The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-31-24 EDC Agenda PacketChair: • Frank Cupery '!Tt 1245 W. Highway 96 I��EN�HILLS Arden Hills, MN 55112 Commissioners: �fi` 651.792.7800 • Rob Williams www.cityofardenhills.org • Ted Brausen Arden Hills • Julie Gronquist • Jud Murchie Economic • Sreya Subramanian • Katherine Schneider Development • Bobby Bonine Commission Meeting Council Liaison: Councilmember Emily July 31, 2024 Rousseau City Vision A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness, and our tradition as a desirable city in which to live, work, and play. Agenda Regular Economic Development Commission Convenes 7:30 AM Call to Order 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 26, 2024 3. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. In -Person Business Visit Strategy Updates B. Gateway Signs Discussion 4. COMMENTS AND REPORTS A. Report from Staff B. Report from the City Council C. Economic Development Commission Comments 5. ADJOURNMENT A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Meeting materials are available online at: http://www.citvofardenhills.org/agendacenter 'It EN HILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 26, 2024 7:30 A.M. — ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Present: Vice Chair Sreya Subramanian, Commissioners Julie Gronquist, Bobby Bonnie, and Jud Murchie Absent: Chair Frank Cupery, Commissioners Rob Williams, Ted Brausen and Youth Commissioner Katherine Schneider, Council Liaison Emily Rousseau Also Present: Community Development Director Jessica Jagoe and Senior Planner Elena Fransen 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA A motion was made by Commissioner Murchie and seconded by Commissioner Gronquist to approve the agenda. The agenda was approved unanimously. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. May 22, 2024 A motion was made by Commissioner Murchie and seconded by Commissioner Gronquist to approve the May 22, 2024 minutes. The minutes were approved unanimously. 3. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Meeting Schedule Senior Planner Fransen shared staff is asking the Economic Development Commission if the group would like to consider adding a July meeting to the calendar. The EDC could elect to add a meeting on July 24 or July 31 and can determine if a quorum could be met on one of these dates. The meeting schedule for August through December will remain as scheduled due to staffing availability. Senior Planner Fransen indicated a July meeting could be centered on continuing efforts for the in -person business visit strategy. Other topics or possible presenters could be suggested by Commissioners for the group and staff to consider adding to the agenda. She asked the Commissioners to discuss their availability for the two shared dates. She imparted that two ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — JUNE 26, 2024 2 Commissioners who were absent from the meeting indicated that they would be available for a meeting on either date. Commissioner Gronquist shared that both dates work for her. Commissioner Murchie indicated that July 31st would work better for him. Vice Chair Subramanian stated that either date would work. Commissioner Bonine agreed. A motion was made by Vice Chair Subramanian and seconded by Commissioner Gronquist to add a July 315t, 2024 EDC meeting date to the 2024 city calendar. The motion was approved unanimously. B. In -Person Business Visit Strategy Senior Planner Fransen shared that staff requested the Economic Development Commission revisit the In -Person Business Visits strategy discussed at the May meeting. Commissioners should review and discuss the details established at the last meeting, suggesting edits and additions as appropriate. She mentioned that the Subcommittee had drafted questions for in -person business visits to distribute at the meeting. Commissioners should discuss and comment on the drafted information. Senior Planner Fransen presented the drafted details for in -person business visits, asking Commissioners to review the information for missing details, additional timeline and milestone information, and what information needs to be prepared for in -person visits. Vice Chair Subramanian commented that the intentions are in alignment with what has been discussed. Commissioner Murchie added that the goals of the strategy connect with the mission of the EDC and are both aimed at informing the EDC's work and benefitting the businesses. Vice Chair Subramanian asked about the target audience for in -person business visits. She asked if all businesses would include online businesses without a physical place of business as well as small businesses and national franchises. She also asked who the individuals would be to answer the questions. Would that be a business owner or manager or any employee. Commissioner Murchie commented that starting with smaller businesses could be the way to go. Commissioner Gronquist provided clarification that all businesses could be included as some franchise owners are local and managers tend to be more local even if the business is a franchise. She stated that the visits could be with a business owner or manager to get more specific information about the business. Commissioner Murchie asked how the Commission might handle a visit if a representative is unavailable at that time or if they only have a quick minute and cannot answer the questions while the Commissioner is present. