Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-22-25-RAddress: Mayor: 1245 W Highway 96 David Grant It Arden Hills MN 55112 ­-AEN HILLS Phone: Councilmembers: 651-792-7800 Brenda Holden Regular City Council Emily Rousseau Website: Tena Monson Agenda www.cityofardenhills.org Kurt Weber September 22, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Hall City Vision Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well -maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long-standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. Members of the public may attend a meeting in -person at City Hall or they may view the meeting remotely on the City's website using the below link. Meetings are also broadcast on Cable Channel 16 for those that live in Arden Hills. https://cityofardenhills.orci/320/Watch- City-Meetings This meeting will be streamed live on local Cable Channel 16 and available for playback on our website. CALL TO ORDER 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2. TCAAP/Rice Creek Commons Update Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator 3. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL This is an opportunity for citizens to respectfully bring to the Council's attention any items which are relevant to the City. In addressing the Council, you must first state your name and address for the record. Comments shall be limited to three (3) minutes or less. Written documents or other materials should be handed to the City Clerk for distribution to the Council prior to or during the meeting. Council will generally not respond at the same meeting where an issue is initially raised by a member of the public but the Council may refer the issue to staff for further research and possible report or action at a future Council meeting. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES 5. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS 6. STAFF COMMENTS 6.A. Transportation Update David Swearingen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Documents: MEMO.PDF 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.A. August 25, 2025 Special City Council Work Session Documents: 08-25-25 SWS.PDF 7.B. August 25, 2025 Regular City Council Documents: 08-25-25-R.PDF 7.C. September 8, 2025 City Council Work Session Documents: 09-08-25-WS.PDF 7.D. September 8, 2025 Regular City Council Documents: 09-08-25-R.PDF 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Those items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion under a Consent Calendar format. There will be no separate discussion of these items, unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event, the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered separately in its normal sequence on the agenda. 8.A. Motion To Approve Claims And Payroll Joua Yang, Finance Director Documents: MEMO.PDF 8.B. Motion To Approve Resolution 2025-060 Designating Certain City -Owned Property As Mullin Gardens Jess Skalicky, Parks and Recreation Manager Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF 8.C. Motion To Approve Resolution 2025-061 Appointing The Parks, Trails And Recreation Committee (PTRC) Youth Committee Member Julie Hanson, Assistant to the City Administrator/City Clerk Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF 8.D. Motion To Approve Geotechnical Evaluation Proposal From Braun Intertec - 2028 PMP And Shoreline Lane David Swearingen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF 8.E. Motion To Approve Payment To Visu-Sewer For Sanitary Sewer Televising Services - 1-35W Trunk Main David Swearingen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF 8.F. Motion To Approve Payment To Klein Underground For Emergency Watermain Repair Roadway Restoration - Dunlap St David Swearingen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF 9. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS Those items that are pulled from the Consent Calendar will be removed from the general order of business and considered separately in its normal sequence on the agenda. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10.A. Quarterly Special Assessments For Delinquent Utilities Joua Yang, Finance Director Amy LaMere, Accounting Clerk Documents: MEMO.PDF 10.B. Planning Case 25-007 Amending Chapter 4 - City Code And Chapter 13 - Zoning Code - Keeping Of Chickens And Ducks Elena Fransen, Senior Planner Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF ATTACHMENT D.PDF ATTACHMENT E.PDF ATTACHMENT F.PDF ATTACHMENT G.PDF 11. NEW BUSINESS 11.A. Resolution 2025-062 Adopting And Confirming Quarterly Special Assessments For Delinquent Utilities Joua Yang, Finance Director Amy LaMere, Accounting Clerk Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHHMENT A.PDF 11.B. Ordinance 2025-003 Amending Chapter 4 - City Code Animals And Pets Sections 400 And 410 And Chapter 13 - Zoning Code Section 1325 - Location For Buildings Housing Farm Animals For Planning Case 25-007 And Authorization To Publish A Summary Ordinance 2025-003 Elena Fransen, Senior Planner Documents: MEMO.PDF ATTACHMENT A.PDF ATTACHMENT B.PDF ATTACHMENT C.PDF 12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS ADJO URN STAFF COMMENTS - 6A '!Tt -fi II�)EN_ HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Transportation Update Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: A verbal update will be provided at the City Council meeting. Page 1 of 1 M� -ARDEN HILLS Approved: September 22, 2025 [DRAFT CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AUGUST 25, 2025 5:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Grant called to order the Special City Council Work Session meeting at 5:00 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant; Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Tena Monson, Emily Rousseau and Kurt Weber Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Jessica Jagoe; Public Works Director/City Engineer David Swearingen; Finance Director Joua Yang, Senior Planner Elena Fransen and Assistant to the City Administrator/City Clerk Julie Hanson 1. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL Aisha Elmquist of Arden Hills is proposing to have a tree planted in memory of House Representative Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark Hortman. In light of the tragedy that happened, many cities and private parties are looking at some way to memorialize them. A tree was recently planted in Shoreview. She would love to see Arden Hills follow suit. She reached out to City Staff to discuss possibilities. Representative Hortman loved flowering trees so a few species were discussed. She discussed potential locations with Staff. She would be happy to gather any additional information that Council would find helpful and bring it back to a future meeting. Mayor Grant said Council discussed this at a previous meeting. There was agreement among Council to plant a tree. Council directed Staff to do some additional research and bring something back. He said she shared some great ideas with Staff and Council is in favor of this proposal. Councilmember Weber asked what location was scoped. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said the exact location has not been determined but there are a couple of ideas for where it could go. Councilmember Rousseau asked what is needed from Council to move forward. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 2 Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said he would need Council to direct him to move forward. He would need to look at what mechanism we would use to approach this. He would like to know what Shoreview did. Mayor Grant thought we could take it out of the Tree Fund. City Administrator Jagoe said we need to make sure it meets the public use expenditures criteria. Mayor Grant said we always plant trees. This would be a tree planted in their honor. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen asked if there would be plaque. City Administrator Jagoe said Staff would look at the total cost of that. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said that is enough direction, for now. Councilmember Holden wants to make sure that when it is planted there will be a dedication ceremony. Mayor Grant agreed. It will be in the newsletter with a photo of the plaque. He asked how soon we can do this. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said we are already in the process of it. We asked Ms. Elmquist to attend tonight to make a formal request. Mayor Grant asked if we are past the planting window for this season. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said there is still time. It will depend on the type of tree selected. Mayor Grant would encourage a hearty, flowering tree. Councilmember Rousseau said we could note when the dedication ceremony will be during the State of the City. Ms. Elmquist said Representative Moller, and others, would be very interested in attending. Once a date is selected, she can make sure to get the word out. Mayor Grant said we will extend an invitation to Senator Marty and get the word to her colleagues at the Capitol. 2. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES None. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 3 3. AGENDA ITEMS A. Utility Billing Rate Discussion Finance Director Yang said the City charges 8% late fee penalty when utility accounts are over 30-days past due. This is a one-time penalty that is charged against the utility account's outstanding invoice amount. The City has waived late penalties on a case by case basis, based on some common themes included in the agenda packet information. The City doesn't have a formal policy on waiving these late fees. Based on Staff inquiries to neighboring cities, that is the case across the cities. Staff is seeking discussion and direction from City Council regarding the existing ordinances and the City's current practices for waiving late fees on utility accounts. Staff received an inquiry about extending the 30-day past due delinquent period for utility bills. Staff is seeking further direction from Council on if we should consider a longer delinquent period, such as 45-days or 60-days. There is an outstanding request to waive two quarters of late fees. Council is requested to have a discussion before any decision is made to move forward with that or deny the request. Mayor Grant is surprised neighboring cities charge 10%. He thought 8% was high. Councilmember Rousseau asked where would residents learn that they can make that request for a one-time accommodation. Finance Director Yang said residents usually call after seeing the late fee in their invoice. Councilmember Rousseau asked if it is stated anywhere that they can call and make the request. Finance Director Yang said that is not on the invoice. Councilmember Rousseau asked how often residents call? She is aware of a business that has done this in the past. Businesses have different resources than a resident. How do residents know there is any flexibility? Finance Director Yang can't speak to how they know. She sees a handful of requests come in on a quarterly basis. There are maybe 5-10 each quarter. Councilmember Rousseau asked if the requests come from the same neighborhoods? Finance Director Yang said it is random. Councilmember Weber is surprised that other cities don't have official policies. He asked if that is correct. Finance Director Yang confirmed. It is a common practice but there is no policy that states how or if fee can be waived. Councilmember Weber said several cities do have official policies. Finance Director Yang said unless it says "policy in place" the cities on the list didn't indicate whether a policy or a common practice. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 4 Councilmember Weber assumes we will not waive the fee unless they are calling to make payment. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Weber said the individual probably isn't looking for a policy prior to calling. He said if they are calling to make payment on that delinquent bill, the waiver should just be given once per year, or however often Council decides to allow. Councilmember Holden doesn't see a water bill any differently than a mortgage, credit card or anything else. You get it and you have at least 10-15 days, by the time you receive the invoice, to pay it. One time she wrote out her bill, stuck it in her briefcase and forgot to mail it. She called. They checked to make sure that had never happened before, and they waived the fee. How many people are repetitively not paying? We know the ones who don't pay because they come up every quarter. She just doesn't think this is any different than any other bill. You get your bills, and you pay them. We have to pay the City of Roseville when our water bill comes. Councilmember Weber asked how often we pay Roseville. Finance Director Yang said payment used to be quarterly but it is now once a month. Councilmember Weber said a resident who is delinquent on a regular basis would not get their fee waived more than once in what ever time frame Council determines. That won't change. He wouldn't want it to get too convoluted. He wondered about a tiered system where maybe you get one fee waived in year one and year two, but then maybe you have to wait a whole year to do it again. That way it is punitive for repeat offenders but not for those who put it in their briefcase and forgot to mail it. There should be a policy in place and it should waive the fee for a resident who misses a single payment in a couple of years. Councilmember Holden asked how hard it is to keep track of who gets a waiver and when. Finance Director Yang said that information can be found quickly. Councilmember Rousseau thinks we should allow a fee to be waived one time over a three year time period. We should put that on the bill and in the policy. Otherwise, we just don't waive the fees. She would like to have a conversation on if 8% is right for us. Mayor Grant agrees with a forgiveness once every three years. There are instances where businesses have billing issues or it might slip through the cracks. If someone calls up and they had an issue and are willing to pay to resolve it. If they get themselves current that should be allowed once every three years. Councilmember Weber agrees with the 8%. It is the middle of the road compared to the cities that were surveyed. He wondered what the fee would be from Roseville, if we were to pay late. Finance Director Yang said we haven't been late since she has been here. The invoice is Excel - based. She hasn't seen any language outlining what the late fee rate is. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 5 Mayor Grant said there is a software conversion for Springbrook. There could be a company going through a software conversion and hit a hiccup and miss a payment. It happens. Councilmember Monson said she agrees, once every three years. She's fine with it being anywhere between 5% and 10%. Thirty days seems long. Is the assumption that if they haven't paid by 30-days that they aren't going to pay? The ones on the list are 5 days, 10 days or just a couple days after. She wondered if Staff had thoughts about the 30-days. She's fine leaving it at 30-days but at some point they are just not going to pay it. Finance Director Yang said the ordinance says 30-days past due. As common practice, we give residents a 10-day grace period beyond the 30-days. City Administrator Jagoe said the due date is 30-days and the ordinance would say the late fee goes on at day 31. Plus there is the 10-day grace period. Councilmember Monson agrees with the waiving the fee once every three years. Keeping it at 8% is fine with her. Councilmember Weber said it's 10-days delinquent. Councilmember Rousseau asked why we are at 8%. She wondered if it was an administrative cost or just a standard penalty to get someone's attention. Finance Director Yang said it is to cover part Admin fee but also to encourage residents to pay on time. Mayor Grant said we are all in agreement with 8% and one time in three years. He asked if Staff needed anything else. City Administrator Jagoe said there is a request from a particular business. She said Staff has removed one of the late fees. The request from this business was to remove two additional quarters worth of fees. She understands the business has brought the account to current, with the exception of the late fees. They stated they have made some internal changes that will correct the issue, moving forward. They were still hoping for relief from two additional quarters of fees. Mayor Grant asked if it was a procedural software administrative issue. City Administrator Jagoe thinks they had some structure changes within their finance department that created a timing issue with payment and processing of checks. Councilmember Holden asked how many quarters this was. City Administrator Jagoe said it was three quarters. We removed one. They requested that we remove two additional quarters of fees. Mayor Grant said they brought themselves current. City Administrator Jagoe confirmed, with the exception of the fees they are hoping to have removed. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 6 Councilmember Holden said they didn't pay the fees so they did not bring themselves to current. Councilmember Monson asked how much the late fee is that they want removed. City Administrator Jagoe said the two quarters of late fees totals about $16,000. Councilmember Monson would be fine with waiving half. Three quarters is a lot. That is a lot of money. Mayor Grant is okay with waiving the full amount given the nature of the problem. Councilmember Rousseau would prefer to allow half. Councilmember Weber said if he called and requested three quarters be waived, it's not happening. Our policy is one and we've done that. He asked if the late fees were applied before payment in full or was there a late fee charged because of a late fee that wasn't paid? Finance Director Yang said there was an outstanding water balance. Councilmember Rousseau asked where will residents find out that they can have one fee waived over three years. Finance Director Yang said that can be added to the utility bill. Mayor Grant asked how much water this customer uses per year. Finance Director Yang didn't have consumption information. Councilmember Monson asked if they are a high user. City Administrator Jagoe said there is a combination of accounts for this customer. Mayor Grant said the total monthly payment to the City may be relevant. City Administrator Jagoe said in the first quarter of 2024 one of the accounts was a couple hundred and another was $53,000 for that quarter. This customer receives eight separate statements. The total, when adding all eight accounts is about $100,000. The late fees total $8,000 each quarter. Councilmember Weber supports full payment. If Council agrees on them paying half, he would support that. Councilmember Holden is okay with half the payment. Councilmember Monson is fine if they pay half, she'd be okay waiving the whole thing, too. Councilmember Rousseau said she supports full payment but would be okay with us waiving half. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 7 Mayor Grant is okay with waiving half. City Administrator Jagoe asked for confirmation that we will keep the due date at 30-days, not extending it to 45-days. Councilmember Monson asked if the same business that is requesting the fees be waived is also requesting 45-day terms. City Administrator Jagoe confirmed. Councilmember Monson said if they are paying monthly we should stick to 30-days. Finance Director Yang said when looking at the ordinance we found some inconsistent language in the 30-day period. Staff will bring forward an updated ordinance in the future. City Administrator Jagoe said it all says the same thing, but the difference in phrasing on how we apply late fees can be confusing. Mayor Grant said straighten it out, bring it back to council and we'll vote on it. Councilmember Holden asked how long someone would have to request a fee be waived. A year? She is worried someone won't pay year after year. What if they come back and request those fees be waived. How long is it open? Council agreed it would only be an option after the due date has passed but before the next billing cycle. Any unpaid balances are certified to taxes. Councilmember Weber wanted to address Councilmember Rousseau's idea of adding a notice to the billing statement. He supports that addition. Councilmember Holden isn't sure that's necessary. People will call the City if they want to make a request. She doesn't think we should announce that we will waive the fees. We are running a business, as far as water goes. Councilmember Weber said it could just say "Overdue bill? Contact City Staff." We don't have to lay it out, but can encourage residents to call us to work it out. Mayor Grant supports that. B. 2026 CIP and Operating Budget Discussion Mayor Grant said this is a big topic. He thought we should start with the general overview. Finance Director Yang said the general overview is broken out into separate sections; one for CIP and one for General Fund. Mayor Grant said we should go through the slides. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 8 Finance Director Yang said we discussed the 2026-2030 CIP budget at the July work sessions. Council directed Staff to provide several budget options that would be funded by either a levy increase or through bonding and the impact each funding option would have. She will touch on the shift in project expenditures and the various impacts. Finance Director Yang began with the Hard Court and Trail Rehabilitation. She shared slides showing how things will change after moving the project expenditures. Project increases, by year, are shown as negative numbers and decreases as positive numbers to show how the changes will impact the overall Fund Balance. Increases to project expenditures reduce Fund Balance and decreases improve Fund Balance. The key changes made include Hazelnut tennis court and trail rehab was shifted from 2026 to 2028. It was $250,000. That moved to $265,000; a 6% or $15,000 cost increase over a 10-year period. The Ingerson basketball court and new trail connection was shifted from both projects occurring in 2027 to just trail connections in 2027 at the $100,000. The basketball court will shift to 2033. There will be a $500 cost increase there. Mayor Grant asked if Council wanted to discuss each topic as we go through. Councilmember Monson didn't have any comments on this portion. Councilmember Holden asked if the borings have been done at Arden Manor. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. Councilmember Holden said it's flat and there doesn't seem to be any chunks out of it. There are a lot of cracks. She asked if we can crack seal it. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said the cracks continue to grow. It has been crack sealed. The problem is it is built on peat moss. Councilmember Holden said we need to do the foundation. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. Mayor Grant said from an expenditure standpoint, he asked if we want to swap the Arden Manor court and Hazelnut, rather than remove Hazelnut. He thinks Hazelnut gets far more use. Councilmember Holden said it's a whole different contract. If we do the church parking lot, they wouldn't be doing the court. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen was originally going to tie the Hazelnut court to the parking lot. Council direction from the previous conversation was to shift some of the hard courts out. He thought that could be separated out from the parking lot. Councilmember Holden asked if we would save any money if they were done together. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said typically it would, from a project management standpoint. The contractor is there. That would save on mobilization costs. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 9 Mayor Grant said if we did Hazelnut in 2026 we could convert it to pickle ball and give residents the opportunity to get regulation pickle ball courts in Arden Hills. He thinks that would be well used. Arden Manor court doesn't get that much use, compared to what you could get out of Hazelnut. Councilmember Weber said there is the possibility of a grant for Arden Manor Court. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said in the past we have applied for the Community Block Development grant. That grant hasn't been available for the past two years. Councilmember Weber asked if it would apply for Hazelnut. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen is not aware of any grants that could be applied to Hazelnut. Councilmember Weber asked if that would happen next year. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said the CDBG grant has no funding available. Councilmember Monson said we already delayed Arden Manor court from 2024. If the basketball court isn't used a lot, could we do fenced in soccer? If we don't think the court will get used, do we need to adjust the amenities for the community that uses it? If we are going to delay it again, she would ask for some consideration on that. If we want the court for sure, she would prefer we do Arden Manor because we've already delayed it for three years. Councilmember Weber would be open to trying to find a way to ask the community. He could see a soccer field be much more utilized there. He likes that idea. Councilmember Monson said there is a soccer field there already. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said the field would flood. There is currently a drainage issue in that space. Councilmember Rousseau would be interested in learning more from the residents. She doesn't know if it's accurate that the current court isn't used. Hazelnut may have more people who are closer to it but she would like to consider this underserved community. We have pushed this out for over three years. Mayor Grant asked if we could get some nets for the hoops. One looks dilapidated and the other one is gone. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said they were planned to be fully replaced with the court. Mayor Grant said that was the plan but for now, can we get nets? There are hoops but no nets. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed we could get nets. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 10 Councilmember Monson asked Staff s opinion on trying to find a different use for that court space. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said it is a fine idea. Logistically we would have to do a public engagement event. If we were to keep this on track to build next year, we would need to start that process soon. We generally are bidding projects by the January/February timeframe. Councilmember Weber asked Staffs opinion on what budget impact installing a field would have. Would we have to add drainage to the soccer field? Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen he heard fenced in soccer. Councilmember Weber asked if making that change would improve the budget situation. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said striping on the hard court would have a similar cost. Councilmember Weber said it's just getting repaved. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. If Council is focusing on there being a different use there. Councilmember Weber asked if Councilmember Monson was referring to a hard court. Councilmember Monson was referring to a hard court. She doesn't know what could be done. There would have to be some research. Councilmember Weber interpreted it to be grass surface and a removal of the hard court. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen has seen videos of mini nets and mini courts, where they can kick the ball off the fence. Mayor Grant said it is a three-quarter court. It certainly isn't regulation size. Maybe it should be similar to Ingerson where you have one half court basketball. One thing he noticed is the play structure is nice. The soccer grass area is kind of marshy and not so great. The shelter is nice. Where can someone go throw a frisbee or baseball, other than the soggy soccer area? If we made that a half court, there would be some green grass area to recreate. Councilmember Rousseau wants to keep this as is. She is in favor of Staff doing the outreach. She understands Staff s time and resource constraints, but she would want to hear from the community members there. Councilmember Monson said if there is a good idea, she would love to repurpose that area to something the residents want. Realistically, if we can't get that outreach completed, maybe we have to push that one to 2027 and do something else in 2026. If we repave the area for something that the community isn't heavily using seems like a missed opportunity to give them something they will actually use. We are functioning under the assumption that those residents don't use the basketball court very much. She doesn't know if that is true. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 11 Councilmember Holden said we continue to get requests for pickle ball repeatedly. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen would hesitate to put pickle ball at that location. Councilmember Holden was thinking Hazelnut. We have pristine tennis courts at Cummings. The cry for pickle bill is still outstanding. If we can save money by doing the tennis court with the parking lot, that might be a slam dunk. Councilmember Weber wanted to know if pickle ball is louder than basketball. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said it generates a lot of complaints. Mayor Grant said tennis balls are soft, pickle balls are hard. Councilmember Monson asked if it is realistic for Staff to complete resident outreach before 2026. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. If he got direction tonight that Council wants to move forward, he would work with Parks and Recreation Manager Skalicky to review. The area was surveyed when we were designing it, in 2022. He will review that information and they will figure out how to approach the outreach. Councilmember Monson would prefer to do the outreach and see what comes up. Then we can make the decision to hold it for 2026 or swap a different project. Councilmember Weber said if we were to decide to push Arden Manor and go with Hazelnut, is that a swap that can be made easily? Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen thinks so. The tennis court at Hazelnut will just be replaced in the same spot. The soil borings there showed there is no major reconstruction work needed. The biggest discussion is what the use will be and if we want to convert it to pickle ball space. Councilmember Weber would prefer to stick to this new schedule, pending what is discovered at Arden Manor. If possible address Arden Manor in 2026. If that isn't possible we have to discuss it. There are at least two councilmembers who don't want to push this two more years. Mayor Grant said he doesn't think we can definitively decide this tonight. There is a lot of information to discuss. He thinks we should move on. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen asked for direction if Council wants Staff to move forward with the public outreach. Mayor Grant said to start with looking at the old survey and see what was said, at that time. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said that is what he will do. If that is insufficient, he would like to begin a public survey process in that community. He asked if ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 12 Council would prefer him to research that and come back to let them know there isn't enough information. Mayor Grant wondered what it would take to print postcards and ask residents to drop it off or send it in. Councilmember Monson thought a QR code and have it in English and Spanish. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said Parks and Recreation Manager Skalicky is good at that. Councilmember Holden said we need to go directly to the residents. We can't go through management. City Administrator Jagoe said we can do a mailer and a Next Door post describing the outreach. Councilmember Rousseau agrees that we need to go directly to the residents. She has concerns about language barriers. If Staff doesn't have what they need from the previous survey results, she is fine with Staff moving forward with the outreach without further Council direction. Mayor Grant said it is important that we get it right and give the residents something that they like and that they will use. Councilmember Holden said we need to be careful on wording. There are a lot of Hispanic residents and she doesn't what people wondering what the City is collecting from them. She wouldn't want anyone to be panicked. Councilmember Weber said that sounds like consensus to move forward. Mayor Grant said yes. Finance Director Yang said there were three location where park shelter replacements were programmed for 2026 at $170,000. Those were shifted to occur in 2029 with Cummings Park removed. That was an $85,000 impact. The changes resulted in a $77,500 decrease to project expenditures over the next 10-year period. The shifts in theses two park projects assume they will remain in place and have been incorporated into the various Fund Balance scenarios that she will be walking through. Mayor Grant said the Cummings Park shelter, that was removed, was used for shade while the kids play on the playground, according to residents he talked to. He asked if Council think we needs a full building, rather than just a shade structure. He doesn't think a shade structure is $85,000. Councilmember Rousseau asked if Mayor Grant was suggesting we add a shade structure as a new item at Cummings. Councilmember Weber said Cummings Park was removed in this scenario. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 13 Mayor Grant said not in 2026 but sometime in the future. If Cummings is just not in the plan at all, scratch that idea. Councilmember Rousseau would like to see us look at an additional playground structure, instead of replacing a pavilion. Councilmember Monson is fine with leaving it out and focusing on some shade potential or expansion of the playground. There are no trees on the south side of the park. Councilmember Rousseau said we could place a dedicated tree there in the near future. Mayor Grant said the best time to plant a tree was yesterday. Finance Director Yang said based on Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen's review of PMP projects, the 2028 PMP could be split into two separate projects. One could occur in 2028 and the other would be in 2030. This would mean pushing the 2030 project back to 2032, with the 2032 project being pushed to 2034, and so forth. This change would yield a Fund Balance improvement of approximately $3.5 million over the next 10-years. Finance Director Yang shared a list of infrastructure projects in 2026 that provide the new project amounts. Councilmember Holden asked how much the City owes for the Old Highway 10 Trail. The packet information says $4.5 million. She wants to know what the City's portion of that is. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said $1.27 million. Mayor Grant said that is an estimate, not a bid. That assumes the County is 50150 with us, plus receipt of a Safe Route to School grant. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. That is two $1 million grants and Ramsey County confirmed they will propose that match in their TIP. Councilmember Rousseau asked what was being taken out of 2028 to reduce the amount by $1.5 million. Finance Director Yang said it is splitting the 2028 PMP into two separate projects in 2028 and 2030. The cost increased slightly, with timing and inflation. Councilmember Weber said it appears to be about $400,000 in estimated increase. He wondered if there is a buffer built in for additional inflation or construction cost increases. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said it captures everything he anticipated. He tried to stay conservative on the high end. Councilmember Holden asked which year will be the commercial property improvements. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said it was originally 2030. It has been shifted to 2032. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 14 Councilmember Holden asked if they pay three quarters of the $8 million. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen clarified that this captures everything. Mayor Grant said the difference of $3.4 million is because the 2034 project got pushed to 2036 and is off the screen. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. Councilmember Weber said we are paying an additional $1.2 million dollars for this new project because we are pushing them out for the next 10 years. He pointed out that is just like bonding. We could just bond, do the projects and pay the same amount extra. Councilmember Monson said in the memo it states the levy increase being proposed for the General Fund is $742,866. Police and fire are 54% of our General Levy Fund. She asked how much is the 2026 PMP, percentage -wise. Finance Director Yang said the $3.3 million cost is not just in the PIR Fund. It is the sewer, water and surface water, as well. Councilmember Monson is just trying to determine how much it is broken out. What percent of the levy is fire safety? How much is parks vs. streets? She thinks the operating is broken out. Finance Director Yang said the way the levy works is, we take into account Fund Balance for CIP. She is proposing for CIP, which is the PIR Fund, to not change from the $250,000. If we shift projects, that will ultimately improve the overall Fund Balance. It may not change the Levy. It could change the levy down or up, if we want to. Right now what is being proposed is to remain at $250,000 for 2026. Councilmember Weber said she is proposing to add $50,000 in 2027. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Based on a specific scenario. Finance Director Yang said under equipment the 621 Case loader was shifted from 2026 to 2027. That was $300,000. Under vehicles the Ford Escape was shifted from 2026 to 2027. That was $33,500. Councilmember Weber thought there was consensus that we were just going to use the loader until we can't. He asked for clarification that all scenarios of the budget plan include the $300,000 expenditure in 2027 for the end loader. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Weber thought there was consensus that the machine will be used until it is no longer usable. He would propose moving it to 2031. We can start now and add an amount into the Equipment Fund so we can get there, by then. Councilmember Holden said the Ford Escape was $41,000. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 15 Finance Director Yang said it's net amount vs. costs. Councilmember Holden agrees to use the loader until it dies. We always try to put something in there. It could die in two years. She is amazed how many trailers we buy. You should just weld it and put a new bearing in it. We need to keep that in there. Councilmember Rousseau is in favor of using the case loader until it dies. She understands that if it does, we need to have the funds ready to purchase something. She doesn't know how far out you have to order a case loader prior to delivery. She said a fire truck is one or two years. She wondered if there is a long wait for a case loader, like there is with a fire truck. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen isn't sure. His guess would be it would be a 6-12 month wait. City Administrator Jagoe said for this discussion, we can put a pause on the timing of the case loader. Staff could bring back a discussion item in March, to get to a set number that we use for equipment replacement. Then we can look at the strategy and timing of the case loader. For now, we can leave it in the 2027 planning. It won't change the discussion for this budget. In March, Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen can do a complete review on the timing and the needs. We can determine an amount that flattens the budget level each year. Mayor Grant said one thing to keep in mind is the 621 case loader is not the only loader down there. We have a 590, as well. Yes, it's a 1-yard bucket but a dump truck is 5-yards. Maybe you have to dump 5 buckets. We can get there. The only other thing the 621 is used for is to push back snow. We usually can push that back with a snow plow, anyway. Councilmember Weber said that is an important factor. We won't be in dire straights if it does break down. We should have one, in the long run. He agrees with keeping it in the long-term plan. He also thinks we should start building for that now. That would mean, if we put away $50,000 a year we can pay for it in 6 years. Councilmember Holden said we should do the planning for that in March. Councilmember Monson agrees that Staff should come back with a plan. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen thought that was the direction to bring it back in March. He will move forward with that. Mayor Grant asked if the 1996 Redi-Haul Trailer is a zero gravity tilt trailer. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen believes all of the trailers are tilt. Mayor Grant doesn't understand why we are getting a new one. We replaced them all because we wanted the gravity tilt. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said ergonomics and safety are the reasons. The other thing to remember is the trade-in value. The "use it until it dies" approach is not ideal. Especially for a City to maintain things that way. When discussing the loader, we did look at used ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 16 pieces of equipment. At that point, we are spending retail. We don't have the state contract pricing. The 2019 model we looked at was $225,000 with no attachments. What is included in the budget is a brand new model with all the attachments we need for $275,000. So using equipment until it dies is putting us in a position where we have a huge gap. Mayor Grant was asking about the Redi-Haul Trailer. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said it's a similar thing. We trade in our trailers while they are still salable on an auction and they go for a good price. Mayor Grant said the City is only three miles north to south. How many miles can we put on a trailer? Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen the reasons are in the justifications. There isn't time to go through all eighty-five pieces of equipment tonight. We can go into it more in depth in March of next year. Mayor Grant said the most you have to do on a trailer is grease the bearings and maybe it needs a little welding once in a while. Councilmember Rousseau said we talked about adding equipment in the budget in the future. Which fund would we end up having discussions about the Park Master Plan and putting something aside to try to make the goals. Will that go into this years plan so it can slowly build up or will we look at it next year. Finance Director Yang said we can discuss it, this time around. It would be in the PIR Fund. Councilmember Holden said just because it's in the budget doesn't mean that we have to vote for it, when it comes forward. She said we had asked for some money to be budgeted for the 75tn Anniversary. Is that in here? City Administrator Jagoe said there hasn't been any money budgeted for that. The only allocation has been the use of the Twin City Gateway Visitor Bureau money. The update on those funds will be at the September work session. Mayor Grant asked if it is worth keeping Truck 431 as a backup. Would there be any residual on that? Or are parts so hard to get on a 2009 Sterling that we just don't want anything to do with it? Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said Truck 431 has already been approved and ordered for replacement. Councilmember Holden said that wasn't the question. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said he doesn't know that level of detail. That is why he had Public Works Superintendent Frid at the last meeting. He doesn't have that information. Finance Director Yang said the next few slides will be discussion on scenarios, she referred Council to Attachment B, page 1-7 in the packet. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 17 Finance Director Yang said the first two scenarios assume no change to PMP projects. She reminded that earlier discussion included splitting the 2028 PMP into two different years. That is not included in these two scenarios. Scenario A shows that if the City chose to only increase the levy, we would need to levy a larger amount. She used $350,000 as an estimate to ensure we could maintain the long term health of the fund. With that change, we would maintain a positive fund balance through 2029. Finance Director Yang said scenario B looks at bonding. The City would receive cash to fund the project, up front, in 2026. There would be no impact to the 2026 levy. The debt service would begin in 2027. The levy would increase by $163,000 in 2027. This would also only get us to 2029. The City would need to bond again in 2030 and increase the levy by $179,000 in 2031 to cover the new debt service. That would get the City to 2035. This is showing what bonding can do to the overall fund balance. Interest payments over the life of the 2026 bond is estimated to be $1.6 million. That would be a $3.3 million bond over 20 years. Interest payments over the life of the 2030 bond is estimated to be $2.7 million. That would be a $5.8 million bond over 20 years. Councilmember Holden said we will have to bond for the spine road. She asked how much we have to bond for TCAAP, including the water tower and all the utilities. Finance Director Yang recalled discussion regarding two issuances. Councilmember Rousseau asked if the water tower would be discussed in future MOUs with developers. Councilmember Weber thought the amount was $13 million. Councilmember Holden asked if that will be next year. Councilmember Weber said no. The only thing the City may be responsible for is the trunk line utilities. The water tower and any other utilities in the area can wait until development. Councilmember Holden understands that. She asked what the first bond amount would be. Councilmember Weber said $7 million. Councilmember Holden said if we bond for $7 million, which will cost us about $3 million in interest. So we will be spending $8-10 million just on bonding. Councilmember Monson said that is just for this scenario, which Staff is not recommending. Mayor Grant said in the packet it states the total interest to be paid over 20 years for the first bond would be $1.56 million. The second estimated to be $2.7 million. That's a lot of interest. Finance Director Yang said the key difference between these scenarios is if we bond, there are structured debt service payments. That means a level levy. That is $350,000 in scenario A vs. $163,000 in scenario B with less burden on taxpayers, annually. You are also spreading the tax burden to current and new users. The Fund Balance capacity is much larger because we would have more dollars to spread, simply bonding. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 18 Councilmember Weber said our projects would stay on track, as well. Finance Director Yang confirmed. She discussed scenarios C and D. These assume a shift in the PMP projects after Public Works Director Swearingen's analysis. Both have the same assumptions including: the shift in the PMP projects, increasing the levy by $50,000 in 2027 with no impact on the 2026 levy. The key difference is in scenario D we increase the levy by $50,000 annually thereafter. It will build up a Fund Balance reserve and get us to 2033 vs. 2031, as in scenario C. If we keep adding to the Fund Balance reserve we will allow ourselves more time. Finance Director Yang said scenario E assumes the same shift in PMP project expenditures but instead of increasing the levy, we would bond in 2026. This scenario will get the City through 2033. With bonding, we have structured debt service payments, a tax levy, and a larger fund balance capacity. Scenario E would see a $2 million fund balance vs. $1.3 for scenario D. If Council doesn't want to bond, Staff s recommendation is scenario D. That would be the PMP project shift and increasing the levy by $50,000 annually. Councilmember Weber said he isn't seeing it outlined that with scenario B that there is going to be a levy increase to pay that. It was a little over $300,000 combined for payment. Those would be down the road vs. a straight $350,000 next year to still fall short. We are looking at a potential increase of $1.2 million, splitting our project costs over the next six years. He said $1.2 over 20- years is a big interest rate so is $1.2 million over six years. We're losing that money either way. He would rather not risk degradation of our roads even further to the point where we have to go to a reconstruct. That would double the price. He likes the idea of scenario D as a measured approach, he thinks bonding now is justified. It will add to the PIR Fund annual levy immediately. It will get our PIR back up, giving us a head start on paying back the bond. The interest is money we would have lost anyway through increases to project costs. Councilmember Holden asked where Councilmember Weber sees the project cost increased to $1.2 or $1.7 million. Councilmember Weber said there was an earlier slide that showed the before and after. Comparing the prices it's a difference of $1.2 million. Each project split in half added an additional $400,000 between the two. The last project getting pushed out two years was a half a million dollars higher. That got kicked off the page so it isn't counted in the total amount. With this plan, over the next 8 years, we're paying an additional $1.2 million for the same projects and just splitting them up. That justifies bonding. Councilmember Holden said the bonding cost is $1.7 million. That's $500,000. Councilmember Weber said it also rescues our fund. Councilmember Holden asked how many roads are close to requiring total reconstruction. We've been doing the worst first. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said today, without the new adjustment, once we got to 2030 we were going to address the ones that are in the worst shape. We did a large area of patching in Chatham neighborhood. That seems to be holding up well. He thinks we can ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 19 get 10 years out of it. It is tough to know until we take the cores. He said starting in 2030 we will address the worst roads. Councilmember Monson asked if Councilmember Weber is in favor of scenario E. Councilmember Weber confirmed, to some extent. Councilmember Monson said it has the PMP pushed still. So he would like to see a blend of D and E. Councilmember Weber said and add in a levy increase right away. We can't get by with a 0% levy increase this year. Councilmember Monson said one of her biggest concerns is to smooth the levy. That seems to be an advantage to scenario E. Any bonding will help smooth the levy. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Monson said if we bond in 2026 we don't need a second bond in 2030. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Rousseau asked if Staff looked at only bonding the $1.2 million for Old Highway 10. Finance Director Yang did not look at that one alone. She took the bigger PMP project. Councilmember Rousseau asked if that could be a compromise. If we did that and a levy increase, we are halfway to the $3.3 million. Finance Director Yang said the total cost to the City for the Old Highway 10 project is $1.3 million. The total project cost is $4.5 million. That is what will drive down the Fund Balance in 2026. We could look to bond a portion of it. Councilmember Rousseau would like to see a scenario where we only bond for Old Highway 10. Other entities are paying 75% of that project. Even if we added an increase in interest, we are still saving money by doing this project. She sees justification in bonding for that. She'd like to see a combination scenario between what Councilmember Weber said and looking at just bonding for our portion of Old Highway 10. Councilmember Holden said the Lake Johanna Trail is coming in 2029. Do these numbers account for that? Finance Director Yang said these scenarios do not include Lake Johanna Boulevard Trail. Councilmember Holden said the balance of the Park Fund after Trident pays their $800,000 will just sit there. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 20 Mayor Grant favors Staff s recommendation. He doesn't think bonding is right of us. The interest payments will get us. He asked Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen about our PCI rating after 2026. He thought it was 72. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen he said it is around 72-74. We need to maintain it or it can dip drastically year to year. Mayor Grant said it can spike backup if we do a needed project. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. Mayor Grant said we are at 72 or 74 and we are trying to maintain 70. As long as the projects in 2028, 2030 and 2032 are not catastrophic projects with low PCIs, scenario D makes even more sense. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. He said we want to avoid upsetting residents over the condition of their roads. Overall the condition is 72 or 73 but Amble Drive is in the teens. It's terrible. Mayor Grant said that one is coming up. That should raise our PCI even higher. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed but the rest of the system is degrading at the same time. Mayor Grant understands it's a net effect. He doesn't want Council digging itself into a hole over future years with interest payments. Councilmember Weber said the hole is already there as indicated by the red on the pages. We need to start to fix that. Right now, scenario D, without the Lake Johanna Trail, is projecting a $1.5 million deficit. That is pushing the projects that pushes them into a territory where full reconstruct may be needed. Bonding now would reduce the need to immediately spike our levy and not push the projects out that need to be done. It also gives us the opportunity to address probable issues with our General Fund being well below the minimum preference of 50% of our budget. He thinks we are at 20% now. Finance Director Yang said it is currently 45%. Councilmember Weber said it is expected to drop significantly. Finance Director Yang confirmed it could. Councilmember Weber thinks we need to address the issue now. We are already looking at the potential for lost funds in spreading out the projects. If we spend that money on interest it will save us from having to spike the levy. Councilmember Monson wondered what the pros for scenario D are other than us choosing not to bond. If we do decide to bond, what is the recommendation? Finance Director Yang said scenario E is the best option, if we choose to bond. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 21 Councilmember Monson said we would increase the levy in 2027 by $163,000. There would be no change to the annual levy after that. It's at $250,000 and we would bump it by $163,000 in 2027. We would just hold it there? We have projects that would allow us to bond in 2026 but this would still shift the projects. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Monson said scenario B is bonding in 2026 and bonding again in 2030 plus an increase to the levy with another increase in 2031. At that point we don't know what else we will be on the project list. She doesn't want to get in the position where we are bonding for every PMP. She is leaning toward scenario E, allowing for adjustments if we need it. Councilmember Holden said in scenario E we say we don't have to have a levy increase or just minor increases. We know we are going to add more projects. We know residents are going to want things. We know public safety costs are going to increase. For us to say the levy will hardly go up over the next 8-10 years isn't a reality. We know we are going to be in the hole in 3032 and 3034. There is no reason why we can't set the levy now to alleviate that, without paying a ton of money in interest. Councilmember Weber asked what percent increase to the PIR would it take for that? He thought 150%. That is essentially scenario A which would increase funding now to plan ahead. That still wouldn't get us there. Just increasing the levy will hurt now and still not get us where we need to be. He agrees with a single round of bonding. Scenario E looks good, it could look better at the end. We don't need a 0% increase on the PIR this year. We can do $50,000 and then $50,000 every year after. The initial presentation that showed we have 30 miles of roads and we're only funding it at 50% of what we need. He thought $1.5 million a year is what we need to be investing in the City to maintain that. We are only doing $750,000. Some of that comes from state aid but that's only $350,000 per year. We need to start building back the PIR. In 2034 we may be in a good position. Once we get Rice Creek Commons moving, those new residents will be helping to pay down those bonds. He isn't suggesting that as a crutch, but it is the goal of the City to get Rice Creek Commons underway. Councilmember Holden said looking at what Rice Creek Commons is going to cost us, we're in the hole. The money we get from Rice Creek Commons has to go back into Rice Creek Commons. The money from the current Arden Hills will have to go into Rice Creek. Councilmember Weber asked in what timeframe. Mayor Grant said it is true that the City will get revenue out of Rice Creek Commons. The City will also incur costs out of Rice Creek Commons that we will have to cover. By the time you net them we hope they break even. He isn't sure we're there. It won't be a huge cash cow. Councilmember Monson asked if Councilmember Holden is advocating for scenario A. Councilmember Holden said she hasn't decided yet. She would probably go with Staff recommendation. Councilmember Monson asked when the PIR Fund had an increase in the levy. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 22 Finance Director Yang did a 10-year look back and it has been steady at $250,000. Councilmember Monson assumes there were transfers into it when we were over 50%, when it was available. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Monson would like to see a consistent investment in our roads so we don't have to have these transfers from the next year. She is open to scenario E with some money starting in 2026. She doesn't think $50,000 per year from 2027 on, would be sufficient for scenario E. We have the increase of $163,000 where we're over $300,000. She doesn't know if we would have to do $350,000 or $400,000 in future years. Councilmember Weber said the debt service is built in. Councilmember Monson said she interpreted Councilmember Weber's comment to suggest adding $50,000 a year, per year. Councilmember Weber said increasing it $50,000. Councilmember Monson said in 2027 it would be $163,000. In 2028 it would be increased by $50,000. Councilmember Rousseau asked if the PIR is what we are looking at for the Park Master Plan. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Monson outlined it's at $250,000 now. This would be an increase of $163,000, totaling $413,000. She stated Councilmember Weber is recommending we go to $463,000 in 2028 and $513,000 in 2029. Councilmember Weber said it would be $326,000, instead of the $250,000. Then $512,000. That's a huge increase. That includes the debt service. Councilmember Monson isn't following that. Finance Director Yang said it sounds like Councilmember Weber is suggesting starting the $50,000 in 2026. So it would start at $300,000. Councilmember Weber confirmed. He said then add the $162,000, getting to $462,000 and doesn't include the $50,000 we add in 2027 to continue building the PIR. That is a giant jump. Maybe we leave it out of 2027. He recognized that going from $250,000 to $412,000 is a big jump but he would rather get a head start. Finance Directory Yang can look at different scenarios. Councilmember Monson said maybe we want to start earlier and not have a $163,000 jump. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 23 Finance Director Yang said Council would like to see a more leveled debt service. Mayor Grant asked if Lake Valentine Road is included with any of the project years. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said the top scenario is in 2030. The scenarios where the PMP is pushed, it would be in 2032. Mayor Grant asked when it was originally proposed, last time. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said there wasn't a clear schedule before he started. Mayor Grant thought it was proposed for 2024. It never did get done. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. We tried large area patching and the chip seal. Mayor Grant asked if there were further questions. He asked Councilmember Rousseau what her request was. Councilmember Rousseau wanted to see a scenario E but including bonding only for the Highway 10 Trail. Councilmember Weber asked if that was still pushing the PMPs. Councilmember Rousseau would like to see it both ways, if possible. Finance Director Yang confirmed she can do that. Councilmember Rousseau asked when the deadline was for the preliminary levy. Finance Director Yang said by the end of September. Councilmember Holden said there is $8,000 for Park and Rec To Go program. There weren't a lot of attendees and the places they are going is in the wealthier communities. She has a problem with that. She understands it hasn't worked in the mobile home community but we should considers ways to make it work at Arden Manor. There are a ton of kids in the town houses. We go to Cummings, which is surrounded by the wealthy community and Hazelnut. She doesn't understand spending $8,000 on a program that isn't hitting the communities that need it. Councilmember Rousseau said it would be helpful if Staff provided a breakdown of why those parks were chosen. With Arden Manor there were conversations about sharing the flyers in other languages. A lot of the kids that came by didn't have a waiver signed. We are early in the Park Master Plan but Cummings and Hazelnut have been identified by the consultants as community parks vs. neighborhood parks. She would be interested to see what thoughts are for next year, regarding those. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said Recreation Supervisor Johnson was going to have an after action report completed soon and will share in the Admin Update. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 24 Councilmember Holden said we didn't have the participation so she is worried that we aren't reaching a population that we need to reach. She doesn't view Cummings as a community park. Most people have to drive to Cummings. Councilmember Monson said that is what Councilmember Rousseau meant by a community park vs. a neighborhood park. Councilmember Holden thinks Cummings is highly utilized by people who live in that area. Same as Hazelnut is mostly utilized by people in that area. That what makes it a neighborhood park. Councilmember Rousseau said it is because of the size. We have the community picnic at Cummings. The Penny Carnival is held at Perry vs. one of the smaller neighborhood parks. Councilmember Holden said it's because of the pavilions, more than anything is why those events are there. Mayor Grant said Council will discuss a couple more items and then recess and return after the regular meeting. Finance Director Yang wanted to recap the different scenarios to ensure she is getting Council all the numbers they requested. She will look at scenario E with some level of an annual levy increase, without shifting projects. She will look at scenario E with annual levy increase and include shifting the projects. She will look at bonding for Old Highway 10 Trail in 2026, without project shifting and look at bonding with shifting the projects. Councilmember Monson said there was a lot of conversation about scenarios D and E. She asked if Councilmember Holden and Mayor Grant will get the information they are looking for with the scenarios Finance Director Yang outlined. Councilmember Holden thinks if we are going to bond, she only wants to do it once. She said it costs us so much money to bond. The interest rates change and then you can't fix it. We have more than enough money for the Highway 10 trail. We have Lake Johanna Trail coming up. We don't know what's going to happen with that one. Councilmember Monson believed scenario E is just a single bond. Staff confirmed. Mayor Grant said he is in favor of scenario D. He doesn't want to see us in an interest rate scenario with bonds going out 20 years. All we are doing is jacking the levy for 20 years. He doesn't want to put us in that situation. There will be opportunities for bonding. He doesn't think we want to do it in 2026. We may take a look at in in 2027-28. He agrees with Councilmember Weber that we should put some PIR money into the levy. He would like to see us get around that because the interest will hurt us. Councilmember Holden said we know the interest rates are going to drop significantly. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 25 Mayor Grant asked if we know that. Councilmember Holden said they are. Because when Paul retires we know the interest rates will go down. If you can't see that writing on the wall, you're an idiot. The longer we wait to bond, the better the interest rates will be. Mayor Grant agrees. That is why he said he doesn't think we should bond now. He is leery to jump in now and mortgage our future for 20 years. Things are happening with TCAAP. We don't know where the County will land on Lake Johanna Blvd. They had a design. Will they hold to that? Will they scale it back? They may choose a different project. There where three projects being considered. He doesn't know what happened to the other two and he doesn't know if Staff knows. Councilmember Holden said one of them is being done. Mayor Grant said then there are two of them and he isn't sure what the County's appetite is. Councilmember Monson asked if there is an advantage to bonding the PMP in 2026 vs. 2028. Finance Director Yang said it just pushes out the Fund Balance. If we bond in 2026, we have a little more Fund Balance capacity. If we wait until 2028, we will drive down the Fund Balance before we get the cash from the bond to come in. Councilmember Monson asked if we would just need a levy to balance that dip. Finance Director Yang said we could. Or we could continue to utilize Fund Balance until we get to 2028 when we would have to increase the levy to fund that debt service. Councilmember Monson summarized that the advantage of a 2026 bond is that we would attack the problem now and we smooth the levy. Would we keep the levy lower, if we wait until 2028? Finance Director Yang said we can increase the levy and build up a reserve until we get to 2028. There are various options. If we bond in 2026 that means we are increasing our overall Fund Balance capacity. Councilmember Monson is interested to know the value of waiting the two years and how that will hit the levy. Councilmember Holden said even at 1% interest rate will make a big difference in our debt service. Discussion ensued recapping all the different scenarios Council discussed and would like to see. Councilmember Weber said he would like to see all of that but he is in favor of solving this problem now. This is a clear problem that is coming at us, head on. He wants to attack it, head on. Now. Mayor Grant would like to see each of the years, the roads and projects and what their current PCI ratings are. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 26 Staff will bring that back. Mayor Grant asked if the software is able to project where we will be at an overall PCI rating in each year? Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen confirmed. That is one of the slides he created for State of the City. He will share that. Council recessed the work session at 6:55 pm. Council reconvened the work session at 7:18 pm. Finance Director Yang said she will discuss the Public Safety Capital Fund. Changes were made to the Public Safety Capital Equipment Fund, based on the latest preliminary estimates from the Lake Johanna Fire Department. The changes include the addition of a command vehicle replacement in 2031 and 2033, an engine ladder replacement in 2032. The levy reserve bank and corresponding transfers to the general fund is based on nine new FTEs vs. the six that were in the July 28 preliminary budget. Finance Director Yang said council is aware that the Safer Grant will discontinue starting in 2027. Contract Cities will need to fund the new positions. In 2024, the City decided to raise the levy in the Public Safety Capital Fund to build up a reserve for this. At that time we knew there were only six FTEs. The reserve build up was agreed upon by Council in order to lower the impact of the annual levy increases. She outlined, in the packet, where it shows what the annual levy increases are based on, with the six and nine FTEs. An additional $12,000 will be needed in 2026 and varying amounts thereafter, should the reserve build up method be agreed upon to fund it. Finance Director Yang programmed the incremental $12,000 at the levy increase in the proposed budget. The City can consider other options. We could utilize excess franchise fees to cover, increase electric franchise fees, implement a gas franchise fee rate, or a combination of a levy increase and utilizing those excess franchise fees. Councilmember Holden said we haven't agreed to the nine FTEs. Councilmember Monson asked if this would be a placeholder for nine FTEs. In the event it stays at six it may decrease. Finance Director Yang said six is the agreed upon number but the proposed amount includes the nine. Councilmember Monson asked if Staff needs direction on if we want to do the $12,000 vs. franchise fees. Finance Director Yang said these are options the City Council can consider. The PIR Fund has a proposed levy of $250,000. That is unchanged from 2025. Staff is recommending scenario D which would shift PMP projects and increase the levy by $50,000 in 2027, with that increase ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 27 being applied annually, thereafter. She asked which changes, if any, Staff should assume based on the scenarios presented. She will run the requested scenarios. Finance Director Yang said the Public Safety Capital Equipment Fund assumes a $52,000 levy increase in 2026 and additional increases in subsequent years, thereafter to cover the City's share of nine FTEs. She asked what changes, if any, Staff should assume. Councilmember Rousseau thinks it needs to go into the levy. She knows we discussed the franchise fees going strictly toward the Fire Department but she feels there should be a separation that is clear that when we have a double digit levy, half of it comes from Public Safety. That may be a communication thing in the future. Councilmember Holden asked how much the franchise fees would have to be increased by? Finance Director Yang doesn't have that number today. She has asked Xcel Energy and she will follow up. Councilmember Holden asked how much we are raising with the franchise fees now, annually? Finance Director Yang said $435,000. Councilmember Holden said that wouldn't really be that much. Councilmember Monson said it isn't clear that we would have to raise the fees. Wouldn't we just use the excess. She asked where the excess between the bond and the $435,000 is allocated in the budget. Finance Director Yang said it is in the Public Safety Capital Equipment Fund. Councilmember Monson asked how it's being applied. Finance Director Yang said it isn't being applied anywhere. It is just sitting there until debt service comes in 2027. It will be used to pay that debt service. Councilmember Monson said we could use that for the extra $12,000. Finance Director Yang confirmed the excess money could be used. Councilmember Monson said that is limited in terms of impact, and we will still have the money in 2027 for the debt service. Finance Director Yang confirmed. She said the difference between using excess franchise fees and increasing the levy incrementally, is that you are increasing that base. That grows the cumulative levy balance where the franchise fee is a fixed amount annually. Councilmember Weber asked if the beginning year balance is the Public Safety Fund. It refers to a Fund Balance. That can't be the Public Safety Fund because it would include an additional $435,000 in contributions. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 28 Finance Director Yang said the page he is referring to is the reserve build up. That's included in the two line items that are highlighted in red. That's where we see the levy increase, annually, based on that reserve build up. The transfer to the General Fund line item is what we would transfer annually to fund those incremental FTEs. Councilmember Weber said most people are concerned about the percentage increase in the levy every year. It's important, when looking at a steep increase to do something to the levy. The next year, if it happens again, the percentage increase doesn't look as steep. That's why our levy looks so large. Historically they haven't been raised with inflation. He thinks the money should come out of a levy increase. He just doesn't know how that fits into the overall scheme. Councilmember Holden said we have always had a 5-10 year budget in front of us. We have looked ahead. We paid cash for a lot of things. To imply we haven't done stuff in the past, isn't the way it happened in the real world. She said we keep talking about increasing the Fund Balance so we have more and more money. How much money do we all want? When do we get to the point where Arden Manor or the townhouses can't afford it? We all have professional jobs and spouses that have professional jobs and it's easy for us to eat a couple hundred by the time we get the tax statement from Ramsey. Is increasing the Fund Balance our main goal so we have unlimited money? Finance Director Yang said it is based upon project expenditures that are set today, it's important that we maintain a positive Fund Balance. If we see dips in Fund Balance, we want to level it or increase it for future project expenditures to happen. It is an annual exercise we have to go through to make sure we are financially stable, long-term. Mayor Grant said we plan a 5-year CIP. We take a look at inflation. Staff goes and talks amongst themselves. We go through this every year. It's not like we are failing to plan. Finance Director Yang has done countless iterations of various financing strategies. She has worked with police, fire and the County to put this together so we can digest it. A year from now we'll be back here. Staff will have done another year in the CIP. We always keep looking at it and planning. We do account for inflation. He is thankful for all the hard work that Staff does. He won't insinuate that they haven't done any planning. Councilmember Monson asked if Councilmember Holden knows the Fire Boards sense on the additional three FTEs. They got the six, partially because they got the Safer Grant. That was after they got a $2 million ladder truck. They got a new fire station. She understands there was approval to order another ladder truck. Now they are asking for another three FTEs. How much does this fire department need in such a short period of time? Councilmember Holden said we can be one vote against the proposed FTEs. Another city is thinking about it but they don't know how to fund it. The bottom line is they want a fire department that is 100% paid people. No volunteers, no part time staff. They want a full time fire department. Councilmember Monson thinks this is too much, at once. We are doing our best to balance it, but it's a lot. She would love to see that spread out a bit. She understands we have one vote and Shoreview has two. The rest are fire fighters. They aren't going to vote against the chief s budget. She would like to see them push some of this out. She doesn't have a strong opinion on if it is ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 29 funded by the levy vs. the franchise fee. With the franchise fee you are getting it but it doesn't grow to cover increases. Finance Director Yang said with the levy you would grow your cumulative balance. It is making sure you are building up that reserve and making sure there is less impact to the taxpayers. The franchise fees are just one annual revenue. It doesn't grow. Councilmember Holden said it can grow. Finance Director Yang said it can grow, if we decide that we want to grow it. Mayor Grant said the remodel of the fire station on County Road I isn't included. He thinks it is imperative to deliver the message that it shouldn't grow this quickly. Councilmember Holden said the message has been received by them, from her. Finance Director Yang wanted to discuss the Tree Trust. Due to the strong demand and positive feedback from residents around the 2025 Tree Trust partnership pilot program, Tree Trust has asked the City to continue its tree sale partnership. That promotes environmental sustainability. The 2026 is estimated to be $6,750. She asked if Council is interested in continuing this partnership. If so, should this come from the Tree Preservation and Landscaping Fund. Councilmember Holden asked what the $6,750 pays for. Does it subsidize the price of the trees? She thought they were expensive trees with no warranty. People can go buy a tree at a different area. She would rather put trees in the parks, rather than in individual homes. Councilmember Weber got one of the trees. He recently planted a line of trees along his yard. He bought them at auction. They cost four or five times as much as the one he bought from the Trust. It is a little smaller than the other trees he purchased but it would have been at least double or triple in price. He thinks it is a great value for residents. Councilmember Rousseau said Anne Hall surveyed people. She said our residents were very happy with this program. She thinks this should be included in the budget and have Staff prepared to help support that, if they can. The Arden Hills Foundation may be willing to cover some of that, as well. Councilmember Monson thinks the dollar amount is minor and it is supporting our tree canopy in the City. She thinks the amount is minor compared to the benefit. She is surprised that it is being called out. She asked if that is because it's new. Finance Director Yang confirmed. It was a pilot program in 2025. Councilmember Monson asked what the limit is that City Administrator Jagoe can approve. City Administrator Jagoe replied $10,000. Councilmember Monson said she thinks this is such a small amount of money. She supports moving forward with it. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 30 Councilmember Holden agrees it is a small amount of money. Park and Go is $8,000. We're almost to a levy point by the time we're done with all the little amounts of money. People can afford trees in our community. It gets to the point where we need to subsidize the people who can't afford it. There aren't many trees in Arden Manor. Those people can't plant trees. Maybe it should be up to the City to start putting more trees elsewhere rather than subsidizing private citizens to do it. Mayor Grant said it is a small amount. We were talking about bonding for millions of dollars and now we're stuck on $6,800. It makes a good statement about tree preservation. He isn't sure what a tree costs and doesn't know if this is a good value or not. For the City it's $6,750. Councilmember Weber said he paid $150 for the trees in his yard vs. $45 for the one from the Tree Trust. Mayor Grant asked how many people purchased trees. City Administrator Jagoe said there were 50 10-gallon trees. Those usually retail for $160-$300 depending on the type of tree. Cost to residents was $45 per tree. Tree Trust subsidized the first year of the program with $5,000. They are proposing 50 to 75 trees this year. Finance Director Yang asked if there are any other assumptions or changes Council would like to see. Councilmember Holden asked about the 75th Anniversary. Councilmember Monson said based on the discussion, it won't be that much money. Councilmember Holden said she has no idea what it will cost. Councilmember Monson said what she had in her mind and then said we're done. Councilmember Monson said she believes she summarized what she heard from everyone. She assumes it will be under $20,000. Councilmember Holden said she has talked to businesses and they are happy to help out. Councilmember Weber asked how much money we have committed from the Gateway fund. City Administrator Jagoe thought it was about $10,000. Mayor Grant said we can carry over 4% of the $20,000 from 2025. Councilmember Rousseau said it can only be spent on marketing. City Administrator Jagoe said Council earmarked $10,000 to the ice swim event and she has heard that event will not be held in 2026. She will bring this discussion back to the September work session to decide how we want to reallocate those funds. Councilmember Holden said it should go to the 75th Anniversary. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 31 Councilmember Rousseau asked about purchasing from Northern Soda. Would that be considered advertising for the local area? Does it have to be swag? Mayor Grant believes it has to be advertising but he will take it back to the Gateway director. Councilmember Rousseau asked if we want to set something aside to build in for the Park Master Plan. Or is that a conversation for next year and we look at the park dedication fees for the development at North Heights? Councilmember Holden said we should look at it next year. Part of the park plan will include the trails that we already have lined up. Mayor Grant said there was a request for a trail segment on New Brighton Road, from County Road E2, down to the park. That would be a safe route to school. Councilmember Monson is open to waiting on the parks until the plan is finalized. She is also fine with investing a small amount to show our commitment. Councilmember Rousseau suggested a place holder of $10,000 so next year we can have the discussion on if we should continue. Councilmember Holden said she would like to put some money aside for a community survey. That's more important. We haven't even seen the park survey to see what people want. If we're going to start putting money into little pots, she has a whole list of them. Mayor Grant said we need to be careful. Once we start creating a bunch of pots then we've got a levy point. Councilmember Rousseau would like $20,000 for Morris Leatherman or something we can address it in two years if we are following the strategic plan that we're starting to build out. Councilmember Weber agrees. The response to the question of how much money do we need is enough to buy the things we need to buy and hopefully a little more for the things that we want. We have wants and needs. He supports $10,000 to show a commitment toward the future of the Park Master Plan. Finance Director Yang asked if it should be $10,000 per year, going forward, or just in 2025. Mayor Grant asked if there was consensus in Council. He heard two in favor of $10,000. Councilmember Monson is fine with $10,000. When we get to the levy points and we need to cut $10,000 she will maybe look here for the space to do that. Mayor Grant said $10,000. He asked Staff to move on, with just 12 minutes left before 8:00. Finance Director Yang said she is happy to walk through the presentation. She is also open to fast forward to the main General Fund levy discussion. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 32 Councilmember Weber said we are probably going to be revisiting this. We won't get through it in 12 minutes. He asked for the high-level outline so Council can begin to digest it. Finance Director Yang shared the slide that shows the City-wide tax levy assumptions as it is today. She walked through the included changes which amount to $742,866, or a 12.32% levy increase. Based on the CIP levy increase of $152,000, that would be an additional 2.52%. That would mean a total levy increase of $894,866 at 14.85%. This provides a leveled increase on the revenue side and the expenditures. It doesn't account for the underfunded balance from the 2025 budget. We passed a budget deficit in 2025 of $122,009 that will continue to sit there. If we want to fund and fully balance the budget, we would add that amount which would get us to a total balanced levy of $1,016,878 , or a 16.87% levy increase. Councilmember Monson said this does not include the $50,000 increase in the PIR fund that was discussed earlier. Finance Director Yang said that is not included. Councilmember Monson said any changes we make will be on top of this. She is looking at the maintenance worker position. She asked how much that is of the $48,000. She has an appetite to push that. Finance Director Yang said the maintenance worker is $50,000. It is funded 45% through the General Fund and 55% from the Enterprise Fund. Councilmember Monson said the $48,000 would go down. Finance Director Yang confirmed. Councilmember Monson would like to see what it looks like when leaving the Lead position in there but without the maintenance worker. Her final comment is she is aware we underfunded $122,000, she asked if we will come out ahead on revenue. Finance Director Yang said for 2025 we are looking good in terms of planning cases and permit revenue. We are looking better. It is hard to say because we're still five months until the end of the year. City Administrator Jagoe said we had some personnel savings, too. Mayor Grant asked if we put any large buildings into the 2025 plan. Finance Director Yang indicated we did not. Mayor Grant said we lost some of the revenue because we lost our inspectors. Councilmember Holden said the Rec to Go program playground leads are funded from something else. She asked if we are double counting them in the $8,000. Or are we hiring more? ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 33 Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said no. This is a new program that wasn't budgeted last year. If we move forward with that program we need to budget for that amount of staff. Councilmember Holden said we have programs at Hazelnut when they go there. So there will be two program leads? Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen we need one to two staff, in addition to what the other programs have. The other programs are fully staffed. This is a new program that needs staff. Councilmember Holden asked if we are hiring three people. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen he said it's one to two staff, depending on site. Councilmember Holden asked if the Rec Assistant is paid out of a different budget. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen that's the person. Councilmember Holden said there is the one to two playground leads. That's two more people. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen that is what is required to support this program. In order to have this program, this is what we need. Councilmember Holden said they aren't funded anywhere else. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen no. This is for this program only. Mayor Grant agrees with Councilmember Monson. He can understand the lead position but the maintenance worker is something he would cut in a tight budget year. It looks like $48,366, the lead is $8,000. You're probably burdening the General Fund by $40,000 and the Enterprise Fund by $40,000. That's $80,000 worth of budget. Our guys are doing just fine. The leads are making things run smoother, now is not the time to add another maintenance worker. Finance Director Yang said she can bring back the maintenance worker starting in the second quarter. Councilmember Monson was thinking it wouldn't be in 2026. Mayor Grant agreed. Councilmember Rousseau said she is not in favor of that. She asked if Councilmember Holden is in favor of it. Councilmember Weber said he isn't in favor of it. Councilmember Holden said she has always been in favor of holding it back. We just added the lead. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 34 Mayor Grant said there are three people who want to hold off on the maintenance worker in 2026. Councilmember Weber asked if that was contingent on where the levy increase falls. Councilmember Monson said she would like to see the impact on the levy. She also needs to see the PIR Fund addition into the levy. It looks like $60,000 is a levy point. If we drop $40,000 that's almost a levy point. But then we're adding another $50,000 for the PIR Fund. She would rather add money into the PIR Fund than add a public works maintenance worker. She thinks we can probably wait another year. There won't ever be a good time. She is open to see what it looks like adding it halfway through the year. In general, she would like to push it out of 2026 for the cost. Mayor Grant said when Ramsey County Sheriff increase their budget, we don't have a say. That is what it is. Same thing goes for Lake Johanna Fire Department. There's nothing we can do about it. There are a number of items in the budget that we can't trim back. He thinks we have a good crew. We are doing okay. One maintenance worker can be taken out of the equation and save the money. He asked if anyone had any other ideas on how to keep the levy down. He doesn't see another way to make the adjustment. Councilmember Weber agreed it is sticker shock. It is hard to swallow. Mayor Grant said some residents can pay that, but consistent large levy increases may be an issue for residents in some parts of town. He hopes we can come closer to being balanced this year. Councilmember Weber asked if Staff has anything else to share. Finance Director Yang summarized the proposed budget includes a 3% COLA, 10% health insurance, 4% dental insurance increases. Councilmember Holden thinks it should be higher than 10%. She is hearing a lot of them are going up by 18% and we're a small group. She thinks it should be at least 15%. City Administrator Jagoe said 10% is typically what is programmed in, at this stage, when we don't have the number yet. Mayor Grant asked what the increase was last year. Finance Director Yang said 16%. City Administrator Jagoe added we absorbed some of with the increase in the family coverage to employees. We offset some of that. Mayor Grant is good with 15%. Councilmember Weber is okay with 15%, as well. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 35 Councilmember Holden said Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen was going to bring back what City Hall maintenance and repairs could be done by Staff. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said there is nothing in 2026 that would affect this. City Administrator Jagoe said Staff will go through the reserve study and see what we can program in for future. Mayor Grant said this is on the revenue side. Councilmember Rousseau asked about the building at the federal property, in regards to revenue. Are they putting in a huge addition? City Administrator Jagoe said that is this year. Councilmember Holden said that is not significant. We won't get the money from that anyway. City Administrator Jagoe said we will get the permit. Councilmember Holden said we have to hire someone outside to do that. City Administrator Jagoe confirmed. We have to use Rum River because of the state delegation. Councilmember Monson said the field house that we thought would be a big windfall is not any more. Mayor Grant never thought it was a windfall. Councilmember Monson thought there was discussion that it will be a great revenue source. Councilmember Holden wanted it added in and we decided not to. Mayor Grant said we didn't have anyone with state delegation. We haven't for years. Councilmember Monson said we thought we would get some money with it. Now that we don't have a state certified building inspector we have to pay a third party, so it's canceling out the benefit. City Administrator Jagoe said we get a smaller portion. It will be about 15% of the permit revenue. Councilmember Monson said there are no other buildings planned. City Administrator Jagoe said not for 2026. We saw North Heights, the field house, Outlot A all in the 2025 year. Councilmember Rousseau said Micro Control was about $80,000 in permits. City Administrator Jagoe confirmed. Pace could be an option for 2026. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 36 Mayor Grant asked if there is a need for an additional work session needed for further discussion about the preliminary levy increase before the end of September. Councilmember Rousseau confirmed. There are some scenarios that will come back. C. Agenda Planning Mayor Grant said we should discuss agenda planning. Councilmember Monson said she doesn't have any comments about the September 8 work session. The special one that Mayor Grant wants is the strategic session. Mayor Grant is tossing out to Council that the Buy Nothing Clean Up Day said Staff recommendation and the majority of Council was that Staff can just do that. Councilmember Holden asked for clarification that any of the items on the list that have staff recommendations are items that Council can vote that Staff complete? Mayor Grant doesn't think that. He thinks Staff could do the Buy Nothing Clean Up Day and not have to bring it back. Other items should be brought back to Council. We want Staff to go out and come up with a recommendation so we aren't reinventing the wheel at a work session. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen said September 22 is the meeting that Ramsey County wants to talk about Lake Johanna Blvd. Trail and likely the Old Highway 10 Trail. Council agreed Staff can move forward with the Buy Nothing Clean Up Day and not bring it back. Councilmember Weber clarified that when he said Staff recommendation, he expected that Staff will develop it and bring it as a consent item. Otherwise, what's the point? If we're bringing them back for another work session, why are we designating them? He expects a recommendation from Staff on everything. If they propose something there should be some recommendation to guide council. This is more than that. This is putting it in Staff s court. These are the things Staff should take care of. That's what he was thinking when he did his rating. Mayor Grant asked Council if Staff recommendation meant bring it back to a work session or to the bench. Councilmember Holden said if an energy audit will cost $20,000 then it needs to come back to a work session. Some of them are non -committal. She doesn't care about volunteer recognition. We always sent thank you notes. Councilmember Monson said she rated them thinking Staff would bring them back on Consent Agenda. That won't work for everything on this list. The encroachment discussion won't be just a staff recommendation. The list isn't that clean. ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 25, 2025 37 Councilmember Weber said there may have been a different interpretation of what Staff recommendation means so Council should re -rate the list. Mayor Grant said Staff recommendation can include if they bring it to a work session or to consent. Council agreed. 