would be used to pay for the remainder. 103 . If you set the percentage to be ENTIRE AMOUNT. . . . . . . . . . 5% paid by directly impacted home- THREE-QUARTERS . . . . . . . . . 9% owners , would you require them to ONE-HALF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26% pay the entire amount, three- ONE-QUARTER. . . . . . . . . . . 23% quarters, one-half, one-quarter or NONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18% none of the costs? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 19% As you may know, recyclable materials are picked up at the curb in Arden Hills. Households are asked to separate recyclables from the rest of their trash and haulers carry them away. 104 . Do you now participate in the YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86% curbside pick-up program? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% IF "YES , " ASK: 105 . How often do you put recy- WEEKLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54% clables out for collection TWICE MONTHLY . . . . . . . . . 25% -- weekly, twice monthly, ONCE MONTHLY . . . . . . . . . . . 6% monthly, quarterly, or less? QUARTERLY. . . . . . 1% • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% LESS . DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 106 . Are you satisfied or dis- SATISFIED. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77% satisfied with the recycling DISSATISFIED. . . . . . . . . . . 9% program? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% IF "DISSATISFIED, " ASK: 107 . Why do you feel that way? PICK UP PLASTICS , 5% ; NEED MORE INFO, 1% ; MORE FREQUENT - ON TIME , 3%. IF "NO, " ASK: 108 . Which of the following best STATEMENT A. . . . . . . . . . . . 2% describes your reasons for STATEMENT B. . . . . . . . . . . . 5% not participating: STATEMENT C. . . . . . . . . . . . 2% A. I wasn't aware of the STATEMENT D. . . . . . . . . . . . 2% program. STATEMENT E. . . . . . . . . . . . 2% B. I knew about it, but need ALL OF THE ABOVE (VOL) . 0% more information. OTHER REASON. . . . . . . . . . . 2% C. The program is too incon- NONE OF ABOVE (VOL) . . . . 1% venient. DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% D. I am just not interested. E. It isn't worth it to take the time. 13 116. Would you say you watch local FREQUENTLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% . government access Channel 16 OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . . 11% frequently, occasionally, RARELY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15% rarely, or not at all? NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . . 19% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% IF "FREQUENTLY" OR "OCCASIONALLY, " ASK: 117 . How would you rate the EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% quality of the picture GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% and sound -- excellent, ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% good, only fair, or POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% poor? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 118 . Would you say you watch City FREQUENTLY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% Council meeting telecasts OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . . . 8% telecasts frequently, occa- RARELY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11% sionally, rarely, or not at NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . . 23% all? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 3% 119 . Do you read either the "Focus" or "FOCUS" ONLY . . . . . . . . . . 6% the "New Brighton Bulletin" or "BULLETIN" ONLY. . . . . . . . 7% both newspapers? BOTH NEWSPAPERS . . . . . . . 80% NEITHER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes . . . . Could you tell me how many people in each of the following age groups live in your household. Let' s start oldest to youngest, and be sure to include yourself. . . . NONE, 86% ; ONE , 6% ; 120 . Persons over 65? TWO OR MORE, 8% . NONE, 12% ; ONE, 10% ; TWO, 5 9% ; 121. Adults over 18? THREE, 13% ; FOUR OR MORE, 6% . NONE, 62% ; ONE, 14% ; 122 . School-aged children? TWO, 18% ; THREE OR MORE, 6% . NONE, 8 3%; ONE , 14% ; 123 . Preschoolers? TWO, 4% ; 124 . Do you own or rent your present OWN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94% residence? RENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 125 . Which of the following categories 18 - 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% contains your age, please? 25 - 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% of 35 _ 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26% 45 54 . . 26% 55 - 64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14% 65 AND OVER. . . . . . . . . . . 12% 15 (o vum U- ;44, • 'may (..b,r►5¢v'�f`l �.} �.,�.�s o C- C)w t A4AJ- ate of- C't oc L-L- lctoocj— Lf Co C—g C rc 1( c� .1- ( a 1� .�c� — S{r 01,E C,3 4 (�° + yo 40 44 Co S4.fvY,*-+;1�4J wo.�l� �.�t�pw� Pro�o! � � r� /��G('fc✓ C. it ,Sa V^U %C.(Ld -74 lc7 `rlftcL ({Y V "L3 EEC Cu'E o °7a C--* CcA9a.� J �cdo oC 6 3 LA S Zrc S e q- �►!b C f c ra 4c. 14 f- �",j(` a i�-c ,q s ,o-,,,, -4-�c r►�a,t� y c�a 4 xovu-t- KA-4 o-� ('ee• w�-�- d�-z 1 �,A. J m �� 30( y� mot., z�4 �. w�wl•L -S'cx d t- ''3' yk P � 34 ►��-�- ,�.�,�ry vat r�� Q- �r S­ 4c + �y'q�t4 �c6,�4 tu ciccu (o"p ir Or s SfO r4CC f ;lj , v 1-� 14 '-, '�Z, ��E�� c,,Vo s i � ,,.i A-� CL,>4 d- cJ etrt2 /0C.►9-� YICs.Wr Qd'1`Q'-y' • ARDEN HILLS PARKS DEPARTMENT PEDESTRIAN TRAILS Proposed Blacktopping Schedule The trails were divided into four categories: (.1) section recommended for blacktopping in 1987 because of high usage and difficult terrain; (2) , (3), and (4) suggested priority for blacktopping in the future as/if funds are available Length Surface Arden Trail ✓'Glenpaul to Stowe 2,575' Ag Lime 2 ,,-Stowe to Co Rd E 1 ,500' Grass 2 Chatham Trails connection 1 ,200 ' 160 ' hard 4 surface, 1 ,040 grass , blocks ,,-- Corridors 4 (600' leading to Valentine School) Natural Area Pathways 8,400' Grass Town House Trails • Village Hall Trail ?, 300 ' Grass 3 NSP Trail 1. , 300 ' Grass 3 Corridor 740 ' Grass 4 t/Floral to Norma Corridor 600 ' Ag Lime 1 Cummings Park to Floral Trail " Cummings Park Trail 1 ,500 ' Grass 3 Cummings to Floral 2,050 ' Grass 2 ,l/1{lora1 ( -) 2,000 ' Grass 3 Crepeau Nature Preserve Nature Trails 2,800' Grass 4 BREAKDOWN BY RUNNING FOOT Phase 1 620 feet Phase 2 6, 125 feet Phase 3 15,540 feet Phase 4 4,580 feet "CELEBRATE ARDEN HILLS" " August 25 , 1990 51>4*1 • 8 : OOa.m. -10 : 30a.m. Pancake breakfast 10 : 30a.m. -11 : OOa.m. PARADE (Pet and wheel ) 11 : OOa.m. -2 : OOp.m. Volleyball tournament ( CO_REC) at McGuires 11 : 00a.m. -12 : OOp.m. "Duck tails" band 1 : 30p.m. -4 :90p .m. Bingo "� l 12: 30p.m. -3 : 30p.m. �Rollerblade`demonstration � 1 : 30p.m. -1,: 45p.m. Canine demonstration 6&. "0 1 : 45p.m. -2 : 15p.m. Rengtr"=&;;,!Animal Display 2 : 30p.m. Children ' s Talent Show ***The Chamber of Commerce and McGuires are sponsoring the pancake breakfast ***All children who participate in the Parade will receive a gift. A bike will be given to one of the children bY. way of a drawing. �� V - • ***St. Paul Book and Stationary will sponsor the Children ' s Talent show and donate all of the prizes for the participants . ***Norwest Bank will sponsor the "Duck tails" band. ***Raffle tickets will be sold by area businesses . Prizes are being donated. Please contact Loren Heuer if you are willing to donate a prize. Tickets will be sold in a book of six . The price of each book is $2 . 