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — JUNE 26, 2024 3 Commissioner Bonine discussed that in those instances, the idea is that a card could be left behind, with the possibility of using a QR code for the business representative to access the questions later. He mentioned that the card could also include contact information for the City. The card could be kept brief to keep the process of implementing the business visits moving forward. Commissioner Murchie said he liked the idea of using a QR code and commented that he thought most people were fans of using QR codes to come back to. Vice Chair Subramanian mentioned that the link could also include a link tree, with other links to the City's Business Resources webpage and other relevant links for businesses. Vice Chair Subramanian asked how the businesses would be approached for in -person visits. Would they sign up for a time and indicate interest or was there some other plan. Senior Planner Fransen stated her understanding was that the business addresses would be divided by area with each Commissioner taking an area of the City to plan out how they would coordinate their visits. Commissioner Gronquist agreed that the businesses could be broken up into regions and shared with the Commissioners. A discussion ensued about how to communicate back to the business community the findings and share the details with the wider Arden Hills Community. Ideas included sharing the information in the Arden Hills Newsletter once information is collected. Commissioner Murchie mentioned that maybe the EDC could share updates to the community through the newsletter, letting community members know that the EDC is working on engaging with the business community and any initial findings or statistics. Senior Planner Fransen offered that perhaps there could be some photographs taken of early visits to share in the newsletter. A newsletter feature could also include the updated EDC mission statement and a contact to reach out to for more information. Commissioner Murchie indicated support of this idea. Commissioner Bonine agreed and added that Commissioner Brausen had previously shared an idea to put together a letter from the Mayor or City Council directed to business representatives. He said that in discussion with staff this letter could be a later follow-up in order to keep the process moving forward with the initial visits. Community Development Director Jagoe offered that there could be an opportunity for the EDC to attend a future City Council Work Session to share the results from the visits to demonstrate the work the EDC has done. The results could help bolster requests for additional resources when putting together the 2025 EDC work plan and that work session could be an opportunity to ask the Council to sign off on a letter to businesses with members of the EDC. The EDC could drive this conversation based on what is learned from the business representatives who were visited. There was support among the Commissioners to pursue this course of action once the visits were completed. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — JUNE 26, 2024 4 Senior Planner Fransen summarized that staff could communicate with the Senior Communications Coordinator about timing for featuring the EDC's in -person business visits in the September or October Arden Hills Newsletter. Commissioner Bonine asked the Commissioners to review the questions drafted for the in -person visits and indicate if they would recommend changes. He mentioned that the subcommittee worked on the questions together and taken in some feedback from staff to get the questions to their current state. He shared that the intent behind the questions being asked was to increase visibility with the businesses and to help the EDC identify allies for the EDC's work in the future. Commissioner Murchie commented that he thought the questions were great. He asked about the categories for the industries and if these would be detailed enough for sharing with the community. Commissioner Gronquist commented that the subcommittee went back and forth on the industries and had originally had a much longer list that was narrowed down to the ones shown. A brief discussion ensued about how certain industries such as food services could be added. Commissioner Jagoe shared that this question could be removed, and that Commissioners could put in any value they like, leaving this type of information open ended. There was general support among the Commissioners to remove this question and