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND STAFF UPDATES Councilmember Monson said after the last meeting about State of the City she thinks after this event Staff can provide a run-down to Council regarding how it went with a list of recommendations, primarily about locking down an annual date, time and location. Maybe it's a certain Saturday of a certain month. We spend so much time talking about it, it seems like it can be an administrative thing that can be locked down. She would recommend that there be a rotation of topics and the Councilmember that presents it. We just rotate every year so there doesn't need to be discussion on who is presenting what topic. She would like Staff to bring that back so it's easy and we don't spend so much time on it. Councilmember Holden said we have to remember timing during election years. It's sensitive and we want to make sure people aren't over represented. If we have it in February or March, fine. Councilmember Rousseau would prefer for Council to pick which topics we want to talk about. Some have more excitement and interest about some topics. Then flip a coin if there is conflict. Councilmember Monson just wants there to be a set way so we aren't battling every year. Mayor Grant said Council can let Staff know what topic they are interested in. You may or may not get it. Staff will just line it up and rotate it. Councilmember Holden said the rotation is a good idea. There is something exciting in each of the topics. Councilmember Monson added it's a chance for Council to work with different Staff members. She didn't mean this to be a big discussion. She would like to see Staff analyze it after this year's event and send something back with a recommendation on how it will work in future. Mayor Grant agrees we took up too much time discussing it this year. A D-InI TR N Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council Work Session meeting at 8:14 p.m. Jen Estling Deputy Clerk David Grant Mayor o -AR�ENHILLS Approved: September 22, 2025 [DRAFT CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 25, 2025 7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor David Grant called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Tena Monson, Emily Rousseau and Kurt Weber Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Jessica Jagoe; Public Works Director/City Engineer David Swearingen; Finance Director Joua Yang; and Assistant to the City Administrator/City Clerk Julie Hanson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Weber requested Item 8E on the Consent Agenda be pulled for discussion as Item 9A. MOTION: Councilmember Monson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as amended. The motion carried (5-0). 2. TCAAP/RICE CREEK COMMONS UPDATE City Administrator Jagoe stated the Joint Development Authority has not met since the last Council meeting, neither have either of the advisory committees. The next JDA meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 9th due to the Labor Day holiday. Tentative agenda items include a land use application from Ramsey County for a preliminary and final plat for Outlot C, this parcel is often times referred to as the California Parcel, their request is to subdivide the parcel for the dedication of the public right-of-way corridor for the Spine Road. The current platting process is not associated with any specific development on the site and the two newly created outlots shown on plat documents will need to be replatted at the time of future development. Additionally, JDA staff will be presenting a draft Request for Information ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — AUGUST 25, 2025 2 document for discussion. This is a process that can be used to gauge interest from developers and gather information on market topics such as best practices, industry standards, pricing, or technology. Councilmember Holden asked how far the design plans were for the spine road. Public Works Director Swearingen reported the County was hoping to have the 90% plans completed by mid -October. Mayor Grant stated it was his understanding there was no developer for the Rice Creek Commons California parcel. He inquired if the County was intending to complete the spine road without a developer. City Administrator Jagoe explained this was the case. Mayor Grant questioned if there had been any discussion about a public process to select a new developer. City Administrator Jagoe indicated the JDA would be discussing this topic at a future meeting. 3. PUBLIC INQUIRIESANFORMATIONAL None. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES None. 5. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS None. 6. STAFF COMMENTS A. Transportation Update Public Works Director Swearingen reported the 2025 Street Maintenance program was now complete. He explained staff has been receiving complaints regarding the Reclamite material tracking into residential driveways. He noted after speaking with the contractor he was assured that this material would fade in a few weeks. Councilmember Weber thanked staff for speaking about this topic, noting he did not track any material into his driveway. Councilmember Monson asked how the recycling day went. City Administrator Jagoe reported it was her understanding 50 residents attended the event during the three hour event. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — AUGUST 25, 2025 I 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. July 28, 2025, Special City Council Work Session B. July 28, 2025, Regular City Council M ION: Councilmember Monson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the July 28, 2025, Special City Council Work Session meeting minutes as amended and the July 28, 2025, Regular City Council meeting minutes as amended. The motion carried (5-0). 8. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Item - Claims and Payroll B. Motion to Accept Resignation of Deb Fellows from the Economic Development Commission (EDC) C. Motion to Approve Resolution 2025-054 Accepting Donation from Arden Hills Foundation D. Motion to Approve Resolution 2025-055 Giving Preliminary Approval to the Issuance and Sale of Revenue Bonds or Other Obligations, and Approving a Deed Application and Scheduling a Public Hearing Regarding the Same E. Motion to Appr-elve Statement regarding immigration Aefivifies F. Motion to Approve Appointment of Public Works Maintenance Worker M ION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Monson seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as amended and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried (5-0). 9. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS A. Motion to Approve Statement regarding Immigration Activities Councilmember Weber read the City's immigration activities statement in full for the record. M ION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Rousseau seconded a motion to approve statement regarding immigration activities. The motion carried (5-0). 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 11. NEW BUSINESS None. 12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — AUGUST 25, 2025 0 13. COUNCIL COM NTS Councilmember Rousseau explained she received resident feedback regarding the new Arden Oaks playground equipment, stating the new equipment was well done. Councilmember Rousseau reported she recently kayaked down Rice Creek and stated this was a beautiful experience. Councilmember Weber stated he received an email from Director Ongstad at Nine North, noting their fees for service will be going up 3% next year. Councilmember Holden indicated the 75th Anniversary Committee held its first meeting. Councilmember Monson reported she attended the community picnic in Cummings Park. Mayor Grant stated he attended the community picnic as well. He thanked the Lions and the vendors in attendance for their assistance with this event. ADJOURN M ION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Monson seconded a motion to adiourn. The motion carried (5-0). Mayor Grant adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:15 p.m. Julie Hanson City Clerk David Grant Mayor M� -ARDEN HILLS Approved: September 22, 2025 [DRAFT CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 5:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Grant called to order the City Council Work Session at 5:30 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant; Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Tena Monson, Emily Rousseau and Kurt Weber Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Jessica Jagoe, Finance Director Joua Yang, Public Works Director/City Engineer David Swearingen and Assistant to the City Administrator/City Clerk Julie Hanson 1. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL None. 2. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES None. 3. AGENDA ITEMS A. State of the City Update City Administrator Jagoe stated the City Council has decided to host an in -person State of the City event on Saturday, February 20, at 10 a.m. at City Hall. Light refreshments will be provided for attendees. Nine North will record, edit, and post a recording of the event online. Staff reviewed the topics that will be addressed and asked if the Council wanted to hold a Q&A segment at the State of the City event. Mayor Grant questioned how long the event would be. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 2 City Administrator Jagoe explained in the past the State of the City event has run about 45 minutes. Councilmember Holden supported a Q&A segment being held at the end of the State of the City event. Councilmember Monson asked what was done last year. City Administrator Jagoe stated a Q&A segment was held at the end of the State of the City last year. Councilmember Weber indicated he wanted residents to be able to submit questions prior to the State of the City event as well. Mayor Grant reported he supported holding a Q&A segment at the end of the event. Councilmember Holden requested further information be provided in the presentation regarding Outlot A, noting only 10 acres had been developed by Ryan Companies and 30 acres remained. Councilmember Monson explained Ryan Companies signed a purchase agreement with Ramsey County for the 40 acres and Ramsey County sold 10 acres for development of Micro Controls. She indicated Ryan Companies was now marketing the remaining 30 acres. C. Use of City Logo Policy Discussion Mayor Grant asked the City Council if they want to create a policy related to use of the Arden Hills City logo and would they want to also trademark the City's logo. Councilmember Holden supported the City trademarking the City's logo with the State process. Councilmember Weber supported this action but anticipated businesses would still use the City's logo, at which time a cease and desist letter could be sent by City staff. Councilmember Rousseau indicated she supported the action that was taken by Anoka by having a general policy in place. She did not support the City trademarking its logo but if the City did pursue, she felt the Federal trademark was the better option. Mayor Grant stated he supported trademarking the City's logo with the State. Councilmember Monson was of the opinion the City was well protected without trademarking the City's logo. She specifically noted the campaign language that was within Anoka's policy. Council consensus was to direct staff to trademark the City's logo with the State and to bring forward a use of City logo policy mirroring that of the City of Anoka's for approval at a future Council meeting. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 3 D. 2026 Operating Budget Discussion Finance Director Yang stated annually, the City prepares a five (5) year Capital Improvement Plan for budgeting and forecasting. The focus of the CIP is on the maintenance and protection of the City's existing assets, redevelopment, and investment in new initiatives. The CIP is part of the budget process, but it is not a budget, it is a plan, and one that changes often. The CIP does not commit the Council to the proposed projects, nor implement the assumptions made during the preparation; however, this is the basis for the 2026 Budget as we continue with its preparation. Staff provided further information on the PIR Fund. Finance Director Yang explained due to the strong demand and positive feedback around the 2025 Tree Trust Partnership pilot program, Tree Trust has asked the City to continue its tree sale partnership, which promotes environmental sustainability. The 2026 cost is estimated to be $6,750. Council's consensus at the August 25 Special Work Session supports the continuation to partner with Tree Trust and funding to come from the Tree Preservation and Landscaping Fund. Finance Director Yang reported annually, City staff prepares and submits a preliminary budget to the City Council for review and feedback. Each department provided their respective forecasts for this budget. The proposed 2026 budget is $7,518,589, an increase of $757,310 or 11.2%. For the purpose of this discussion, there is a 15.0% or $906,103 tax levy increase reflected in the budget, of which $754,103 for the General Fund, $100,000 for the EDA Fund, and $52,000 for the Public Safety Capital Fund. As presented, the General Fund Budget is underfunded by $122,009, which is the budget shortfall projected in the 2025 budget. This practice is not sustainable in the long term. A tax levy increase of 17.1% or $1,028,112 would be needed to balance the budget in 2026. Staff provided further comment on the amount the General Fund Budget is underfunded at different tax levy increase amounts and requested feedback from the Council on how to proceed. Mayor Grant commented on a number of ways the PIR Fund could be protected, such as putting off the Perry Park improvements in order to create a non-bonding scenario. Councilmember Holden indicated the Council would have to raise the levy in order to pay the debt service. Finance Director Yang reported this was the case. Councilmember Monson explained the City's revenue was stagnant, but expenditures continue to rise. She stated she appreciated the options that were presented by staff, and suggested the Council find a balance where revenues cover inflation while also investing in the City's amenities. Mayor Grant reported a bond would cost the City 3% to 4% in interest. He supported the $250,000 number rising because revenues have become stagnant. He indicated some of the proposed projects may have to flex in order to address increasing costs. Councilmember Rousseau stated in the last two years there has been a recommendation to increase the PIR Fund by $50,000 and this has not been done. She asked how much the City would save by partnering with other organizations to complete the trail work. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 4 Finance Director Yang reported the City received $2 million in local grants for the Old Highway 10 project to assist with covering the costs for the trail work. Councilmember Weber commented on how bonding costs the City money, but noted it also costs the City money to defer projects. He explained in the last Council meeting there was a consensus to go with Option D or E. He noted he supported Options D or J moving forward. Mayor Grant supported the Council focusing on Options D and J. Councilmember Holden asked how many years the City would be bonding for. Finance Director Yang reported this would be a 20 year bond. Further discussion ensued regarding Options J-1 and J-2. Councilmember Holden indicated she would rather levy for dollars up front than throw away funding on interest payments. She asked how much the City would be paying in interest each year for 20 years. Finance Director Yang estimated this to be $1.3 million on a $2.8 million bond. There was further discussion around the interest amount and whether it was $1.3 million or $1.5 million. Finance Director Yang confirmed it is the $1.3 million. Councilmember Weber commented if the proposed street projects were further delayed, costs to the City would continue to rise. He did not want to risk the street projects rolling over to a full reconstruction. He supported the City paying $1.3 million for 20 years starting in 2028 then end up with an unhealthy PIR Fund. Councilmember Monson explained Scenario J has a shift in the PMP projects. She expressed concern with how the delay and bonding would impact expenses for the City. She stated she would like to see what it would look like to not shift the 2028 project. Councilmember Holden indicated the bonding was not a short term action but rather would require putting enough money into the budget for the future. She was of the opinion $50,000 was too low. Mayor Grant commented if the City set aside $180,000 (three levy points) in addition to the $250,000, the City would have $430,000 annually. He indicated the Council could consider a 3% additional levy increase over the next few years and this funding could go directly into the PIR Fund. He explained he would like to avoid the $1.5 million in interest each year for the next 20 years. Councilmember Rousseau stated she understood this levy number would be high, but this does have some appeal as this would assist with saving money over time. She understood this increase would hurt initially but this may be the best option for the City in the long run. She indicated she was also interested in making sure the road projects weren't shifted. Mayor Grant noted Karth Lake was proposed for 2026 and Benton Way was proposed for 2028. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 5 Councilmember Monson asked if the City were to levy for the funds up front, what would the number have to be. She recommended 2028 be held and not be split. Councilmember Holden questioned how much of the residents' money the City wants to hold. She noted Option J would have the City holding up to $8 million. She reported Ramsey County was proposing a 9.7% increase. Councilmember Weber stated his previous statement was based on the assumption the City should not push the projects because it does not make sense for the City to bond. He supported the City holding enough funding to pay for all three projects. He indicated he wanted the City's ten year outlook to be good. He reiterated that he did not support splitting the projects. Mayor Grant commented if Director Swearingen had brought these projects forward as a 2026 and 2028 project, there would be no discussion about pushing the projects. He noted only a single project was brought forward for 2026. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen clarified the 2026 project remains the same and the 2028 PMP was being proposed to split. Mayor Grant indicated if the project had been brought forward as a split, the Council would not be discussing this matter. Councilmember Holden asked what percentage of the budget is placeholders 10 years out. Public Works Director/City Engineering Swearingen commented the estimates get more refined as projects are five years out and beyond five years the today's rate was inflated until the year it is proposed. Mayor Grant stated another item that comes into play is the possibility of improvements to Lake Johanna Boulevard. He reported this project may require bonding and he did not want to see the City double bonding for this project and a future project. Councilmember Monson asked that staff provide the Council with another round of scenarios. She stated Option D was a 15% levy and Option J was a 15.9% levy. She indicated these were significant numbers. Councilmember Holden reported there was a time when the legislature had put a cap on what the City could levy. She explained this occurred for six or seven years and she feared the legislature may do this again. She stated it may be advantageous for the City to levy over 15% for the coming year should the legislature put a cap in place for future years. City Administrator Jagoe indicated staff would take another look at Option D, shifting the PMP projects with an increase annually beginning in 2026 with no bonding. She asked if the Council wanted to see what this looks like earmarking $180,000 annually. Councilmember Monson stated she was in favor of running scenarios of funding the levy now with no bonding for the next 10 years and funding the levy now, assuming bonding, but no split of the 2028 projects. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 6 Councilmember Holden inquired if the cost for Lake Johanna Boulevard was written into the proposed scenarios. Finance Director Yang reported it was not. Councilmember Holden asked if the projects in 2028 would require the City to hire consultants. Public Works Director/City Engineer Swearingen explained these costs were already included in the numbers. Councilmember Weber commented he was interested in seeing a scenario with no shift in 2028. Mayor Grant reported the Council would be deciding on the preliminary levy at the next City Council meeting. Councilmember Rousseau explained she would like to see how the levy would be impacted if the 2026 projects were not shifted. Finance Director Yang indicated the 2026 projects were not proposed to be shifted, just the projects for 2028. Mayor Grant inquired if the Council would like to hold a Special Work Session prior to the September 22 City Council meeting. Councilmember Monson proposed the Council hold a special City Council meeting after the Council strategic planning meeting on September 29 to approve the preliminary levy. Councilmember Rousseau asked that staff bring forward information on how a 15% through 20% levy increase will impact taxpayers. Councilmember Monson agreed it would be beneficial to have more specific numbers on how the median value homeowner in Arden Hills will be impacted. City Administrator Jagoe reported staff would come back to the Council with new scenarios for D-1, F-1 and F-2. She noted staff would schedule a special City Council meeting on September 29. She asked if the Council had direction for staff regarding the operating budget. Mayor Grant indicated he did not support hiring for the new maintenance worker or lead. In addition, he did not support the purchase of a new trailer. Councilmember Monson explained she could support the lead, but not the maintenance worker. Councilmember Weber commented he could support the lead position being included in the operating budget. Councilmember Rousseau noted she was in favor of the lead and the maintenance worker position being included. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 7 Council consensus was that Director Yang would provide updated information regarding the new scenarios that were discussed. Council also agreed to have a Special Meeting on September 29 at 7:30 pm, following the conclusion of the strategic planning meeting. D. Twin Cities Gateway Discussion City Administrator Jagoe stated for 2025, the City has received $19,375 from the Twin Cities Gateway (TCG) Visitors Bureau; this money comes from a portion of the lodging tax that the City charges its hotels and remits to the Visitors Bureau. Additionally, at the end of the 2024 period there was $807.25 in grant dollars remaining which were carried over to this year for a total dispersal of $20,182.25 in 2025. At the May 27th Work Session, the City Council directed staff to utilize the funds towards the MN Ice Swim, Ribfest and the Norwegian Foot March, with any remaining funds going towards the City's 75th Anniversary. Staff reviewed the stipulations put forward by TCG regarding how the money can be spent; in short, the money is intended to bring outside visitors into the City. City Administrator Jagoe explained staff was recently informed that the MN Swim Event will not be occurring in January 2026. Therefore, the Council should discuss and direct staff on how to utilize the remaining funds of $10,145.80 for 2025. • Ribfest — $4,000 • Norwegian Foot March — $2,000 • 75th Anniversary — $4,036.45 (20%) Remaining Funds = $10,145.80 City Administrator Jagoe stated additionally, the City has a second Board Member serving on the Bureau's Board of Directors based on the percentage of lodging fee contributions during the preceding year. This appointment is currently held by John Connelly, Twin Cities North Chamber of Commerce. At the end of September, Mr. Connelly will be retiring from the Chamber of Commerce. Per the Bureau agreement, each member city shall have at least one Board Member. The first Board Member appointed by the City shall be an elected or appointed municipal representative of that City. The second Board Member selected by the City will be from the community's lodging industry. The City Council should discuss and provide direction on the replacement of this second Board Member appointment for the remainder of 2025. Councilmember Holden explained she supported the additional funding being designated to the 75th Anniversary. Mayor Grant requested staff confirm that the funds could be allocated to the 75th Anniversary. Councilmember Rousseau supported Councilmember Holden and Councilmember Monson make decisions on how this funding could be used to market the 75th Anniversary. E. Agenda Planning City Administrator Jagoe stated per Council's adopted policy on agenda setting, please find the proposed agenda below for the upcoming meeting. She noted the time needed for the Ramsey County Projects discussion, stating a follow up budget discussion could occur following that item. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 8 She also asked if Council would be amenable to having the Affordable Housing Policy Discussion on October 13 instead of September 22. The next two Work Sessions' topics were updated as follows: September 22nd Work Session • Ramsey County Projects Discussion • Budget Discussion • Agenda Planning (time sensitive) October 13th Work Session • Accessory Dwelling Unit Discussion • Affordable Housing Policy Discussion • Agenda Planning (time sensitive) 4. COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS None. ADJOURN Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council Work Session at 6:57 p.m. Julie Hanson David Grant City Clerk Mayor o -AR�ENHILLS Approved: September 22, 2025 [DRAFT CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor David Grant called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Tena Monson, Emily Rousseau and Kurt Weber Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Jessica Jagoe; Public Works Director/City Engineer David Swearingen; Finance Director Joua Yang; and Assistant to the City Administrator/City Clerk Julie Hanson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Monson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as presented. The motion carried (5- 2. TCAAP/RICE CREEK COMMONS UPDATE City Administrator Jagoe stated the Joint Development Authority has not met since the last Council meeting, neither have either of the advisory committees. The next JDA meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 9th due to the Labor Day holiday. Agenda items include a land use application from Ramsey County for a preliminary and final plat for Outlot C. She noted this parcel is oftentimes referred to as the California Parcel and their request is to subdivide the parcel for the dedication of the public right-of-way corridor for the Spine Road. Additionally, JDA staff will be presenting a draft Request for Information document for discussion. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 2 Councilmember Holden indicated she has received questions from residents on why the recent City newsletter did not address why the PDA lapsed with Alatus. She believed that transparency on this point would benefit the City. Councilmember Monson explained this was a sensitive topic because there was an ongoing lawsuit. She noted there was significant discussion surrounding whether or not to extend at the last JDA meeting. She reported in the end after two years, the JDA was not seeing progress and the County could not get to a purchase and sale agreement with Alatus. Councilmember Weber commented that the PDA lapsed because the contract expired on June 30, 2025. He explained the JDA through the lack of action opted not to extend the contract. Mayor Grant reported the contract gave the developer exclusive rights to negotiate and this contract lapsed. He stated there was now no developer that had an exclusive right to develop the California parcel. City Administrator Jagoe reported the preliminary development agreement (PDA) had an expiration date of June 30, 2025 and with the JDA taking no action to extend this agreement, the agreement terminated on its own on June 301n 3. PUBLIC INQUIRIESANFORMATIONAL None. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INQUIRIES None. 5. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS None. 6. STAFF COMMENTS A. Transportation Update Public Works Director Swearingen reported the road just south of the DMV will be closed while the contractor constructs the watermain interconnect. He explained the road closure was expected to begin on Monday, September 15 and should last one week. Public Works Director Swearingen stated the Lift Station 5 forcemain work would begin on Wednesday, September 10. He noted County Road E would be closed during this work which would take two to three weeks and a detour would be put in place. Councilmember Holden stated the on/off ramp onto 35W by Cleveland Avenue was closed. 7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. August 11, 2025, Special City Council Work Session ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 B. August 11, 2025, Regular City Council MOTION: Councilmember Monson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the August 11, 2025, Special City Council Work Session meeting minutes as amended and the August 11, 2025, Regular City Council meeting minutes as amended. The motion carried (5-0). 8. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Item - Claims and Payroll B. Motion to Approve Resolution 2025-056 Accepting Donation from the Arden Hills Foundation C. Motion to Approve Amended Planned Unit Development Agreement — 3529 Lexington Avenue — Planning Case 25-005 D. Resolution 2025-057 Appointing Kayleigh Shrom as the Youth Commissioner and Resolution 2025-058 Appointing Ihsan Isak to Economic Development Commission (EDC) MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Weber seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried (5-0). 9. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS None. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Approval of the Issuance of an Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note, Series 2025 Finance Director Yang stated on Monday, August 25, 2025, the Council approved Resolution 2025-055 Giving Preliminary Approval to the Issuance and Sale of Revenue Bonds or Other Obligations, and Approving a Deed Application and Scheduling a Public Hearing for the Same. This public hearing is regarding the proposed issuance of an Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note and is being held as required by federal law. The purpose of this hearing is to receive comments from the public on the city's role as a conduit issuer in the amount not to exceed $1.7M in tax-exempt revenue bonds for the benefit of the Church of St. Odilia. These bonds will be refinancing an existing tax-exempt bond that was originally issued by the City of North Oaks in 2017, for improvements to the school. It is important to note that the City's role is strictly as a conduit or pass -through for this financing. The bonds will be repaid by the Church, and neither the city nor its taxpayers will have any financial obligation or liability for the repayment of this debt. A notice of this public hearing was properly published in the Pioneer Press on Thursday, August 28th, 2025. She noted that Rick Storms, Parish Administrator, from the school is here to provide a brief overview and to answer any questions. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 0 Mayor Grant opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. Rick Storms, Parish Administrator from the Church of St. Odilia thanked staff for the detailed presentation and noted he was available for comments or questions. Councilmember Weber thanked Mr. Storms for bringing this request to the City of Arden Hills. With no one coming forward to speak, Mayor Grant closed the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. 11. NEW BUSINESS A. Resolution 2025-059 Approval of the Issuance of an Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note, Series 2025 Finance Director Yang stated on Monday, August 25, 2025, the Council approved resolution 2025-055 Giving Preliminary Approval to the Issuance and Sale of Revenue Bonds or Other Obligations, and Approving a Deed Application and Scheduling a Public Hearing for the Same. The Church of St. Odilia has submitted an application to the City and has submitted a nonrefundable application fee in the amount of $500 according to the City's procedures for Private Activity Revenue Bond Financing. The fees collected on this conduit debt issuance is estimated to be $12,000. MOTION: Councilmember Monson moved and Councilmember Rousseau seconded a motion to adopt Resolution 2025-059, Approving the Issuance of an Educational Facilities Revenue Refunding Note, Series 2025. The motion carried (5-0). 12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Rousseau reminded residents that the State of the City event would be held on Saturday, September 20 at City Hall beginning at 10:00 a.m. Councilmember Rousseau reported Ribfest would be held on Saturday, September 13 at the Red Bull site beginning at 12:00 p.m. She noted she would be serving as a judge at Ribfest along with Councilmember Holden and Mayor Grant. Councilmember Rousseau stated on Monday, September 22, the League of Women Voters would be hosting a candidate forum for the Mounds View School District candidates. Councilmember Rousseau thanked John Connelly for serving as the President of the Chamber of Commerce for many years and wished him a happy retirement. Councilmember Weber thanked the Councilmembers who would be acting as judges at Ribfest. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 E Councilmember Weber stated the Planning Commission met last week and reviewed the chicken ordinance and a new home request with a significant number of variances on Lake Johanna Boulevard. He reported the Commission made a recommendation for approval on the lake home with conditions on how to address the non -conformances. Councilmember Holden reported she was looking forward to serving as a judge at Ribfest. Councilmember Monson commented she would like the Council to receive updates from the Fire Board after each of their meetings. Mayor Grant stated he was looking forward to serving as one of the many judges at Ribfest. He noted Ribfest would begin at 12:00 noon on Saturday, September 13. Mayor Grant indicated the State of the City address would be held on Saturday, September 20. Mayor Grant explained he has worked with John Connelly for many years and he appreciated all of his efforts on behalf of the City of Arden Hills. ADJOURN MOTION: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Monson seconded a motion to adiourn. The motion carried (5-0). Mayor Grant adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:26 p.m. Julie Hanson City Clerk David Grant Mayor CONSENT ITEM 8A ,fiIZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Joua Yang, Finance Director Pang Silseth, Accounting Analyst SUBJECT: Claims and Payroll Listing Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motion to approve, table or deny the following: • Claims and Payroll Listing All items need a simple majority for action unless otherwise noted. Funding Source: N/A Background Payroll is processed biweekly and accounts payable is processed weekly. Budget Impact N/A 2025 Payroll #19 Paid Claims - 09/01/2025-09/12/2025 (Check Nos. 53644-53671 and ACH Checks) Total Payroll Total Accounts Payable $145,223.07 $145,223.07 $403,715.18 $403, 715.18 Total Claims $548,938.25 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PAYROLL # 19 CHECKS DATED: Biweekly: 09/12/25 08/23/25 - 09/05/25 EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONS AMT. CITY BENEFIT Payment Method FIT 8,304.54 EFT EFT EFT EFT A/P Check* A/P Check* A/P Check* A/P Check* FICA Oasdi 5,831.89 5,831.89 FICA Medicare 1,363.92 1,363.92 SIT 4,017.00 TOTAL TAXES 1 19,517.351 7,195.81 Health Premium 2,405.76 30,717.50 Dental Premium 282.62 789.90 FSA Health Care Reimb. 137.50 FSA Dependent Care Reimb. 0.00 TOTAL FLEXIBLE SPENDING 1 2.825.881 31.507.40 HSA Health Saving 1 1,070.191 1,250.00 EFT TOTAL HEALTH SAVINGS 1 1,070.191 1,250.00 EFT EFT A/P Check* EFT EFT A/P Check* A/P Check* A/P Check* A/P Check* A/P Check* ERA 6,214.19 7,170.20 tissionSquare 1,548.67 0.00 entral Pension Fund -Union 1,680.00 IN State Retirement System 1,800.00 'OTAL RETIREMENT 1 11,242.861 7,170.20 TLAC 22.76 ife/Addl/Dep Life 48.69 98.90 ife/Addl non -tax 18.96 TD/STD Insurance 1,347.39 ERA Life Insurance 40.00 JOE 49 Dues (Union) i 122.50 Total Employee Deductions 36,256.58 Net Payroll 0.00 Direct Deposit 61,744.18 Gross Payroll Tie -Out 98,000.76 Plus City Paid Benefit 47,222.31 TOTAL PAYROLL COST 145,223.07 FICA TIE -OUT Gross Payroll 98,000.76 Less Total FSA 2,825.88 Less Total H.SA 1,070.19 Less Voluntary Ins 41.72 Net P/R Subject to FICA 94,062.97 FICA Oasdi @ 6.20% 5,831.89 FICA Medicare @ 1.45% 1,363.92 EFT Note: Federal and State Payroll Tax obligations are satisfied by means of utilizing the US Bank Easy Tax Deposit Service. Transfers are typically made up to two days after the payroll date. * A/P Checks can be found on the ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Check Approval report. Checks may be paid this week or the following week. Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date User: pang.silseth Printed: 9/18/2025 8:44 AM �RQEN HIILLS Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount Invoice No Description Reference ACH 0242 M T COUNCIL ENVIRON SERVICES-S. 09/05/2025 09022025 August SAC-472.15 09022025 August SAC 47,215.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0242: 46,742.85 ACH 0327 STAPLES INC 09/05/2025 6040012913 supplies 88.67 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0327: 88.67 ACH 10363 M NUTE MAKER SECRETARIAL 09/05/2025 M2114 08/25 CC Meeting Minutes 172.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10363: 172.00 ACH 10476 TWIN CITIES COMMERCIAL CLEANEI 09/05/2025 09251670 Janitorial Services -September 1,554.58 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10476: 1,554.58 ACH 10487 LUCAS MILLER 09/05/2025 082725 Expense Reimbursement:PWX Conference 1,029.49 082725 M leage and Parking 158.23 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10487: 1,187.72 ACH 10497 CINTAS CORP 09/05/2025 4232782500 M is -June 105.39 4241569440 M ts-August 105.39 5288200704 First Aid 51.45 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10497: 262.23 ACH 1125 BOLTON & MENK INC 09/05/2025 0371177 JDA Escrow #811 RCC Oulot a Development 344.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 1125: 344.00 ACH 5173 BADGER METER 09/05/2025 80209685 Beacon & LTE Sery Units -August 813.74 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 5173: 813.74 ACH 6555 TKDA INC 09/05/2025 002025004594 South Tower 7/27-8/23 1,528.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 6555: 1,528.00 ACH ESRI ESRI 09/05/2025 900079183 Agreement Fee 11/10/25-11/9/2026 3,100.00 900079183 Agreement Fee 11/10/25-11/9/2026 3,100.00 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (9/18/2025 8:44 AM) Page 1 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount Invoice No Description Reference 900079183 Agreement Fee 11/10/25-11/9/2026 1,550.00 900079183 Agreement Fee 11/10/25-11/9/2026 1,550.00 900079183 Agreement Fee 11/10/25-11/9/2026 3,100.00 900079183 Agreement Fee 11/10/25-11/9/2026 3,100.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor ESRI: 15,500.00 53644 2355 ANDERSON IRRIGATION INC 09/05/2025 184509 Lake Shore Place Irrigation System 12,100.00 Total for Check Number 53644: 12,100.00 53645 6842 BELSON OUTDOORS LLC 09/05/2025 383197 Bench -Valentine Hills Park 1,061.41 Total for Check Number 53645: 1,061.41 53646 10483 CENTRAL PENSION FUND 09/05/2025 401333.0825 August Apprenticeship Fund 504.00 Total for Check Number 53646: 504.00 53647 CPF 1 CENTRAL PENSION FUND SOURCE A 09/05/2025 184503.0825 August Pension 5,040.00 Total for Check Number 53647: 5,040.00 53648 10276 CITY OF COON RAPIDS 09/05/2025 AR-0000014759 2025 Street Maintenance Project 2,297.64 Total for Check Number 53648: 2,297.64 53649 0447 I.U.O.E LOCAL 49 BENEFIT FUND-INSI 09/05/2025 BP3.1025 October Insurance 10,955.00 N134.1025 October Insurance 1,772.00 Total for Check Number 53649: 12,727.00 53650 10486 MINNESOTA METRO NORTH TOURISA 09/05/2025 082625 Quality Inn July Lodging Tax 4,362.40 Total for Check Number 53650: 4,362.40 53651 10286 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTF 09/05/2025 502879 Drug Screening 209.00 Total for Check Number 53651: 209.00 53652 2732 MWP RECREATION 09/05/2025 2025288 2025 Park Project AOP 1,730.00 Total for Check Number 53652: 1,730.00 53653 7038 PEARSON BROS INC 09/05/2025 6312 2025 Street Maintence Project 30,039.00 Total for Check Number 53653: 30,039.00 53654 10471 RAINBOW TREECARE 09/05/2025 528637 Tree Removal 4,282.23 Total for Check Number 53654: 4,282.23 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (9/18/2025 8:44 AM) Page 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount Invoice No Description Reference 53655 0811 RAMSEY COUNTY 09/05/2025 PRMG-005790 PW Rental Space -October 3,070.85 PRMG-005790 PW Rental Space -October 6,141.69 PRMG-005790 PW Rental Space -October 3,070.83 PRMG-005790 PW Rental Space -October 1,364.82 Total for Check Number 53655: 13,648.19 53656 10423 SIR LINES -A -LOT 09/05/2025 H5-0362-02p-001 2025 Street Maintenance Project 4,277.20 Total for Check Number 53656: 4,277.20 53657 10568 VERIZON CONNECT 09/05/2025 100000188906 August Service 334.95 Total for Check Number 53657: 334.95 Total for 9/5/2025: 160,806.81 ACH 0192 GRAINGER INC 09/12/2025 9623023083 supplies 62.03 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0192: 62.03 ACH 0230 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 09/12/2025 1489012-00 Supplies 143.08 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0230: 143.08 ACH 0243 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL -WASTE WE 09/12/2025 0001192428 Wastewater -October 83,122.72 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0243: 83,122.72 ACH 0320 HEALTH PARTNERS INC 09/12/2025 009599072797 October Insurance 26,896.42 009599072797 October Insurance 1,475.06 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0320: 28,371.48 ACH 0339 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518 09/12/2025 0551104 Gloves 46.65 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0339: 46.65 ACH 0387 MISSIONSQUARE #302482 09/12/2025 PR 25-19 PR Batch 00100.09.2025 ICMA Employee Dedu PR Batch 00100.09.2025 ICIVi 1,150.00 PR 25-19 PR Batch 00100.09.2025 ICMA Employee Perce PR Batch 00100.09.2025 IC1V 398.67 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0387: 1,548.67 ACH 0453 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP 09/12/2025 0065366 supplies 218.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0453: 218.00 ACH 0772 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 09/12/2025 FF3715 Manhole 3,941.00 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (9/18/2025 8:44 AM) Page 3 Check No Vendor No Invoice No Vendor Name Check Date Description Reference Check Amount Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 0772: 3,941.00 ACH 10268 DAVID SWEARINGEN 09/12/2025 090225 Expense Reimbursement PWX Conference 227.18 090225 Mileage Reimbursement PWX Conference 26.46 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10268: 253.64 ACH 10584 CRITERION INC 09/12/2025 INV-2020034993 Talent Lite 10/l/25-9/30/26 957.21 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10584: 957.21 ACH 10594 JENNIFER ESTLING 09/12/2025 090525 Appreciation Picnic 25.41 090525 Mileage 5/22/25-9/5/25 129.22 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10594: 154.63 ACH 10618 JULIE WHITNEY 09/12/2025 090525 Mileage Reimbursement MBPTA 8/26 8.71 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 10618: 8.71 ACH 1125 BOLTON & MENK INC 09/12/2025 0372143 Park Improvement 7/13-8/15 4,005.00 0372144 Park System Plan -August 14,118.50 0372173 Parks Services -August 637.00 0372173 GIS Services -August 5,235.00 0372173 Engineering Services -August 1,780.50 0372173 MS4 Services -August 3,005.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 1125: 28,781.00 ACH 4889 COMMUNITY FOOTWORKS 09/12/2025 09032025 September Foot Care Clinic 384.80 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 4889: 384.80 ACH 5180 THE TESSMAN COMPANY LLC 09/12/2025 S421949-IN Lawn Care Supplies 1,404.58 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 5180: 1,404.58 ACH 6060 BATTERIES PLUS 09/12/2025 P84760807 Battery 21.95 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 6060: 21.95 ACH 6129 FAST SIGNS INC 09/12/2025 204-65961 Name Plates and Name Tags 81.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 6129: 81.00 ACH 7025 ON SITE COMPANIES -OSSTC INC 09/12/2025 0001947850 Restrooms 8/30-9/26 882.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 7025: 882.00 ACH 7804 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS INC 09/12/2025 46683509 Supplies 242.19 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (9/18/2025 8:44 AM) Page 4 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount Invoice No Description Reference Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 7804: 242.19 ACH ADVS ADVANTAGE SIGNS & GRAPHICS INC 09/12/2025 V0825-80 Signs 129.40 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor ADVS: 129.40 ACH ALPI ALLEGRA PRINT & IMAGING INC 09/12/2025 176318 Fall Rec Guide 5,368.47 176318 Fall Rec Guide Postage 1,203.27 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor ALPL• 6,571.74 ACH FPTC FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOLS AND EQUIPME 09/12/2025 31794 Manhole Ring 776.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor FPTC: 776.00 ACH FRID JEFF FRID 09/12/2025 090825 Mileage Reimbursement 49.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor FRID: 49.00 ACH TOII TOKLE INSPECTIONS INC 09/12/2025 090125 Electrical Inspections -August 1,622.20 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor TOII: 1,622.20 53658 0131 BEISSWENGERS DO IT BEST 09/12/2025 1212/6 Supplies 16.36 Total for Check Number 53658: 16.36 53659 10405 DALEY ELECTRIC LLC 09/12/2025 250268 Liftstation 6 140.00 Total for Check Number 53659: 140.00 53660 10353 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 09/12/2025 00000849702 ICWC Hours 850.00 00000849702 ICWC Hours 850.00 Total for Check Number 53660: 1,700.00 53661 0849 FRA-DOR INC 09/12/2025 2508016 Dirt Purchases 303.50 Total for Check Number 53661: 303.50 53662 1040 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC 09/12/2025 024-028-15 Zoning Code Update -August 3,006.65 Total for Check Number 53662: 3,006.65 53663 10330 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 09/12/2025 61044 Lake Johanna Blvd 3,657.75 61046 Lake Johanna Blvd 9,021.75 61152 3305 Katie Lane 2,513.00 61170 3319 Katie Lane 4,828.00 Total for Check Number 53663: 20,020.50 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (9/18/2025 8:44 AM) Page 5 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount Invoice No Description Reference 53664 1055 KODIAK POWER SYSTEMS INC 09/12/2025 KPS1832 Service to Portable Generator 536.55 Total for Check Number 53664: 536.55 53665 10579 LEVANDER GILLEN & MILLER P.A. 09/12/2025 42000E-0825 August Legal 7,584.50 42000E-0825 Escrow PC 25-005 #813 823.50 42000E-0825 Escrow PC 25-008 #831 238.00 42000E-0825 Escrow PC 24-018 #784 161.25 42000E-0825 August Legal - TCAAP 587.50 42000E-0825 August Legal 782.00 42000E-0825 August Legal 17.00 Total for Check Number 53665: 10,193.75 53666 10523 METRO-INET 09/12/2025 2945 IT Support -September 10,461.00 Total for Check Number 53666: 10,461.00 53667 0257 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH 09/12/2025 081525 Q3 Water Connection Fee 6,449.00 Total for Check Number 53667: 6,449.00 53668 1074 PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE INC 09/12/2025 90360 Tree Removal -Perry Park 2,100.00 Total for Check Number 53668: 2,100.00 53669 SRFC SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC 09/12/2025 16750.00-21 Old Highway 10 Trail -August 27,246.12 Total for Check Number 53669: 27,246.12 53670 3099 TRI STATE BOBCAT INC-LITTLE CANT 09/12/2025 A52819 Parts: Tooth 320.56 A52864 Parts: Handle 550.85 Total for Check Number 53670: 871.41 53671 10581 ULINE 09/12/2025 196140400 A -Frame Leg 89.85 Total for Check Number 53671: 89.85 Total for 9/12/2025: 242,908.37 Report Total (62 checks): 403,715.18 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (9/18/2025 8:44 AM) Page 6 CONSENT ITEM - 8B -ARkEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Jess Skalicky, Parks and Recreation Manager SUBJECT: Designating Mullin Gardens Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $0 $80 (for Park sign) PIR - Parks Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Resolution 2025-060 Designating Certain City -Owned Property as "Mullin Gardens". Background/Discussion Robert (Bob) Mullin was a long-time Arden Hills resident who passed away in March of 2025. For many years, he led volunteer efforts at Floral Park. He planted and maintained the large pollinator garden and monarch butterfly waystation in the park. On April 15, 2025, the Parks, Trails, and Recreation Committee passed a motion to recommend the City Council name the pollinator garden at Floral Park to "Mullin Gardens." At both the April 14, 2025 and July 14, 2025 regular City Council meetings, numerous Councilmembers mentioned their support for renaming the pollinator gardens; however, no formal motion was made at either of these meetings. The attached Resolution 2025-060 designates the City -owned property as "Mullin Gardens." If Council adopts the resolution, City staff will order and install such signage on the property as needed to reflect this designation and take such other action as needed to update the City's official website and publications to reflect the same. Budget Impact The Park signage will be funded by the PIR — Parks fund. Attachments Attachment A — Resolution 2025-060 Page 1 of 1 It --ARpEN_HILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2025-060 Attachment A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN CITY -OWNED PROPERTY AS "MULLIN GARDENS" WHEREAS, the City of Arden Hills is the fee owner of that certain real property located within Floral Park, 1423 Floral Dr West, in the City of Arden Hills, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, described as follows: That part of the park located 200 feet northeast of Floral Drive, 13.5 feet to the east of the side of the paved trail, 52 feet from the northwest corner of the playground container, 270 feet to the south southeast of the ballfield home plate, 272 feet from the northwest corner of the tennis court fence, in an oval shape of 975 square feet, 120 feet in circumference, 44 feet in diameter from the northwest to the southeast and 25 feet in diameter from the southwest to the northeast, that is currently filled with pollinator plants and flowers in its entirety. WHEREAS, the Property consists of approximately 0.022 acres and is currently being maintained as a pollinator garden; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to name the garden after the person who originally planted it and maintained it for many years, Robert "Bob" Mullin, and maintain it as a pollinator garden to serve the City's residents, businesses, and visitors. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills that: 1. The City -owned property located at 1423 Floral Dr West, as further described herein, shall be known as "Mullin Gardens." 2. Mullin Gardens shall be maintained as a pollinator garden or for other gardening purposes as determined by the City. Such garden use shall continue until the City Council takes official action to change this designation and direct a different use of the Property. 4. City staff is directed to maintain the Property for garden purposes. 5. City staff is directed to create and install such signage on the Property as needed to reflect this designation, and to take such other action as needed to update the City's official website and publications to reflect the same. To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025. David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. CONSENT ITEM - 8C 'It WREN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Julie Hanson, Assistant to the City Administrator/City Clerk SUBJECT: Appointment of Theodore Chresand as the Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee (PTRC) Youth Committee Member Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Resolution 2025-061 Appointing Theodore Chresand as the Youth Committee Member to the Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee (PTRC). Background On July 10, 2023, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2023-007, adding one additional member to serve to the PTRC in the capacity as Youth Commissioner/Committee Member. A Youth Commissioner/Youth Committee Member is defined as being a sophomore, junior or senior enrolled in a high school or PSEO program and enrolled in a school district serving Arden Hills (or a resident of Arden Hills attending school outside of the City's typical districts). An interview was conducted by a panel that included PTRC member Liz Johnson, Councilmember liaison Emily Rousseau, and Staff liaison Parks and Recreation Manager Jess Skalicky. It is the recommendation that the Council consider appointing Theodore Chresand as the PTRC Youth Committee Member for a term ending August 31, 2026. Budget Impact N/A AttarhmPnte Attachment A: Resolution 2025-061 Page 1 of 1 'It --ARQENHILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2025-061 Attachment A RESOLUTION APPOINTING THEODORE CHRESAND TO THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PARKS, TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the City Council appoints residents to serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council regarding city parks, trails, and recreation services; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 2023, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2023-007, adding an additional member to serve on the Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee in the capacity of a Youth Committee Member. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota that Theodore Chresand is appointed to the Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee as the Youth Committee Member with a term expiring on August 31, 2026. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025. David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. CONSENT ITEM - 8D r -ARPEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, P.E. Public Works Director / City Engineer SUBJECT: Geotechnical Evaluation — Proposed 2028 PMP Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $4,395,000 $29,295 PIR, Water Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Geotechnical Evaluation proposal from Braun Intertec in the amount of $29,295 for the proposed 2028 PMP and Shoreline Lane. Background/Discussion Depending on several factors of proposed PMP projects, this geotechnical evaluation can be ordered at earlier stages of project planning to provide additional information for making decisions. With the recent discussions with the City Council revolving around the proposed 2028 PMP, City staff have requested a proposal from Braun Intertec as seen in Attachment A. Also included in the geotechnical evaluation is review of Shoreline Lane, which is not within the proposed 2028 PMP. This road is experiencing settlement around several manhole structures and Public Works has received complaints from residents that travel the road frequently over the past several years. The proposed evaluation will help staff determine if there is a larger subgrade issue or if the solution can be localized to the manhole structures. Page 1 of 2 Budget Impact The 2028 PMP project within the 2025-2029 CIP Budget is estimated to be $4,395,000. The geotechnical evaluation is included within the 2025-2029 CIP Budget as it is a necessary component of the typical PMP street & utility projects; this data will be used to determine the rehabilitation type, which is a requirement of the feasibility study to apply special assessments. Attachments Attachment A — Geotechnical Evaluation proposal Page 2 of 2 September 4, 2025 David Swearingen, PE City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Re: Proposal for a Geotechnical Evaluation 2028 Pavement Management Project Various Streets Arden Hills, Minnesota Dear Mr. Swearingen: Attachment A INTERTEC Proposal QTB221496 Braun Intertec Corporation (Braun Intertec) appreciates the opportunity to submit this proposal to complete a geotechnical evaluation for the 2028 Pavement Management Project in Arden Hills, Minnesota. Project Information We understand City of Arden Hills is in the process of preparing the project scope for their 2028 pavement rehabilitation program. The project is proposed to include either mill and overlay (M&O) or full -depth reclamation (FDR) depending on in -situ pavement conditions. Figure 1 depicts the proposed pavement rehabilitation areas, including those that will have spot utility replacements. I i i I N I t i � I i i i I � i i I i t � i I i I i I J �o - J __L i i i =u w,?6G ST9Ec PE-AELTA-CA,- PROPOGED STREET RE�VBIrTAT,OM i POTENTUL'A.gTERWu4 REPLACE&C-fw - ------- ------- Figure 1. Proposed Project Street Rehabilitation Figure provided by Bolton & Menk, Inc. on August 27, 2025. 952.995.2000 1 11001 Hampshire Ave. S, Bloomington, MN 55438 Ibraunintertec.com City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Proposal QTB221496 September4, 2025 We also understand from conversations with Bolton & Menk, Inc. that Shoreline Lane is experiencing settlement around the utility manhole structures. Depending on soil boring exploration, a M&O or FDR may not be suitable, and a full reconstruction may be needed to correct either soft, loose or compressible soils. Purpose The purpose of our geotechnical evaluation will be to characterize subsurface geologic conditions at selected exploration locations, evaluate their impact on the project, and provide geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the 2028 Pavement Management Project. Scope of Services We propose the following tasks to help achieve the stated purpose. If we encounter unfavorable or unforeseen conditions during the completion of our tasks that lead us to recommend an expanded scope of services, we will contact you to discuss the conditions before resuming our services. Site Access Based on aerial photographs, it appears that the site is accessible to a truck mounted drill rig for soil borings and a pick-up truck mounted with a coring machine for the pavement cores. We assume there will be no cause for delays in accessing the exploration locations. We are not including debris or obstruction removal, grading of navigable paths, or snow plowing. Depending on access requirements, ground conditions or potential utility conflicts, our field crew may alter the exploration locations from those proposed to facilitate accessibility. Staking We will stake prospective subsurface exploration locations, as selected by Braun Intertec, and obtain surface elevations at those locations using GPS (Global Positioning System) technology. In order to link the GPS data to an appropriate reference, we request that you provide CAD files indicating location/elevation references appropriate for this project, or give us contact information for the consultant that might have such information. Utility Clearance Prior to drilling or excavating, we will contact Gopher State One Call and arrange for notification of the appropriate utility vendors to mark and clear the exploration locations of public underground utilities. You, or your authorized representative, are responsible to notify us before we begin our work of the presence and Location of any underground objects or private utilities that are not the responsibility of public agencies. ROW Permit and Work Hours We will obtain a right-of-way (ROW) permit through the City of Arden Hills (City) prior to beginning our fieldwork. We assume the City will waive permit fees as we will be completing the work for them. We assume Braun Intertec Page 2 City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Proposal QTB221496 September 4, 2025 that the City permit will not include a work hour restriction for this work (i.e., an 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM normal work hour will apply). Traffic Control Based on aerial images from Google Earth we anticipate performing the borings and pavement cores mainly in low volume residential roads in existing drive lanes. We are including fees for warning signs to alert motorists to our work within the roadway. For Stowe Avenue and Pine Tree Drive/Harriet Avenue, we are including fees for our subcontractor, Safety Signs of MN, LLC, to perform traffic control (flagging) for the pavement cores in these locations. We are including fees for up to 2 days of flagging in our scope of services. Ground Penetrating Radar We understand that the streets are proposed to be rehabilitated via a mill and overlay or full -depth reclamation (FDR). To help with filling in pavement section thicknesses between the proposed boring/pavement core locations, we propose to perform ground penetrating radar (GPR) prior to performing our borings and pavement cores. The GPR testing would be proposed in both travel directions along the planned roadways. The GPR data will provide a continuous estimate of pavement layer thicknesses along the roadways that is correlated to the thickness of the physical pavement core samples to provide a more complete estimate of the overall in -place. The GPR measurements obtained will be tied to GPS coordinates for mapping and reference purposes. An air -coupled GPR unit can be expected to penetrate approximately 2 feet under ideal conditions and is capable of detecting differentiation between bituminous pavement layers and underlying aggregate base layers if present. The GPR can take 4 to 5 measurements per linear foot, so for a 1-mile-long alignment it can produce 20,000 to 25,000 thickness measurements for each direction of travel with the GPR. The GPR is a very efficient way of collecting additional pavement thicknesses measurements for estimating purposes. Figure 2 in our soil borings section shows the proposed GPR locations. Pavement Coring We propose to perform 40 pavement cores for the project, 4 of those locations will be at soil boring locations. The coring will be performed with a 4-inch diamond -toothed core barrel fitted on a mechanically operated rotary drill. The coring will extend down through the existing bituminous section. Upon completion of each core, we will extend a manually operated hand auger through the aggregate base section to a depth of 2 to 4 feet into the underlying subgrade. The thickness of the cores will be measured to the nearest 1/4-inch, and the aggregate base will be measured to the nearest 1-inch (depending on the underlying soil type and past mixing of the aggregate layer). If groundwater/frost is encountered, we will note their presence on the boring logs. We will photograph the pavement cores and attach in a core photo log. The pavement cores will be retained for up to 60 days, unless otherwise noted. Braun Intertec Page 3 City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Proposal QTB221496 September4, 2025 Figure 2 in our soil borings section shows the proposed pavement coring locations. Soil Borings We propose to drill standard penetration test (SPT) borings for the project to nominal depths of 15 feet below existing grade surface. We will perform standard penetration tests at 2 1/2-foot vertical intervals to a depth of about 15 feet (boring termination). If soft, loose or organic soils are encountered at boring termination depth, we will perform sampling at 5-foot intervals beyond 15 feet to understand extents for utility replacement. Figure 2 below shows an illustration of our proposed boring locations (along with associated pavement coring and GPR). Figure 2. Proposed Boring / Pavement Core / GPR Locations Figure annotated in and extracted from Google Earth'" If the intended boring depths do not extend through unsuitable material, we will extend the borings at least 5 feet into suitable material at greater depths. The additional information will help evaluate such issues as excavation depth, among others. If we identify a need for deeper (or additional) borings, we will contact you prior to increasing our total estimated drilled footage and submit a Change Order summarizing the anticipated additional effort and the associated cost, for your review and authorization. If the borings encounter groundwater during or immediately after drilling of each boring, we will record the observed depth on the boring logs. We will not leave any of the boreholes open for an extended period of time. Braun Intertec Page 4 City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Proposal QTB221496 September4, 2025 MDH Notification and Sealing Record Since our planned exploration will be less than 15 feet in depth, the Minnesota Statutes will not require that we complete any notifications or sealing records. If we extend any of the borings to a depth of 15 feet or greater, the Statutes requires that we seal the boreholes and complete a Sealing Record. If 25 feet or greater, the Statutes also require us to complete a Sealing Notification Form. If the Record or Form are required, we will contact you to discuss the additional fees and sealing requirements. Borehole Abandonment We will backfill our exploration locations immediately after completing the drilling or coring at each location. Minnesota Statutes require sealing temporary borings that are 15 feet deep or deeper. Based on our proposed subsurface characterization depths, we currently do not anticipate having to seal any of the boreholes with grout. Upon backfilling or sealing exploration locations, we will fill holes in pavements with a temporary bituminous cold patch. Over time, subsidence of borehole (core) backfill may occur, requiring releveling of surface grades or replacing bituminous patches. We are not assuming responsibility for releveling or re -patching after we complete our fieldwork. Sample Review and Laboratory Testing We will return recovered samples to our laboratory, where a geotechnical engineer will visually classify and log them. To help classify the materials encountered and estimate the engineering properties necessary to our analyses, we have budgeted to perform the following laboratory tests. Table 1. Laboratory Tests Moisture content D2216 Soil classification, moisture condition, and engineering properties Atterberg limits D4318 Soil plasticity, shrink/swell potential, engineering parameters, suitability of soils for reuse Sieve analysis D1140 Soil classification Percent passing #200 sieve D1140 Soil classification, and evaluate frost susceptibility Organic content D2974 Evaluate suitability of soils for reuse We will determine the actual laboratory testing for the project depending on the encountered subsurface conditions. If we identify a laboratory testing program that exceeds the budget included in this proposal but provides additional value to the project, we will request authorization for the additional fees through a Change Order. Braun Intertec Page 5 City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Proposal QTB221496 September4, 2025 Report We will prepare a report including: A sketch showing the exploration and GPR locations. ■ Logs of the borings describing the materials encountered and presenting the results of our groundwater measurements and laboratory tests. A photographic pavement core log. GPR thickness results (graphical and/or electronic). A summary of the subsurface profile and groundwater conditions. Discussion identifying the subsurface conditions that will impact design and construction. ■ Discussion regarding the reuse of on -site materials during construction. Recommendations for preparing utility and pavement subgrades, pavement rehabilitation method, and the selection, placement, and compaction of fill. ■ Recommendations for the pavement section design (including assumed R-value), recommended pavement reclamation or milling depths, and spot utility replacement. We will only submit an electronic copy of our report to you unless you request otherwise. At your request, we can also send the report to additional project team members. Schedule We anticipate performing our work according to the following schedule. GPR mobilization —within 2 weeks following receipt of written authorization Pavement coring mobilization — after GPR is performed, which would be about 1 week after Drill rig mobilization —within 5 weeks following receipt of written authorization GPR field exploration —1 day on site to complete the GPR ■ Soil boring field exploration —1 day on site to complete the soil borings Pavement coring exploration — 2 days on site to complete the pavement cores Classification and laboratory testing — within 2 weeks after completion of field exploration ■ Preliminary results —within 2 weeks after completion of field exploration ■ Draft report submittal — about 3 weeks of after completion of field exploration ■ Final report submittal —within 5 days of receiving comments on the draft report and depending on the complexity of the comments Braun Intertec Page 6 City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project ProposalQTB221496 September4, 2025 If we cannot complete our proposed scope of services according to this schedule due to circumstances beyond our control, we may need to revise this proposal prior to completing the remaining tasks. Fees We will furnish the services described in this proposal on a time and materials basis for an estimated fee of $29,295. We are attaching a tabulation showing hourly and/or unit rates associated with our proposed scope of services. Our work may extend over several invoicing periods. As such, we will submit partial progress invoices for work we perform during each invoicing period. Braun Intertec Page 7 City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Proposal QTB221496 September4, 2025 General Remarks We based the proposed fee on the scope of services described and the assumption that you will authorize our services within 30 days and that others will not delay us beyond our proposed schedule. We include the Braun Intertec General Conditions, which provide additional terms and are a part of our agreement. To accept this proposal and authorize us to proceed, please sign and return it to us in its entirety. We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal to you. We will be happy to meet with you to discuss our proposed scope of services further and clarify the various scope components. To have questions answered or schedule a time to meet and discuss our approach to this project further, please contact Zach Semlak at 651.788.5071 (zsemlak@braunintertec.com). Sincerely, Braun Intertec Corporation fZf ayT. Semlak, EIT Staff Engineer ��- � !� 4&'C' Kevin S. Zalec, PE Senior Manager, Senior Engineer Attachments: Project Proposal - QTB221496 General Conditions (11/04/2024) c: Bradley Fisher, PE, Bolton & Menk, Inc. The proposal is accepted, and Braun Intertec is authorized to proceed. Authorizer's Firm Authorizer's Signature Authorizer's Name (please print or type) Authorizer's Title Date Braun Intertec Page 8 BRAUN Project Proposal INTERTEC QTB221496 the science you build on City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project Client: City of Arden Hills David Swearingen 1245 W Hwy 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 (651)792-7800 Work Site Address: Various Streets Arden Hills, MN 55112 Service Description: Geotechnical Evaluation, Pavement Coring, Ground Penetrating Radar Description Quantity Units Unit Price Extension Phase 1 Geotechnical Evaluation Activity 1.1 Site Layout - Staking - Utility Coordination - CADD $4,120.00 205 Site layout and utility coordination 16.00 Hour 115.00 $1,840.00 5099 Trimble R8 Rover (horizontal and vertical), per hour 16.00 Each 80.00 $1,280.00 1862 Utility Trip Charge 2.00 Each 60.00 $120.00 288 Project Assistant 3.00 Hour 100.00 $300.00 371 GIS/CAD Specialist II 2.00 Hour 140.00 $280.00 118 Staff Engineer 2.00 Hour 150.00 $300.00 Activity 1.2 Traffic Control (Subcontracted) $3,800.00 SUB Traffic Control (Subcontracted) 2.00 Each 1,750.00 $3,500.00 118 Staff Engineer 2.00 Hour 150.00 $300.00 Activity 1.3 _ Ground Penetrating Radar $3,475.00 1600 GPR Mobilization, per mile 60.00 Each 1.00 $60.00 1804 GPR Equipment Fee, Roadway, per hour 9.00 Each 85.00 $765.00 383 GPR Technician 9.00 Hour 130.00 $1,170.00 126 Project Engineer 8.00 Hour 185.00 $1,480.00 Activity 1.4 Pavement Coring and Hand Auger Borings $7,930.00 252 Bituminous Coring, two person 22.00 Hour 255.00 $5,610.00 1861 SPEC Trip Charge 2.00 Each 60.00 $120.00 1555 Bituminous patch material, per core 40.00 Each 25.00 $1,000.00 118 Staff Engineer 8.00 Hour 150.00 $1,200.00 Activity 1.5 Drilling Services $2,940.00 9000 Truck Mounted Drilling Services, per hour 7.00 Each 420.00 $2,940.00 1029 Standby time, per hour Each 420.00 $.00 Activity 1.6 Sample Review and Laboratory Testing $3,150.00 1152 Moisture content (ASTM D 2216), per sample 60.00 Each 20.00 $1,200.00 1156 Atterberg Limits: ILL and PL (ASTM D 4318), per sample 1.00 Each 130.00 $130.00 1162 Sieve analysis with 200 wash (ASTM C 136 and C 117), per sample 2.00 Each 160.00 $320.00 1166 200 wash (ASTM C 117), per sample 8.00 Each 100.00 $800.00 1174 Organic content (ASTM D 2974), per sample 1.00 Each 100.00 $100.00 118 Staff Engineer 4.00 Hour 150.00 $600.00 Activity 1.7 Engineering and Reporting $3,880.00 138 Project Assistant 5.00 Hour 100.00 $500.00 125 Project Control Specialist 2.00 Hour 150.00 $300.00 118 Staff Engineer Hour 150.00 $.00 09/04/2025 10:46 AM Page 1 of 2 BRAUN Project Proposal INTERTEC QTB221496 the science you build on City of Arden Hills 2028 Pavement Management Project 126 Project Engineer L128 Senior Engineer 12.00 Hour 185.00 $2,220.00 4.00 Hour 215.00 $860.00 Phase 1 Total: $29,295.00 Proposal Total: $29,295.00 09/04/2025 10:46 AM Page 2 of 2 BRAUN INTERTEC BRAUN INTERTEC GENERAL CONDITIONS SECTION 1:AGREEMENT 1.1 Agreement. This agreement consists of these General Conditions and the accompanying written proposal or authorization ("Agreement"). This Agreement is the entire agreement between Consultant and Client and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. 1.2 Parties to the Agreement. The parties to this Agreement are the Braun Intertec entity ("Consultant") and the client ("Client") as described in the accompanying written proposal or authorization. Consultant and Client may be individually referred to as a Party or collectively as the Parties. SECTION 2: SCOPE OF SERVICES 2.1 Services. Consultant will provide services ("Services") in connection with the project ("Project") which are specifically described in this Agreement. Client understands and agrees that Consultant's Services are limited to those which are expressly set forth in this Agreement. 2.2 Additional Services. Any Services not specifically set forth in the Agreement constitute "Additional Services." Additional Services must be agreed upon in writing by the Parties prior to performance of the Additional Services and may entitle Consultant to additional compensation and schedule adjustments. Additional compensation will be based upon Consultant's then current rates and fees. SECTION 3: PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES 3.1 Standard of Care. Consultant will perform its professional Services consistent with the degree of care and skill exercised by members of Consultant's profession performing under similar circumstances at the same time and in the same locality in which the professional Services are performed. CONSULTANT DISCLAIMS ALL STATUTORY, ORAL, WRITTEN, EXPRESS, AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES IN A GOOD AND WORKMANLIKE MANNER. 3.2 Written Reports and Findings. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, Consultant's findings, opinions, and recommendations will be provided to Client in writing and may be delivered via electronic format. Client agrees not to rely on oral findings, opinions, or recommendations. 3.3 Observation or Sampling Locations. Locations of field observations or sampling described in Consultant's report or shown on Consultant's sketches reference Project plans or information provided by others or estimates made by Consultant's personnel. Consultant will not survey, set, or check the accuracy of those points unless Consultant accepts that duty in writing. Client agrees that such dimensions, depths, or elevations are approximations unless specifically stated otherwise in the report. Client accepts the inherent risk that samples or observations may not be representative of items not sampled or seen and further that site conditions may vary over distance or change over time. 3.4 Project Site Information. Client will provide Consultant with prior environmental, geotechnical and other reports, specifications, plans, and information to which Client has access about the Project site and which are necessary for Consultant to carry out Consultant's Services. Client agrees to provide Consultant with all plans, changes in plans, and new information as to Projectsite conditions until Consultant has completed its Services. 3.5 Subsurface Objects. To the extent required to carry out Consultant's Services, Client agrees to provide Consultant, in a timely manner, with information that Client has regarding buried objects at the Project site. Consultant will not be responsible for Locating buried objects or utilities at the Project site unless expressly set forth in this Agreement, or expressly required by applicable law. Client agrees to hold Consultant harmless, defend, and indemnify Consultant from claims, damages, losses, penalties and expenses (including attorney fees) involving buried objects or utilities that were not properly marked or identified or of which Client had or should have had knowledge but did not timely notify Consultant or correctly identify on the plans Client or others furnished to Consultant. Consultant, from time to time, may hire a third party to locate underground objects or utilities and, unless otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, such action shall be for the sole benefit of Consultant and in no way will alleviate Client of its responsibilities hereunder. 3.6 Hazardous Materials. Clientwill notify Consultant of any knowledge or suspicion of the presence of hazardous or dangerous materials present on any Project site or in any sample or material provided to Consultant. Client agrees to provide Consultant with information in Client's possession or control relating to such samples or materials. If Consultant observes or suspects the presence of contaminants not anticipated in this Agreement, Consultant may terminate Services without liability to Client or to others, and Client will compensate Consultant for fees earned and expenses incurred up to the time of termination. 3.7 Supervision of Others. Consultant shall have no obligation to supervise or direct Client's representatives, contractors, or other third parties retained by Client. Consultant has no authority over or responsibilityfor the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected or used by Client, Client's representatives, contractors, or other third parties retained by Client. 3.8 Safety. Consultantwill provide a health and safety program for its employees as well as reasonable personal protective equipment ("PPE") typicalfor the performance ofthe Services provided bythis Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all extraordinary PPE required by Client. Client will provide, at no cost to Consultant, appropriate Project site safety measures which are necessary for Consultant to perform its Services at the Project location or work areas in connection with the Project. Consultant's employees are expressly authorized by Clientto refuseto work under conditions that may, in an employee's sole discretion, be unsafe. Consultant shall have no authority over or be responsible for the safety precautions and programs, or for security, at the Project site (except with respect to Consultant's own Services and those of its subconsultants). 3.9 Project Site Access and Damage. Client will provide or ensure access to the site. In the performance of Services some Project site damage is normal even when due care is exercised. Consultant will use reasonable care to minimize damage to the Project site. Unless otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, the cost of restoration for such damage has not been included in the estimated fees and will be the responsibility of the Client. 3.10 Monitoring Wells. To the extent applicable to the Services, monitoring wells are Client's property, and Client is responsible for monitoringwell permitting, maintenance, and abandonment unless otherwise expressly set forth in this Agreement. 3.11 Contaminant Disclosures Required by Law. Client agrees to make alldisclosures related to the discovery or release of contaminants that are required by law. In the event Client does not own the Project site, Client acknowledges that it is Client's duty to inform the owner of the Project site of the discovery or release of contaminants at the site. Client agrees to hold Consultant harmless, defend, and indemnify Consultantfrom claims, damages, penalties, or losses and expenses, including attorney fees, related to Client's failure to make any disclosure required by law or for failing to make the necessary disclosure to the owner of the Project site. SECTION 4: SCHEDULE 4.1 Schedule. Consultant shall complete its obligations within a reasonable time and shall make decisions and carry out its responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Standard of Care. Specific periods of time for rendering Services or specific dates by which Services are to be completed are provided in this Agreement. If Consultant is delayed in the performance of the Services by actions, inactions, or neglect of Client or others for whom Client is responsible, by changes ordered in the Services, or by other causes beyond the control of Consultant, includingforce majeure events, then the time for Consultant's performance of Services shall be extended and Consultant shall receive payment for all expenses attributable to the delay in accordance with Consultant's then current rates and fees. 4.2 Scheduling On -Site Observations or Services. To the extent Consultant's Services require observations, inspections, or testing be performed at the Project site, Client understands and agrees that Client, directly or indirectly through its authorized representative, has the sole right and responsibility to determine and communicate to Consultant the scheduling of observations, inspections, and testing performed by Consultant. Accordingly, Client also acknowledges that Consultant bears no responsibility for damages that may result because Consultant did not perform such observations, inspections, or testing that Client failed to request and schedule. Client understands that the scheduling of observations, inspections, or testing will dictate the time Consultant's field personnel spend on the job site and agrees to payfor all services provided by Consultant due to Client's scheduling demands in accordance with Consultant's then current rates and fees. SECTION 5: COST AND PAYMENT OF SERVICES 5.1 Cost Estimates. Consultant's price or fees provided for in this Agreement are an estimate and are not a fixed amount unless otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement. Consultant's estimated fees are based upon Consultant's experience, knowledge, and professional judgment as well as information available to Consultant at the time of this Agreement. Actual costs may vary and are not guaranteed or warrantied. 5.2 Payment. Consultant will invoice Client on a monthly basis for Services performed. Client will pay for Services as stated in this Agreement together with costs for Additional Services or costs otherwise agreed to in writingwithin thirty (30) days of the invoice date. Unless otherwise stated in this Agreement or agreed to in writing, Consultant's costs for all services performed will be based upon Consultant's then current rates, fees, and charges. No retainage shall be withheld by Client. All unpaid invoices will incur an interest charge of 1.5% per month or the maximum allowed by law. 5.3 Other Payment Conditions. Consultant will require Client credit approval and Consultant may require payment of a retainer fee. Client agrees to pay all applicable taxes. Client's obligation to pay for Services under this Agreement is not contingent on Client's ability to obtain financing, governmental or regulatory agency approval, permits, final adjudication of any lawsuit, Client's successful completion of any project, receipt of payment from a third parry, or any other event. 5.4Third Party Payment. Provided Consultant has agreed in writing, Client may request Consultant to invoice and receive payment from a third party for Consultant's Services. Consultant, in its sole discretion, may also require the third party to provide written acceptance of all terms of this Agreement. Neither payment to Consultant by a third party nor a third party's written acceptance of all terms of this Agreement will alter Client's rights and responsibilities under this Agreement. Client expressly agrees that Rev. 2024-11-04 Page 1 of 2 the Agreement contains sufficient consideration notwithstanding Consultant being paid by a third party. 5.5 Non -Payment. If Client does not pay for Services in full as agreed, Consultant may retain work not yet delivered to Client and Client agrees to return all Project Data (as defined in this Agreement) that may be in Client's possession or under Client's control. If Client fails to pay Consultant in accordance with this Agreement, such nonpayment shall be considered a default and breach of this Agreement for which Consultant may terminate for cause consistent with the terms of this Agreement and without liability to Client or to others. Client will compensate Consultant for fees earned and expenses incurred up to the time of termination. Client agrees to be liable to Consultant for all costs and expenses Consultant incurs in the collection of amounts invoiced but not paid, including but not limited to attorney fees and costs. SECTION 6: OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DATA 6.1 Ownership. All reports, notes, calculations, documents, and all other data prepared by Consultant in the performance of the Services ("Project Data") are instruments of Consultant's Services and are the property of Consultant. Consultant shall retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including the copyright thereto, of Project Data. 6.2 Use of Project Data. The Project Data of this Agreement is for the exclusive purpose disclosed by Client and, unless agreed to in writing, for the exclusive use of Client. Client may not use Project Data for a purpose for which the Project Data was not prepared without the express written consent of Consultant. Consultant will not be responsible for any claims, damages, or costs arisingfrom the unauthorized use of any Project Data provided by Consultant under this Agreement. Client agrees to hold harmless, defend and indemnify Consultant from any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of such unauthorized use. 6.3 Samples, Field Data, and Contaminated Equipment. Samples and field data remaining after tests are conducted, as well as field and laboratory equipment that cannot be adequately cleansed of contaminants, are and continue to be the property of Client. Samples may be discarded or returned to Client, at Consultant's discretion, unless within fifteen (15) days ofthe report date Client gives Consultant written direction to store or transfer the samples and materials. Samples and materials will be stored at Client's expense. 6.4 Data Provided by Client. Electronic data, reports, photographs, samples, and other materials provided by Client or others may be discarded or returned to Client, at Consultant's discretion, unless within 15 days of the report date Client gives Consultant written direction to store or transfer the materials at Client's expense. SECTION 7: INSURANCE 7.1 Insurance. Consultant shall keep and maintain the following insurance coverages: a. Workers' Compensation: Statutory b. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 bodily injury, each accident 1 $1,000,000 bodily injury by disease, each employee 1 $1,000,000 bodily injury/disease, aggregate c. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence 1 $2,000,000 aggregate d. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit (bodily injury and property damage) e. Excess Umbrella Liability: $5,000,000 per occurrence 1 $5,000,000 aggregate f. Professional Liability: $2,000,000 per claim 1 $2,000,000 aggregate 7.2 Waiver of Subrogation. Client and Consultant waive all claims and rights of subrogation for losses arising out of causes of loss covered by the respective insurance policies. 7.3 Certificate of Insurance. Consultant shall furnish Client with a certificate of insurance upon request. SECTION 8: INDEMNIFICATION, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LIABILITY LIMITS 8.1 Indemnification. Consultant's only indemnification obligation shall be to indemnify and hold harmless the Client, its officers, directors, and employees from and against those damages and costs incurred by Client or that Client is legally obligated to pay as a result of third partytort claims, includingfor the death or bodily injuryto any person or for the destruction or damage to any property, but only to the extent proven to be directly caused by the negligent act, error, or omission of the Consultant or anyone for whom the Consultant is legally responsible. This indemnification provision is subject to the Limitation of Liability set forth in this Section 8. 8.2 Intellectual Property. Client agrees to indemnify Consultant against losses and costs arising out of claims of patent or copyright infringement as to any process or system that is specified or selected by Client or others on behalf of Client. 8.3 Mutual Waiver of Consequential Damages. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY HEREUNDER, NEITHER CONSULTANT NOR CLIENT SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, OR LOSS OF USE OR RENTAL, LOSS OF PROFIT, LOSS OF BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY, LOSS OF PROFITOR REVENUE ORCOSTOF FINANCING, OR OTHERSUCH SIMILAR AND RELATED DAMAGE ASSERTED IN THIRD PARTY CLAIMS, OR CLAIMS BY EITHER PARTY AGAINST THE OTHER. 8.4 Limitation of Liability. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, THE TOTAL LIABILITY IN THE AGGREGATE OF CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT'S OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, PARTNERS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, AND SUBCONSULTANTS, TO CLIENT AND ANYONE CLAIMING BY, THROUGH OR UNDER CLIENT FOR ANY CLAIMS, LOSSES, COSTS, OR DAMAGES WHATSOEVER ARISING OUT OF, RESULTING FROM OR IN ANY WAY RELATED CONSULTANT'S PERFORMANCE OF THE SERVICES OR THIS AGREEMENT, FROM ANY CAUSE OR CAUSES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO NEGLIGENCE, PROFESSIONAL ERRORSAND OMISSIONS, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF CONTRACT, INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS OR BREACH OF WARRANTY, SHALL NOT EXCEED THE TOTAL COMPENSATION RECEIVED BY CONSULTANT OR $50,000, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. SECTION 9: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 9.1 Services Prior to Agreement. Directing Consultant to commence Services prior to execution of this Agreement constitutes Client's acceptance of this unaltered Agreement in its entirety. 9.2 Confidentiality. To the extent Consultant receives Client information identified as confidential, Consultant will not disclose that information to third parties without Client consent. Additionally, any Project Data prepared in performance of the Services will remain confidential and Consultant will not release the reports to any third parties not involved in the Project. Neither of the aforesaid confidentiality obligations shall apply to any information in the public domain, information lawfully acquired from others on a nonconfidential basis, or information that Consultant is required by law to disclose. 9.3 Relationship ofthe Parties. Consultant will perform Services under this Agreement as an independent contractor, and its employees will at all times be under its sole discretion and control. No provision in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to create a joint venture, partnership, agency or other such association between the Parties. 9.4 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. To the extent applicable to the Services, neither this Agreement nor the providing of Services will operate to make Consultant an owner, operator, generator, transporter, treater, storer, or a disposal facility within the meaning of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, or within the meaning of any other law governing the handling, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances. Client agrees to hold Consultant harmless, defend, and indemnify Consultant from any claims, damages, penalties or Losses resulting from the storage, removal, hauling or disposal of such substances. 9.5 Services in Connection with Legal Proceedings. Client agrees to compensate Consultant in accordance with its then current fees, rates, or charges if Consultant is asked or required to respond to legal process arising out of a proceeding related to the Project and as to which Consultant is not a party. 9.6 Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by Consultant or Client without the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 9.7 Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended, or will be construed, to confer upon or give any person or entity other than Consultant and Client, and their respective permitted successors and assigns, any rights, remedies, or obligations under or by reason of this Agreement. 9.8 Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either Party for cause upon seven (7) days written notice to the other Party. Should the other Party fail to cure and perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement within such seven-day period, the Agreement mayterminate at the sole discretion ofthe Partythat provided the written notice. The Client may terminate this Agreement for its convenience. If Client terminates for its convenience, then Consultant shall be compensated in accordance with the terms hereof for Services performed, reimbursable costs and expenses incurred prior to the termination, and reasonable costs incurred as a result of the termination. 9.9 Force Majeure. Neither Party shall be liable for damages or deemed in default of this Agreement to the extent that any delay or failure in the performance of its obligations (other than the payment of money) results, without its fault or negligence, from any cause beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to acts of God, acts of civil or military authority, embargoes, pandemics, epidemics, war, riots, insurrections, fires, explosions, earthquakes, floods, adverseweather conditions, strikes or lock -outs, declared states of emergency, and changes in laws, statutes, regulations, or ordinances. 9.10 Disputes, Choice of Law, Venue. In the event of a dispute and prior to exercising rights at law or under this Agreement, Consultant and Client agree to negotiate all disputes in good faith for a period of 30 days from the date of notice of such dispute. This Agreement will be governed bythe laws and regulations ofthe state in which the Project is located and all disputes and claims shall be heard in the state or federal courts for that state. Client and Consultant each waive trial byjury. 9.11 Individual Liability. No officer or employee of Consultant, acting within the scope of employment, shall have individual liability for any acts or omissions, and Client agrees not to make a claim against any individual officers or employees of Consultant. 9.12 Severability. Should a court of law determine that any clause or section of this Agreement is invalid, all other clauses or sections shall remain in effect. 9.13 Waiver. The failure of either Party hereto to exercise or enforce any right under this Agreement shall not constitute a release or waiver of the subsequent exercise or enforcement of such right. 9.14 Entire Agreement. The terms and conditions set forth herein constitute the entire understanding ofthe Parties relatingto the provision of Services by Consultant to Client. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument signed by both Parties. In the event Client issues a purchase order or other documentation to authorize Consultant's Services, any conflicting or additional terms of such documentation are expressly excluded from this Agreement. Rev. 2024-11-04 Braun Intertec General Conditions Page 2 of 2 CONSENT ITEM - 8E EN HILLS 11l I NLVA Eel .7_I►111NLVA DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, P.E. Public Works Director / City Engineer SUBJECT: Payment for sanitary sewer televising services — Trunk main under I-35W Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $4,889.50 (remaining) $12,695 602-49490-43100 ($7,805.50 over budget) Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Payment for sanitary sewer televising services in the amount of $12,695. Background/Discussion Public Works Director/City Engineer ordered televising services to inspect the current condition of 1,594-feet of sanitary sewer main that crosses I-35W from the TCAAP site to Mounds View where it connects to the Mounds View sewer system. The televising services was to review if any rehabilitation work is needed while design is underway for the Ramsey County Spine Road which could have been included in the project construction plans. The last televising for this sewer main was conducted in 2014 and indicated a slight sag in a section. The latest televising video and report determined that the sag in the sanitary sewer did not worsen and is in overall great condition, therefore, no rehabilitation work will be necessary. To perform the televising, it includes heavy cleaning of the sewer main which is required standard maintenance now that the main is active due to the recent connection of the DMV and Fleet Services properties. Once larger flows occur through this segment of sewer main, the sewer main will be considered self-cleaning, therefore, maintenance will only occur on an as -needed basis per the City's Sanitary Sewer Maintenance policy. Page 1 of 2 Budget Impact The televising services fall under the Sanitary Sewer Fund account 602-49490-43100. The overall fund balance for the Sanitary Sewer Fund is healthy and will be able to absorb the budget overage of $7,805.50. This work is not typically routine and was not anticipated while putting together the 2025 budget in 2024. Due to the large amount of sediment observed and removed in the sewer main, Public Works will plan to perform sewer cleaning maintenance every 4 to 6 years until larger flows occur. Attachments Attachment A — Televising services invoice Page 2 of 2 Attachment A ITEM Visu-Sewer L Inspect. Maintain. Rehabilitate. BOLTON MENK 12224 NICOLLET AVE BURNSVILLE, MN 55337-1649 ATTN: RYAN PETERSON RE: TCAAP ARDEN HILLS DESCRIPTION www.visu-sewer.com INVOICE NUMBER: 39273 INVOICE DATE: 8/20/2025 CUSTOMER NO. 2625 JOB NO. 25219M COMPLETED EST. THIS TO QTY U/M PRICE PERIOD DATE AMOUNT T&M FOR CCTV/ VACTOR/ E.M. 8 T&M TO DUMP VACTOR (2 LOADS) PLEASE REMIT TO: VISU-SEWER, LLC P.O. BOX 804 PEWAUKEE, WI 53072-0804 DUE UPON RECEIPT OF INVOICE. A SERVICE CHARGE OF 1 1/2 % PER MONTH MAY BE CHARGED ON ALL PAST DUE ACCOUNTS. H R 595.00 20.00 20.00 11, 900.00 HR 265.00 3.00 3.00 795.00 TOTAL WORK COMPLETED 12,695.00 LESS 0% RETAINAGE LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENT TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 12,695.00 Visu-Sewer, LLC W230 N4855 Betker Dr, Pewaukee, WI 53072 (P) 800-876-8478 / 262-695-2340 (F) 262-695-2359 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer CONSENT ITEM - 8F -fiR)LEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: David Swearingen, P.E. Public Works Director / City Engineer SUBJECT: Payment for Emergency Watermain Repair Restoration on Dunlap Street Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: $23,340.80 (remaining) $11,936.50 601-49440-44030 Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table, or deny the following: • Payment of $11,936.50 to Klein Underground for the roadway restoration following an emergency watermain repair that occurred on August 23, 2025. Background/Discussion On August 23, 2025, Public Works and Valley Rich excavated near 3750 Dunlap Street to repair the City -owned watermain 3" water service lead. The water surfacing was substantial, undermining a portion of the road. The roadway restoration took place on September 16th after giving the sub soils time to settle. The roadway damage was considered moderate. Budget Impact The restoration falls under the Water Fund account 601-49440-44030. This work was required following the emergency watermain repair on August 23, 2025 to repair the damage caused by water surfacing from the mainline. Attachments Attachment A — Klein Underground Quote Page l of 1 9/2/25, 1:14 PM Estimate #12568 Estimate for CITY OF ARDEN HILLS US Mobile 651-755-1461 Job Location: 3755 Dunlap Street Arden Hills, MN Estimate No. 12568 Issued on Tue Aug 26, 2025 Attachment A r KLEIN iV Li L r1 U m V U i4 iJ PO Box 564 Howard Lake, MN 55349 651.775.0252 www.KleinUnderground.com Qty Name Description Rate Amount Tax 17 Curb Curb $65.00 $1,105.00 NON 5 CBR Curb Removal $7.00 $35.00 NON 2 Curb Curb Cut $6.25 $12.50 NON 3 SPT Spoils Per Ton $40.00 $120.00 NON 459 Asphalt Asphalt - 17x27x8 $11.50 $5,278.50 NON 12 Asphalt Asphalt - Road 2x6x8 $11.50 $138.00 NON 110 AR Asphalt Removal $3.00 $330.00 NON 85 Sawing 2 Concrete/Blacktop Sawing (Chg per Linear Ft.) $6.25 $531.25 NON 22 SPT Spoils Per Ton $40.00 $880.00 NON 250 Asphalt Asphalt - Drive Way 10x25x4-6 $8.50 $2,125.00 NON 250 AR Asphalt Removal $3.00 $750.00 NON 25 Sawing Concrete/Blacktop Sawing (Chg per Linear Ft.) $5.25 $131.25 NON 12.5 SPT Spoils Per Ton $40.00 $500.00 NON tax $0.00 estimated total $11,936.50 Signature: Signature Date: THANK YOU for considering Klein Underground, LLC If these items meet your approval, automatically approve this estimate now! QUESTIONS? CONTACT US TERMS & CONDITIONS Jeremy Klein We accept payment by check. Please send checks to our main JeremyKlein5@gmail.com address. https://securel .mhelpdesk.com/pdf/Modules/Ticket/Estimate_Print.aspx?mhd_enc=LM03FLDrOjb7BH2UWjXZuWSv760KkV/Ob4E5nVDPgCKj0425o1Ttz02GWr... 1 /2 9/2/25,1:14 PM Estimate #12568 651.775.0252 NOTE: Created with mHelpDesk https:llsecure l.mhelpdesk.comlpdfIModulesITicketlEstimate_Print.aspx?mhd_enc=LM03FLDrOjb7BH2UW jXZuWSv76OKkVlOb4E5nVDPgCKjO425olTtzO2GWr... 2/2 PUBLIC HEARING -10A '!Tt HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Joua Yang, Finance Director Amy LaMere, Accounting Clerk SUBJECT: Public Hearing Regarding Quarterly Special Assessments for Delinquent Utilities Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: Council Should Consider Holding a Public Hearing regarding delinquent utilities. BackLrround Water customers whose accounts are 90 days past due were informed that the City intends to certify delinquent charges to Ramsey County to be collected with property taxes. These customers have the right to a hearing in front of the City Council to discuss this matter prior to certification. Page 1 of 1 PUBLIC HEARING — IOB 'It EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Elena Fransen, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #25-007 — Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 400 and 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Hold the required Public Hearing for Planning Case 25-007, a text amendment to the Zoning Code and City Code to modify language for the keeping of chickens and ducks in the residential zoning districts. The City Council will be asked to make a formal decision regarding the application under Agenda Item 11 B. Background The City Council reviewed and discussed the ordinance for the keeping of chickens at several City Council Work Sessions in May and June of 2025. Suggested revisions were made to make the ordinance less restrictive and to incorporate additional best practices into the language. Following these work sessions, staff was directed to incorporate the recommendations into the ordinance for the Planning Commission to review. The Planning Commission reviewed a draft version of the ordinance amendment for the keeping of chickens at the August 6, 2025 meeting. The Planning Commission discussed multiple amendments to the draft language and tabled the review with direction to staff to review and draft revisions related to: 1. Number of chickens: increase the number permitted to seven (7) Page 1 of 7 2. Coop size and location: modify language to allow for a larger maximum coop size and be more clear about location requirements 3. Climate control: modify language to be less prescriptive 4. Cleanliness and enforcement/license revocation: review language for consistency with other communities and modify to be less prescriptive 5. Roaming of chickens: review language to allow for chickens to move about a fenced area within a backyard 6. Garages: consider updated language to allow for a chicken coop to be interior to a detached garage 7. The neighbor consent policy: provide language to modify policy to neighbor notification At the August 11 Special Work Session, the City Council discussed the keeping of ducks. The City Council directed staff to bring forth the topic of the keeping of ducks to the Planning Commission for discussion to occur along with the review of ordinance language for chickens. The Planning Commission was asked to provide a recommendation to the City Council on whether the inclusion of ducks should be considered in city ordinances. Staff revised the draft ordinance language to incorporate the City Council's directed revisions and the Planning Commission's recommended revisions related to chickens. Staff also provided background information gathered from adjacent communities and draft ordinance language to assist with the Planning Commission's discussion about the inclusion of ducks. At the September 3 Meeting, the Planning Commission discussed and recommended the drafted revisions and incorporation of ducks in the ordinance language. Overview of Ordinance Amendments Staff has prepared a draft ordinance identifying language to be modified for the City Council's review (Attachment A). The applicable Sections to be modified are as follows: • Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals • Section 400.01, General Provisions • Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License Throughout the draft ordinance, language has been added to reference both chickens and ducks where applicable or language has been deleted to be inclusive of both chickens and ducks. Staff reviewed the ordinances of 10 neighboring communities and found that six of these communities specifically allow for the keeping of ducks. Of these communities, five require a permit or license for the keeping of ducks, which is the same requirement for keeping chickens. Staff identified that where the keeping of ducks is permitted, a coop or containment facility is required to provide shelter for the animals. Language for the maintenance of ducks, such as climate control, maintaining clean and sanitary conditions, and following best practices, was the same as the language for chickens. The six ordinances that allowed for the keeping of ducks did not reference resources specific to the keeping of ducks. Page 2 of 7 Staff provided draft language for ducks for the Planning Commission to discuss at the September meeting and the Planning Commission recommended the City Council include ducks in the draft ordinance. Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals 1) Modify language for the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks a. Modify coop size and location requirements for the keeping of chickens and ducks The City Council suggested amendments to chicken/duck keeping area requirements including increasing the minimum required coop size from 12 square feet to 20 square feet; making an exercise yard optional and keeping a covered and fenced pen as a requirement. For location, suggested edits included adding specific language that the outer limit of the coop and pen shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line, while maintaining the standard that the outer limit shall be closer to the principal dwelling upon the license holder property than any other abutting property. The City Council also directed staff to remove screening requirements for chicken keeping areas. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission made recommendations about the minimum and maximum coop size and the criteria for distance from principal dwellings on abutting properties. The Planning Commission noted that residents may prefer to construct a coop that is greater than 20 square feet based on available prefabricated structures or their specific needs. There were multiple recommendations on this topic, including increasing the maximum coop size to 36 square feet to allow for a 6-foot by 6-foot structure and removing the maximum coop size. Staff reviewed the chicken ordinance language in 10 neighboring cities and found that, two cities have an established maximum coop size, one at 60 square feet and one at 120 square feet. Four out of the 10 cities establish a minimum coop size ranging from 3- to 4-square feet per bird. The UMN Extension resource recommends having a minimum of 3- to 5-square feet of indoor space per bird and the Urban Chickens resource recommends 4 square feet per bird. In September, staff brought forth draft language in Subd. 6 A l.a. to allow for a coop size of up to 36 square feet which the Planning Commission recommended for City Council consideration. The Planning Commission also recommended staff update the language related to a chicken/duck keeping area and its proximity to principal dwellings on abutting properties to mirror the language in the ordinance for bee hives. The ordinance for bee hives establishes that hives may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. Staff updated the language for coop structures to match the language for bee hives, which the Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended. At a City Council Work Session, staff was directed to include language in the draft ordinance to allow for a homeowner to repurpose a coop on their property if they decide to cease keeping chickens and the coop is compliant with the accessory structure requirements. Language has been added to allow for a conforming coop structure that is allowed as a second accessory, and in conformance with the accessory structure requirements, to be repurposed by the homeowner. Page 3 of 7 b. Modify language for climate control requirements At a City Council Work Session, it was suggested that the draft ordinance should include striking the specific temperature that would be maintained in a coop. In their review, the Planning Commission recommended further modification to the language to make it less prescriptive to prospective licensees. Staff considered the ordinance language of neighboring communities while drafting revisions to the climate control regulations. Three out of the 10 cities reviewed included language for coops to be maintained at a specific temperature whereas seven cities had more general for climate control; instead referencing standards such as: coops shall protect birds from the weather and coops shall be fully enclosed, wind proof, and have sufficient windows for natural light. Staff has drafted updates to Subd. 6 A Lf to remove specific requirements for a set temperature and a lightbulb while keeping the reference to a licensee providing a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature. Staff has also updated the language to clarify that the plan is required at the time of the initial application for the keeping of chickens/ducks and installation of a coop. On September 3, the Planning Commission included these ordinance updates in their recommendation to the City Council. c. Modify language for maintaining a nuisance -free area for chickens/ducks The Planning Commission requested that staff draft language for the maintenance of chickens that is in keeping with the requirements for cats and dogs. City Code requires the owner of a cat or dog to be responsible for cleaning up and disposing of animal feces in a sanitary manner. Draft language in Subd 6 A. 3 states that the licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken/duck keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. This language is in line with the regulations for cleaning up litter for cats and dogs. Staff has not changed Subd. 6 A. 4, which relates to chicken/duck keeping areas constituting a nuisance for adjacent properties. The Planning Commission has recommended this updated draft language to the City Council. d. Consider language to allow for the roaming of chickens/ducks At the August meeting, the Planning Commission commented on the language is Subd. 6 A. 5 which references that roaming chickens would be in violation of the conditions for keeping chickens/ducks. Members of the Planning Commission noted that chickens are foragers and there are benefits to allowing chickens to roam in the backyard to eat invasive insects. The Planning Commission made a recommendation for staff to review possible ordinance language that would allow for the roaming of chickens in a fenced area. The City Code language for chickens already includes an exercise yard, defined as a larger fenced area adjacent to coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for birds when supervised. Staff added in a provision in item Subd. 6 A.2.c. to reference an exercise yard as optional and a space where chickens/ducks can roam while supervised by the licensee. Page 4 of 7 Staff also added language to Subd. 6 A. 5 to clarify that roaming chickens/ducks outside of proper enclosures would be in violation of the conditions of this section of the code. At the September 3 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended the updated language for optional exercise yards and roaming chickens/ducks. e. Consider language to allow for a coop to be interior to a detached garage The current keeping of chickens ordinance does not allow for chickens to be housed in a detached garage or other accessory structure. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission discussed this requirement and made a recommendation for staff to review other ordinances and provide language for the Commission to consider allowing for chickens to be kept within a detached structure, meaning the coop is located within another structure. Staff reviewed ordinance language for 10 other communities and did not find ordinances that allow for coops to be interior to a garage. Seven ordinances specifically prohibit chickens/ducks from being kept in a dwelling or a garage. It could also be difficult to apply location and setback requirements to a coop and pen that is enclosed within a structure that was approved for a non - chicken use. Staff did not include changes to this provision for the Planning Commission's review on September 3 at which time Planning Commission recommended the drafted ordinance without this language. Section 400.01, General Provisions 2) Add and modify definitions to include ducks Including ducks in the ordinance language requires additional definitions or modifications to existing definitions. New definitions have been drafted for a call duck and a drake as types of ducks that will be prohibited and definitions for a coop, exercise yard, and hens have been modified to be inclusive of ducks. These definitions are referenced throughout the other modified sections of the draft ordinance. Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License As part of the City Council's review of the keeping of chickens ordinance, amendment language was also suggested for the City Code section for chicken licenses. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the City Council's directed revisions for Section 410 including modifying the license fee, removing the leg banding requirement and updating the resource referenced. The Planning Commission has recommended these revisions and suggested modifications to the neighbor consent requirement. For the City Council's review, staff has provided wording revisions related to ducks in Section 410 based on the recommendations of the Planning Commission. 3) Revisions to the Chickens License requirements a. Update Chickens License to Chickens/Ducks License Page 5 of 7 Based on the Planning Commission September meeting recommendation to include ducks in the drafted ordinance, language has been added to revise the Chickens License to be the Chickens/Ducks License and to include references to ducks where applicable. b. Modify Neighbor Consent requirement to Neighbor Notification requirement It is established in Section 410 that an applicant for a chickens license is required to have neighbor consent from all of the immediately adjacent properties for the initial issuance of a license. This requirement has remained consistent since the ordinance language was first adopted. At the August 6 meeting, the Planning Commission discussed this requirement and provided a recommendation to alter the language to align with requirements for the keeping of bees. A resident who intends to have bee hives on their property is required to provide neighbor notice prior to keeping bees. The Planning Commission has recommended draft language to modify the neighbor consent requirement to a neighbor notification requirement. Following the Planning Commission's September meeting review, staff added a requirement to Section 410 that establishes that as part of the application review, the prospective license holder shall certify that they have provided the required written notification of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. This requirement would also be added to the chickens/ducks license application. c. Increase maximum number of chickens permitted from three (3) hens to seven (7) hens The City Council directed staff to amend the drafted ordinance language to increase the maximum number of chickens permitted from three (3) to six (6). The Planning Commission reviewed this proposed amendment at the August meeting and recommended the number be increased to seven (7). The Planning Commission proposed this change to allow licensees greater flexibility when purchasing additional chicks if they decide to increase the number of chickens they are keeping or if they are in need of replacement chickens. Per the revisions, residents could keep a combination of up to seven (7) chickens or ducks and would be required to provide a coop and pen, subject to the coop requirements. Staff has also included a revision to move the number of chickens/ducks permitted by a chickens/ducks license from the language in Section 1325.07 Subd. 6 A. to Section 410 to keep the language in the Zoning Code specific to chicken/duck keeping structures. Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission reviewed this application at the August 6, 2025 and September 3, 2025 meetings. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission tabled the review of the application for further revisions and another review before a recommendation to the City Council was made. The Planning Commission reviewed the revised draft of the ordinance language at the September 3 meeting and voted 7-0 to recommend approval of Planning Case 25-007. An ordinance amendment to the Zoning Code does require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held the required public hearing on August 6, 2025 meeting. One comment was provided in favor of the application. Page 6 of 7 Public Comment A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on September 12, 2025. The City has received one public comment regarding this case that was not in support of the chickens ordinance. Attachments A) Redlined Draft Keeping of Chickens and Ducks Ordinance 2025-003 B) Clean Ordinance 2025-003 and Summary Ordinance C) August 6 Planning Commission Memo D) September 3 Planning Commission Memo E) August 6 Planning Commission Minutes F) Draft September 3 Planning Commission Minutes G) Presentation Page 7 of 7 It -AR)2EN HILLS ORDINANCE NO.2025-003 Attachment A CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4, ANIMALS AND PETS, SECTIONS 400 AND 410; AND CHAPTER 13, ZONING CODE, SECTION 1325 OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 400 — General Provisions, Subsection 400.01, Definitions is hereby amended by deleting stfikethFough language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 400 — General Provisions 400.01 Definitions. The following definitions shall be used in the application and interpretation of the provisions of this chapter: Animal. Any non -human mammal, reptile, amphibian, or bird. Animal Control Officer. An individual or employee of a business retained by the City for purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Chapter; or a member of the City's law enforcement agency. • Animal, Domestic. Animals kept within the home as pets, such as fish, dogs, cats, household bird, and similar animals. • Animal, Non -Domestic. Animals which are kept outside the home for purposes of food or pleasure such as cattle, hogs, horses, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, ducks, birds, such as falcons and pigeons, and similar animals. • Animal, Wild. Any animal which is of a species not usually domesticated and of a species which, due to size, wild nature or other characteristics, is dangerous to humans and would ordinarily be confined in a zoo or found in the wild. The term includes but is not limited to: Animals and birds, the keeping of which is licensed by the state or federal government, such as wolves, raptors, and pheasants. • Eagles, ocelots, jaguars, cougars, weasels, wild ferrets, badgers, monkeys, chimpanzee, deer, and bison. Error! Unknown document property name. • Crossbreeds of wild animals and domesticated animals such as the cross between dogs and coyotes and dogs and wolves. • Any large cat of the family Felidae, such as lions, tigers, jaguars, leopards, cougars and ocelots, except commonly accepted domesticated house cats. • Any member of the family Canidae, such as wolves, coyotes, dingoes, and jackals, except domesticated dogs. • Any poisonous snake such as a rattlesnake, coral snake, water moccasin, puff adder, or cobra. • Any snake or reptile which by its size, vicious nature or other characteristic is dangerous to human beings. • Any skunk, raccoon, or fox whether captured in the wild, domestically raised, descented or not descented, vaccinated against rabies or not vaccinated against rabies. Any bear, ape, gorilla, monkey, or badger. Any other animal or reptile which is commonly considered wild. At Large. An unattended animal on public property; or an unattended animal on private property without the consent of the property owner. Cat. Any domesticated feline animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Call Duck. A specific breed of duck known for being especially loud and chatty and used exclusively for either showing, ornamental, or pet purposes. • Coop. An accessory structure for the keeping or housing of chickens or ducks permitted by the ordinance. Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: Without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property; Killed a domestic animal without provocation; or A potentially dangerous dog which aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. Dog. Any canine animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Drake. A male duck. • Enclosure. Any structure, except a dwelling, designed to securely enclose and prevent an animal from escaping therefrom. • Proper Enclosure. Proper Enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the animal. A Proper Enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage or other structure that would allow the animal to exit of its volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the dog from exiting. • Exercise yard. Is a larger fenced area adjacent to ehieken a coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for the birds when supervised. • Hen. IAA female chicken or duck. • Owner. Any person, firm, or corporation, organization or department possessing, harboring, keeping, having an interest in or having custody or control of an animal. 225614v1 • Pen. A fully enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens or ducks can roam unsupervised. Potentially Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: When unprovoked, bites a human or domestic animal; • When unprovoked, chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks or any other public property in an apparent attitude of attack; or • Has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. • Restrained. On a leash of not more than six (6) feet in length or on a leash which can be retracted to a length of six (6) feet or less, and in the custody of a person of sufficient age to adequately control the animal; in a vehicle; or confined to the owner's property by enclosure or fencing. • Rooster. Is a male chicken. • Substantial Bodily Harm. Bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member. SECTION 2. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 410 — Licenses, Subsection 410.01, Licenses Required, is hereby amended by deleting stroke*>7,.etigh language and adding the underlined language as follows: 410.00 - Licenses 410.01 License Required. The following animal licenses shall be required within the City of Arden Hills. Subd. 1 Dog/Cat Licenses. All dogs and cats within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a dog or cat which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the dog or cat shall make application for a dog or cat license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. B. Vaccination. It shall be unlawful for any dog or cat owner to keep or maintain any dog or cat older than six (6) months of age unless it shall have been vaccinated with an anti -rabies vaccine certified to be effective by a licensed veterinarian. No license renewal shall be issued except upon compliance with this section. C. License Fee. The license fee for each dog or cat must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A license shall be issued for a period of time not to exceed the expiration date of the rabies vaccination. No dog or cat license shall be renewed without proof of vaccination. 225614v1 E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form, receipt of the license fee and receipt of the proof of vaccination, the City Administrator shall cause a dog or cat license to be issued to the applicant for a particular dog or cat. F. Receipt and Tags. The City of Arden Hills shall issue a license fee receipt to the applicant along with a metallic dog or cat license tag. The applicant shall permanently affix the tag by a metal fastening device to the collar of the licensed animal in a manner that allows the tag to be easily observed. If a tag is lost, a duplicate may be issued by the City of Arden Hills upon presentation of a receipt showing payment of the initial license fee and upon payment of an additional fee for each duplicate tag. G. Change of Address. An applicant who has obtained a dog or cat license shall notify the City of the applicant's address changes within the corporate limits of the City within ten (10) days of any address change. H. Counterfeit Tags. No person shall counterfeit or attempt to counterfeit dog or cat license tags. I. Transfer of Tags. No person shall transfer a dog or cat tag from one dog or cat to another. J. Exceptions. The following dogs and cats are not required to be licensed: 1. Dogs and cats less than six (6) months of age. 2. Dogs and cats whose owners are temporary visitors within the City for thirty (30) days or less. 3. Dogs and cats which are brought into the City for appearance in an animal show. 4. Dogs being used by law enforcement officers Subd. 2 Wild Animal Licenses. A. General Prohibition. All wild animals except the following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills: 1. Wild animals brought into the City for entertainment, exhibition or show purposes by persons keeping wild animals for a public zoo. 2. Wild animals which are part of a permanent display sponsored by a bona fide research institution, a veterinary hospital, public zoo or other institution. 3. Nonpoisonous snakes, birds kept indoors, hamsters, mice, rabbits, gerbils, white rats, guinea pigs, chinchillas, or lizards and similar small animals capable of being kept in cages continuously. 4. Monkeys trained as personal helpers and kept by handicapped persons. 5. Raptors owned by licensed Falconers holding valid state and federal Falconry permits so long as the conditions of such permits are being satisfied. 6. Wild animals and birds that are part of the natural habitat and environment. B. License Application. Applications for a Wild Animal License shall be submitted on forms provided by the City along with a Certificate of Insurance which indicates that applicant has $200,000 of liability coverage on the Wild Animal and which includes an endorsement indicating that the liability coverage will not be cancelled without twenty (20) days written notice to the City of Arden Hills. C. Investigation. The Animal Control Officer shall review the application, conduct such investigation as the Animal Control Officer deems necessary, and shall prepare a written recommendation regarding the issuance of a Wild Animal License. The City Administrator shall within ten (10) days mail a notice to all property owners within 350 feet of the site on which the 225614v1 Wild Animal will be kept. The notice shall indicate that the City has received an application for a Wild Animal License and shall request comments from such property owners. D. Review. The City Council shall review the application, the Animal Control Officer's recommendations, and the comments from property owners. The City Council may issue a Wild Animal License if it determines that the application is in compliance with the City's regulations. The City Council may attach any reasonable conditions to the issuance of a license as it determines to be necessary in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arden Hills residents. E. Existing Wild Animals. Anyone keeping a Wild Animal in Arden Hills at the time of the adoption of this regulation shall have ninety (90) days in which to comply with the provisions of this regulation or otherwise remove the Wild Animal from the City. Extensions beyond ninety (90) days may be granted by the City Council for good cause but in no case shall such extension permanently exempt a person from the requirements of this regulation. F. Wild Animal Restrictions. 1. Confinement. No person owning or harboring or having the care or custody of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go unconfined on the premises of such person. A wild animal is "unconfined" as the term is used in this section if such animal is not securely confined indoors or confined in a secure enclosure suitably sized for the wild animal is confined therein. An "enclosure" is secure within the meaning of this section if it is constructed of heave gauge mesh steel, or other suitable material; consists of a top and sides, with the bottom of such sides fastened along their perimeter to a slab floor of concrete or other suitable material; where no slab floor is provided, the sides must be embedded into the ground no less than one foot; all access points of the enclosure must be locked when the animal is confined therein. The Animal control officer may seize a wild animal that has been declared dangerous that is unconfined. 2. Muzzling. No person owning or harboring, or having the care of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go beyond the premises of such person unless such animal is securely muzzled and restrained with a chain not exceeding three (3) feet in length, and having a tensile strength sufficient to restrain the animal. Wild animals which are actively participating in recognized local, regional or national trials, training or other such sponsored competition, need not to be muzzled while being transported to or from during such competitions. 3. Summary Destruction. Any person harboring or owning a wild animal that is found to be in violation of the City's Animal Control Regulations may be summarily destroyed. Subd. 3 Chickens/Ducks License. All chickens and ducks within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a chicken or a duck which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the chicken(s)/ducks shall make application for a chickens/ducks license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. If the Applicant is a renter, the Property Owner signature shall be required on the license application form. B. Neighbor Clensent-Notification. The Applicant shall be responsible for providing written notification to the neighbors immediately adjacent to the property of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. As part of the application review, the prospective license holder shall certify that they have provided the required written notification of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. This 225614v1 C. License Fee. The license fee for e >, eh ',o„ must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A two-year license shall be issued. E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form and receipt of the license fee, the City Administrator shall cause a chicken/duck license to be issued to the applicant subject to: (1) beg banding of all ehiekens is r-equir-ed. The bands mmust identify the owner- and the owner's address and telephone „ mbor (24 (1) No more than seven (7) hens shall be housed or kept on anone (1) residential lot with the issuance of a Citv license. (-3) Q Dead chickens and ducks must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of Animal Health rules which require chicken and duck carcasses to be disposed of as soon as possible after death, usually within forty-eight (48) to seventy-two (72) hours. Legal forms of chicken and duck carcass disposal include burial, off -site incineration or rendering, or composting. (4) (33) Prior to issuance of a license, the prospective annual license holder certifies as part of the application review that they have read "Keeping of Chickens/Ducks Informational Handout" "Re-ea,,„Y,o„rlations for- ra,,.,ieip.,' Regulations for- Ur -ban Chieken". F. The following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills for chickens and ducks: (1) Roosters, Drakes, and Call Ducks are prohibited. (2) No breeding of chickens or ducks is allowed. (3) Slaughtering of chickens or ducks on the property is prohibited. SECTION 3. Chapter 13 — Zoning Code, Section 1325 — General Regulations, Subsection 1325.07 Subd. 6.A — Performance Standards, is hereby amended by deleting str-i ,ethr-,,,,g language and adding the underlined language as follows: Subd.6 Animals. A. Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. Any building in which farm animals are kept shall be located a distance of two hundred (200) feet or more from any lot line. Any open structure in which farm animals are kept shall be a distance of four hundred (400) feet or more from any lot line, except for ehieken coops and bee hives in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 Districts provided the following requirements are met: Coops 225614v1 (21) A separate coop, separate from other structures, is required to house the -chickens/ ducks. Coops must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum requirements: a. A coop with a minimum of 4-2-20 square feet and no larger than 2-5 36 square feet is permitted as an accessory structure subject to Section 1325.01. Subd. 4 A. for Size. b. Exemption to Ordinance - A residential property with a detached garage and an accessory structure/shed will be allowed a third accessory structure for keeping chickens/ducks. The combined square footage of all three detached structures may not exceed 728 square feet. c. Located in the rear yard. Chieken Coop, pen, and optional exercise yard are not permitted in the front or side yard. d. Setbacks are subject to applicable accessory structure setbacks of the underlying zoning district. In no instance shall the coop be located in front of the rear building line of the principal structure. e. The outer limit of the coop including pen and exercise ,..,,.,1 shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line and may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkwa. shall be laeated ^laser to the pr-ineipal dwelling upon the pr-epet4y that is isstied a lieense than any other- r-esidentia dwelling on an abutting property. f. Climate control — adequate ventilation and/or insulation and an operable lig tb lb shall be provided to maintain the coop temperature. between45 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Prior to issuance of anew license, the prospective amivaklicense holder must provide a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature in the coop for safety of the fowl or poultry. The plan must address both extreme winter and summer temperature conditions. g. Rodent proof — coop construction, all grain and food, and materials must be adequate to prevent access by rodents. h. Coops shall be constructed and maintained in a workmanlike manner. i. Chickens and ducks shall not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage. (32) A pen is required. Pen must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum standard: a. The pen and exeFeise •..,,.,1 ;s shall be located adjacent to the coop and shall be fenced with adequate coverage to keep hens in and predators out of a ma4er-ial that ean be easily Faked of b. Minimum size per bird shall be 10 square feet of floor space c. An exercise yard is optional. This area must be located adjacent to coop and pen and chickens/ducks must be supervised by the licensee while in an exercise yard. 225614vl iizxer-eise yard 174 s e feet installation. Aeeeptable fot:ms of sR------ — a six (6) foot tall solid fenee or- vegetation tha shall eatisist of plantings whieh shall PFOvide fOF year- round SeFeening and installe (63) The licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken/duck keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. All premises on _hieh hens are kert ^maintained shall be kept elean from filth, garbage, and any s4stanees whieh attr-aet r-edefits. The eeep and its suFFettnding must be eleaned ffequently etlEfflgh W eE)f1tFE)l MEW. Mantir-e shall not be allowed to shall be kept in a fedefft proof eentainen (94) Hens, coop, pen, and optional exercise yard shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. (15) Any violation of the above conditions, (i.e. roaming chickens/ducks outside of proper enclosure, uncontrolled odor), if not remedied within 10 days, may result in revocation of the homeowner's license. (4-06) If the license holder does not renew their chickens/ducks license, and the coop was licensed as an allowed third accessory structure for chickens/ducks, the coop/third structure cannot be repurposed for a storage structure and disc ,.,*roues having ehie ^r�, the homeowner shall have 60 days to remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard associated with the keeping of chickens and/or ducks in its entirety. if the eeep was lieensea as allowed third ^ . If the homeowner/license holder fails to perform either of the above, the City may enter upon the subject property, remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard from the homeowner's property, and charge the amount back to the homeowner as an assessment on the property tax roll. If the coop was licensed as an allowed second accessory structure, and the propertyplies with the accessory structure requirements, the structure mawpurposed for a storage structure. Bee Hives (1) The number of hives on residential lots is not to exceed: i. 1 acre or larger: 8 ii. 1 acre to 3/4 acre: 6 iii. 3/4 acre to 1/2 acre: 4 iv. 1/2 acre or less: 2 225614vl (2) The bee hive(s) may not be located in the front yard or a side yard abutting a street. (3) Bee hive(s) may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. (4) The hives shall be located at least ten (10) feet from side and rear property lines. (5) Any property owner who keeps bees shall provide and maintain a nearby, designated water source. (6) Prior to installation of the bee hive(s), the property owner shall provide written notice to the neighbors immediately adjacent of their intent to keep bees. B. Number of Animals Allowed. Up to four (4) domestic animals, excluding birds and fish, are permitted in any dwelling unit, but without a residential dog kennel license not more than two (2) may be dogs. Up to three (3) dogs are allowed with a residential dog kennel license. Dog enclosures may be located only in a rear yard in all zoning districts. C. Animals for Research. Animals for research may be kept in appropriate places by conditional use permit. D. Wild Animals. Wild animals are not permitted in any district. Subd. 7 Site Grading. A. Erosion Prevention. Earth surfaces shall be planted or stabilized to prevent erosion. B. Drainage onto Neighboring Property. Finished slopes and grades shall not cause adverse drainage effects on adjoining properties. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. A Summary of this Ordinance will be published in accordance with state statute. PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2025, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk 225614v1 'It EN HILLS ORDINANCE NO.2025-003 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Attachment B AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4, ANIMALS AND PETS, SECTIONS 400 AND 410; AND CHAPTER 13, ZONING CODE, SECTION 1325 OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 400 — General Provisions, Subsection 400.01, Definitions is hereby amended by deleting sail Tough language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 400 — General Provisions 400.01 Definitions. The following definitions shall be used in the application and interpretation of the provisions of this chapter: Animal. Any non -human mammal, reptile, amphibian, or bird. Animal Control Officer. An individual or employee of a business retained by the City for purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Chapter; or a member of the City's law enforcement agency. • Animal, Domestic. Animals kept within the home as pets, such as fish, dogs, cats, household bird, and similar animals. • Animal, Non -Domestic. Animals which are kept outside the home for purposes of food or pleasure such as cattle, hogs, horses, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, ducks, birds, such as falcons and pigeons, and similar animals. • Animal, Wild. Any animal which is of a species not usually domesticated and of a species which, due to size, wild nature or other characteristics, is dangerous to humans and would ordinarily be confined in a zoo or found in the wild. The term includes but is not limited to: Animals and birds, the keeping of which is licensed by the state or federal government, such as wolves, raptors, and pheasants. • Eagles, ocelots, jaguars, cougars, weasels, wild ferrets, badgers, monkeys, chimpanzee, deer, and bison. Error! Unknown document property name. • Crossbreeds of wild animals and domesticated animals such as the cross between dogs and coyotes and dogs and wolves. • Any large cat of the family Felidae, such as lions, tigers, jaguars, leopards, cougars and ocelots, except commonly accepted domesticated house cats. • Any member of the family Canidae, such as wolves, coyotes, dingoes, and jackals, except domesticated dogs. Any poisonous snake such as a rattlesnake, coral snake, water moccasin, puff adder, or cobra. • Any snake or reptile which by its size, vicious nature or other characteristic is dangerous to human beings. • Any skunk, raccoon, or fox whether captured in the wild, domestically raised, descented or not descented, vaccinated against rabies or not vaccinated against rabies. Any bear, ape, gorilla, monkey, or badger. Any other animal or reptile which is commonly considered wild. At Large. An unattended animal on public property; or an unattended animal on private property without the consent of the property owner. Cat. Any domesticated feline animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Call Duck. A specific breed of duck known for being especially loud and chatty and used exclusively for either showing, ornamental, or pet purposes. • Coop. An accessory structure for the keeping or housing of chickens or ducks permitted by the ordinance. Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: Without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property; Killed a domestic animal without provocation; or A potentially dangerous dog which aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. Dog. Any canine animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Drake. A male duck. Enclosure. Any structure, except a dwelling, designed to securely enclose and prevent an animal from escaping therefrom. • Proper Enclosure. Proper Enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the animal. A Proper Enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage or other structure that would allow the animal to exit of its volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the dog from exiting. • Exercise yard. Is a larger fenced area adjacent to ehieken a coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for the birds when supervised. Hen. Is -A female chicken or duck. Owner. Any person, firm, or corporation, organization or department possessing, harboring, keeping, having an interest in or having custody or control of an animal. 225614v1 • Pen. A fully enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens or ducks can roam unsupervised. Potentially Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: When unprovoked, bites a human or domestic animal; When unprovoked, chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks or any other public property in an apparent attitude of attack; or • Has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. • Restrained. On a leash of not more than six (6) feet in length or on a leash which can be retracted to a length of six (6) feet or less, and in the custody of a person of sufficient age to adequately control the animal; in a vehicle; or confined to the owner's property by enclosure or fencing. Rooster. Is a male chicken. Substantial Bodily Harm. Bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member. SECTION 2. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 410 — Licenses, Subsection 410.01, Licenses Required, is hereby amended by deleting stril rough language and adding the underlined language as follows: 410.00 - Licenses 410.01 License Required. The following animal licenses shall be required within the City of Arden Hills. Subd. 1 Dog/Cat Licenses. All dogs and cats within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a dog or cat which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the dog or cat shall make application for a dog or cat license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. B. Vaccination. It shall be unlawful for any dog or cat owner to keep or maintain any dog or cat older than six (6) months of age unless it shall have been vaccinated with an anti -rabies vaccine certified to be effective by a licensed veterinarian. No license renewal shall be issued except upon compliance with this section. C. License Fee. The license fee for each dog or cat must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A license shall be issued for a period of time not to exceed the expiration date of the rabies vaccination. No dog or cat license shall be renewed without proof of vaccination. 225614v1 E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form, receipt of the license fee and receipt of the proof of vaccination, the City Administrator shall cause a dog or cat license to be issued to the applicant for a particular dog or cat. F. Receipt and Tags. The City of Arden Hills shall issue a license fee receipt to the applicant along with a metallic dog or cat license tag. The applicant shall permanently affix the tag by a metal fastening device to the collar of the licensed animal in a manner that allows the tag to be easily observed. If a tag is lost, a duplicate may be issued by the City of Arden Hills upon presentation of a receipt showing payment of the initial license fee and upon payment of an additional fee for each duplicate tag. G. Change of Address. An applicant who has obtained a dog or cat license shall notify the City of the applicant's address changes within the corporate limits of the City within ten (10) days of any address change. H. Counterfeit Tags. No person shall counterfeit or attempt to counterfeit dog or cat license tags. I. Transfer of Tags. No person shall transfer a dog or cat tag from one dog or cat to another. J. Exceptions. The following dogs and cats are not required to be licensed: 1. Dogs and cats less than six (6) months of age. 2. Dogs and cats whose owners are temporary visitors within the City for thirty (30) days or less. 3. Dogs and cats which are brought into the City for appearance in an animal show. 4. Dogs being used by law enforcement officers Subd. 2 Wild Animal Licenses. A. General Prohibition. All wild animals except the following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills: 1. Wild animals brought into the City for entertainment, exhibition or show purposes by persons keeping wild animals for a public zoo. 2. Wild animals which are part of a permanent display sponsored by a bona fide research institution, a veterinary hospital, public zoo or other institution. 3. Nonpoisonous snakes, birds kept indoors, hamsters, mice, rabbits, gerbils, white rats, guinea pigs, chinchillas, or lizards and similar small animals capable of being kept in cages continuously. 4. Monkeys trained as personal helpers and kept by handicapped persons. 5. Raptors owned by licensed Falconers holding valid state and federal Falconry permits so long as the conditions of such permits are being satisfied. 6. Wild animals and birds that are part of the natural habitat and environment. B. License Application. Applications for a Wild Animal License shall be submitted on forms provided by the City along with a Certificate of Insurance which indicates that applicant has $200,000 of liability coverage on the Wild Animal and which includes an endorsement indicating that the liability coverage will not be cancelled without twenty (20) days written notice to the City of Arden Hills. C. Investigation. The Animal Control Officer shall review the application, conduct such investigation as the Animal Control Officer deems necessary, and shall prepare a written recommendation regarding the issuance of a Wild Animal License. The City Administrator shall within ten (10) days mail a notice to all property owners within 350 feet of the site on which the 225614v1 Wild Animal will be kept. The notice shall indicate that the City has received an application for a Wild Animal License and shall request comments from such property owners. D. Review. The City Council shall review the application, the Animal Control Officer's recommendations, and the comments from property owners. The City Council may issue a Wild Animal License if it determines that the application is in compliance with the City's regulations. The City Council may attach any reasonable conditions to the issuance of a license as it determines to be necessary in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arden Hills residents. E. Existing Wild Animals. Anyone keeping a Wild Animal in Arden Hills at the time of the adoption of this regulation shall have ninety (90) days in which to comply with the provisions of this regulation or otherwise remove the Wild Animal from the City. Extensions beyond ninety (90) days may be granted by the City Council for good cause but in no case shall such extension permanently exempt a person from the requirements of this regulation. F. Wild Animal Restrictions. 1. Confinement. No person owning or harboring or having the care or custody of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go unconfined on the premises of such person. A wild animal is "unconfined" as the term is used in this section if such animal is not securely confined indoors or confined in a secure enclosure suitably sized for the wild animal is confined therein. An "enclosure" is secure within the meaning of this section if it is constructed of heave gauge mesh steel, or other suitable material; consists of a top and sides, with the bottom of such sides fastened along their perimeter to a slab floor of concrete or other suitable material; where no slab floor is provided, the sides must be embedded into the ground no less than one foot; all access points of the enclosure must be locked when the animal is confined therein. The Animal control officer may seize a wild animal that has been declared dangerous that is unconfined. 2. Muzzling. No person owning or harboring, or having the care of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go beyond the premises of such person unless such animal is securely muzzled and restrained with a chain not exceeding three (3) feet in length, and having a tensile strength sufficient to restrain the animal. Wild animals which are actively participating in recognized local, regional or national trials, training or other such sponsored competition, need not to be muzzled while being transported to or from during such competitions. 3. Summary Destruction. Any person harboring or owning a wild animal that is found to be in violation of the City's Animal Control Regulations may be summarily destroyed. Subd. 3 Chickens/Ducks License. All chickens and ducks within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a chicken or a duck which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the chicken(s)/ducks shall make application for a chickens/ducks license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. If the Applicant is a renter, the Property Owner signature shall be required on the license application form. B. Neighbor Ce�Notification. The Applicant shall be responsible for providing written notification to the neighbors immediately adjacent to the property of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. As part of the application review, the prospective license holder shall certify that they have provided the required written notification of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. This 225614v1 C. License Fee. The license fee rn eaeh eh ',o,, must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A two-year license shall be issued. E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form and receipt of the license fee, the City Administrator shall cause a chicken/duck license to be issued to the applicant subject to: (1) Leg banding of all ehiekens is required. The bands must identi6, the ownef an the owner-'s address and telephone number-. (2-) (1) No more than seven (7) hens shall be housed or kept on any one (1) residential lot with the issuance of a City license. (3) (2) Dead chickens and ducks must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of Animal Health rules which require chicken and duck carcasses to be disposed of as soon as possible after death, usually within forty-eight (48) to seventy-two (72) hours. Legal forms of chicken and duck carcass disposal include burial, off -site incineration or rendering, or composting. (4) (3) Prior to issuance of a license, the prospective annual license holder certifies as part of the application review that they have read "Keeping of Chickens/Ducks Informational Handout„ "Reeemmendat ons for- Nl rieip l Regulations for- Urban. Chiekens F. The following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills for chickens and ducks: (1) Roosters, Drakes, and Call Ducks are prohibited. (2) No breeding of chickens or ducks is allowed. (3) Slaughtering of chickens or ducks on the property is prohibited. SECTION 3. Chapter 13 — Zoning Code, Section 1325 — General Regulations, Subsection 1325.07 Subd. 6.A — Performance Standards, is hereby amended by deleting sal r-Ough language and adding the underlined language as follows: Subd.6 Animals. A. Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. Any building in which farm animals are kept shall be located a distance of two hundred (200) feet or more from any lot line. Any open structure in which farm animals are kept shall be a distance of four hundred (400) feet or more from any lot line, except for ehiekei3 coops and bee hives in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 Districts provided the following requirements are met: Coops 225614v1 (21) A separate coop, separate from other structures, is required to house the -chickens/ ducks. Coops must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum requirements. a. A coop with a minimum of 4-2-20 square feet and no larger than 25 36 square feet is permitted as an accessory structure subject to Section 1325.01. Subd. 4 A. for Size. b. Exemption to Ordinance - A residential property with a detached garage and an accessory structure/shed will be allowed a third accessory structure for keeping chickens/ducks. The combined square footage of all three detached structures may not exceed 728 square feet. c. Located in the rear yard. ChiekenrCoop, pen, and optional exercise yard are not permitted in the front or side yard. d. Setbacks are subject to applicable accessory structure setbacks of the underlying zoning district. In no instance shall the coop be located in front of the rear building line of the principal structure. e. The outer limit of the coop including pen and exec-e se yard shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line and may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or anypublictrail or walkwa. shall be leeatea e'eser to the pr-ineipal dwelling upon the property that is issued a lieense than any other- residential dwelling on an abutting p pefty f. Climate control — adequate ventilation and/or insulation and an opo,-able'ighthulb shall be provided to maintain the coop temperature. between 45 85 degreesFalifenneit. Prior to issuance of anew license, the prospective annual license holder must provide a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature in the coop for safety of the fowl or poultry. The plan must address both extreme winter and summer temperature conditions. g. Rodent proof — coop construction, all grain and food, and materials must be adequate to prevent access by rodents. h. Coops shall be constructed and maintained in a workmanlike manner. i. Chickens and ducks shall not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage. (2) A pen and o xr 0 0 yard is required. Pen and o 0 0 yard must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum standard: a. The pen and exec-e se yard is shall be located adjacent to the coop and shall be fenced with adequate coverage to keep hens in and predators out of a material that ear be easily raked Ew regularly r-eplaeed to r-eduee eder- and flies. b. Minimum size per bird shall be 10 square feet of floor space c. An exercise yard is optional. This area must be located adjacent to coop and pen and chickens/ducks must be supervised by the licensee while in an exercise yard. 2256141 ii. Exereisyard 4 square fee (4) Ser-eening shall be installed around the perimeter- of the area dedieated for- the keeping of ehiekens in a manner- that minimizesview from adjaeent par -eels. A ser-eening plan shall b installation. Aeeeptable fafms of s . - a six (6) feet tall solid fenee or -vegetation th shall eensist of plantings w-hieh shall pr-evide for- year- round ser-eening and installed at mininium ,f six (6) foot al (5) Chiekens ffmst not be housed in a residential house or an attaehed or detaehed gar -age. (63) The licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken/duck keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. All premises on w-hieh hens e keptor- „tamed shag be kept elean from filth, garbage, and any substanees w-hieh attr-aet r-odents. The eeep and its suffounding must be eleaned frequently enough to eentfol odon Manufe shall not be allowed to property. Failufe to eemply with these eenditions may result in the offieer- r-emoving ehiekens (7) All grain and food ster-ed for- the use of the hens with a ehieken lieense shall be kept in a r-odent proof eentainen (84) Hens, coop, pen, and optional exercise yard shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. (15) Any violation of the above conditions, (i.e. roaming chickens/ducks outside of proper enclosure, uncontrolled odor), if not remedied within 10 days, may result in revocation of the homeowner's license. (106) If the license holder does not renew their chickens/ducks license, and the coop was licensed as an allowed third accessory structure for chickens/ducks, the coop/third structure cannot be repurposed for a storage structure and this,,„* „es having ,.>,;,.hor�, the homeowner shall have 60 days to remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard associated with the keeping of chickens and/or ducks in its entirety. if the eeep was lieensoa as an allowed third stfuefffe for- ehiekens, the eeep4hir-d struetwe must be removed and eannot be rep storage st-fl-jetffe. If the homeowner/license holder fails to perform either of the above, the City may enter upon the subject property, remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard from the homeowner's property, and charge the amount back to the homeowner as an assessment on the property tax roll. If the coop was licensed as an allowed second accessory structure, and the property complies with the accessory structure requirements, the structure may be repurposed for a storage structure. Bee Hives (1) The number of hives on residential lots is not to exceed: i. 1 acre or larger: 8 ii. 1 acre to 3/4 acre: 6 iii. 3/4 acre to 1/2 acre: 4 iv. 1/2 acre or less: 2 225614vl (2) The bee hive(s) may not be located in the front yard or a side yard abutting a street. (3) Bee hive(s) may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. (4) The hives shall be located at least ten (10) feet from side and rear property lines. (5) Any property owner who keeps bees shall provide and maintain a nearby, designated water source. (6) Prior to installation of the bee hive(s), the property owner shall provide written notice to the neighbors immediately adjacent of their intent to keep bees. B. Number of Animals Allowed. Up to four (4) domestic animals, excluding birds and fish, are permitted in any dwelling unit, but without a residential dog kennel license not more than two (2) may be dogs. Up to three (3) dogs are allowed with a residential dog kennel license. Dog enclosures may be located only in a rear yard in all zoning districts. C. Animals for Research. Animals for research may be kept in appropriate places by conditional use permit. D. Wild Animals. Wild animals are not permitted in any district. Subd. 7 Site Grading. A. Erosion Prevention. Earth surfaces shall be planted or stabilized to prevent erosion. B. Drainage onto Neighboring Property. Finished slopes and grades shall not cause adverse drainage effects on adjoining properties. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. A Summary of this Ordinance will be published in accordance with state statute. PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2025, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk 2256141 Attachment C PC Agenda Item — 3A 'It EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: August 6, 2025 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Elena Fransen, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #25-007 — Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens Requested Action The City of Arden Hills is proposing ordinance language in the Zoning Code to modify language for the keeping of chickens in the residential zoning districts in Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. The proposed amendment would include revisions to the City Code amending Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License. Background At the May 12 City Council Work Session, the City Council requested that the ordinance for the keeping of chickens be scheduled for discussion. At the June 9 work session, the Council began the review and discussion on potential amendments to Ordinance 2021-008 for the Keeping of Chickens. The discussion for the Keeping of Chickens continued at the June 30 Special Work Session. Staff prepared a redlined version of the Keeping of Chickens ordinance with the amendments discussed and generally agreed upon by the Council. At the June 30 Special Work Session, the Council discussed additional items to be incorporated into the redlined ordinance, such as setbacks, number of accessory structures including a coop, fencing/screening, cleaning standards, and leg banding requirements. The City Council's intent with the revisions to the keeping of chickens ordinance was to keep the code language consistent with best practices. The current ordinance language solely references Recommendations of Municipal Regulation of Urban Chickens. Council discussed several Page 1 of 6 regulations from the University of Minnesota Extension on Raising chickens for eggs. Direction was given to incorporate some of those recommendations into the current ordinance as well as having staff create a handout that refers to both of these resources as part of the City's licensing requirements for the Keeping of Chickens. The drafted ordinance amendment incorporates these suggested revisions. Overview of Ordinance Amendments Staff has prepared a draft ordinance identifying language to be modified for the Planning Commission's review (Attachment A). The applicable Sections to be modified are as follows: • Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals • Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals 1) Modify language for the Keeping of Chickens a. Increase maximum number of chickens permitted from three (3) hens to six (6) hens Under the drafted Subd. 6 A. 1, the maximum number of chickens permitted is increased. The number of chickens permitted in a residential setting can vary from city to city. It is recognized in the UMN Extension resources and the Recommendations for Municipal Regulation of Urban Chickens that chickens are social animals and more than one chicken is recommended for their wellbeing. Direction was given by the City Council to increase the maximum permitted number of chickens by three to allow for up to six hens. The maximum number of chickens permitted has implications for the ordinance requirements that relate to standards per bird. b. Modify structure requirements for the keeping of chickens Several edits to the structure requirements for coops, pens, and exercise yards have been incorporated in the drafted amendment language. A coop is defined as an accessory structure for the keeping or housing of chickens permitted by the ordinance. Under the drafted Subd. 6 A. 2, A, the minimum required coop size has been increased from 12 square feet to 20 square feet. This update is related to the increased number of chickens permitted per license holder. The UMN Extension resource recommends having a minimum of 3 to 5 square feet of indoor space per bird and the Urban Chickens resource recommends 4 square feet per bird. For six chickens, this guidance would recommend between 18 and 24 square feet. A minimum coop size of 20 square feet would ensure coop sizing that can accommodate the increased number of chickens permitted. In the drafted Subd. 6 A. 2, 3, and updated 5, updated language makes it optional to have an exercise yard, defined as a larger fenced area adjacent to chicken coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for the birds when supervised. The Urban Chickens resource recommends an exercise yard while the UMN Extension resource does not. Edits have been Page 2 of 6 incorporated to allow license holders the option to install an exercise yard without setting a minimum size requirement for an exercise yard. The drafted language in Subd. 6 A. 3 updates the language for a pen, which is defined as a fully enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens can roam unsupervised. Some cities use this same definition to define a run. In the drafted language, pen remains a required area for the keeping of chickens with a minimum size per bird of 10 square feet of floor space. Both the Urban Chickens and Extension resource reference a pen, with the latter resource recommending 10 square feet minimum per bird. The City Council has discussed modifying the minimum size per bird, with one member suggesting 8 square feet per bird and another supporting a larger minimum size per bird. The Planning Commission may consider discussing the minimum pen size per bird and if there is a recommendation to the City Council to further amend this language. c. Modify coop location and setback requirements The drafted Subd. 6 A. 2. e. updates the location requirements for a coop and pen and incorporates specific language that the outer limit of the coop and pen shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line, but remains the same on the standard that these shall be closer to the principal dwelling upon the license holder property than any other abutting property. This language conforms with the setback requirements for an accessory structure. d. Remove screening requirements for areas dedicated to the keeping of chickens The drafted amendment includes removing Subd. 6 A. 4, which removes the requirement for screening to be installed around the perimeter of the area for the keeping of chickens. A fence around a pen is still a requirement in 6 A. 3 but a fence around the entire chicken keeping area is proposed to be removed. The Urban Chickens resource recommends that pens are fenced and recommends the use of privacy fencing while the Extension resource does not explicitly reference fencing. The intent with striking this item is to remove a requirement that could be seen as cost prohibitive when combined with the requirement for a pen to be fully �ed and covered as noted in A. 3 and definitions of Chapter 4, Animals and Pets. e. Modify language for the required maintenance of chickens The drafted revisions in Subd. 6 B. include updates for the required maintenance of chickens. In 6. A. 21, language has been added to update requirements for climate control from a specific temperature in line with guidance from the Extension resource. In 2.g, language that was previously addressed in A. 7 is incorporated with the first reference to maintaining a rodent -free environment and the reference was removed from A. 7. Similarly, 2.i is updated to reference that chickens must not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage, which was originally in the previous version A. 5 and is proposed to be removed in the drafted amendment. Subd. 6 A. 4 describes the requirement to keep all premises on which hens are kept clean. The provision does not include a specific frequency for cleaning, and this is common in other cities' ordinances for the keeping of chickens as well. The Extension resource references weekly coop Page 3 of 6 and pen cleaning and the Urban Chickens resource references both daily and yearly cleaning habits. The City Council generally expressed interest in removing any reference to daily cleaning and incorporating best practices to maintain a clean environment to control odors and deter rodents. The Planning Commission may consider discussion on additional language to establish a required cleaning routine within this section of the ordinance. f. Establish a pathway for a homeowner to repurpose a coop into a storage structure As drafted, Subd. 6 A. 7 would allow for a homeowner to repurpose a coop on their property if they decide to cease keeping chickens and the coop is compliant with the accessory structure requirements. Residential properties are permitted up to two accessory structures but as noted in 6 B. 2.b, a residential property with a detached garage and an accessory structure will be allowed a third accessory structure for keeping chickens. If a chicken license holder decides not to renew their license, and was allowed a coop as a third accessory structure, they would need to remove the structure. However, if the coop was allowed as a second accessory, and is in conformance with the accessory structure requirements, the coop could be repurposed by the homeowner. This language is incorporated to allow for conforming structures to be retained if the homeowner wanted to go down that path. Section 410.01. Subd. 3. Chickens License As part of the City Council's review of the keeping of chickens ordinance, amendment language was also suggested for the City Code section for chicken licenses. 2) Revisions to the Chickens License requirements a. Modify license fee to be one set fee rather than a fee for each chicken In Subd. 3 C, the Council has suggested an edit to the chickens license fee, changing the fee from a fee per chicken to one fee per license. The fee is established in the City's fee schedule, which is reviewed and adopted on an annual basis. b. Remove the leg banding requirement for all chickens The drafted language in Subd. 3 E removes provision number 1 and the requirement for leg banding of all chickens. Neither the Extension resource nor the Urban Chickens resource reference leg banding so this revision would be in accordance with the best practices. c. Update reference to resources reviewed Provision number 2 under Subd. 3 E revises the referenced material from the "Recommendations for Municipal Regulations for Urban Chickens" to "The Arden Hills Keeping of Chickens Informational Handout." The newly referenced handout will be drafted by staff following the adoption of the ordinance amendment and will reflect the updated ordinance and reference the University of Minnesota Extension resources for keeping chickens in addition to the Recommendations for Municipal Regulations for Urban Chickens. The intent with this update to E.2 is to incorporate additional best practices for the keeping of chickens. Page 4 of 6 An ordinance amendment to the Zoning Code does require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to amend ordinance language for the keeping of chickens. 2. The proposed ordinance will include amendments to the language of Chapter 13 — Zoning Code of the City Code. 3. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. • Recommend Approval: Motion to recommend approval as written of Planning Case 25- 007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the findings of fact and as presented in the August 6, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission. Recommend Approval with Amendments: Motion to recommend approval with amendments of Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the findings of fact and the August 6, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission with amendments: a specific reason should be included with all amendments. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Page 5 of 6 Notice A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on July 25, 2025. The City has not received any public comments regarding this case. Attachments A) Draft Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendment B) Redline Draft Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendment C) Recommendations for Municipal Regulations of Urban Chickens D) University of Minnesota Extension — Raising Chickens for Eggs Page 6 of 6 Attachment D PC Agenda Item — 3B 'It EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 3, 2025 TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Elena Fransen, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #25-007 — Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens Requested Action The City of Arden Hills is proposing ordinance language in the Zoning Code to modify language for the keeping of chickens in the residential zoning districts in Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. The proposed amendment would include revisions to the City Code amending Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License. The Planning Commission reviewed an earlier draft of this language at the August 6 meeting and tabled the ordinance amendment with recommendations to staff for further revisions. In this review of the ordinance language, the Planning Commission is also asked to review and discuss possible language to allow for the keeping of ducks. Background The City Council has reviewed and discussed the ordinance for the keeping of chickens at several City Council Work Sessions with suggested revisions. Following these work sessions, direction was given to staff to incorporate the recommendations into the ordinance for the Planning Commission to review. The Planning Commission reviewed a draft version of the ordinance amendment for the keeping of chickens at the August 6, 2025 meeting. The Planning Commission discussed multiple amendments to the draft language and tabled the review with direction to staff to review and draft revisions related to: 1. Number of chickens: increase the number permitted to seven (7) 2. Coop size and location: modify language to allow for a larger maximum coop size and be more clear about location requirements Page 1 of 7 3. Climate control: modify language to be less prescriptive 4. Cleanliness and enforcement/license revocation: review language for consistency with other communities and modify to be less prescriptive 5. Roaming of chickens: review language to allow for chickens to move about a fenced area within a backyard 6. Garages: consider updated language to allow for a chicken coop to be interior to a detached garage 7. The neighbor consent policy: provide language to modify policy to neighbor notification At the August 11 Special Work Session, the City Council discussed the keeping of ducks. The City Council directed staff to bring forth the topic of the keeping of ducks to the Planning Commission for discussion to occur along with the review of ordinance language for chickens. The Planning Commission was asked to provide a recommendation to the City Council on whether the inclusion of ducks should be considered in city ordinances. Staff has revised the draft ordinance language to incorporate the City Council's directed revisions and the Planning Commission's recommended revisions related to chickens. Based on the Council's direction for the Planning Commission to discuss whether ducks should be incorporated in the ordinance language, staff has provided background information gathered from adjacent communities and draft ordinance language to aid in the Planning Commission's review of this topic. Overview of Ordinance Amendments Staff has prepared a draft ordinance identifying language to be modified for the Planning Commission's review (Attachment A). The applicable Sections to be modified are as follows: • Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals • Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals 1) Modify language for the Keeping of Chickens a. Modify coop size and location requirements for the keeping of chickens The Planning Commission previously reviewed several updates to the structure requirements for coops, pens, and exercise yards. Drafted amendments included increasing the minimum required coop size from 12 square feet to 20 square feet, making an exercise yard optional, and keeping a covered and fenced pen as a requirement. For location, the August draft included specific language that the outer limit of the coop and pen shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line, but the standard that the outer limit shall be closer to the principal dwelling upon the license holder property than any other abutting property remained unchanged. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission made recommendations about the minimum and maximum coop size and the criteria for distance from principal dwellings on abutting properties. Page 2 of 7 It was noted that residents may choose to construct a coop that is greater than 20 square feet based on available prefabricated structures or their specific needs. There were multiple recommendations on this topic, including increasing the maximum coop size to 36 square feet to allow for a 6 foot by 6 foot structure and removing the maximum coop size. Staff reviewed the chicken ordinance language in 10 neighboring cities and found that, two cities have an established maximum coop size, one at 60 square feet and one at 120 square feet. Four out of the 10 cities establish a minimum coop size ranging from 3 to 4 square feet per bird. The UMN Extension resource recommends having a minimum of 3 to 5 square feet of indoor space per bird and the Urban Chickens resource recommends 4 square feet per bird. Staff has revised the drafted language in Subd. 6 A La. to allow for a coop size of up to 36 square feet. The Planning Commission may consider further recommendations on the minimum and maximum coop sizes permitted. The Planning Commission recommended staff update the language related to a chicken keeping area and its proximity to principal dwellings on abutting properties to mirror the language in the ordinance for bee hives. The ordinance for bee hives establishes that they may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. Staff has updated the language for coop structures to match the language for bee hives. b. Modify language for climate control requirements In the August draft, the proposed language included striking the specific temperature that would be maintained in a chicken coop. In their review, the Planning Commission recommended further modification to the language to make it less prescriptive to prospective licensees. Staff considered the ordinance language of neighboring communities while drafting revisions to the climate control regulations. Three out of 10 cities reviewed included language for coops to be maintained at a specific temperature whereas the language for seven cities was more general for climate control, referencing standards such as coops shall protect chickens from the weather and coops shall be fully enclosed, wind proof, and have sufficient windows for natural light. Staff has drafted updates to Subd. 6 A l.f to remove specific requirements for a set temperature and a lightbulb while keeping the reference to a licensee providing a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature. Staff has also updated the language to clarify that the plan is required at the time of the initial application for the keeping of chickens and installation of a chicken coop. The Planning Commission may provide a recommendation for further revisions to this section. c. Modify language for maintaining a nuisance -free area for chickens Similar to the Planning Commission's recommendation to modify language for climate control, there was a recommendation to modify language for maintaining the chicken keeping environments that is in alignment with City Code language for cats and dogs. The Planning Commission requested that staff draft language for the maintenance of chickens that is in keeping with the requirements for cats and dogs. City Code requires the owner of a cat or dog to be responsible for cleaning up and disposing of animal feces in a sanitary manner. Page 3 of 7 For the Planning Commission's consideration, staff has drafted language in Subd 6 A. 3, that the licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. This language is in line with the regulations for cleaning up litter for cats and dogs. Staff has not changed Subd. 6 A. 4 which relates to chickens and chicken keeping areas constituting a nuisance for adjacent properties. The Planning Commission may consider this language and other possible revisions to this requirement. d. Consider language to allow for the roaming of chickens At the August meeting, the Planning Commission commented on the language is Subd. 6 A. 5 which references that roaming chickens would be in violation of the conditions for keeping chickens. Members of the Planning Commission noted that chickens are foragers and there are benefits to allowing chickens to roam in the backyard to eat invasive insects. The Planning Commission made a recommendation for staff to review possible ordinance language that would allow for the roaming of chickens in a fenced area. The City Code language for chickens already includes an exercise yard, defined as a larger fenced area adjacent to chicken coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for bird when supervised. Staff has added in a provision in item Subd. 6 A.2.c. to reference an exercise yard as optional and a space where chickens can roam while supervised by the licensee. Staff has also added language to Subd. 6 A. 5 to clarify that roaming chickens outside of proper enclosures would be in violation of the conditions of this section of the code. e. Consider language to allow for a coop to be interior to a detached garage The current keeping of chickens ordinance does not allow for chickens to be housed in a detached garage or other accessory structure. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission discussed this requirement and made a recommendation for staff to review other ordinances and provide language for the Commission to consider allowing for chickens to be kept within a detached structure, meaning the coop is located within another structure. Staff reviewed ordinance language for 10 other communities and did not find ordinances that allow for chicken coops to be interior to a garage. Seven ordinances specifically prohibit chickens from being kept in a dwelling or a garage. It could also be difficult to apply location and setback requirements to a coop and pen that is enclosed within a structure that was approved for a non - chicken use. The drafted language does not include changes to this provision. Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License As part of the City Council's review of the keeping of chickens ordinance, amendment language was also suggested for the City Code section for chicken licenses. At the August meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the City Council's directed revisions for Section 410 including modifying the license fee, removing the leg banding requirement and updating the resource referenced. Staff has provided further revisions to Section 410 for consideration based on the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Page 4 of 7 2) Revisions to the Chickens License requirements a. Modify Neighbor Consent requirement to Neighbor Notification requirement It is established in Section 410 that an applicant for a chickens license is required to have neighbor consent from all of the immediately adjacent properties for the issuance of a license. This requirement has remained consistent since the ordinance language was first adopted and the City Council has not given specific direction for new language to alter this requirement. At the August 6 meeting, the Planning Commission discussed this requirement and provided a recommendation to alter the language to align with requirements for the keeping of bees. A resident who intends to have bee hives on their property is required to provide neighbor notice prior to keeping bees. While discussing the neighbor consent language, members of the Planning Commission asked staff if neighbor consent is required when a chickens licensee goes to renew their license after two years. Staff responded at the meeting that neighbor consent is required at both the time of the initial license issuance and at the biannual renewal. However, upon review, staff has determined that this is incorrect, and that neighbor consent is only required when a resident applies for a new chickens license. Staff found during the review of other keeping of chickens ordinances that 3 out of the ten ordinances require neighbor consent for a chickens license, with a minimum required percentage of neighbors consenting ranging from 60 percent to 75 percent. In one other community, a public hearing before the City Council is required and another community notices neighbors and the City Council considers the license application if there are objections. Staff has prepared two options for revisions. The first (Attachment A) includes keeping the neighbor consent requirement but adding a clarifying statement that neighbor consent is required for a new chickens license. The second option (Attachment B) includes revising the neighbor consent requirement to a neighbor notification requirement. The Planning Commission may consider recommending either of these two options for the City Council to consider. b. Increase maximum number of chickens permitted from three (3) hens to seven (7) hens The City Council directed staff to amend the drafted ordinance language to increase the maximum number of chickens permitted from three (3) to six (6). The Planning Commission reviewed this proposed amendment at the August meeting and recommended the number be increased to seven (7). The Planning Commission proposed this change to allow licensees greater flexibility when purchasing additional chicks if they decide to increase the number of chickens they are keeping or if they are in need of replacement chickens. Staff has also included a revision to move the number of chickens permitted by a chicken license from the language in Section 1325.07 Subd. 6 A. to Section 410 to keep the language in the Zoning Code specific to chicken keeping structures. The draft language also includes revisions which the Planning Commission had already reviewed at the August 6 meeting, including removing screening requirements for areas dedicated to the Page 5 of 7 keeping of chickens and establishing a pathway for a homeowner to repurpose a coop into a storage structure. Keeping ofDucks At the August 11 Special Work Session, the City Council directed staff to bring forth the topic of the keeping of ducks to the Planning Commission for discussion to occur with the review of ordinance language for chickens. The Planning Commission was asked to provide a recommendation to the City Council on inclusion of ducks in city ordinance. As preparation for this discussion, staff has reviewed the ordinances of 10 neighboring communities and found that six of these communities specifically allow for the keeping of ducks. Of these communities, five require a permit or license for the keeping of ducks, which is the same requirement for keeping chickens. Staff identified that where the keeping of ducks is permitted, a coop or containment facility is required to provide shelter for the animals. Language for the maintenance of ducks, such as climate control, maintaining clean and sanitary conditions, and follow best practices, was the same as the language for chickens. The five ordinances that allowed for the keeping of ducks did not reference resources specific to the keeping of ducks. In keeping with the ordinance language for other communities, staff has drafted a version of the ordinance language (Attachment C) that includes ducks in the revisions to Section 410 for Chickens License and Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. Per the revisions, residents could keep a combination of up to seven (7) chickens or ducks and would be required to provide a coop and pen, subject to the coop requirements. The Planning Commission is asked to discuss the topic of keeping ducks and to provide a recommendation to the City Council. Public Hearing An ordinance amendment to the Zoning Code does require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held the required public hearing for the keeping of chickens ordinance at the August 6, 2025 meeting. The Planning Commission may consider allowing additional public comment based on the updates to the ordinance amendment. Another public hearing will be held as part of the City Council review. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to amend ordinance language for the keeping of chickens. 2. The proposed ordinance will include amendments to the language of Chapter 13 — Zoning Code of the City Code. Page 6 of 7 3. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 4. The Planning Commission held the required public hearing on August 6, 2025. Options and Motion Language Staff has provided the following options and motion language for this case. The Planning Commission should consider providing additional findings of fact as part of the motion to support their recommendation for approval or denial. • Recommend Approval: Motion to recommend approval as written of Planning Case 25- 007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the findings of fact and as presented in the September 3, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission. Recommend Approval with Amendments: Motion to recommend approval with amendments of Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the findings of fact and the September 3, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission with amendments: a specific reason should be included with all amendments. • Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Notice A Zoning Code Amendment requires a public hearing. Notice was published in the Pioneer Press on August 22, 2025. The City has not received any public comments regarding this case. Attachments A) Redline Draft Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendment B) Redline Draft Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendment — with Neighbor Notification C) Redline Draft Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendment — Ducks included Page 7 of 7 Attachment E ,-ARQEN HILLS Approved: September 3, 2025 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2025 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Collins called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Chair Joshua Collins, Commissioners Jessica Birken, Brad Bjorklund, Patrick Burlingame, Stephen Erler, Nancy Jacobson, and Ben Lindau. Absent: Commissioners Katie Stromberg and SJ Julius. Also present were: City Administrator Jessica Jagoe, Senior Planner Elena Fransen and Council Liaison Kurt Weber. APPROVAL OF AGENDA — AUGUST 6, 2025 Commissioner Erler moved, seconded by Commissioner Lindau, to approve the August 6, 2025, agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 9, 2025 — Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Lindau moved, seconded by Commissioner Birken, to approve the July 9, 2025, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried 6-0-1 (Commissioner Bjorklund abstained). PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 25-007 — City of Arden Hills — Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens — Public Hearing Senior Planner Fransen stated at the May 12 City Council Work Session, the City Council requested that the ordinance for the keeping of chickens be scheduled for discussion. At the June 9 work session, the Council began the review and discussion on potential amendments to Ordinance 2021-008 for the Keeping of Chickens. The discussion for the Keeping of Chickens ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION August 6, 2025 2 continued at the June 30 Special Work Session. Staff prepared a redlined version of the Keeping of Chickens ordinance with the amendments discussed and generally agreed upon by the Council. At the June 30 Special Work Session, the Council discussed additional items to be incorporated into the redlined ordinance, such as setbacks, number of accessory structures including a coop, fencing/screening, cleaning standards, and leg banding requirements. Senior Planner Fransen explained the City Council's intent with the revisions to the keeping of chickens ordinance was to keep the code language consistent with best practices. The current ordinance language solely references Recommendations of Municipal Regulation of Urban Chickens. Council discussed several regulations from the University of Minnesota Extension on Raising chickens for eggs. Direction was given to incorporate some of those recommendations into the current ordinance as well as having staff create a handout that refers to both of these resources as part of the City's licensing requirements for the Keeping of Chickens. The drafted ordinance amendment incorporates these suggested revisions. Senior Planner Fransen provided an overview of the ordinance amendments and offered the Findings of Fact for review: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to amend ordinance language for the keeping of chickens. 2. The proposed ordinance will include amendments to the language of Chapter 13 — Zoning Code of the City Code. 3. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. Senior Planner Fransen stated staff recommends approval of, based on the findings of fact and as presented in the August 6, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission. Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission for Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens: 1. Recommend Approval as Written 2. Recommend Approval with Amendments 3. Recommend Denial 4. Table Chair Collins opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Jacobson stated she believed staff and the Council had taken a thorough look at this topic. She indicated she lived on a nonconforming corner lot and suggested language added to the ordinance to address nonconforming lots. Senior Planner Fransen was of the opinion there were elements within the ordinance that would address unique properties and staff would be willing to have conversations with residents on how to address how the ordinance applied to their lot. City Administrator Jagoe reported nonconforming and corner lots would still be eligible for chickens just subject to the ordinance language. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — August 6, 2025 3 Commissioner Jacobson indicated she believed the language surrounding noise and odor was too vague and questioned how the City would enforce these matters. Senior Planner Fransen reported if a complaint was made to the City and there was a violation of any of the conditions, the property owners would be required to come into compliance in 10 days or their license could be revoked. Commissioner Jacobsen inquired if a license was good for one year, would the applicant have to get consent from the neighbors on a yearly basis. Senior Planner Fransen explained chicken keeping licenses were good for two years and with the relicensing, the applicant would have to check in and verify with their neighbors every two years. Commissioner Bjorklund thanked staff for the municipal recommendations on Attachment C. He asked how Falcon Heights was managing chickens in their community. Senior Planner Fransen stated she did not have this specific information, but noted many adjacent communities were allowing chickens. Commissioner Lindau asked what the intention was of Attachment C Page 2. Senior Planner Fransen reported this was a handout for the Commission and would not be included in the ordinance. Commissioner Bjorklund inquired what the cost would be for the chicken keeping license. City Administrator Jagoe indicated the Council would be addressing this matter further when considering the fee schedule under City Code. Commissioner Erler stated he believed the general changes that were made to the ordinance were moving in the right direction. He asked if both sections of the ordinance would be brought to the City Council. Senior Planner Fransen reported this would be the case. Commissioner Erler indicated he would like to see a change made to the neighbor consent information noting no other animal is required to have neighbor consent. He supported the consent requirement going away and that only notice to the neighbors be required. He anticipated any trouble with the chickens would be dealt with through noise or odor complaints. He asked if the City only took action against a property if there was a complaint. Senior Planner Fransen stated the City was complaint based, noting the City did not have a code enforcement department that went door to door. Commissioner Erler inquired if the City had an animal control officer. City Administrator Jagoe reported the City has an animal control officer through the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION August 6, 2025 4 Commissioner Burlingame explained chickens were social birds and he supported the increase in the number of chickens to six and even seven. He suggested residents be allowed to have up to eight chickens through a CUP noting this would align with surrounding cities. He commented the coop size of 20 square feet should not apply to families that only want one or two chickens. He recommended the coop size more closely align with the number of birds a family has. He recommended coops not be placed in front of neighboring windows and that the language regarding cleaning routines be reconsidered. Lastly, he suggested the City limit licenses based on lot sizes or chicken licensing concentration. Commissioner Birken stated she was glad the City Council was reviewing this ordinance. She believed the original ordinance was not workable and overly prescriptive. She agreed 100% neighbor consent was an overreach and indicated she liked the idea of notice instead. She asked if the City was regulating dogs and cats to the same level as chickens. Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the Animal Licenses City Code language that pertained to cats and dogs and noted the section did not address cleanliness or disposal of deceased. Chair Collins commented one clarification the Commission may need to consider within this ordinance is if chickens are farm animals or pets. Further discussion ensued regarding how nuisances will be addressed for chickens. Chair Collins opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m. Chair Collins invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Lynn Diaz, 1143 Ingerson Road, explained she was happy to see the good changes that had been made to the ordinance. She strongly objected to requiring residents to receive written support from all adjoining properties. She believed this did not make any sense. She supported allowing anyone to have chickens so long as they follow the City's requirements. She reported dogs were much more likely to affect the neighbors than chickens. She did not want to see the City pitting one neighbor against another. She questioned why the City chose a maximum coop size and believed it would be beneficial for residents to have larger more attractive coops. She explained she would like more information regarding how the pen was defined. She recommended the City further define legitimate complaints and cleaning standards. She suggested there be more allowance to let chickens roam about a backyard, especially for residents that have a six foot fence. She recommended the fee remain at $15 per coop and that the City not charge a fee per chicken, because this may become a hardship. She indicated she knew of other residents that would have comments regarding chickens but they were not aware of this meeting. She suggested the City send out a newsflash or other public notice to residents in order to make them aware of matters like this. There being no additional comment Chair Collins closed the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Chair Collins asked for language changes from the Commission for the ordinance. Commissioner Birken recommended the ordinance be changed to require neighbor notice instead of consent. She recommended the location and placement of chicken coops be more closely aligned with the beehive placement language. She recommended that a light bulb not be required in the chicken coops but that climate control be regulated by the property owner. She ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — August 6, 2025 5 indicated she would support a chicken coop being located within an accessory garage. She recommended the cleaning standard language be omitted and suggested this matter be addressed by the property owners and the discretion of an animal control officer. She explained she supported chickens roaming on a property and believed it would be inhumane to not allow chickens to forage. Lastly, she supported this ordinance being renamed the poultry keeping ordinance instead of the chicken keeping ordinance. Chair Collins stated he would create a list of suggested conditions and this list could then be reviewed when a motion was on the floor. City Administrator Jagoe clarified that the City does require neighbor notice for beehives. Commissioner Burlingame recommended the hen limit be increased to seven through the issuance of a City license, and that eight hens be allowed with a CUP. He recommended chicken coop size be tiered based on the number of hens a property owner has. He recommended the coop placement be no less than 10 feet from any property line and when feasible, shall be positioned to minimize impacts to neighboring dwellings such as avoiding placement adjacent to windows, patios or frequently occupied spaces on abutting properties. He recommended cleanliness be addressed by noting all premises where chickens are kept shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition to prevent the accumulation of waste and odor and the attraction of rodents. He recommended coop bedding and manure be removed once per week or more in order to maintain sanitary conditions. Commissioner Erler recommended the language under the neighbor consent to require the applicant shall provide written notice to the neighbors immediate adjacent of their intent to keep chickens. Commissioner Lindau commented he did not have anything to add at this time. Commissioner Bjorklund reported he has raised chickens in the country. He commented in order to grow eggs a light source was needed all winter, and most of the spring and fall. He reported this light source was essential for cleaning and general maintenance. He recommended the light bulb be required. He stated chickens are good to 15 degrees Fahrenheit, but below that, an additional heat source is required. He supported residents being allowed to have a six by six shed because this was more multi -purpose and would be easier to take care of. He indicated a coop that was only 25 square feet was too small he recommended coops be allowed to be as large as 36 square feet. He explained he did not support requiring residents to clean out manure on a weekly basis, he believed this was an overreach that was not realistic. He recommended the cleaning language be stricken. Chair Collins reviewed the proposed language changes with the Commission. Commissioner Birken stated she could support the first sentence that addressed coop cleaning to remain as is and recommended the remaining language be stricken as this would allow residents to dictate how they will manage the cleanliness of their coop. Commissioner Bjorklund suggested all of sub point 4 remain in place noting he did not want the City require residents to clean their coops each and every week. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION August 6, 2025 6 Commissioner Burlingame explained he could support striking the language, however he wanted to ensure there was adequate language in place for staff to address odor and nuisance complaints. Commissioner Birken moved and Commissioner Bjorklund seconded a motion to recommend striking paragraph 6, future paragraph 4. City Administrator Jagoe stated another path forward for this ordinance would be to table action in order to allow staff to consider the proposed language changes and recommendations from the Commission. She reported this would ensure the language remained consistent throughout the entire City Code. She asked that the Commission provide staff with a little more direction on what items should be further considered by staff. She understood the number of chickens, tiering, cleaning, and coop size need to be addressed. Commissioner Bjorklund withdrew his second. There was no longer a motion on the floor. Chair Collins asked how the City Council went from three to six chickens. City Administrator Jagoe recalled there was a general consensus from the Council to move to six from three. Chair Collins asked for a consensus vote from the Commission when it comes to the language issues that still need to be addressed within the ordinance. He asked if the Commission supported the neighbor consent language being changed to neighbor notice, which was similar to the language within the bee ordinance. The consensus of the Commission was to support this change. Chair Collins inquired if the Commission supported changing the coop placement language. He recommended this language be simplified to more closely reflect the beehive language. The consensus of the Commission was to support this change. Chair Collins questioned if the Commission supported requiring a light source within the chicken coops. Commissioner Birken recommended staff review other pet enclosure requirements and report back to the Commission on what standards should be in place. The consensus of the Commission was to support this recommendation. Chair Collins asked if the Commission was in favor of allowing a chicken coop in a detached garage. Commissioner Jacobson commented there were auxiliary services that could be accomplished in an accessory detached garage. She believed it was overly prescriptive to state chickens could not be housed in a detached garage. Chair Collins stated he would support allowing chicken coops in an attached or detached garage. Commissioner Lindau supported staff investigating if other cities allow chicken coops in garages. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION August 6, 2025 7 City Administrator Jagoe stated if coops were allowed in garages, the Commission would then have to consider how permits were managed and where the pen or exercise yard was located. She stated she would have to investigate this further if the Commission supported allowing chicken coops in garages. The consensus of the Commission was to direct staff to further investigate the allowance of chicken coops in garages. Further discussion ensued regarding the roaming language and staff noted the intent was to allow chickens to roam in the pen or exercise yard. Chair Collins indicated the Commission was interested in allowing chickens to roam in a supervised manner in the rear yard along with the exercise yard. City Administrator Jagoe explained she would further clarify the roaming language within the ordinance. Chair Collins inquired if the Commission supported renaming the ordinance to the poultry ordinance. City Administrator Jagoe reported it would be staff s recommendation that this suggestion be passed along to the City Council, but that at this time, the ordinance remain the chicken keeping ordinance. Chair Collins asked if the Commission would support the number of chickens increased. Commissioner Birken explained when chicks are ordered they are shipped live and the minimum order is three. She was of the opinion the maximum number of chickens allowed should be set at seven as proposed by Commissioner Burlingame. The consensus of the Commission was to support a flock size of up to seven chickens. Chair Collins asked how the Commission wanted to address coop size. Commissioner Lindau supported staff investigating what size premade structures were in order to streamline the process for applicants in the future. City Administrator Jagoe reported she would further investigate this matter for the Commission and could report back with coop size recommendations. Chair Collins inquired how the Commission wanted to address coop cleanliness. Commissioner Birken stated she would like staff to provide the Commission with comparable language on how dogs and cat cleanliness is to be addressed by pet owners. Commissioner Burlingame moved and Commissioner Biorklund seconded a motion to table action on Planning Case 25-007 for the ordinance amendments for the keeping of chickens to allow staff to further investigate matters as directed by the Commission to the September Planning Commission meeting. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). Attachment F ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — September 3, 2025 12 Chair Collins recessed the Planning Commission meeting at 9:05 p.m. Chair Collins reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 9:11 p.m. B. Planning Case 25-007 — City of Arden Hills — Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Review for the Keeping of Ducks — Public Hearing Not Required Senior Planner Fransen stated the City Council has reviewed and discussed the ordinance for the keeping of chickens at several City Council Work Sessions with suggested revisions. Following these work sessions, direction was given to staff to incorporate the recommendations into the ordinance for the Planning Commission to review. The Planning Commission reviewed a draft version of the ordinance amendment for the keeping of chickens at the August 6, 2025 meeting. The Planning Commission discussed multiple amendments to the draft language and tabled the review with direction to staff to review and draft revisions related to: 1. Number of chickens: increase the number permitted to seven (7) 2. Coop size and location: modify language to allow for a larger maximum coop size and be more clear about location requirements 3. Climate control: modify language to be less prescriptive 4. Cleanliness and enforcement/license revocation: review language for consistency with other communities and modify to be less prescriptive 5. Roaming of chickens: review language to allow for chickens to move about a fenced area within a backyard 6. Garages: consider updated language to allow for a chicken coop to be interior to a detached garage 7. The neighbor consent policy: provide language to modify policy to neighbor notification Senior Planner Fransen explained at the August 11 Special Work Session, the City Council discussed the keeping of ducks. The City Council directed staff to bring forth the topic of the keeping of ducks to the Planning Commission for discussion to occur along with the review of ordinance language for chickens. The Planning Commission was asked to provide a recommendation to the City Council on whether the inclusion of ducks should be considered in city ordinances. Staff has revised the draft ordinance language to incorporate the City Council's directed revisions and the Planning Commission's recommended revisions related to chickens. Based on the Council's direction for the Planning Commission to discuss whether ducks should be incorporated in the ordinance language, staff has provided background information gathered from adjacent communities and draft ordinance language to aid in the Planning Commission's review of this topic. Senior Planner Fransen provided an overview of the Ordinance Amendments and provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to amend ordinance language for the keeping of chickens. 2. The proposed ordinance will include amendments to the language of Chapter 13 — Zoning Code of the City Code. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — September 3, 2025 13 3. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 4. The Planning Commission held the required public hearing on August 6, 2025 Senior Planner Fransen reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the findings of fact and as presented in the September 3, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission.: I . Recommend Approval as Submitted 2. Recommend Approval with Amendments 3. Recommend Denial 4. Table Chair Collins opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Chair Collins stated he does not have any expertise when it came to duck ownership and he was uncertain of the proposed code was appropriate when it came to duck ownership. Commissioner Lindau thanked staff for working diligently and bringing together all of the comments from the Commission. He appreciated the information that was provided from what other cities were doing as well. He stated he supported the proposed language changes from staff. Commissioner Bjorklund thanked staff for all of their efforts, noting staff did an excellent job consolidating all of the comments. He explained he supported the keeping of both chickens and ducks. He recommended Options A and C move forward. Commissioner Jacobson reported she supported neighbor notification and not consent. She questioned why people would keep ducks over chickens and inquired if ducks needed water. Commissioner Bjorklund stated people keep ducks for the eggs and noted ducks do not need a pond. Commissioner Erler thanked staff for working to summarize the comments of the Commission so succinctly. He discussed how ducks were messier, needed a water source and that they were more complicated, especially if ducks and chickens are combined. He suggested a handout be created for those wishing to keep ducks. Senior Planner Fransen indicated staff would prepare some sort of handout for both chicken and duck keeping. Commissioner Birken thanked staff for all of their efforts on the ordinance amendments. She indicated she supported neighbor notification and not consent. She stated she supported the language surrounding ducks noting there were many different theories when it comes to duck keeping. She commented further on the pros of keeping ducks. She suggested no roosters, drakes or call ducks be allowed. Chair Collins asked if chickens would be able to roam around in a backyard under supervision. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION — September 3, 2025 14 Senior Planner Fransen reported this would be allowed. She then read the definition within the code for an exercise yard. Commissioner Jacobson inquired if it would be onerous of the City to require chickens to be supervised when roaming the backyard. City Administrator Jagoe described the differences between an exercise yard versus a run/pen area which would have a roof. Commissioner Erler recommended a change to the language, noting a coop separate from other structures was required to house the chickens and ducks. He stated another minor change could be made to the language noting chickens and ducks shall not be housed in a residential house or detached garage. Commissioner Burlingame indicated he supported the proposed changes as well as neighbor notification versus consent because this process would be cleaner. He stated his only concern when it came to chicken coops was with their cleanliness and how this would be monitored by the City. Commissioner Erler spoke to the need for the City having some process in place in order to bring a coop into compliance, when it comes to cleanliness. He stated perhaps, the existence of the animal control officer would address this matter. City Administrator Jagoe indicated she would like to speak with other cities to see how they verify or ensure applicants have given neighbor notification. Chair Collins moved and Commissioner Lindau seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens, based on the findings of fact and as presented in the September 3, 2025 Report to the Planning Commission subiect to city verification requirements for neighbor notifications with the minor language changes as discussed. The motion carried unanimously (7-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS None. REPORTS A. Report from the City Council Councilmember Weber provided the Commission with an update from the City Council. He expressed his thanks on behalf of the City Council for all of their efforts in addressing the zoning code amendments and chicken ordinance. He invited the Commission to attend Rib Fest on Saturday, September 13 at the Red Bulls facility. He noted the State of the City event would be held on Saturday, September 20. He was pleased to report the City Council approved the hire of a new Community Development Director. V) � o ��txo o�� _ � o •- Q O .- 0- Ln Ln V N `� O (U V bn Z3 bA > .0 0 O V c6 N a) ca 4A =; E Ln i .— i 0 Q Q � E V a� Q GCQV 0 U 4-j t+- 0 b-0 �0 c6 buo c6 Q) U � cn � U bn 0 ' — a-J L 0cn 0 c6 -0 b-0 q�0 E L / —0 O L 0-0.� C6 .� Ln u cn Q1 Ln QU -1� 4-' U Z3 .�- 4) 0 -0 V E ro Q0 O Z V) m Qj O � � v O � J O ,O � Q O C V a M� Ln Qj O L O O O Mlift lift O O O O ( Q UI UI . . N N7 C) V Qj L 4 i 0 m Q) Q) E 0 c Q) E V c c� _0 i O O .O V Q) 0 0 0 n , a--� O • +-O D ca Q) Q) Qj o � L •x O o 0 ro p = " U� 0 m �' o ru U ° o `� o = aio ._ > Z5 Z5 Q) °' ago Q) C: w E O -0 m ago a--' ru Q � 0 N bn -0 ?> �. p N O N U N Ca _p O � a a� V) U a--� a--+ Q) � N Q) v O p O_ U m-0 bn O '> �E -o -0 L p O can O � Ov -0 O � N Q) U o aA co N � • E E a- E IE m m r� � � zu Evv ooc �V-� v O rl N M Ln lfl I� O � � cQ • =3 V ca v V c/) >% u O u U O _ p p cn ca C�0 cry 0 O cn .— v E E E O E a, U O Q) O U •O I •— V � .� =3-0 ca -0 O o m '> U O w4-j �A � U � V � cQ • • Ln D -� E E O U t1A � O dA Q v � o V) U Ln O U r n , .� Q� C6 +, T•: • L E E c6 Ln kk Ln lD 4- Alu • V U i O 4- Ul ca L c6 E E ca • — cn C N c6 4-+ •— N cn � _0 O N Z5 c 0- O W •c/� _0 a-�+ O •U C6 � ca ca •� E +- C: O O `~ U � CAA O O O U M v O 0 0 r Rn . N D O Ln bn .Z3 m 0 .O U 0 O U a) un 0 bn (v i aj L 0 ro N Q O O U C6 � O U L N N � 0 4- " O -�-j E f E 0 O �' O 4-J r-� C6 ate-J M N a- aA -+ c6 U.' c6 (3) ro -0 0 U Q — O w / E o V) ca LL • a co a, O bn a� � .� 4-1 ' of � n =3 00 nZ: W = }' U ro � V) u n� W 5 0 m � � O a--+ 0 C6 � O U �_ L- O N V N O V . — C N E =3 E O O _I_- .� Q U O cry O a� o +, N � Q, N •� E > �_ M c(n 'u 0 N E (U +� O w w V Q C— cry U +-j RN v O 0 09 bn .Ln D O Ln bn .Z3 m (ri O L.ri N M Q) C6 E U O 4- C6 C6 L N Q Ul O a U i N 4- N L O E rr M E L LL O (n � C6 O Q� .� U 0 C: •� ro V) •� m O c6 � O � U C6 O C6 .� Q E 6 L L O O � � (� C6 O � � � O � N • M �' � 0 O U O � e v O 0 09 r Rn .N D O Ln bA .Z3 m Q �D bA E ro O .Ln O U O V) C) V) _O U L Q O O 0 O D V) U U .E ca - 0 VIN �6 O O O Q O O Q � tu0 t xo ca txA U C: C6 O �z N buo O (6 U buo m v O 0 0 r Rn .O .N O r Ak u r-I O O .O U L O C6 U O z hA z 0 N E .D 0- ai Ln U O hA z 0 Ln �.J cm �.J �.J L E O C) E L Q U 4- 0 C) E E E X m E C) C) N M a--j O � U � • — � C6 N O 4-, E O 4-1 � U E C- -0 ,O CL O _0 > E 4-j a .C- u .v �' o O N Ul) M CL • • bA .C- m rl on _0 L/) Z. Lr) (V 0 M _0 � ca O U � � (/) U M U O O 4-J t�0 ca U O L � I O O � E ca Q O CL) O o O cn U tp .O •� V Q) 0 I � O O Ln � fV U N Ul ul +-+ ca � U a� aA E � O ca E Q 8 NEW BUSINESS -11A r -ARPEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Joua Yang, Finance Director Amy LaMere, Accounting Clerk SUBJECT: Adopting and Confirming Quarterly Special Assessments for Delinquent Utilities Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: Council Should Consider Motion to approve, table or deny the following: • Resolution 2025-062 certifying delinquent utilities to Ramsey County. Background Delinquent utility amounts are certified to Ramsey County quarterly. A list of utility accounts with a delinquent balance was compiled and notices dated August 6, 2025 were mailed. These customers were informed of their delinquent status and were asked to make payment of the delinquent balance by September 8, 2025. Utility accounts with an unpaid delinquent balance would be certified to Ramsey County to be added to property taxes payable in 2026. The certification amount is equal to the unpaid delinquent balance plus an eight percent penalty. The list of remaining delinquent utility accounts is attached. The City will request that Ramsey County levy the delinquent balances against the respective properties. Attachments Attachment A: Resolution No. 2025-062 and Delinquent Utility Accounts List Page l of 1 It ,-A EEN�HILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2025-062 Attachment A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING QUARTERLY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT UTILITIES WHEREAS, the amount to be specially assessed for DELINQUENT UTILITIES has been duly calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code and Minnesota Statues; and WHEREAS, notices have been duly mailed as required by law; and WHEREAS, said proposed assessments have at all times since their filing been open for public inspection, and an opportunity has been given to all interested parties to present objections if any, to the proposed assessments; and WHEREAS, there were no oral or written objections received. 1. The amounts so calculated and set forth in said notices are hereby levied against the respective parcels of land described therein, and 2. The proposed assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as special assessments for each of said parcels of land and the assessments together with an additional penalty of eight percent (8%) of the original unpaid amount, inclusive of any previous delinquency penalty, shall be a lien concurrent with general taxes upon such parcel. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, that the City Administrator be authorized and directed to transmit to the County Auditor a certified duplicate of the assessment roll to be extended upon the property tax lists of the County, and the County Auditor shall collect said special assessments with taxes levied in 2025, payable in 2026: ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025. ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk David Grant, Mayor To view the final document, access adopted Resolutions via Arden Hills Public Laserfiche Weblink by visiting cityofardenhills.org and clicking on Archived Documents under Helpful Links on our main webpage. City of Arden Hills Delinquent Public Utility Accounts 273023340003 001489-000 343023210016 001920-000 343023230017 002369-000 223023240347 003135-000 223023240326 000375-000 223023240240 003444-000 223023240239 011640-000 223023240296 007949-000 223023240322 009989-000 223023210028 013227-000 223023210066 005371-000 223023210086 008185-000 223023210088 006007-000 223023240167 012351-000 223023240170 012402-000 333023310030 007153-000 213023410028 006494-000 343023130010 005286-000 343023130011 008190-000 333023330032 006926-000 283023330032 003132-000 223023310014 012582-000 223023310008 012973-000 223023320026 008331-000 273023430008 012627-000 273023430008 013495-000 273023430008 013515-000 343023210002 011863-000 343023210005 012664-000 343023210008 012859-000 283023240027 012455-000 223023320070 011904-000 343023330015 001629-000 333023330024 012306-000 333023330040 002470-000 333023330035 002511-000 333023340067 009129-000 333023330074 004091-000 333023330057 003236-000 333023240028 013350-000 333023240019 008210-000 333023240032 002096-000 223023340036 000231-000 223023130080 000157-000 163023340015 001285-000 343023140028 012757-000 223023420041 011927-000 333023240108 012524-000 223023340034 000355-000 213023430017 001534-000 213023430012 012516-000 223023120013 000569-000 333023310008 012881-000 333023420002 002989-000 283023120008 001225-000 283023120052 001575-000 213023120004 005384-000 343023440077 012425-000 333023240039 013057-000 223023330015 004713-000 223023320020 010860-000 223023320013 000743-000 213023140006 001271-000 343023330050 001671-000 343023220022 002277-000 343023220023 002089-000 343023310015 002293-000 343023220033 013272-000 223023230024 012587-000 333023320006 001720-000 333023320008 005251-000 283023330011 007090-000 283023330012 003256-000 213023410008 001589-000 223023130015 013071-000 1435 Arden Uaks Drive 54.45 88.47 17.91 160.83 12.87 173.7U 1437 Arden Place 91.63 131.41 17.91 240.95 19.28 260.23 1532 Arden Place 222.40 307.80 17.91 548.11 43.85 591.96 4322 Arden View Court 149.98 258.63 23.23 431.84 34.55 466.39 4370 Arden View Court 112.07 164.24 23.23 299.54 23.96 323.50 4412 Arden View Court 146.36 211.37 23.23 380.96 30.48 411.44 4413 Arden View Court 150.89 223.02 23.23 397.14 31.77 428.91 4474 Arden View Court 52.57 233.68 23.23 309.48 24.76 334.24 4478 Arden View Court 63.34 80.74 23.23 167.31 13.38 180.69 1370 Arden View Drive 127.11 172.39 23.23 322.73 25.82 348.55 1405 Arden View Drive 135.75 198.28 23.23 357.26 28.58 385.84 1430 Arden View Drive 67.57 87.83 23.23 178.63 14.29 192.92 1432 Arden View Drive 90.75 123.92 23.23 237.90 19.03 256.93 1466 Arden View Drive 97.58 142.99 23.23 263.80 21.10 284.90 1468 Arden View Drive 77.31 136.75 23.23 237.29 18.98 256.27 1827 Beckman Avenue 43.84 171.89 17.91 233.64 18.69 252.33 1675 Brueberry Lane 103.37 149.77 23.23 276.37 22.11 298.48 1315 Cannon Avenue 188.97 272.80 17.91 479.68 38.37 518.05 1323 Cannon Avenue 83.54 149.53 17.91 250.98 20.08 271.06 3182 Cleveland Avenue N 105.28 158.29 17.91 281.48 22.52 304.00 3670 Cleveland Avenue N 47.56 73.91 17.91 139.38 11.15 150.53 1348 Colleen Avenue 136.64 194.49 17.91 349.04 27.92 376.96 1414 Colleen Avenue 157.70 224.35 17.91 399.96 32.00 431.96 1469 Colleen Avenue 120.53 169.60 17.91 308.04 24.64 332.68 3776 Connelly Avenue 10.85 15.84 86.31 113.00 9.04 122.04 3776 Connelly Avenue 0.15 5.24 29.45 34.84 2.79 37.63 3776 Connelly Avenue 253.92 84.12 500.00 838.04 67.04 905.08 1392 County Road E W 119.14 171.51 17.91 308.56 24.68 333.24 1412 County Road E W 89.68 130.08 17.91 237.67 19.01 256.68 1434 County Road E W 2.03 124.90 14.95 141.88 11.35 153.23 1929 County Road E2 W 121.43 159.30 17.91 298.64 23.89 322.53 1478 Dawn Circle 120.92 174.55 17.91 313.38 25.07 338.45 1569 Edgewater Avenue 74.74 105.65 17.91 198.30 15.86 214.16 1983 Edgewater Avenue 95.89 140.34 17.91 254.14 20.33 274.47 1984 Edgewater Avenue 25.38 133.19 17.91 176.48 14.12 190.60 2022 Edgewater Avenue 1.06 104.35 7.79 113.20 9.06 122.26 1927 Glenpaul Avenue 100.92 144.63 17.91 263.46 21.08 284.54 1960 Glenpaul Avenue 143.44 211.10 17.91 372.45 29.80 402.25 2015 Glenpaul Avenue 88.31 124.11 17.91 230.33 18.43 248.76 1846 Grant Road 116.48 171.43 17.91 305.82 24.47 330.29 1873 Grant Road 60.00 75.61 17.91 153.52 12.28 165.80 1876 Grant Road 179.15 247.38 17.91 444.44 35.56 480.00 4101 Hamline Avenue N 95.54 136.06 17.91 249.51 19.96 269.47 4350 Hamline Avenue N 109.40 137.97 17.91 265.28 21.22 286.50 4627 Highway 10 116.05 166.66 17.91 300.62 24.05 324.67 1138 Hunters Court 0.92 92.54 5.98 99.44 7.96 107.40 1331 Indian Oaks Circle 68.29 91.62 17.91 177.82 14.23 192.05 1850 Indian Place 125.95 179.63 23.23 328.81 26.30 355.11 4126 James Circle 136.12 194.12 17.91 348.15 27.85 376.00 1791 Janet Court 271.01 364.68 17.91 653.60 52.29 705.89 1810 Janet Court 117.74 170.83 17.91 306.48 24.52 331.00 1307 Karth Lake Circle 179.01 262.65 17.91 459.57 36.77 496.34 3333 Lake Johanna Blvd 131.78 191.29 17.91 340.98 27.28 368.26 3352 Lake Johanna Blvd 77.80 137.80 17.91 233.51 18.68 252.19 1708 Lake Valentine Road 22.96 145.98 17.91 186.85 14.95 201.80 1761 Lake Valentine Road 115.58 166.52 17.91 300.01 24.00 324.01 4541 Lakeshore Place 107.11 152.93 17.91 277.95 22.24 300.19 3205 Lexington Avenue N 195.13 332.76 17.91 545.80 43.66 589.46 3424 New Brighton Road 96.09 134.07 17.91 248.07 19.85 267.92 4149 Norma Avenue 85.50 129.71 17.91 233.12 18.65 251.77 4268 Norma Avenue 145.58 208.63 17.91 372.12 29.77 401.89 4283 Norma Avenue 175.09 250.38 17.91 443.38 35.47 478.85 4401 Old Highway 10 22.96 145.98 17.91 186.85 14.95 201.80 3130 Ridgewood Road 60.43 77.36 17.91 155.70 12.46 168.16 3520 Siems Court 98.50 174.10 17.91 290.51 23.24 313.75 3530 Siems Court 153.92 242.08 17.91 413.91 33.11 447.02 3354 Snelling Avenue N 60.87 78.77 17.91 157.55 12.60 170.15 3575 Snelling Avenue N 0.78 77.48 5.73 83.99 6.72 90.71 4370 Snelling Avenue N 123.41 210.40 17.91 351.72 28.14 379.86 1988 Stowe Avenue 89.67 127.85 17.91 235.43 18.83 254.26 2000 Stowe Avenue 119.73 165.82 17.91 303.46 24.28 327.74 1971 Thom Drive 69.59 91.39 17.91 178.89 14.31 193.20 2023 Thom Drive 102.31 153.94 17.91 274.16 21.93 296.09 1675 Wedgewood Circle 89.10 126.56 17.91 233.57 18.69 252.26 1238 Wyncrest Court 105.04 149.35 17.91 272.30 21.78 294.08 7,699.64 11,917.39 1,942.57 21,559.60 1,724.78 23,284.38 NEW BUSINESS —11B 'It WIZEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Jessica Jagoe, City Administrator FROM: Elena Fransen, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #25-007 — Public Hearing Required Applicant: City of Arden Hills Request: Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 400.01 and 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount: Funding Source: N/A N/A N/A Council Should Consider Motions to approve, table or deny the following: • Adoption of Ordinance 2025-003 for Planning Case 25-007 regarding a Zoning Code amendment to Chapter 13 Section 1325 to modify language for the keeping of chickens and ducks in the residential zoning districts and a City Code amendment to Chapter 4 Section 400 to update definitions relevant to the keeping of chickens and ducks and Section 410 to modify language for chickens/ducks licenses and authorization to publish a Summary Ordinance of 2025-003. Approval for authorization to publish summary ordinance requires an affirmative vote of four councilmembers. Overview of Ordinance Amendments Staff has prepared a draft ordinance identifying language to be modified for the City Council's Review (Attachment A). The applicable Sections to be modified are as follows: • Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals • Section 400.01, General Provisions • Section 410.01, Subd. 3, Chickens License Page 1 of 6 Proposed Language: Section 400.01. General Provisions • Call Duck. A specific breed of duck known for being especially loud and chatty and used exclusively for either showing, ornamental, or pet purposes. • Coop. An accessory structure for the keeping or housing of chickens or ducks permitted by the ordinance. • Drake. A male duck. • Exercise yard. Is a larger fenced area adjacent to ehieken a coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for the birds when supervised. • Hen. IAA female chicken or duck. Section 410.01 Subd. 3, Chickens License Subd. 3 Chickens/Ducks License. All chickens and ducks within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a chicken or a duck which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the chicken(s)/ducks shall make application for a chickens/ducks license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. If the Applicant is a renter, the Property Owner signature shall be required on the license application form. B. Neighbor Consent -Notification. The Applicant shall be responsible for providing written notification to the neighbors immediately adjacent to the property of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. As part of the application review, the prospective license holder shall certify that they have provided the required written notification of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. This notifieation will be distribtited in the fefmat provided by the City. Neighbor vffitten responses will be retttmed to the City. Neighbor- eensent from all of the inmnedia ely adjaeent pf0peffies-tis does t , „stitute , nt C. License Fee. The license fee for eaeh eh must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A two-year license shall be issued. E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form and receipt of the license fee, the City Administrator shall cause a chicken/duck license to be issued to the applicant subject to: (1) Leg banding of all ehiekens is fequir-ed. The bands must identify the owner an the evffier-'s dares and telephone number-. (2-) (1) No more than seven (7) hens shall be housed or kept on any one (1) residential lot with the issuance of a City license. (3) (2) Dead chickens and ducks must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of Animal Health rules which require chicken and duck carcasses to be disposed of as soon as possible after death, usually within forty-eight (48) to Page 2 of 6 seventy-two (72) hours. Legal forms of chicken and duck carcass disposal include burial, off -site incineration or rendering, or composting. (4) (3) Prior to issuance of a license, the prospective annual license holder certifies as part of the application review that they have read "Keeping of Chickens/Ducks Informational Handout" "Reeam.,-,o,,,lations for Munieipal Regulations for Ur-b,,,, Chiekens F. The following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills for chickens and ducks: (1) Roosters, Drakes, and Call Ducks are prohibited. (2) No breeding of chickens or ducks is allowed. (3) Slaughtering of chickens or ducks on the property is prohibited. Section 1325.07 Subd. 6.A, Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals Subd.6 Animals. A. Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. Any building in which farm animals are kept shall be located a distance of two hundred (200) feet or more from any lot line. Any open structure in which farm animals are kept shall be a distance of four hundred (400) feet or more from any lot line, except for ehieken coops and bee hives in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 Districts provided the following requirements are met: Chicken Coops (1) No more than three (3) hens shall be housed or kept on any one (1) residenlial lot wi (21) A separate coop, separate from other structures, is required to house the -chickens/ ducks. Coops must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum requirements. a. A coop with a minimum of 4-2-20 square feet and no larger than 25 36 square feet is permitted as an accessory structure subject to Section 1325.01. Subd. 4 A. for Size. b. Exemption to Ordinance - A residential property with a detached garage and an accessory structure/shed will be allowed a third accessory structure for keeping chickens/ducks. The combined square footage of all three detached structures may not exceed 728 square feet. c. Located in the rear yard. ChiekerCoop, pen, and optional exercise yard are not permitted in the front or side yard. d. Setbacks are subject to applicable accessory structure setbacks of the underlying zoning district. In no instance shall the coop be located in front of the rear building line of the principal structure. e. The outer limit of the coop including pen and exec-e se yard shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line and may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkwa. shall be leeatea el sef to the pr-ineipal dwelling upon the property that is issued a lieense than any othef Fesidential dwelling on an abutting property. Page 3 of 6 f. Climate control — adequate ventilation and/or insulation and an operable light"•lb shall be provided to maintain the coop temperature. between 45 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Prior to issuance of anew license, the prospective annual license holder must provide a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature in the coop for safety of the fowl or poultry. The plan must address both extreme winter and summer temperature conditions. g. Rodent proof — coop construction, all grain and food, and materials must be adequate to prevent access by rodents. h. Coops shall be constructed and maintained in a workmanlike manner. i. Chickens and ducks shall not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage. (2) A pen and o xr 0 0 yard is required. Pen and o 0 0 yard must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum standard: a. The pen and exec-e se yard is shall be located adjacent to the coop and shall be fenced with adequate coverage to keep hens in and predators out of a material that ear be easily raked eT regularly r-eplaeed to r-eduee edef and flies. b. Minimum size per bird shall be 10 square feet of floor space c. An exercise yard is optional. This area must be located adjacent to coop and pen and chickens/ducks must be supervised by the licensee while in an exercise yard. (63) The licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken/duck keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. All premises on w-hieh hens are kert of maintainedshall be kept elean from filth, garbage, and any substanees whieh attr-aet r-edeiAs. The e0ep and its suffeunding must be eleaned frequently enough to eentfol odor-. Manufe shall not be allowed to (84) Hens, coop, pen, and optional exercise yard shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. Page 4 of 6 (15) Any violation of the above conditions, (i.e. roaming chickens/ducks outside of proper enclosure, uncontrolled odor), if not remedied within ten (10) days, may result in revocation of the homeowner's license. (106) If the license holder does not renew their chickens/ducks license, and the coop was licensed as an allowed third accessory structure for chickens/ducks, the coop/third structure cannot be repurposed for a storage structure and dice „*roues having ehie ��„�, the homeowner shall have 60 days to remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard associated with the keeping of chickens and/or ducks in its entirety. if the eeep was lieensed as llowe third ^ storage stfueWfe. If the homeowner/license holder fails to perform either of the above, the City may enter upon the subject property, remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard from the homeowner's property, and charge the amount back to the homeowner as an assessment on the property tax roll. If the coop was licensed as an allowed second accessory structure, and the property complies with the accessory structure requirements, the structure may be repurposed for a storage structure. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their September 3 meeting and have offered the following findings of fact for your consideration: General Findings: 1. The City of Arden Hills is proposing to amend ordinance language for the keeping of chickens. 2. The proposed ordinance will include amendments to the language of Chapter 13 — Zoning Code of the City Code. 3. Amendments to the Zoning Code regulations require a public hearing prior to action by the City Council. 4. The Planning Commission held the required public hearing on August 6, 2025. Options and Motion Language The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their September 3, 2025 meeting. At that time, they recommended approval with amendments of Planning Case 25-007 by a 7-0 vote, The following are motion language options for the City Council to consider: • Approval: Motion to aOrdinance 2025-003 and authorization to publish Summary Ordinance for Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 400.01 and Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks, based on the findings of fact and as presented in the September 22, 2025, Report to the City Council. • Approval with Amendments: Motion to adopt with amendments Ordinance 2025-003 and authorization to publish Summary Ordinance for Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 400.01 Page 5 of 6 and Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks, based on the findings of fact and the September 22, 2025, Report to the City Council with amendments: a specific reason should be included with all amendments. Denial: Motion to deny Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 400.01 and Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks, based on the following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. • Table: Motion to table Planning Case 25-007 for Ordinance Amendments to Zoning Code Section 1325.07, Subd. 6.A and City Code Section 400.01 and Section 410.01, Subd. 3 regarding the Keeping of Chickens and Ducks: a specific reason and information request should be included with a motion to table. Budget Impact N/A Attachments A) Redlined Keeping of Chickens and Ducks Ordinance 2025-003 B) Clean Ordinance 2025-003 and Summary Ordinance C) Presentation Page 6 of 6 Attachment A �ENHILLS ORDINANCE NO.2025-003 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4, ANIMALS AND PETS, SECTIONS 400 AND 410; AND CHAPTER 13, ZONING CODE, SECTION 1325 OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 400 — General Provisions, Subsection 400.01, Definitions is hereby amended by deleting str-i ,v*4e language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 400 — General Provisions 400.01 Definitions. The following definitions shall be used in the application and interpretation of the provisions of this chapter: Animal. Any non -human mammal, reptile, amphibian, or bird. Animal Control Officer. An individual or employee of a business retained by the City for purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Chapter; or a member of the City's law enforcement agency. • Animal, Domestic. Animals kept within the home as pets, such as fish, dogs, cats, household bird, and similar animals. • Animal, Non -Domestic. Animals which are kept outside the home for purposes of food or pleasure such as cattle, hogs, horses, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, ducks, birds, such as falcons and pigeons, and similar animals. • Animal, Wild. Any animal which is of a species not usually domesticated and of a species which, due to size, wild nature or other characteristics, is dangerous to humans and would ordinarily be confined in a zoo or found in the wild. The term includes but is not limited to: Animals and birds, the keeping of which is licensed by the state or federal government, such as wolves, raptors, and pheasants. • Eagles, ocelots, jaguars, cougars, weasels, wild ferrets, badgers, monkeys, chimpanzee, deer, and bison. Error! Unknown document property name. • Crossbreeds of wild animals and domesticated animals such as the cross between dogs and coyotes and dogs and wolves. • Any large cat of the family Felidae, such as lions, tigers, jaguars, leopards, cougars and ocelots, except commonly accepted domesticated house cats. • Any member of the family Canidae, such as wolves, coyotes, dingoes, and jackals, except domesticated dogs. • Any poisonous snake such as a rattlesnake, coral snake, water moccasin, puff adder, or cobra. • Any snake or reptile which by its size, vicious nature or other characteristic is dangerous to human beings. • Any skunk, raccoon, or fox whether captured in the wild, domestically raised, descented or not descented, vaccinated against rabies or not vaccinated against rabies. Any bear, ape, gorilla, monkey, or badger. Any other animal or reptile which is commonly considered wild. At Large. An unattended animal on public property; or an unattended animal on private property without the consent of the property owner. Cat. Any domesticated feline animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Call Duck. A specific breed of duck known for being especially loud and chatty and used exclusively for either showing, ornamental, or pet purposes. • Coop. An accessory structure for the keeping or housing of chickens or ducks permitted by the ordinance. Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: Without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property; Killed a domestic animal without provocation; or A potentially dangerous dog which aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. Dog. Any canine animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Drake. A male duck. • Enclosure. Any structure, except a dwelling, designed to securely enclose and prevent an animal from escaping therefrom. • Proper Enclosure. Proper Enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the animal. A Proper Enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage or other structure that would allow the animal to exit of its volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the dog from exiting. • Exercise yard. Is a larger fenced area adjacent to ehieken a coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for the birds when supervised. • Hen. IAA female chicken or duck. • Owner. Any person, firm, or corporation, organization or department possessing, harboring, keeping, having an interest in or having custody or control of an animal. 225614v1 • Pen. A fully enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens or ducks can roam unsupervised. Potentially Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: When unprovoked, bites a human or domestic animal; • When unprovoked, chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks or any other public property in an apparent attitude of attack; or • Has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. • Restrained. On a leash of not more than six (6) feet in length or on a leash which can be retracted to a length of six (6) feet or less, and in the custody of a person of sufficient age to adequately control the animal; in a vehicle; or confined to the owner's property by enclosure or fencing. • Rooster. Is a male chicken. • Substantial Bodily Harm. Bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member. SECTION 2. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 410 — Licenses, Subsection 410.01, Licenses Required, is hereby amended by deleting st-Fi ,ethr-etlg>, language and adding the underlined language as follows: 410.00 - Licenses 410.01 License Required. The following animal licenses shall be required within the City of Arden Hills. Subd. 1 Dog/Cat Licenses. All dogs and cats within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a dog or cat which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the dog or cat shall make application for a dog or cat license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. B. Vaccination. It shall be unlawful for any dog or cat owner to keep or maintain any dog or cat older than six (6) months of age unless it shall have been vaccinated with an anti -rabies vaccine certified to be effective by a licensed veterinarian. No license renewal shall be issued except upon compliance with this section. C. License Fee. The license fee for each dog or cat must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A license shall be issued for a period of time not to exceed the expiration date of the rabies vaccination. No dog or cat license shall be renewed without proof of vaccination. 225614v1 E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form, receipt of the license fee and receipt of the proof of vaccination, the City Administrator shall cause a dog or cat license to be issued to the applicant for a particular dog or cat. F. Receipt and Tags. The City of Arden Hills shall issue a license fee receipt to the applicant along with a metallic dog or cat license tag. The applicant shall permanently affix the tag by a metal fastening device to the collar of the licensed animal in a manner that allows the tag to be easily observed. If a tag is lost, a duplicate may be issued by the City of Arden Hills upon presentation of a receipt showing payment of the initial license fee and upon payment of an additional fee for each duplicate tag. G. Change of Address. An applicant who has obtained a dog or cat license shall notify the City of the applicant's address changes within the corporate limits of the City within ten (10) days of any address change. H. Counterfeit Tags. No person shall counterfeit or attempt to counterfeit dog or cat license tags. I. Transfer of Tags. No person shall transfer a dog or cat tag from one dog or cat to another. J. Exceptions. The following dogs and cats are not required to be licensed: 1. Dogs and cats less than six (6) months of age. 2. Dogs and cats whose owners are temporary visitors within the City for thirty (30) days or less. 3. Dogs and cats which are brought into the City for appearance in an animal show. 4. Dogs being used by law enforcement officers Subd. 2 Wild Animal Licenses. A. General Prohibition. All wild animals except the following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills: 1. Wild animals brought into the City for entertainment, exhibition or show purposes by persons keeping wild animals for a public zoo. 2. Wild animals which are part of a permanent display sponsored by a bona fide research institution, a veterinary hospital, public zoo or other institution. 3. Nonpoisonous snakes, birds kept indoors, hamsters, mice, rabbits, gerbils, white rats, guinea pigs, chinchillas, or lizards and similar small animals capable of being kept in cages continuously. 4. Monkeys trained as personal helpers and kept by handicapped persons. 5. Raptors owned by licensed Falconers holding valid state and federal Falconry permits so long as the conditions of such permits are being satisfied. 6. Wild animals and birds that are part of the natural habitat and environment. B. License Application. Applications for a Wild Animal License shall be submitted on forms provided by the City along with a Certificate of Insurance which indicates that applicant has $200,000 of liability coverage on the Wild Animal and which includes an endorsement indicating that the liability coverage will not be cancelled without twenty (20) days written notice to the City of Arden Hills. C. Investigation. The Animal Control Officer shall review the application, conduct such investigation as the Animal Control Officer deems necessary, and shall prepare a written recommendation regarding the issuance of a Wild Animal License. The City Administrator shall within ten (10) days mail a notice to all property owners within 350 feet of the site on which the 225614v1 Wild Animal will be kept. The notice shall indicate that the City has received an application for a Wild Animal License and shall request comments from such property owners. D. Review. The City Council shall review the application, the Animal Control Officer's recommendations, and the comments from property owners. The City Council may issue a Wild Animal License if it determines that the application is in compliance with the City's regulations. The City Council may attach any reasonable conditions to the issuance of a license as it determines to be necessary in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arden Hills residents. E. Existing Wild Animals. Anyone keeping a Wild Animal in Arden Hills at the time of the adoption of this regulation shall have ninety (90) days in which to comply with the provisions of this regulation or otherwise remove the Wild Animal from the City. Extensions beyond ninety (90) days may be granted by the City Council for good cause but in no case shall such extension permanently exempt a person from the requirements of this regulation. F. Wild Animal Restrictions. 1. Confinement. No person owning or harboring or having the care or custody of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go unconfined on the premises of such person. A wild animal is "unconfined" as the term is used in this section if such animal is not securely confined indoors or confined in a secure enclosure suitably sized for the wild animal is confined therein. An "enclosure" is secure within the meaning of this section if it is constructed of heave gauge mesh steel, or other suitable material; consists of a top and sides, with the bottom of such sides fastened along their perimeter to a slab floor of concrete or other suitable material; where no slab floor is provided, the sides must be embedded into the ground no less than one foot; all access points of the enclosure must be locked when the animal is confined therein. The Animal control officer may seize a wild animal that has been declared dangerous that is unconfined. 2. Muzzling. No person owning or harboring, or having the care of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go beyond the premises of such person unless such animal is securely muzzled and restrained with a chain not exceeding three (3) feet in length, and having a tensile strength sufficient to restrain the animal. Wild animals which are actively participating in recognized local, regional or national trials, training or other such sponsored competition, need not to be muzzled while being transported to or from during such competitions. 3. Summary Destruction. Any person harboring or owning a wild animal that is found to be in violation of the City's Animal Control Regulations may be summarily destroyed. Subd. 3 Chickens/Ducks License. All chickens and ducks within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a chicken or a duck which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the chicken(s)/ducks shall make application for a chickens/ducks license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. If the Applicant is a renter, the Property Owner signature shall be required on the license application form. B. Neighbor Gensei#-Notification. The Applicant shall be responsible for providing written notification to the neighbors immediately adjacent to the property of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. As part of the application review, the prospective license holder shall certify that they have provided the required written notification of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. q'kis 225614v1 C. License Fee. The license fee for e >, eh ',v„ must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A two-year license shall be issued. E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form and receipt of the license fee, the City Administrator shall cause a chicken/duck license to be issued to the applicant subject to: (1) beg banding of all ehiekens is r-equir-ed. The ba-ads must idei4ify the owner- an the owner's address and telephone number-. (24 (1) No more than seven (7) hens shall be housed or kept on anone (1) residential lot with the issuance of a Citv license. (-3) Q Dead chickens and ducks must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of Animal Health rules which require chicken and duck carcasses to be disposed of as soon as possible after death, usually within forty-eight (48) to seventy-two (72) hours. Legal forms of chicken and duck carcass disposal include burial, off -site incineration or rendering, or composting. (4) (33) Prior to issuance of a license, the prospective annual license holder certifies as part of the application review that they have read "Keeping of Chickens/Ducks Informational Handout" "Reeam,,-,0.,.7ations for ra,,, ieipa' Regulations for U-ba.n Chicken F. The following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills for chickens and ducks: (1) Roosters, Drakes, and Call Ducks are prohibited. (2) No breeding of chickens or ducks is allowed. (3) Slaughtering of chickens or ducks on the property is prohibited. SECTION 3. Chapter 13 — Zoning Code, Section 1325 — General Regulations, Subsection 1325.07 Subd. 6.A — Performance Standards, is hereby amended by deleting st-Fi ,ethr-,,,,g language and adding the underlined language as follows: Subd.6 Animals. A. Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. Any building in which farm animals are kept shall be located a distance of two hundred (200) feet or more from any lot line. Any open structure in which farm animals are kept shall be a distance of four hundred (400) feet or more from any lot line, except for ehieken coops and bee hives in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 Districts provided the following requirements are met: Coops 225614v1 (21) A separ-ate-coop, separate from other structures, is required to house Ow -chickens/ ducks. Coops must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum requirements: a. A coop with a minimum of 4-2-20 square feet and no larger than 25 36 square feet is permitted as an accessory structure subject to Section 1325.01. Subd. 4 A. for Size. b. Exemption to Ordinance - A residential property with a detached garage and an accessory structure/shed will be allowed a third accessory structure for keeping chickens/ducks. The combined square footage of all three detached structures may not exceed 728 square feet. c. Located in the rear yard. Chicken Coop, pen, and optional exercise yard are not permitted in the front or side yard. d. Setbacks are subject to applicable accessory structure setbacks of the underlying zoning district. In no instance shall the coop be located in front of the rear building line of the principal structure. e. The outer limit of the coop including pen and exeFeise ,..,,-a shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line and may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. shall be leeated ^loser to the pr-ineipal dwelling upon the pr-epefof that is issued a lieefise than any other- r-esidefftia dwelling on an abutting property. f. Climate control — adequate ventilation and/or insulation and an operable lig tbulb shall be provided to maintain the coop temperature. be�ween45 85 degreesFalrei+heit. Prior to issuance of anew license, the prospective amivaklicense holder must provide a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature in the coop for safety of the fowl or poultry. The plan must address both extreme winter and summer temperature conditions. g. Rodent proof — coop construction, all grain and food, and materials must be adequate to prevent access by rodents. h. Coops shall be constructed and maintained in a workmanlike manner. i. Chickens and ducks shall not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage. (32) A pen is required. Pen must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum standard: a. The pen andexer-eiseyard ;s shall be located adjacent to the coop and shall be fenced with adequate coverage to keep hens in and predators out of a matefial that ean be easily raked of b. Minimum size per bird shall be 10 square feet of floor space c. An exercise yard is optional. This area must be located adjacent to coop and pen and chickens/ducks must be supervised by the licensee while in an exercise yard. 225614v1 iizxer-eise yard 174 s e feet (4) Sereening shall be installed around the Per-iffleteF of the area dedicated fOF the keeping of ehieken- ' - P that minifnizes view f�ofn adjaeent pafeels. A ser-eening plan shall be installation. Aeeeptable fofms of so, . — a si�E (6) foot tall solid fenee or vegetation th shall eansist of plantings whieh shall provide for- yeaF ratffid sereening and installed at ,f six (6) t e 4.,11 (63) The licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken/duck keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. All premises on _hieh hens are kept ^maintained shall suFFounding must be eleaned frequently e-natigh to eapArel odor. Manufe shall not be allowed to (7) All grain and food ster-ed for- the use of the hens with a ehieken heense shall be kept in a Fedent proof eentainer-. (84) Hens, coop, pen, and optional exercise yard shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. (15) Any violation of the above conditions, (i.e. roaming chickens/ducks outside of proper enclosure, uncontrolled odor), if not remedied within 10 days, may result in revocation of the homeowner's license. (106) If the license holder does not renew their chickens/ducks license, and the coop was licensed as an allowed third accessory structure for chickens/ducks, the coop/third structure cannot be repurposed for a storage structure and disctint es having ehie ^„�, the homeowner shall have 60 days to remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard associated with the keeping of chickens and/or ducks in its entirety. if the eeep was 1i^used as allowed third ^ . If the homeowner/license holder fails to perform either of the above, the City may enter upon the subject property, remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard from the homeowner's property, and charge the amount back to the homeowner as an assessment on the property tax roll. If the coop was licensed as an allowed second accessory structure, and the propertyplies with the accessory structure requirements, the structure mawpurposed for a storage structure. Bee Hives (1) The number of hives on residential lots is not to exceed: i. 1 acre or larger: 8 ii. 1 acre to 3/4 acre: 6 iii. 3/4 acre to 1/2 acre: 4 iv. 1/2 acre or less: 2 225614v1 (2) The bee hive(s) may not be located in the front yard or a side yard abutting a street. (3) Bee hive(s) may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. (4) The hives shall be located at least ten (10) feet from side and rear property lines. (5) Any property owner who keeps bees shall provide and maintain a nearby, designated water source. (6) Prior to installation of the bee hive(s), the property owner shall provide written notice to the neighbors immediately adjacent of their intent to keep bees. B. Number of Animals Allowed. Up to four (4) domestic animals, excluding birds and fish, are permitted in any dwelling unit, but without a residential dog kennel license not more than two (2) may be dogs. Up to three (3) dogs are allowed with a residential dog kennel license. Dog enclosures may be located only in a rear yard in all zoning districts. C. Animals for Research. Animals for research may be kept in appropriate places by conditional use permit. D. Wild Animals. Wild animals are not permitted in any district. Subd. 7 Site Grading. A. Erosion Prevention. Earth surfaces shall be planted or stabilized to prevent erosion. B. Drainage onto Neighboring Property. Finished slopes and grades shall not cause adverse drainage effects on adjoining properties. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. A Summary of this Ordinance will be published in accordance with state statute. PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2025, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk 225614v1 'It EN HILLS ORDINANCE NO.2025-003 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Attachment B AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4, ANIMALS AND PETS, SECTIONS 400 AND 410; AND CHAPTER 13, ZONING CODE, SECTION 1325 OF THE ARDEN HILLS CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 400 — General Provisions, Subsection 400.01, Definitions is hereby amended by deleting sail Tough language and adding the underlined language as follows: Section 400 — General Provisions 400.01 Definitions. The following definitions shall be used in the application and interpretation of the provisions of this chapter: Animal. Any non -human mammal, reptile, amphibian, or bird. Animal Control Officer. An individual or employee of a business retained by the City for purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Chapter; or a member of the City's law enforcement agency. • Animal, Domestic. Animals kept within the home as pets, such as fish, dogs, cats, household bird, and similar animals. • Animal, Non -Domestic. Animals which are kept outside the home for purposes of food or pleasure such as cattle, hogs, horses, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, ducks, birds, such as falcons and pigeons, and similar animals. • Animal, Wild. Any animal which is of a species not usually domesticated and of a species which, due to size, wild nature or other characteristics, is dangerous to humans and would ordinarily be confined in a zoo or found in the wild. The term includes but is not limited to: Animals and birds, the keeping of which is licensed by the state or federal government, such as wolves, raptors, and pheasants. • Eagles, ocelots, jaguars, cougars, weasels, wild ferrets, badgers, monkeys, chimpanzee, deer, and bison. Error! Unknown document property name. • Crossbreeds of wild animals and domesticated animals such as the cross between dogs and coyotes and dogs and wolves. • Any large cat of the family Felidae, such as lions, tigers, jaguars, leopards, cougars and ocelots, except commonly accepted domesticated house cats. • Any member of the family Canidae, such as wolves, coyotes, dingoes, and jackals, except domesticated dogs. Any poisonous snake such as a rattlesnake, coral snake, water moccasin, puff adder, or cobra. • Any snake or reptile which by its size, vicious nature or other characteristic is dangerous to human beings. • Any skunk, raccoon, or fox whether captured in the wild, domestically raised, descented or not descented, vaccinated against rabies or not vaccinated against rabies. Any bear, ape, gorilla, monkey, or badger. Any other animal or reptile which is commonly considered wild. At Large. An unattended animal on public property; or an unattended animal on private property without the consent of the property owner. Cat. Any domesticated feline animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Call Duck. A specific breed of duck known for being especially loud and chatty and used exclusively for either showing, ornamental, or pet purposes. • Coop. An accessory structure for the keeping or housing of chickens or ducks permitted by the ordinance. Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: Without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property; Killed a domestic animal without provocation; or A potentially dangerous dog which aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. Dog. Any canine animal, male or female, whole or neutered. Drake. A male duck. Enclosure. Any structure, except a dwelling, designed to securely enclose and prevent an animal from escaping therefrom. • Proper Enclosure. Proper Enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the animal. A Proper Enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage or other structure that would allow the animal to exit of its volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the dog from exiting. • Exercise yard. Is a larger fenced area adjacent to ehieken a coop and pen that provides space for exercise and foraging for the birds when supervised. Hen. Is -A female chicken or duck. Owner. Any person, firm, or corporation, organization or department possessing, harboring, keeping, having an interest in or having custody or control of an animal. 225614v1 • Pen. A fully enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens or ducks can roam unsupervised. Potentially Dangerous Dog. Any dog that has committed any of the acts set forth below: When unprovoked, bites a human or domestic animal; When unprovoked, chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks or any other public property in an apparent attitude of attack; or • Has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. • Restrained. On a leash of not more than six (6) feet in length or on a leash which can be retracted to a length of six (6) feet or less, and in the custody of a person of sufficient age to adequately control the animal; in a vehicle; or confined to the owner's property by enclosure or fencing. Rooster. Is a male chicken. Substantial Bodily Harm. Bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member. SECTION 2. Chapter 4 — Animals and Pets, Section 410 — Licenses, Subsection 410.01, Licenses Required, is hereby amended by deleting stril rough language and adding the underlined language as follows: 410.00 - Licenses 410.01 License Required. The following animal licenses shall be required within the City of Arden Hills. Subd. 1 Dog/Cat Licenses. All dogs and cats within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a dog or cat which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the dog or cat shall make application for a dog or cat license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. B. Vaccination. It shall be unlawful for any dog or cat owner to keep or maintain any dog or cat older than six (6) months of age unless it shall have been vaccinated with an anti -rabies vaccine certified to be effective by a licensed veterinarian. No license renewal shall be issued except upon compliance with this section. C. License Fee. The license fee for each dog or cat must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A license shall be issued for a period of time not to exceed the expiration date of the rabies vaccination. No dog or cat license shall be renewed without proof of vaccination. 225614v1 E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form, receipt of the license fee and receipt of the proof of vaccination, the City Administrator shall cause a dog or cat license to be issued to the applicant for a particular dog or cat. F. Receipt and Tags. The City of Arden Hills shall issue a license fee receipt to the applicant along with a metallic dog or cat license tag. The applicant shall permanently affix the tag by a metal fastening device to the collar of the licensed animal in a manner that allows the tag to be easily observed. If a tag is lost, a duplicate may be issued by the City of Arden Hills upon presentation of a receipt showing payment of the initial license fee and upon payment of an additional fee for each duplicate tag. G. Change of Address. An applicant who has obtained a dog or cat license shall notify the City of the applicant's address changes within the corporate limits of the City within ten (10) days of any address change. H. Counterfeit Tags. No person shall counterfeit or attempt to counterfeit dog or cat license tags. I. Transfer of Tags. No person shall transfer a dog or cat tag from one dog or cat to another. J. Exceptions. The following dogs and cats are not required to be licensed: 1. Dogs and cats less than six (6) months of age. 2. Dogs and cats whose owners are temporary visitors within the City for thirty (30) days or less. 3. Dogs and cats which are brought into the City for appearance in an animal show. 4. Dogs being used by law enforcement officers Subd. 2 Wild Animal Licenses. A. General Prohibition. All wild animals except the following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills: 1. Wild animals brought into the City for entertainment, exhibition or show purposes by persons keeping wild animals for a public zoo. 2. Wild animals which are part of a permanent display sponsored by a bona fide research institution, a veterinary hospital, public zoo or other institution. 3. Nonpoisonous snakes, birds kept indoors, hamsters, mice, rabbits, gerbils, white rats, guinea pigs, chinchillas, or lizards and similar small animals capable of being kept in cages continuously. 4. Monkeys trained as personal helpers and kept by handicapped persons. 5. Raptors owned by licensed Falconers holding valid state and federal Falconry permits so long as the conditions of such permits are being satisfied. 6. Wild animals and birds that are part of the natural habitat and environment. B. License Application. Applications for a Wild Animal License shall be submitted on forms provided by the City along with a Certificate of Insurance which indicates that applicant has $200,000 of liability coverage on the Wild Animal and which includes an endorsement indicating that the liability coverage will not be cancelled without twenty (20) days written notice to the City of Arden Hills. C. Investigation. The Animal Control Officer shall review the application, conduct such investigation as the Animal Control Officer deems necessary, and shall prepare a written recommendation regarding the issuance of a Wild Animal License. The City Administrator shall within ten (10) days mail a notice to all property owners within 350 feet of the site on which the 225614v1 Wild Animal will be kept. The notice shall indicate that the City has received an application for a Wild Animal License and shall request comments from such property owners. D. Review. The City Council shall review the application, the Animal Control Officer's recommendations, and the comments from property owners. The City Council may issue a Wild Animal License if it determines that the application is in compliance with the City's regulations. The City Council may attach any reasonable conditions to the issuance of a license as it determines to be necessary in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arden Hills residents. E. Existing Wild Animals. Anyone keeping a Wild Animal in Arden Hills at the time of the adoption of this regulation shall have ninety (90) days in which to comply with the provisions of this regulation or otherwise remove the Wild Animal from the City. Extensions beyond ninety (90) days may be granted by the City Council for good cause but in no case shall such extension permanently exempt a person from the requirements of this regulation. F. Wild Animal Restrictions. 1. Confinement. No person owning or harboring or having the care or custody of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go unconfined on the premises of such person. A wild animal is "unconfined" as the term is used in this section if such animal is not securely confined indoors or confined in a secure enclosure suitably sized for the wild animal is confined therein. An "enclosure" is secure within the meaning of this section if it is constructed of heave gauge mesh steel, or other suitable material; consists of a top and sides, with the bottom of such sides fastened along their perimeter to a slab floor of concrete or other suitable material; where no slab floor is provided, the sides must be embedded into the ground no less than one foot; all access points of the enclosure must be locked when the animal is confined therein. The Animal control officer may seize a wild animal that has been declared dangerous that is unconfined. 2. Muzzling. No person owning or harboring, or having the care of a wild animal shall suffer or permit such animal to go beyond the premises of such person unless such animal is securely muzzled and restrained with a chain not exceeding three (3) feet in length, and having a tensile strength sufficient to restrain the animal. Wild animals which are actively participating in recognized local, regional or national trials, training or other such sponsored competition, need not to be muzzled while being transported to or from during such competitions. 3. Summary Destruction. Any person harboring or owning a wild animal that is found to be in violation of the City's Animal Control Regulations may be summarily destroyed. Subd. 3 Chickens/Ducks License. All chickens and ducks within the City of Arden Hills, except as hereinafter provided, shall be licensed. A. Application. Within thirty (30) days after acquiring possession of a chicken or a duck which has not been licensed by the City of Arden Hills, the owner of the chicken(s)/ducks shall make application for a chickens/ducks license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City of Arden Hills. If the Applicant is a renter, the Property Owner signature shall be required on the license application form. B. Neighbor Ce�Notification. The Applicant shall be responsible for providing written notification to the neighbors immediately adjacent to the property of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. As part of the application review, the prospective license holder shall certify that they have provided the required written notification of their intent to keep chickens/ducks. This 225614v1 C. License Fee. The license fee rn eaeh eh ',o,, must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council Resolution. D. Duration of License. A two-year license shall be issued. E. Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form and receipt of the license fee, the City Administrator shall cause a chicken/duck license to be issued to the applicant subject to: (1) Leg banding of all ehiekens is required. The bands must identi6, the ownef an the owner-'s address and telephone number-. (2-) (1) No more than seven (7) hens shall be housed or kept on any one (1) residential lot with the issuance of a City license. (3) (2) Dead chickens and ducks must be disposed of according to the Minnesota Board of Animal Health rules which require chicken and duck carcasses to be disposed of as soon as possible after death, usually within forty-eight (48) to seventy-two (72) hours. Legal forms of chicken and duck carcass disposal include burial, off -site incineration or rendering, or composting. (4) (3) Prior to issuance of a license, the prospective annual license holder certifies as part of the application review that they have read "Keeping of Chickens/Ducks Informational Handout„ "Reeemmendat ons for- Nl rieip l Regulations for- Urban. Chiekens F. The following are prohibited within the City of Arden Hills for chickens and ducks: (1) Roosters, Drakes, and Call Ducks are prohibited. (2) No breeding of chickens or ducks is allowed. (3) Slaughtering of chickens or ducks on the property is prohibited. SECTION 3. Chapter 13 — Zoning Code, Section 1325 — General Regulations, Subsection 1325.07 Subd. 6.A — Performance Standards, is hereby amended by deleting sal r-Ough language and adding the underlined language as follows: Subd.6 Animals. A. Location for Buildings Housing Farm Animals. Any building in which farm animals are kept shall be located a distance of two hundred (200) feet or more from any lot line. Any open structure in which farm animals are kept shall be a distance of four hundred (400) feet or more from any lot line, except for ehiekei3 coops and bee hives in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 Districts provided the following requirements are met: Coops 225614v1 (21) A separate coop, separate from other structures, is required to house the -chickens/ ducks. Coops must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum requirements. a. A coop with a minimum of 4-2-20 square feet and no larger than 25 36 square feet is permitted as an accessory structure subject to Section 1325.01. Subd. 4 A. for Size. b. Exemption to Ordinance - A residential property with a detached garage and an accessory structure/shed will be allowed a third accessory structure for keeping chickens/ducks. The combined square footage of all three detached structures may not exceed 728 square feet. c. Located in the rear yard. ChiekenrCoop, pen, and optional exercise yard are not permitted in the front or side yard. d. Setbacks are subject to applicable accessory structure setbacks of the underlying zoning district. In no instance shall the coop be located in front of the rear building line of the principal structure. e. The outer limit of the coop including pen and exec-e se yard shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line and may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or anypublictrail or walkwa. shall be leeatea e'eser to the pr-ineipal dwelling upon the property that is issued a lieense than any other- residential dwelling on an abutting p pefty f. Climate control — adequate ventilation and/or insulation and an opo,-able'ighthulb shall be provided to maintain the coop temperature. between 45 85 degreesFalifenneit. Prior to issuance of anew license, the prospective annual license holder must provide a plan for maintaining an adequate temperature in the coop for safety of the fowl or poultry. The plan must address both extreme winter and summer temperature conditions. g. Rodent proof — coop construction, all grain and food, and materials must be adequate to prevent access by rodents. h. Coops shall be constructed and maintained in a workmanlike manner. i. Chickens and ducks shall not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage. (2) A pen and o xr 0 0 yard is required. Pen and o 0 0 yard must be constructed and maintained to meet the following minimum standard: a. The pen and exec-e se yard is shall be located adjacent to the coop and shall be fenced with adequate coverage to keep hens in and predators out of a material that ear be easily raked Ew regularly r-eplaeed to r-eduee eder- and flies. b. Minimum size per bird shall be 10 square feet of floor space c. An exercise yard is optional. This area must be located adjacent to coop and pen and chickens/ducks must be supervised by the licensee while in an exercise yard. 2256141 ii. Exereisyard 4 square fee (4) Ser-eening shall be installed around the perimeter- of the area dedieated for- the keeping of ehiekens in a manner- that minimizesview from adjaeent par -eels. A ser-eening plan shall b installation. Aeeeptable fafms of s . - a six (6) feet tall solid fenee or -vegetation th shall eensist of plantings w-hieh shall pr-evide for- year- round ser-eening and installed at mininium ,f six (6) foot al (5) Chiekens ffmst not be housed in a residential house or an attaehed or detaehed gar -age. (63) The licensee shall be responsible for cleaning up the chicken/duck keeping areas and disposing of waste in a sanitary manner. All premises on w-hieh hens e keptor- „tamed shag be kept elean from filth, garbage, and any substanees w-hieh attr-aet r-odents. The eeep and its suffounding must be eleaned frequently enough to eentfol odon Manufe shall not be allowed to property. Failufe to eemply with these eenditions may result in the offieer- r-emoving ehiekens (7) All grain and food ster-ed for- the use of the hens with a ehieken lieense shall be kept in a r-odent proof eentainen (84) Hens, coop, pen, and optional exercise yard shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. (15) Any violation of the above conditions, (i.e. roaming chickens/ducks outside of proper enclosure, uncontrolled odor), if not remedied within 10 days, may result in revocation of the homeowner's license. (106) If the license holder does not renew their chickens/ducks license, and the coop was licensed as an allowed third accessory structure for chickens/ducks, the coop/third structure cannot be repurposed for a storage structure and this,,„* „es having ,.>,;,.hor�, the homeowner shall have 60 days to remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard associated with the keeping of chickens and/or ducks in its entirety. if the eeep was lieensoa as an allowed third stfuefffe for- ehiekens, the eeep4hir-d struetwe must be removed and eannot be rep storage st-fl-jetffe. If the homeowner/license holder fails to perform either of the above, the City may enter upon the subject property, remove the coop, pen, and exercise yard from the homeowner's property, and charge the amount back to the homeowner as an assessment on the property tax roll. If the coop was licensed as an allowed second accessory structure, and the property complies with the accessory structure requirements, the structure may be repurposed for a storage structure. Bee Hives (1) The number of hives on residential lots is not to exceed: i. 1 acre or larger: 8 ii. 1 acre to 3/4 acre: 6 iii. 3/4 acre to 1/2 acre: 4 iv. 1/2 acre or less: 2 225614vl (2) The bee hive(s) may not be located in the front yard or a side yard abutting a street. (3) Bee hive(s) may be no closer than twenty-five (25) feet to an occupied building on another lot and/or any public trail or walkway. (4) The hives shall be located at least ten (10) feet from side and rear property lines. (5) Any property owner who keeps bees shall provide and maintain a nearby, designated water source. (6) Prior to installation of the bee hive(s), the property owner shall provide written notice to the neighbors immediately adjacent of their intent to keep bees. B. Number of Animals Allowed. Up to four (4) domestic animals, excluding birds and fish, are permitted in any dwelling unit, but without a residential dog kennel license not more than two (2) may be dogs. Up to three (3) dogs are allowed with a residential dog kennel license. Dog enclosures may be located only in a rear yard in all zoning districts. C. Animals for Research. Animals for research may be kept in appropriate places by conditional use permit. D. Wild Animals. Wild animals are not permitted in any district. Subd. 7 Site Grading. A. Erosion Prevention. Earth surfaces shall be planted or stabilized to prevent erosion. B. Drainage onto Neighboring Property. Finished slopes and grades shall not cause adverse drainage effects on adjoining properties. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. A Summary of this Ordinance will be published in accordance with state statute. PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2025, by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS David Grant, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Hanson, City Clerk 2256141 V) O txo Q O n Ln V O (U V bn Z3 bA > .0 0 O V c6 N a) ca 4A =; E Ln i .- i Q Q CrV E w a� Q GCQV O O 1 Ln N ca U Cu0 ca 0 M O O Ln N O N U ca O 0 •O Q O Q • 1 O U U a--+ (1) C: -0 ca C: N o- c: E c6 ca • U a) U 0 O v O 4-' U � O � E U Q co �-0 E C6 c6 a) +-+ U O .N U _0 � ro tU0 •- O O N (6 N ro O � - 0- O O Q bn • O >, Q O c6 O •O , O +� N 0 .� C: r-I O O � s .— Z3 .O ro U -0 0 ca ��-+ c6 V) Z3 U U •- � N O U O � =3 �-0 o U (1) U U qt U U M O O N O N 0 a) I buo bn O bn Q cn buo W �-' Q �O 0 cn O •U J v • — Q c� ,� O _ U '— V O J i cn cn � Q � •V s U 0 � c6 c6 `. L7 cn � U O O O O O m N O O L- Q4- Q N •O E_ •aO •O c6 a� c +-j -i +� 0 +, Ln Q cry c.n un un Q C6 - = U c- b-0 = O c6 W c6 — Z3 C— U 4-J C6 C6 c '� U O (U _0 E m E U m O m 4 U — . N a--j U Q •� C— � U N U _ � ca W � 4-j • a--� U E y� aJ O O O O N O Ln�U 4-j to O rn � O O Q rl E 0 w - 0 ,0 u E M U Q +- N M � Lri N O N O too O 0 v i � � � .� `� U � c6 N � � O v +� OQ� >� �0 0, � O w E p0 p c6 � M cn U E cn O � Qj = 0j Ln � M -0 � =(31 o M N �O .� O N 00 N I\ i •+'' v U QL NLn Qj•— Ln = O O Q N Z N U Ln vn +� Q Ln O ttiOM a +O Q_0 O GJ a p O OC: v p -0 QJ �i aJ r O ,r, p U � GJ E (� c6 a--' � c6 O •O c6 +-Q. J J , � � O � 4� O " 0 a) U U .. � ca - a -I� � U 0 � 0 ca Q ru� � •- 0�.� ca caO-0� O Q� M� ca U 0 .QJ cry c,n° Q � ro0 ,ca L NO E O E N OUco Ln O �� p �U cru � cljv 0 V) C: 0 ro O �' a O � O O Q Q-QU� QO 0cri� OU a N tao -0 U ca 0 0-0 O � V) m O 4j O -0 C 4� O v O Ln V) � I N C: QJ N O O 4. can O Qj m O U U Q) U U V ca O (/� 4j v Qj O N p a +, O O v �, Qj �' • — 4j ' F Ln �' U O O � - � O E U O •�'' _0 Ln 0 Q U � a 0 _0 � a (1)rtio o ca 0 � ar-., O Z3 O O Lri V) O M Ln .v v � � Qj O c�i� O 0.. c6 � cnE U u a a b.0 p • • -Z U U C: c6 • ca v a p O N p O 0 o p U p � U O O c E UQj cn Qj 'Q E O �QU� 0 on _0 Ln Z. Lr) (V 0 M _0 � ca O U (/) U M U O O 4-J t�0 ca U O Q) I � O 0 ::1- E ca Q O CL) O o O cn U O •� V Q) N Ln I � O O Ln � fV U N ul +-+ ca � U a) aA E � O ca E Q