00 or a group for $10 . 00 . WE ARE HOPING TO MAKE AUGUST 25 A FULL DAY OF FAMILY FUN FOR EVERYONE. WE NEED YOUR HELP ! ! • PROPOSED PLAY EQUIPMENT FOR VALENTINE PARK <g GAMETIME MIRACLE QUALITY PLASTIC SPIRAL SLIDE I 11' CYCLONE SLIDE PLASTIC SPIRAL SLIDE WAVE SLIDE 16' TUBE SLIDE STRAIGHT TUBE SLIDE i PRE-SCHOOL SLIDE PRE-SCHOOL SLIDE PRE-SCHOOL SLIDE 8' CRAWL TUBE I 8' RAMP HORIZONTAL LADDER SLIDING POLE SLIDING POLE SLIDING POLE CLIMBING NET SMALL CHAIN LADDER CHAIN NET SPIRAL CLIMB CURVED CLIMBER ARCH CLIMBER STEPS 8' CRAWL TUBE SUSPENDED BRIDGE TIC-TACK-TOE SPIDER CLIMBER TWO BELT SWINGS 5 DECKS VERTICAL LADDER 6 DECKS • CARGO NET CLIMBER 8' RAMP CURVED HORIZONTAL LADDER WEND CLIMBER PVC STEPS 5 DECKS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS MEMORAI'-DUM DATE: June 21, 1990 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John T. Buckley, Park .Director SUBJECT: Arden Trail Improvement Terry Maurer and I met with neighborhood representatives Gary Niemczyk, Jerry Gelao and Charles Chenowith on June 5 to discuss the Arden Trail improvement proposal . Items discussed were: - width of pathway, 41, 6- , or 8 ' width pathway surfacing, grass or C.-.ass 5 versus asphalt - option of placing pathway on New Brighton Road or Stowe Ave . - motorized vehicle control - concern over the intersection of Stowe and New Brighton Rd. • Little agreement was reached during the 1 112 hour friendly/ hostile discussion . The neighborhood representatives were opposed to any improvements in the Arden Trail . The Arden Trail does provide the residents in southwest Arden Hills a safe option of getting to Hazelnut Park, Sampson Park, Lake Johanna beach, and small shopping centers on Cleveland Avenue and County Road D, without traveling on busy, narrow roads . The trail also provides a connection to northern trails in Ramsey County Open Space and in the Chatham neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION: Arden Trail improvement be completed this summer. (See attached recommendation from Engineer Maurer) . ACTION REQUIRED: If Council concurs with the staff recommendation, they should advise staff to authorize the contractor to proceed with the improvements as proposed in the May 14 bid award. JTB:madlr Mattachment / ) CONSULTING ENGINEERS Maier Stewart & Associates Inc. June 20, 1990 File No: 520-012-20 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Arden Hills 1450 W. Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: 1990 TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS Dear Council Members: On Tuesday, June 5, John Buckley and I met with three representatives of the neighborhood surrounding the proposed 1990 trail improvements. These proposed improvements are on the City property which follows the power line between Stowe Avenue and County Road E east of New Brighton Road. Many items were discussed, including the following: • 1. New Brighton Road Alignment This idea would be very difficult to implement since the current right- of-way is only 66 feet wide. In order to construct a trail and still leave room for a future road improvement, an additional 5-10 feet of right-of-way would need to be acquired. The cost of this would be much more than the construction cost. Also, with the amount and speed of traffic on New Brighton Road this alignment does not afford the safety of the proposed alignment. 2. Narrowing of the Trail Width Narrowing of the trail to a 6 foot width was discussed but was not received favorably by the three neighborhood representatives. They proposed an unreasonably narrow width, such as two feet. Six feet would cause some problems for two way traffic and anything narrower would be very difficult to maintain with normal equipment. 3. Motorized Vehicles The neighborhood representatives expressed a concern about motorized vehicles using the improved trail . An attempt could be made to eliminate this by the placement of posts at each end and possibly some signage. Beyond that, the problem will be one of enforcement. • 1959 SLOAN PLACE, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55117 612-774-6021 Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF ARDEN HILLS JUNE 20, 1990 • PAGE TWO 4. Gravel Surface Use of a surface material other than bituminous, such as limerock, was raised by the neighborhood representatives. This would be very difficult to maintain and would not promote the type of use the City is intending for the trail . In conclusion, the neighborhood' s desire to leave the area alone is in direct conflict with the City' s desire to construct a portion of the overall trail system. For this reason it appears very difficult, if not impossible, to reach any type of compromise which wi 11 address both concerns. A follow- up meeting was offered to the neighborhood representatives, but they felt it would not accomplish anything and therefore declined. If you have any questions regarding this, please call . Sincerely, MAIER STEWART AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Terry J. Maurer, P. E. TJM/km cc: Mr. Gary Berger John Buckley • NJNUIIS OF THE ARDEN HILLS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 29, 1990, 6:30 P.M. - CITY HALL • CLOSED SESSION; Council held a closed meeting to discuss labor LABOR NEGOTIATIONS negotiations between 6:30 and 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Sather called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL The roll being called the following members were present: Mayor Thomas Sather, Councilmembers Nancy Hansen, Paul Malone and JoAnn Growe. Absent: Councilmember Thomas Mahowald. Also present: Engineer Terry Maurer, Park Director John Buckley, Public Works Supervisor Daniel Winkel, Clerk Administrator Gary Berger and Deputy Clerk Catherine Iago. ADOPT REVISED Mayor Sather asked if there were any additions to the AGENDA 5-29-90 May 29 Agenda. Councilmember Malone requested Item 4 b. , Approval of Bergerson-Caswell Change Order, under Consent Calendar, be moved to Unfinished and New Business for discussion. Clerk Administrator Berger requested an additional item be placed on the Consent Calendar, Approve Payment to HRS Construction for Removal of Underground Storage Tanks. Growe moved, seconded by Hansen, to adopt the May 29 Council Agenda as amended to remove Item 4 b. , Bergerson-Caswell Change Order, from the Consent Agenda for discussion and to add Item 4 c. Approve Payment to • HRS Construction for removal of Underground Storage Tanks. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) APPROVE MINUTES Mayor Sather asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of May 14. Councilmember Malone requested the following wording be included for clarification purposes: Page 5: Paragraph #1: Delete the words "sump pump" and add "sanitary sewer". Page 7: Paragraph #6: Add the word "move" at the end of the first sentence. Hansen moved, seconded by Growe, to approve the minutes of the May 14 Council Meeting, as amended. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) CONSENT Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to approve the Consent CALENDAR Calendar, as amended, and authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein: a. Appoint Firm to Prepare Citizen Survey. b. Approve List of Claims and Payroll. c. Approve Partial Payment, HRS Construction, for Removal of Underground Storage Tanks. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) • CHANGE ORDER; Council was referred to a letter from Delta Environmental BERGERSON-CASWELL Consultants, dated 5-24-90, regarding agreements for WELL ABANDONMENT change orders at the Kem Milling site discussed at the Council worksession on 5-21-90. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 3 . TRAIL (Cont Id) Herman Friesen, 3370 New Brighton Road, expressed concern for the safety of small children biking in the area; stated the asphalt surface will attract motorcycles and snowmobiles. He agreed a nature trail better serves the area. Jane Pream, 1886 Grant Road, stated the trail will decrease property values in this area. Tom Pream, 1886 Grant Road, agreed safety is the major concern, especially with children biking in the area and crossing New Brighton Road. He was of the opinion the trail improvement will not be beneficial to Arden Hills. Pream also expressed his dissatisfaction that residents had very little input into the planning of the trail improvement. Dennis Dee, 1880 Grant Road, expressed concern relative to the lack of notice to residents regarding the improvement. He stated he is opposed to the trail and questioned future plans for upgrading the path and surrounding area. Resident, 1895 Noble Road, advised all the neighbors have been maintaining the path area by mowing. He stated if asphalt is installed, residents will have to purchase further equipment to maintain the area. Christine Poelzer, 1870 Indian Place, stated she did not receive notice of the improvement, although her rear yard abuts the existing trail. She expressed concern relative to safety with children biking on the path and crossing streets. Poelzer stated safety is the main issue whether or not the bituminous surface is . installed. Bruce Peterson, 1873 Grant Road, stated his opposition to the improvement due to decreased privacy, pedestrian traffic through his yard and safety concerns regarding crossing New Brighton Road. Jerry Gelao, 1911 Noble Road, agreed with all concerns expressed by the residents. He questioned the necessity for another improved trail in Arden Hills, as there are numerous paved trails throughout the City. Gelao stated the trail in its natural state is still highly functional and accessible for residents. He discussed some alternatives, such as, extending the bike path from New Brighton Road (where Hazelnut path ceases) and extend it nortaft along New Brighton. Road to County Road E-2; access is still provided to Lake Johanna, via County Road E, and to Perry Park and access to other trails abutting New Brighton Road, along County Road E-2. Mayor Sather asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of the proposed trail improvement. There was no response. Mayor Sather stated Council has heard and understands all concerns expressed by residents this evening. He explained that a contract has been awarded for the improvement at the last Council meeting, however, it appears that some discussion of the improvement is warranted at this time. Sather suggested two residents be appointed to work with the Park Director and City Engineer to discuss possible alternatives regarding the trail improvement, relating to the shape, form or development of the pathway. He requested residents prioritize their concerns prior to scheduling a meeting between the two appointees and staff. The Mayor suggested a thirty day time-frame for the discussions and the matter placed on the June 25 Regular Council meeting agenda. He directed the Park Director and Engineer to review recent trail improvements in other communities. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 5 SURVEY (Cont Id) There was discussion regarding the fact no recommendation • for appointment from the City Hall Committee, Human Rights, or Planning Commission have been received and a Council liaison been not been recommended. Mayor Sather suggested ratification of the individuals listed in Berger's memorandum and other volunteers may be added at a later date. Council suggested that Councilmember Mahowald be appointed as Council liaison, since he was instrumental in initiating the survey. Malone moved, seconded by Growe, that Council ratify the Appointment of individuals listed in the Clerk Administrator's memorandum dated 5-25-90, to work with Decision Resources on a citizen survey and reserve further appointments for future consideration. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) APPOINTMENT; Councilmember Hansen recommended appointment of Eugene PUB. SAFETY/WORKS Novak, 1190 Tiller Lane, to the Public Safety/Works CONMTTEE Committee. Mayor Sather concurred and recommended appointment of Novak to the Public Safety/Works Committee. Hansen moved, seconded by Malone, to ratify the appointment of Eugene Novak, 1190 Tiller Lane, to the Public Safety/Works Committee and directed staff to send a letter to Novak notifying him of the appointment. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) • COUNCIL COMMENTS CHARITABLE GAMBLING Councilmember Malone suggested Council consider a formula INACTIVE LICENSES whereby inactive licenses would not be eligible for renewal unless the taxes collected from the licensee are equal to approximately 80% of the average of the taxes collected from all the licenses in the same classification. He explained if the percentage of taxes are not paid to the City, when the licensee applies for renewal, the Council would have a basis for denial. Mayor Sather recalled that staff was directed at the last meeting to investigate some means to determine which licenses are active or inactive; Attorney Filla and staff were recruested to make recommendations as to how this may be accomplished. Malone explained the proposed approach to licensing charitable gambling applicants will provide maximum benefit to the City, rather than considering the charitable organization by other criteria. EMERGENCY MGMI'. Councilmember Malone questioned why the City is Pam; ARSENAL responsible for compiling an emergency management plan for the arsenal. Clerk Administrator Berger advised staff is reviewing this matter; the request also states the City is responsible for appointing an Emergency Preparedness Director. There was discussion relative to citizens that have served in this position in previous years and appointment of a volunteer to work on the emergency plan. Councilmember Malone questioned if the Federal Government could be held responsible for cost reimbursement for training personnel or developing the plan since the government has brought potentially dangerous conditions into the City. AGENDA • PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING CITY OF ARDEN HILLS TUESDAY, JUNE 26, 1990, 7:30 P.M. �J CITY HALL �. Call to Order and Roll Call. S / C,2. Approval of April 24, 1990 Minutes. Council Report /Arden Trail V/Charite§ambling(y, J �'ij��°� } _ ""7 uk s f�►"r'° e Review Trail Deve�nt for 1991 9- /Y'70 Reports � x- ✓Ro/ay C/ tree planting ("�Irlil,,��,/� _ �yy�QG Gateway gardens _kAof • �Ct Rd. E gardens } &-'e"�C�- r Ea le Scout C — � �g Ommlini tv Sa�r�'Se'g /- YAaron Boeckermann/gateway gardens �-4zS ccoott Fergerson/Trail improvements -✓Don Freimuth/Crepeau Park Torch Run - July � 4th Arden Hills Celebration - August 25th Summer Programs e v Proposed Fall Programs -- y„ 4 Senator Boschwitz`s tour_ �'✓ rMisc./New Business o✓L � 4'i� +� �/�ti'`� L G/3n 1:: ✓Valentine Park Play Equipment `/_ 7. Adjournment. 