for Commissioners to indicate an appropriate industry for the businesses they speak with. Commissioner Murchie commented that he liked the question about owning or leasing space in Arden Hills and asked about the intent behind this question. Community Development Director Jagoe echoed this question, mentioning that most multi - tenant development businesses lease the space from the owner of the development so it can be identified who is or is not the owner of their business location. Commissioner Gronquist mentioned that the idea was that businesses that own their space could be more engaged and rooted within the community. Commissioner Murchie commented that this question could be construed as intrusive by some business representatives. Commissioner Bonine added that he could see this being the case and that if there was a chance of this being an issue the question could be removed. He mentioned that there had been previous discussion about business licensing which is of interest to several commissioners but might not be the right thing to bring up during an initial conversation where the EDC is being introduced. Senior Planner Fransen mentioned that this question could also be removed and be something to follow-up with the engaged "Allies" identified after the initial visits. Her understanding is that there could be some distinctions between engagement from space leasers or owners and this could be a future area of study for the EDC. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — JUNE 26, 2024 5 There was general support among the Commissioners to remove this question and for Commissioners to indicate additional information as appropriate on this topic. Commissioner Murchie suggested adding a question about the business's primary customer. There was general support among the Commissioners to add this question to the list. Commissioner Bonine asked if there were other questions to add to the drafted list. Senior Planner Fransen mentioned that something to consider asking about is if a business would like to be added to a City email list for businesses. She asks this because the EDC had previously identified a possible work plan strategy of putting together a list of business emails and content for emails to this group. Commissioner Gronquist commented that this could be addressed in other questions. Commissioner Bonine agreed, stating that the representative would be asked if they are open to the EDC contacting them in the future so that would be the opening to this question. Vice Chair Subramanian asked how the Commissioners would plan on getting responses to the questions and how they would be added to a spreadsheet after completing the visit. Commissioner Murchie offered that each Commissioner could enter in their results using the QR code. He offered to help with putting the questions into an online format that could be completed using a link. Senior Planner Fransen shared that she could speak with the Senior Communications Coordinator about online services used and how this could be done using existing resources. A motion was made by Commissioner Bonine and seconded by Commissioner Murchie to approve the in -person business visit questions as drafted with the discussed revisions. The motion was approved unanimously. Senior Planner Fransen recapped the follow-ups, that the revisions to the questions would be made by staff and shared with the commissioners, staff would follow-up with the Senior Communications Coordinator regarding featuring the work of the EDC in the newsletter and working with Commissioner Murchie on the QR code, and staff will work on putting together the business areas that can be divided among commissioners. 4. COMMENTS AND REPORTS A. Staff Updates Senior Planner Fransen recapped that several members of the EDC attended the June Planning Commission meeting to share the EDC's proposed revisions to the City Sign Code. She shared that there was agreement from the Planning Commissioners and that they looked forward to the next steps. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — JUNE 26, 2024 6 Senior Planner Fransen also shared that the Commission and Committee Appreciation Picnic had been confirmed for July 16 at 6:00 p.m. and that she hoped the Commissioners would be able to attend. B. Economic Development Commission Comments None. ADJOURNMENT A motion to adiourn was made by Vice Chair Subramanian and seconded by Commissioner Gronquist. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:58 a.m. ,-ARZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: July 31, 2024 EDC AGENDA ITEM — 3A TO: Economic Development Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Elena Fransen, Senior Planner SUBJECT: In -Person Business Visits Strategy Requested Action The Economic Development Commission should revisit the In -Person Business Visits strategy and updates from the June meeting. Commissioners should be familiar with the updated visit questions and be prepared to review and discuss a drafted handout, a drafted procedure document, and drafted timeline for the visits. Staff will provide the updated questions and drafted handout as well as an update on how the Arden Hills businesses could be divided among the commissioners. The in -person business visit subcommittee will have drafts for the procedure document and drafted timeline. Commissioners should discuss and comment on the drafted information and find consensus on next steps for the strategy. Background At the May 22, 2024 meeting, the EDC reviewed and discussed the top three strategies identified by commissioners and elected to focus on in -person business visits. A subcommittee was established and is comprised of Commissioners Gronquist, Brausen, and Bonine. The first task of the subcommittee was drafting questions for the in -person business visits. At the June 26, 2024 meeting, the commission reviewed the drafted questions and approved a motion to move forward with the questions after a few revisions were made. Staff has the revised questions and shared them with the EDC in advance of this meeting. Also discussed at the June meeting was working with the City's Senior Communications Coordinator to determine what online tools could be used to facilitate the entry of the visit questions and leverage a QR code and develop a handout that could be left behind for a business representative to review and complete the visit questions at a later time. Staff also mentioned that they could start looking into divvying up the businesses in Arden Hills into groupings. Staff will share an update on the discussion with the Senior Communications Coordinator and share a drafted handout for the commission to consider. There will also be an update on staff s proposed Page 1 of 2 strategy to group City businesses to be distributed amongst the commissioners for planning visits. Following the June meeting, staff asked the subcommittee to draft a procedure document and timeline for the in -person business visits. The goal with these documents is to establish a standard operating procedure and expectations for when the visits could begin and when they should be completed. These drafted documents will be provided as a handout at the July meeting. Discussion In -person business visits strategy follow-ups from June meeting Communications update - Online tool for question submittal - Drafted handout o Discuss drafted content and format o Consider revisions to draft o Next steps for handout — subcommittee to provide final sign -off? Dividing City businesses amongst commissioners for visit - Discuss approach and proposed number of businesses to visit - Review map provided in presentation - Next steps Procedure document - Review drafted document - Discuss possible revisions - Next steps Timeline document - Review drafted document Discuss potential questions, possible revisions Next steps Next Steps Staff will work with the Senior Communications Coordinator on the online tool and associated QR code for the visit questions. For the handout, staff will make the recommended revisions and work with the Senior Communications Coordinator to create a more complete mock-up. The commission should determine who will provide final sign -off on the handout. Staff will incorporate the EDC's feedback into the process of dividing up the City's businesses for the in -person visits. Staff will plan to share proposed business lists to commissioners at the next meeting. After receiving feedback on the procedure and timeline documents, staff will work with the subcommittee to finalize the procedure and timeline documents to be shared at the next EDC meeting. Attachments Handouts to be provided at the meeting as referenced. Page 2 of 2 EDC AGENDA ITEM — 3B ,--ARRZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: July 31, 2024 TO: Economic Development Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Gateway Signs Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Requested Action Commissioners should discuss and provide feedback to City staff on next steps for the potential future installation of gateway signs. This information will be shared with the City Council as part of the upcoming 2025 budget discussions. Background The Economic Development Authority (EDA), comprised of the five members of the City Council, has been reviewing conceptual plans for the installation of additional City of Arden Hills gateways signs for a number of years. There are three gateways signs that have already been installed in the City. Existing Gateway Sims After those were installed, the EDA initially identified six potential locations for gateway signs with Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue being identified as the priority location. A conceptual design and cost analysis was prepared by WSB for this location (Attachment E). In 2022, the EDA added to the list a seventh potential location at Lake Valentine Road at 35W. During this discussion, the EDA requested feedback from the EDC on the proposed gateway sign locations and