't4l4l 4� / '�'' 1�1 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, APRIL 24, 1990 . Call to Order The regular meeting of the Arden Hills Park and Recreation Commission was called to order at 7 : 40 P.M. by Chair David Sand. Roll Call Present: David Sand, Mark Magers, Don Messerly and Alan Montgomery. Absent Keith Enrooth, Pattie Green, Dorothy McClung, and Tom Mulcahy. Also Present Council Paul Malone, Program Supervisor Cindy Severtson and Parks Director John Buckley. Approval of Minutes Minutes of the March 27 meeting were approved as mailed. Council Report Councilmember Malone reported: - Kem Milling buildings will be removed and property cleaned up during April. Cost of demolition is $100, 000. - Opus Corp. will be constructing the new Group Health Medical Clinic. Park dedication for this subdivision will be • negotiated between $20-$80, 000. - The development of the Army Reserve Training Center on the Arsenal has stimulated the improvement of Lexington Avenue from TH 96 north to County Road G-2 . Cost of these improvements will be shared with Shoreview. Arden Hills' share is $100, 000. The bike path proposed for the west side of Lexington was not included in the Lexington Avenue projext. Cost of the pathway was $35, 000. - Finance Committee and Council are presently working on an assessment policy for financing City street improvements. 1990 Trail Developments $25, 000 is budgeted for trail improvements in 1990. Council approved having the City Engineer prepare specifications and bids for asphalting an 8' wide trail from Stowe to County Road E. 13 contractors submitted bids at the May 9 bid opening. Bids ranged from a low of $11,438 to a high of $17, 242 . The project is scheduled for Council approval on May 14 . Spring Program Report Cindy Severtson reported: There has been a strong interest in the new after school April 24 , 1990 Minutes, Page 2 programs at Valentine Hills School New programs include two sessions of beginning sports skills, two sessions of magic, one session of cartoon drawing/shirt painting, and one babysitting clinic session. If school space is available, these after school programs will be expanded to include Island Lake students this Fall. Elementary track continues to be a popular Spring activity. Over 100 children signed up for track at Valentine Hills School and 161 signed up at Island Lake School. Summer Program Severtson reviewed the new programs being offered this Summer, which include: Beginning Ball Skills 4 & 5 year olds Ceramics 4 & 5 year olds 1st-6th grade Candlemaking 1st-6th grade Fishing 2nd-6th grade Penny Carnival all ages Day Camp (one week) 2nd-6th grade Co-ed Sandlot Volleyball teen league Gateway Gardens Buckley updated the Commission on the progress of the gateway • gardens. Arden Hills teen Aaron Boeckermann (Eagle Scout candidate) will research, plant and maintain the gateway flower beds the entire summer as part of his community service requirements for Eagle Scout award. Gateway flower beds will be located at City Hall, TH 96 and Lexington, Lexington and Co. Rd. E (2 beds - McGuires corner and C.G. Rein office bldg. corner) , Co. Rd. F & Hamline, Co. Rd. E & Old Hwy. 10, Co. Rd. D & Lake Johanna Blvd. (Sutton Place) . County Road E Flower Beautification Buckley reported that the County Road E businesses have been enthusiastically supportive of the flower beautification project for "Main Street" . The Parks Department will coordinate construction of the flower beds, purchase timbers for the borders, and deliver the flowers. Businesses will pay the cost of the beds and flowers as well as provide labor. All the businesses plan to plant their flower beds on Saturday, May 19. McGuires will provide a pancake breakfast for the volunteers at 8 : 30 A.M. Master gardeners will be available for planting instructions. Mayor Sather will kick-off the planting. Volunteers will then disperse to their garden sites to plant flowers. Arbor Day City Clean-up The annual Arden Hills Arbor Day celebration will take place on April 24, 1990 Minutes, Page Three . Saturday, May 5. Girl Scouts, Cub Scouts and families have expressed interest in planting trees this year. Planting is scheduled for 10 AM to 12 noon at Hazelnut, Floral, and Royal Hills Parks and along the Chatham trails. Arden Hills/Shoreview Clean-up is also scheduled on May 5. Time for delivering materials at the disposal site is 8 AM to 4 PM, at the Shoreview City Hall/Maintenance Center. Miscellaneous Business Bruce Vento's office informed me that the Congressman is negotiating with Ted Schulte (TCAAP Commander) , U. S. Army Rockford Office, and North Suburban mayors to discuss the Arsenal athletic complex. Arden Hills qualified and received a 1989 National Tree City Award. This is the fifth year that Arden Hills has received this award. Adjourn Meeting adjourned at 9: 15 P.M. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 6 EMERG. PLAN (Cont'd) Fire Chief Winkel stated the Arsenal representatives have been cooperative and kept the LJVFD advised of materials • stored on this property, as well as providing safety data sheets to the City. METRO WASTE REPORT Councilmember Malone questioned if the City has a serious problem with the Infiltration/Inflow, as per the Metropolitan Waste Control report. He asked if a substantial sewer upgrade will be necessary. Clerk Administrator Berger advised he and Public Works Supervisor Winkel will be attending a series of meetings sponsored by the MWCC regarding this matter. SIEMS COURT; Councilmember Growe asked staff if further information ODOR PROBLEM is available regarding the odor complaint on Siems Court. Public Works Supervisor Winkel explained his staff has checked this area on two occasions and has found no problem. He noted the odor may be from stagnant water or composting; leaves have been dumped on the vacant lot. Winkel stated routine maintenance has been completed on the sewer lines in this area and no problems were found in the lines. Councilmember Malone requested Winkel refer to this matter as an "odor or noxious odor complaint", rather than a "sewer odor" in all future correspondence. Winkel explained the complaint was received as "sewer gas odor" and that was the reason it was documented as such; agreed that in future correspondence he will classify complaints as "odor complaint". He stated no further complaints have • been received. SCHEDULE WKSESSION; Clerk Administrator Berger advised the Audit Report is AUDIT REPORT DISC. being distributed this evening for Council review. He suggested Council schedule a worksession prior to the Regular Council meeting held June 11 to discuss the report with the auditor. Malone moved, seconded by Growe, that Council schedule a worksession on Monday, June 11, 1990, at 6:30 p.m. , for the purpose of discussion of the Audit Report. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) Council requested staff invite the auditor and members of the Finance Committee to attend this meeting. ACCEPT RESIGNATION; Malone moved, seconded by Growe, that Council accept the WI=AM WRIGLEY resignation of William Wrigley from the City Hall CITY HALL COMMITTEE Committee, as per his letter dated 5-18-90. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) ADJOURN Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) Gary R. Berger Thomas R. Sather Clerk Administrator Mayor NOTICE OF MEETING There will be a Council Worksession held Monday, June 11, 1990, at 6:30 p.m. , at City Hall for the purpose of discussing the audit report. The Regular Council �' r-i 7.,! 11. 1-- held at 7:30 p.m. Monday, June 11 . 1990, at City Hall Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 4 TRAIL (Cont'd) There was discussion relative to the bid award and possible consequences if the improvement is postponed. • Engineer Maurer explained Council has the option to advise the contractor when to begin the improvement. There was discussion regarding an alternative route for the trail along New Brighton Road. Council noted New Brighton Road is a County Road and the City would have to obtain permission to reroute the path from the County. Gelao advised he has spoken to planning personnel at the County and was advised the County usually cooperates with cities regarding trail improvements. Councilmember Hansen did not favor rerouting the bike path along New Brighton Road; stated it is an extremely dangerous roadway. She advised that past cormmmity surveys indicate residents place trails as a high priority and have indicated paved surfaces are preferable. Hansen also advised the County has not been cooperative in the past regarding City requests to reduce the speed limit on New Brighton Road. She expressed concern that citizens were not notified earlier of the proposed improvement and favored the citizens working with staff to resolve their concerns. Hansen stated the City should mark the trail near dangerous intersections, such as the railroad bridge across New Brighton Road. Council concurred with the recommendation of Mayor Sather regarding the citizens and staff meeting to discuss this matter and return June 25 with recotmnendations le AWARD BID; 1990 Council was referred to a letter from Engineer Maurer OVERLAY & SEAL dated 5-17-90, relative to the bid award for the 1990 COATING IMPRVMI'. overlay and seal coating improvement. Engineer Maurer reviewed the bids received and recc minded the bid be awarded to Bituminous Consulting and Contracting, Inc. , as the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $74,822.55. Councilmember Malone questioned if the additional funds budgeted in 1990 will be utilized to complete other improvement projects outlined in the Pavement Management Plan. Maurer advised language was placed in the specifications for additional work and those may be added with change orders. He advised he is reviewing areas of the City with the Public Works Supervisor to determine where the additional monies would be utilized. Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to award the bid for the 1990 Overlay and Seal Coating Project to Bituminous Consulting and Contracting, Inc. , in the amount of $74,822.55. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) APPOIN`IM=S; Council was referred to a memorandum from the Clerk CITIZEN SURVEY Administrator dated 5-25-90, listing recommendations for VOLUNTEERS appointments to work with Decision Resources on the • Citizen Survey. Councilmember Hansen advised another member of the Public Safety/Works Committee had expressed interest in appointment, however, at this time she did not recall the person. She questioned if she make further recommendations at a later date. Minutes of the Arden Hills Regular Council Meeting, 5-29-90 Page 2 CHANGE ORDER (Cont'd) Councilmember Malone stated it was his understanding from the worksession discussion that Bergerson-Caswell agreed • to charge the City for the entire well abandonment project on a time and materials basis. Council concurred with Malone's assessment of the worksession discussion. Malone moved, seconded by Hansen, to amend and approve the agreement with Delta Environmental Consultants, per their letter dated May 24, 1990, and for well abandonment at the Kem Milling site with Bergerson-Caswell conditioned upon the entire project closing costs being billed to the City on a time and materials basis and approval of the change order, not to exceed $81,000.00 for the project. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) PUBLIC COMMENTS ARDEN TRAIL Council was referred to a memorandum from Park Director IMPROVEMENT Buckley dated 5-24-90, relative to the notice sent to property owners regarding the Arden Trail Improvements and a memorandum from residents along the trail dated 5-23-90, requesting this matter be placed on the agenda. Mayor Sather requested persons wishing to speak in favor of or opposed to the proposed improvement to speak at the microphone, identify themselves by name and address and briefly state their concerns. Gary Niemczyk, 1918 Noble Road, stated the trail improvement has been discussed for several years and he remains opposed to the improvement. He expressed concern• that the existing trail is currently in good condition and will become full of debris, similar to the north part of the trail system, if improved. Charlie Chenoweth, 1898 Noble Road, did not favor the improvement and expressed concern that the motorized vehicles currently using the trails will increase with the improvement. He also expressed concern at the lack of privacy that will be experienced by residents; currently persons using the trail walk through his yard. Bob Johnson, 1902 Noble Road, stated there is currently a drainage problem along the north and south sides of Noble Road. He expressed concern that the problem will occur along the pathway; displayed pictures of the problem. Dave Haney, 1889 Grant Road, stated his principal concern is loss of privacy due to increased pedestrian traffic. Virginia Haney, 1889 Grant Road, expressed concern relative to the change in the type of people that will utilize the trail if bituminous surface is installed; currently the trail is used by bikers, walkers and joggers. Haney stated once the bituminous surface is installed the trail will be used for skateboards, roller blades and motorized vehicles. Shannon Johnson, 1902 Noble Road, commented that the bituminous surface contradicts the "flower power" image currently being promoted by the City. She stated the trail is very appealing in its natural state. • 126. Which of the following best SINGLE FAMILY HOME . . . . 87% describes your present residence? DUPLEX/DOUBLE BUNGALOW. 1% (READ CHOICES #1-#6. ) 3-PLEX OR 4-PLEX. . . . . . . 3% APARTMENT BUILDING OF 5-9 UNITS . . . . . . . . . 0% APARTMENT BUILDING OF 10 OR MORE UNITS . . 1% MOBILE HOME. . . . . . . . . . . . 2% OTHER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 127 . What is the last grade of LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL. . 2% education you completed? HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE. . 14% VO-TECH SCHOOL. . . . . . . . . 5% SOME COLLEGE. . . . . . . . . . 17% COLLEGE GRADUATE. . . . . . 35% POST-GRADUATE. . . . . . . . . 27% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 128 . What is your occupation and, if applicable, the occupation of your spouse? (CODED AS HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD) PROFESSIONAL - TECHNICAL, 30% ; OWNER - MANAGER, 37% ; CLERICAL - SALES , 7% ; BLUE COLLAR, 7% ; RETIRED, 15% ; SCATTERED, 4% . 129 . Do you and/or your spouse, if RESPONDENT ONLY. . . . . . . 11% applicable, work in Arden Hills? SPOUSE ONLY . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% BOTH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% NEITHER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 6% 130 . Which of the following categories BELOW $12 , 500 . . . . . . . . . . . 2% includes your 1989 total pre-tax $12 , 501-$25 , 000 . . . . . . . . . 6% household income. Please stop me $25 , 001-$37 , 500 . . . . . . . . . 9% when I read the right one. $37 , 501-$50, 000 . . . . . . . . 18% $50 , 001-$62 , 500 . . . . . . . . 17% $62 , 501-$75 , 000 . . . . . . . . 13% $75 , 001-$87 , 500 . . . . . . . . . 6% $87 , 501-$100, 000 . . . . . . . . 8% OVER $100 , 000 . . . . . . . . . . . 9% DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13% 131 . Gender (DO NOT ASK) MALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50% FEMALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50% LIST: PRECINCTS ONE & TWO. . . 38% PRECINCT THREE . . . . . . . . 30% PRECINCT FOUR. . . . . . . . . 32% 16 109 . How do you currently dispose of COMPOST ON PROPERTY. . . 51% grass clippings and yard waste USE DROP-OFF SITE. . . . . 21% -- do you compost on your prop- GARBAGE HAULER. . . . . . . . . 8% erty, use a yard waste drop-off OTHER METHOD (VOL. ) . . . 16% site, or have your garbage hauler DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 5% collect it? As you also may know, several refuse haulers serve Arden Hills. This arrangement has permitted citizens to choose their own haulers and contract directly with them. Some people say it has created significant overlap between the hauler routes and increased noise and congestion on city streets. 110 . Of the following three proposals, PROPOSAL A. . . . . . . . . . . . 65% which do you most favor: PROPOSAL B. . . . . . . . . . . . 13% A. The present system. PROPOSAL C. . . . . . . . . . . . 15% B. The City assigns current ALL EQUALLY. . . . . . . . . . . . 3% haulers to exclusively handle DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 6% specific areas .- C. The City designates one hauler to serve the entire city; Changing topics again. . . . 111 . What is your primary source of information about community events going on in Arden Hills? NONE, 3% ; CABLE, 2% ; PAPER, 9% ; NEWSLETTER, 9% ; TOWN • CRIER, 50% ; FOCUS , 12% ; NEW BRIGHTON BULLETIN, 15% ; PEOPLE, 3% ; FLYERS , 2% . 112 . What is your primary source of information about City government and its activities? NONE, 5% ; CABLE, 4% ; PAPER, 7% ; NEWSLETTER, 8% ; TOWN CRIER, 50% ; FOCUS , 10% ; NEW BRIGHTON BULLETIN, 12% ; PEOPLE, 2% ; DISPATCH, 2% ; FLYERS , 1% . 113 . Do you receive the quarterly RECEIVE/READ. . . . . . . . . . 94% "Town Crier" Newsletter"? (IF RECEIVE/DON'T READ. . . . . 3% "YES, " ASK: ) Do you regularly DON'T RECEIVE. . . . . . . . . . 3% read the newsletter? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% IF "RECEIVE AND READ, " ASK: 114 . Are there any changes in the format or coverage you would like to see? (IF "YES , " ASK: ) What are they? MORE OFTEN, 3% ; LARGER, 6% ; BETTER FORMAT, 3% . 115 . Does your household currently YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46% subscribe to cable television? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54$ DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% IF "YES, " ASK: 14 t_5 0 0 av PM/� - through the use of park dedication fees, and has never required any type of property tax funding. That financial situation may • change in the future. 96 . Would you favor or oppose a prop- STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . 22% erty tax increase to maintain and FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33% ,J improve the park system? (WAIT OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19% FOR RESPONSE) And do you feel STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 20% strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7% IF "STRONGLY FAVOR" OR "FAVOR, " ASK: 97 . How much would you be willing NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, to see your property taxes $10 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17% increase per year? Let's $20 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% say, would you be willing to $30 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9% see a yearly increase of $40 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% $ ? (CHOOSE RANDOM START- $50 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7% ING LEVEL; MOVE UP OR DOWN $60 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% DEPENDING ON ANSWER. ) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% about $ ? (REPEAT PROCESS) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% Changing topics . . . . 98 . Do you approve or disapprove of STRONGLY APPROVE. . . . . . 16% charitable gambling in Arden Hills APPROVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23% establishments? (WAIT FOR RE- DISAPPROVE. . . . . . . . . . . . 15% SPONSE) And do you feel strongly STRONGLY DISAPPROVE. . . 36% that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 11% The City raises $110, 000 . 00 per year through taxes on charitable gambling activities. 99 . Would you support the elimination YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27% of charitable gambling in the city NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64% even if property taxes would have DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 9% to be raised or city services cut to make up the difference? Some people feel that neighborhood improvements should be paid for only by the people directly affected in the area. Others feel that neighborhood improvements should be paid for by general city funds, since property values across the city are indirectly impacted. For each of the following improvements, please tell me if you think that only property owners in the area, or the entire city should pay. . . . AREA CITY BOTH DKRF 100. Street lighting? 