possible design. Page 1 of 2 Included with this memo are maps that identify existing, previously identified, and potentially new gateway sign locations (Attachment B). It should be noted that with some of the previously identified and new locations that the City may not have sufficient right-of-way for placement of a gateway sign. The City would need to acquire additional right-of-way or obtain an easement from the Property Owner for installation. These are merely potential locations selected at a high-level for consideration without an analysis for feasibility. Discussion: Staff has briefly mentioned to the EDC that gateway signs would be a topic for future discussion based on Council direction. Staff initially held off this discussion in order to allow EDC members an opportunity to get familiar with their roles as well as to start developing a work plan. With the upcoming Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) budget discussions, the City Council is seeking feedback from the EDC on the future installation of gateway signs. The 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Plan has benchmarks for the construction of gateway signs in 2025 and 2027 (Attachment A). Based on this information, staff seeks direction from the EDC on handling gateway signs. One of the reasons for scheduling the discussion is the gateway sign at the corner of Highway 96 and Lexington, opposite the existing Shoreview sign. This is a large expense, $270,000, in the CIP and will have implications for the budget if the EDC decides to pursue this or not. Should the EDC decide the Highway 96 gateway sign is no longer a priority, or other gateway signs, the City Council as part of their upcoming budget discussions may look to repurpose these funds. This direction does not necessarily mean that the potential for future installation of a gateway sign is discontinued. However, it may more accurately reflect the timing needed by the EDC to have a thorough review and discussion on priority location(s), current pricing, conceptual design (i.e. city branding), and completion of a feasibility study. Budget Impact N/A Attachments A. 2024 CIP B. Gateway Sign Maps C. October 24, 2022 EDA Minutes D. 2018 EDA Memo E. WSB 2018 Concept Design Page 2 of 2 Capital Improvement Plan 2024 thrtt 2028 City of Arden Hills, Minnesota Project # 25-EDA-001 Project Name Gateway Signs TCAAP No Department Economic Development Contact Community Devl Dir Type Improvement Useful Life Category Economic Devi Improvement Priority n/a Description I Total Project Cost: $310,000 Install gateway signs at major entry points to the City. Potential locations for signs include: (1) Highway 96 at Round Lake Road, (2) Highway 96 at Lexington Avenue, (3) Lake Valentine Road at 35W, (4) County Road E at Lexington Avenue, (5) Lexington Avenue at County Road F, (6) Lexington Avenue at County Road D, and (7) County Road E at Highway 51. Potential sign locations are not listed in order of priority and are subject to change. There are three existing gateway signs in the following locations: (1) County Road E2 at I-35W, (2) County Road D at Cleveland Avenue, and (3) Lake Johanna Boulevard at the Roseville border. Staff has budeeted for the comDletion of an additional eatewav sien in 2026 at a location to be determined. Justification kdvance the economic development goals in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Implement the Guiding Plan for the B2 District. Work to better .dentify the entrance points to the City for businesses and visitors. Foster civic pride and community identity. Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total Construction/Maintenance 270,000 40,000 310,000 Total 270,000 40,000 310,000 Funding Sources 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total EDA General Fund 270,000 40,000 310,000 Total 270,000 40,000 310,000 maintenance costs for sign cleaning and care of landscaping is estimated by the Public Works Department at $500 per sign annually. Produced Using the Plan -It Capital Planning Software 121 Gateway Signs 0 Parcels 1:35,430 City Mask Existing Gateway Signs • Identified Gateway Sign Location N A New Potential Gateway Sign Location April 11, 2024 LLS W S b Gateway Signs - North of Highway 96 rt =D Training Site Road o - � m D Q < n rn < =5 z m W Z o cm 3 gain/ns Marsden Lake N Q'ty a ro D < ro C m � Z r way 96 P � � 1:35,430 0 Parcels Existing Gateway Sign City Mask • Identified Gateway Sign Location N New Potential Gateway Sign Location A April 11, 2024 s1b -AR�EN HILLS WS b ,-ARZEN HILLS Approved: October 23, 2023 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING OCTOBER 24, 2022 IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Grant called to order the Economic Development Authority meeting at 7:56 p.m. Present: EDA Chair David Grant; EDA Commissioners Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Steve Scott and David Radziej Absent: None Also present: EDA Secretary Dave Perrault; Community Development Director Jessica Jagoe; Finance Director Gayle Bauman; and City Clerk Julie Hanson 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: EDA Chair Grant moved and all EDA Commissioners seconded a motion to approve the EDA meeting agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 25, 2021 EDA MOTION: EDA Commissioner Holden moved and EDA Commissioner Holmes seconded a motion to approve the October 25, 2021 Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 3. NEW BUSINESS None. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Gateway Signs ARDEN HILLS EDA MEETING — October 24, 2022 2 Community Development Director Jagoe stated that staff was looking for direction on scheduling a future EDA meeting to discuss Gateway signs. She noted this was brought to the City Council in conceptual format in 2018 and six locations were identified, with the Highway 96/Lexington Avenue location being the priority. Commissioner Radziej asked if the EDA had decided on one style or design for the signs and what the associated costs would be. A discussion ensued regarding styles that have been debated in the past, the potential costs, and the locations of existing Gateway signs. Commissioner Holden stated the City received multiple proposals for a sign at Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue but it is a problematic site because the Shoreview sign is so huge. She thought the location on Lexington Avenue and County Road D near the Dairy Queen was an important location as people do not realize that is Arden Hills. Commissioner Holmes agreed but felt it would be difficult for a sign to be at that location due to being residential properties versus commercial properties. She thought this would be awkward. A discussion ensued regarding the southern portion of Arden Hills, particularly near Lexington Avenue and County Road D. EDA Chair Grant noted that the locations previously discussed were all entry points into Arden Hills. EDA Secretary Perrault said that the intent at the meeting this evening was to gain insight if the EDA wanted to meet more regularly in 2023 or 2024 to talk about these projects. He noted he wanted to make sure that Community Development Director Jagoe has good direction. Commissioner Holmes stated that Council previously indicated it wanted to wait regarding a sign at Highway 96 until TCAAP starts moving and perhaps businesses could contribute. She said she would like to see a schematic of a potential sign for the Lexington Avenue and County Road D location. A discussion ensued regarding the properties located near the Lexington Avenue and County Road D location. Commissioner Radziej noted he would like to see the same style of signage throughout the city, regardless if the size varies. EDA Chair Grant recommended staff look at the current signs to determine if they have been durable or have any issues. The EDA Commissioners concurred. Commissioner Holmes suggested a sign near Lake Valentine Road and Mounds View High School as many people do not know that the high school is located in Arden Hills. ARDEN HILLS EDA MEETING — October 24, 2022 3 Commissioner Holden thought Community Development Director could take a look at locations and bring fresh eyes and ideas to the table. She noted how expensive the signs can be. Discussion further ensued regarding the list of potential locations that was created by the EDC. They concurred they would await recommendation from Director Jagoe. 5. EDA MEMBER COMMENTS None. 6. ADJOURN MOTION: EDA Commissioner Radziei moved and EDA Commissioner Holden seconded a motion to adiourn the Economic Development Authority meeting. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). EDA Chair Grant adjourned the Economic Development Authority meeting at 8:13 p.m. Julie Hanson City Clerk David Grant EDA Chair 'It -fi` DEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 16, 2018 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Perrault, City Administrator FROM: Matthew Bachler, City Planner Sue Polka, Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue Gateway Sign Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: N/A Council Should Consider N/A AGENDA ITEM 11 Funding Source: N/A Review conceptual plans for the Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue gateway sign and provide direction to staff. Background The adopted 2018-2022 Capital Improvement Plan includes $80,000 for gateway sign construction in 2018. At their work session on June 19, 2017, the City Council discussed using the funds budgeted in 2018 for a gateway sign at Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue. In August 2017, staff began working with WSB & Associates on a concept design plan and cost estimate for the gateway sign. Staff from WSB will be in attendance at the work session on January 16, 2018 to present the concept design plan. To date, gateway signs have been installed at the following locations: • County Road E2 at Cleveland Avenue • County Road D at Cleveland Avenue • County Road D at New