30% 47% 20% 3% 101. Sidewalks? 41% 38% 20% 5% 102 . Street reconstruction? 15% 61% 21% 3% 12 likely require citizens to approve a bond referendum. Property owners would be asked to increase their property taxes to cover • the principal and interest of the bonds. First, let' s consider just a City Hall . . . . 83 . Would you favor or oppose a prop- STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . 13% erty tax increase to construct a FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34% new City Hall? (WAIT FOR RE- OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18% SPONSE) And do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 27% that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8% IF "STRONGLY FAVOR" OR "FAVOR, " ASK: 84 . How much would you be willing NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% to see your property taxes $10 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% increase per year? Let' s $20 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% say, would you be willing to $30 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% see a yearly increase of $40 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4% $ ? (CHOOSE RANDOM START- $50 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% ING LEVEL; MOVE UP OR DOWN $60 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4% DEPENDING ON ANSWER. ) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% about $ ? (REPEAT PROCESS) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% How about a new City Hall with adjoining Community Center. . . . 85 . Would you favor or oppose a prop- STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . 11% erty tax increase to construct a FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25% • new City Hall and Community Cen- OPPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17% ter? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And, do STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 41% you feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 6% IF "STRONGLY FAVOR" OR "FAVOR, " ASK: 86 . How much would you be willing NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% to see your property taxes $15 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% increase per year? Let's $30 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11% say, would you be willing to $45 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8% see a yearly increase of $60 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% $ ? (CHOOSE RANDOM START- $75 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% ING LEVEL; MOVE UP OR DOWN $90 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% DEPENDING ON ANSWER. ) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% about $ ? (REPEAT PROCESS) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% Turning to parks and recreational opportunities. . . . 87 . In general , do you usually spend OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES . . . . 61% your leisure time in outdoor INDOOR ACTIVITIES . . . . . 16% activities, weather permitting, BOTH (VOL. ) . . . . . . . . . . . 23% or indoor activities? NO FREE TIME (VOL. ) . . . . 1% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 10 There is the possibility that the Arsenal property in Arden Hills could become available for other uses. The property lies • completely within the city and covers 2 , 331 acres . 69 . Would you favor or oppose the STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . 33% City initiating action to speed FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31% up the sale of this property? OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . . 8% strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 18% 70 . Should the City of Arden Hills PURCHASE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17% attempt to purchase that land to REGULATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65% directly control its use or should DEPENDS (VOL) . . . . . . . . . . 7% it try to regulate its future use DON'T CARE (VOL) . . . . . . . 3% through zoning decisions without DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8% buying the property? If the City were to purchase and redevelop that land, substantial costs might be involved. The City would not only have to pay fair value for the land, but would have to bear costs to clean up contaminated soil and remove buried ammunition. The City might have to ask residents to permit the issuing of long term bonds to finance this project. Property owners would be asked to increase their property taxes to cover the principal and interest of the bonds. 71 . Would you favor or oppose a prop- STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . . 5% • erty tax increase to purchase and FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% redevelop the Arsenal site? (WAIT OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23% FOR RESPONSE) And do you feel STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . 51% strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 9% IF "STRONGLY FAVOR" OR "FAVOR, " ASK: 72 . How much would you be willing NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% to see your property taxes $25 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% increase per year? Let' s $50 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% say, would you be willing to $100 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% see a yearly increase of $125 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% $ ? (CHOOSE RANDOM START- $150 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% ING LEVEL; MOVE UP OR DOWN $175 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% DEPENDING ON ANSWER. ) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% about $ ? (REPEAT PROCESS) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 73 . Should the arsenal property be SINGLE FAMILY DWELL. . . 19% developed PRIMARILY for single MULTIPLE FAMILIES . . . . . . 0% family dwellings, multiple family RETAIL SHOPPING. . . . . . . . 3% housing, retail shopping, light LIGHT INDUSTRY. . . . . . . . 10% industry, offices, OR recreational OFFICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4% and park uses? RECREATIONAL/PARKS . . . . 17% COMBINATION (VOL) . . . . . 37% NONE OF ABOVE (VOL) . . . . 4% • DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7% 8 45. What department or official did you contact first about this inquiry? • "CITY HALL, " 26% ; PARK & REC, 8% ; BLDG. INSPECTOR, 4% ; PUBLIC WORKS , 6% ; SCATTERED, 3% , DON'T KNOW, 7% . 46. In general, were you satis- SATISFIED. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41% fied or dissatisfied with the DISSATISFIED. . . . . . . . . . 13% way your inquiry was handled? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . . 3 IF "DISSATISFIED, " ASK: 47 . Why were you dissatisfied? NOTHING DONE, 11% ; INCORRECT INFORMATION, 2% . 48 . Have you visited the Arden Hills YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62% City Hall during the past two NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38% years? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 49 . From what you have heard or seen, EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% how would you rate the condition ADEQUATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56% of the building -- excellent, ade- INADEQUATE. . . . . . . . . . . . 14% quate, inadequate, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 200 50 . In general , do you feel that the ADEQUATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59% • structure is adequate or inade- INADEQUATE. . . . . . . . . . . . 17% quate for providing service to DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 24% the residents of Arden Hills? Let's talk about future economic development in Arden Hills . . . . 51. How would you rate the pace of TOO RAPID. . . . . . . . . . . . . 13% economic development in Arden ABOUT RIGHT. . . . . . . . . . . 73% Hills -- too rapid, about right, TOO SLOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% or too slow? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 5% IF OPINION IS GIVEN, ASK: 52 . Why do you feel that way? GOOD MIX, 70% ; TOO FAST, 12% ; NEEDS NOT MET, 10% . 53 . If the City were to attract more development, what kind would you most prefer? DON'T KNOW, 15% ; NONE, 9% ; RESIDENTIAL, 19% ; OFFICE, 25% ; RETAIL - STORES , 12% ; RECREATIONAL, 3% ; LIGHT INDUSTRY, 17% . 6 28 . How much do you feel you know GREAT DEAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% about the work of the Mayor and FAIR AMOUNT. . . . . . . . . . . 460 • City Council -- a great deal, a VERY LITTLE. . . . . . . . . . . 47% fair amount, or very little? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 1% 29 . From what you know, do you ap- STRONGLY APPROVE. . . . . . 19% prove or disapprove of the job SOMEWHAT APPROVE. . . . . . 58% the Mayor and City Council are SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE. . . . 5% doing? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) STRONGLY DISAPPROVE. . . . 3% And do you feel strongly that DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 16% way? IF OPINION STATED IN QUESTION #29 , ASK: 30 . Why do you feel that way? GOOD JOB, 32% ; NO PROBLEMS, 20% ; COULD IMPROVE, 13% ; SPECIFIC ISSUES , 6% ; HEARSAY, 8% ; NO ANSWER, 5% . 31 . How much first-hand contact have QUITE A LOT. . . . . . . . . . . . 7% you had with the Arden Hills City SOME. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36% Staff -- quite a lot, some, very VERY LITTLE. . . . . . . . . . . 39% little, or none at all? NONE AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . 18% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 1% 32 . From what you have seen or heard, EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14% how would you rate the job per- GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56% • formance of the Arden Hills City ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% Staff -- excellent, good, only POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% fair, or poor? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 19% IF RATING GIVEN IN QUESTION #32 , ASK: 33 . Why did you rate city staff as GOOD JOB, 43%; NO PROBLEMS, 14% ; COULD IMPROVE, 11% ; SPECIFIC ISSUES , 7% ; HEARSAY, 4% ; NO ANSWER, 5% . Let's talk about public safety in Arden Hills. . . . 34 . During the past year, have you YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45% been involved in or observed a NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55% situation in which a member of DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% the Ramsey County Sheriff Depart- ment was present in an official capacity? IF "YES , " ASK: 35 . Would you say the way the EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 21% police handled the situation GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19% was excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% fair, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% • DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 1% 4 7 . What do you like LEAST about it? NO ANSWER, 11% ; NOTHING, 32% ; TAXES, 11% ; CITY SERVICES , • 15% ; TRAFFIC, 8% ; GROWTH, 5% ; CITY GOVERNMENT, 5% ; NO SHOPS , 4% ; SCHOOLS, 2% ; LOCATION, 4% ; PEOPLE, 2% ; ARSENAL, 1% ; SCATTERED, 1%. 8 . How would you rate the general EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17% sense of community among Arden GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61% Hills residents -- excellent, ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18% good, only fair, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 2% 9 . Is there a geographical area in the city which you consider to be the focal point of Arden Hills? (IF "YES, " ASK: ) Where is it? NO ANSWER, 55% ; COUNTY RD. "E, " 26% ; ARDEN CENTER, 5% ; LAKE JOHANNA, 6% ; LEXINGTON AVE. , 3% ; OTHER, 5% . Changing topics. . . . 10 . Would you favor or oppose an in- FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45% crease in city property taxes if OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44% it were needed to maintain city DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 11% services at their current level? 11. Do you consider property taxes in COMPARATIVELY LOW. . . . . . 6% • Arden Hills to be (ROTATE SERIES) ABOUT AVERAGE. . . . . . . . . 48% comparatively low, about average, RELATIVELY HIGH. . . . . . . 35% relatively high, or excessively EXCESSIVELY HIGH. . . . . . . 7% high? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 5% As you may know, property taxes are divided between the City of Arden Hills , Ramsey County, and the Mounds View Public School District. 12 . For each dollar of property taxes UNDER TEN PERCENT. . . . . 10% you pay, about what percentage do 10% TO 20%. . . . . . . . . . . . 41% you think goes to city govern- 21% TO 30% . . . . . . . . . . . . 13% ment? (READ CHOICES , IF NEEDED) 31% TO 40% . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4% 41% TO 50%. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% 0 51% TO 60%. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1%0 OVER SIXTY PERCENT. . . . . 2% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 27% As you may know, the City share of the property tax in your school district is about sixteen percent. 13 . During the past few years, has INCREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42% the City's tax rate increased, DECREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2% decreased, or remained about the ABOUT THE SAME. . . . . . . . 34% same? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 22% • For your information, the City's tax rate has relatively stable. 2