Brighton Road/Lake Johanna Boulevard (Triangle Property) The approximate cost of the signs for these past projects has been $10,000. The project at the Triangle Property included additional landscaping and irrigation improvements, and staff has estimated the total cost of this project (including the sign) at between $30,000 and $45,000. Staff had anticipated the cost of the gateway sign at Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue to be more than these previous signs due to the larger scale of the project. Page 1 of 2 Discussion Location Staff evaluated the feasibility of locating a gateway sign in the northwest or southwest corner of the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Highway 96. The southwest corner was selected due to a significant grade change at the northwest corner from the road to a wetland. WSB completed a topographical survey of the area to locate curb lines, walkways, lights, utilities, trees, and right- of-way. The sign would be located in Ramsey County right-of-way and coordination with the County would be required. Concept Design WSB prepared a concept design for the gateway sign for the City Council to consider (Attachment B). Staff provided information on past design plans so that the sign is consistent in style with other monument signs. The plans took into consideration the following: • Travel speed • Size of sign/text for readability • Setbacks from roadway curb and walkways • Viewing orientation • Constructability The sign would be oriented towards the intersection to maximize visibility and would be setback approximately 30 feet from the public trail along Highway 96 and Lexington Avenue. The sign would have a curved face running 40 feet in length with a height of 10 feet. A perennial planting bed is shown in front of the sign and a mix of aspen and coniferous trees and shrubs behind the sign. Electrical service would be provided to illuminate the sign lettering. Cost Estimates WSB has provided an estimate of the construction cost in Attachment C. The estimate includes the cost of the sign itself, site preparation, landscaping, and electrical service. This subtotal cost is estimated at $193,150. With contingencies and construction administration included, the estimated total is $260,753. WSB has identified two potential cost reduction items: replacing the proposed stone veneer with simulated concrete stone, and reducing the length of the sign from 40 feet to 22 feet. The associated cost savings with these changes are included in Attachment C. Potential add -on items include sign wing walls (shown in the concept plan rendering), uplighting, and irrigation. These items are not included in the current estimated total. Attachments A. Aerial Map B. Concept Plan C. Cost Estimate Page 2 of 2 44t■ • -04 ■' � _� � � ram,'. tf e, 00, R 4, - wrcvlcU Adw- �i woo ' ' �opown ow /= 42" ARC It It 5, .,�� _ mot+►. ;� ,y #� r _ _ _� *•. - •�' err � � _ *t r. �� '�� ■��1 •fir wilt � ■ ■' • • �` z �• ': r • �;• .'�`. fxr! r t p °y Ilk' � w i it • IMP - w . ' F+F q k[1n4 1 r .f 1 �� ` � - �s!, stt r • .F fM�ts`' i. �3.Fk t tir. '3 � � � ..raj _ . k �r�}_�..�?�,.1. k='��-+ - k �_�� .� �� ? �a., c4 `Y� �� -�J,l �¢` � �' ,�• ',e ��. - i �r{A 6,��',�_ i fF .�'raP _J, j f '`t� .� � � VI - t ( !'►��! L.�yf+... .ir .A�'.:Y .��'6 �. i F `':r: -Y AWN ,.1 'J _ _. - �+A :/I.i�. • � � � P• �p " r I• F �,- _:� �fj�T•:F •xjff�•)'A' tow �Y m .� �'� .� `•ir � { �• - `'Flee •�- '4 yq�.�• Y' T. -i - _t:, �ds _ �� ' - k.[ 11 .'° r ��,.. �. I?4. Iro ,` .1•f.r�� .xr if;�� r..C. ,'I�k iti c+=��.'�{-��`.�!�� rr..r(�; City Monument Sign Concept One Estimated Construction Cost WSB Project #010661-000 December 14th, 2017 By: SF Base Items ESTIMATED Item Description CITY COST 1 Mobilization 1 $ 9,200 2 Earthwork and erosion control 1 $ 25,500 40' long by 10' high masonry monument sign 3 including central wall with veneer on front face only, 1 $ 110,000 sign lettering, lighting of lettering 4 Electrical service 1 $ 15,000 5 Sodding 1500 $ 12,000 6 Concrete edging 215 $ 6,450 7 Tree, shrub and perennial planting 1 $ 15,000 Subtotal $ 193,150 Recommended Contingency (20%) $ 38,630 Estimated Design through Construction $ 28,973 Administration (15%) Estimated Total $ 260,753 Potential Cost Reduction Items Replace stone veneer with simulated stone pattern concrete wall resulting in a RED.1 cost reduction of $16,000. Reduce size of sign wall to 22' long by 10' high and replace stone veneer with RED.2 simulated stone pattern concrete wall resulting in a cost reduction of $46,600. Potential Add -On Items ADD.1 Monument Sign Wing Walls with veneer on front face only 1 $ 63,000 ADD.2 Uplighting 1 $ 10,000 ADD.3 Irrigation System 1 $ 15,000 Note: This estimate is based on concept planning level design work for the purpose of budgeting. It should be anticipated that cost the estimate will need to be refined as the design progresses with greater detail. 12/14/2017 K:1010661-000\Quantity\Preliminary1010661-000 City Monument Sign at Hwy 96 & Lexington