HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 03-26-2001
.,'
:,'
. .:
.
.
..
-
~
~~HILLS
FILE
7:30 P.M.
7:30 P.M.
7:30 P.M.
7:35 P.M.
7:40 P.M.
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL
MONDAY, MARCH 26, 2001, 6:30 P.M.
City Philosophv
To provide a basic and necessary scope of quality services
through the innovative and purposeful use ofresources.
1.
Call to Order
2.
Approval of Meeting Agenda
3.
Approval of Minutes
a. March 12, 2001Regular Council Meeting, TCAAP Discussion
b. March 12, 2001 Regular Council Meeting
c. March 19, 2001Council Worksession
4.
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 fonnat. There will be no separate
discussion of these items, unless a Council member so requests, in which event, the item will be
removed from the general order of business and considered separately in its nonnal sequence
on the agenda
a. Claims and Payroll
b. Receive 2000 Treasurer's Report
c. City Hall Construction
1. Pay Application #6 through February 28, 2001, Rochon
Corporation
2. Pay Request Invoice #0000015 through January 26, 2001,
Architectural Alliance, Professional Services
5.
Public Comments
This is an opportunity or citizens to bring to the Council s attention any items not currently on
the agenda. In addressing the Council, please state your name and address for the record, and
a brief summary of the specific item being addressed to the Council. To allow adequate time
for each person wishing to address the Council, we ask that individuals limit their comments to
three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior to the meeting,
or as bench copies, to allow a more timely presentation.
City of Arden Hills . 4364 West Round Lake Road Arden Hills, MN . 55112-5794
Phone (651) 633-5676 . Fax: (65t) 633-7839 www.ci.arden.hills.mn.us
-.. ~ '-"
-- Y t',
-l ~.. -'j
...."!'~ _.to 1 ~.
AGENDA - PAGE TWO
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL
MONDAY, MARCH 26, 2001, 6:30 P.M.
.
7:45 P.M. 6. Unfinished and New Business
a. Plannin!! Cases
I. Case #00-45, Semper Development, County Road E &
Lexington Avenue N., Site Plan, Special Use Permit
(SUP), Variance, Lot Split
2. Case #01-05, Chesapeake Companies, I-35W and 1-
694, Master PUD
3. Case #01-06, Compo Plan Amendment, City of Arden
Hills
b. City Hall Construction
I. Costs
2. Technology, Security and Maintenance, and
Furnishing Options and Recommendations
7:50 P.M. 7. Administrator Comments
7:55 P.M. 8. Council Comments
8:00 P.M. 9. Adjourn ..
The above times may vary depending upon length of issue discussion.
"What good, for which people, at what eost1"
Tentative ADril Meetiol! Schedule
Meeting dates, times and locations are subject to change.
Please contact City Hall for the most current schedule
Tentative Mav Meetiul! Schedule
Meeting dates, times and locations are subject to change.
Please contact City Hall for the most current schedule
April 4 Planning Commission 7:30 P.M.
April 9 Council Meeting 7:30 P.M.
Aprill9 Operations & Finance 7:00 P.M.
Committee
April ]6 Council Worksession 4:45 P.M.
April 24 Parks & Recreation 7:00 P.M.
Committee
April 25 Communications 7:00 A.M.
Committee
April 30 Council Meeting 7:30 P.M.
May 2 Planning Commission
May 14 Couucil Meeting
May 17 Operations & Finance
Committee
May 21 Council W orksession
May 22 Parks & Recreation
Committee
May 28 Holiday
May 29 Council Meeting
May 30 Communications
Committee
7:30 P.M.
7:30 P.M.
7:00 P.M.
4:45 P.M.
7:00 P.M.
7:30 P.M.
-'
7:00 A.M.
03/23/01 FRI 13:52 FAX 6516345137
CIty of Arden Hills
I4i 001
.
***************************
..* ERROR TX REPORT ...
***************************
TX FUNCTION WAS NOT COMPLETED
0108
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESULT
7634219511
03/23 13:52
00'00
o
NG #018
.
.
03/23/01 FRI 13:45 FAX 6516345137
CIty of Arden Hills
141 001
*********************
***
TX REPORT
***
*********************
.
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST, TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESULT
0109
96516286833
03/23 13:44
00'50
2
OK
.
.
03/23/01 FRI 13:47 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS, SENT
RESITLT
.
.
City of Arden Hills
~001
*********************
*** TX REPORT ...
*********************
0110
97637060891
03/23 13:45
01' ] 1
2
OK
03/23/01 FRI 13:49 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST, TIME
llSAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESllLT
.
.
CIty of Arden Hills
I4i 001
*********************
*** TX REPORT ***
*********************
0111
96516333846
03/23 13:48
01'23
2
OK
03/23/01 FRI 14:01 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TXlRX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST, TIME
VSAGE T
PGS, SENT
RESULT
.
.
CIty of Arden Hills
~001
*********************
***
TX REPORT
***
*********************
0117
96512282191
03/23 14:01
00'47
2
OK
03/23/01 FRI 14:04 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST, TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESULT
.
.
City of Arden Hills
~001
*********************
*** TX REPORT ***
*********************
0118
96512279371
03/23 14: 03
00'48
2
OK
03/23/01 FRI 13:51 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMI SSION OK
TXlRX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESlILT
.
.
City of Arden Hills
!gj 001
*********************
*** TX REPORT ***
*********************
0113
96514821262
03/23 13:50
00'48
2
OK
03/23/01 FRI 13: 52 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS, SENT
RESULT
.
.
City of Arden Hill s
I4i 001
*********************
*** TX REPORT ***
*********************
0114
96512669301
03/23 13:51
00'47
2
OK
.
.
.
facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
----
to: Greg Brown
fax#: 612-370-1378
reo Council Meeting Agenda
date: -3 -eJ3 -6/
pages: l, including this cover sheet.
Attached is the City's upcoming meeting agenda for your information. A hard copy has been
mailed.
Call me if you have any questions or need additional information. Thanks!
From the desk of...
Sheila Stowell
Administrative Secretary
City of Arden Hills
4364 West Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
651-633-5676
Fax: 651-633-7839
03/23/01 FRI 13:54 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESULT
.
.
City of Arden Hills
141001
*********************
.**
TX REPORT
***
*********************
0115
96123701378
BRW, INC.
03/23 13:53
00'57
3
OK
.
.
.
facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
----
to: Siobhan Parnicky
fax #: 646-1220
re: Council Meeting Agenda
date: .3 -;;..,3 - oj
pages: :3 , including this cover sheet.
Attached is the City's upcoming meeting agenda for your information.
Call me if you have any questions or need additional information. Thanks!
From the desk of...
Sheila Stowell
Administrative Secretary
City of Arden Hills
4364 West Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
612-633-5676
Fax: 612-633-7839
03/23/01 FRI 14:03 FAX 6516345137
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESULT
.
.
City of Arden Hills
141 001
*********************
*** TX REPORT ***
*********************
0116
96516461220
KMWB WB23 MPLS M
03/23 14:02
00'57
3
OK
.
.
.
D,,- ~',ii p.,-, t' T
+.- JJ\1
~ '", 04l.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 12, 2001
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
CALL TO ORDERlROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Dennis Probst called to order the regular
City Council meeting at 6:42 p,m,
Present:
Mayor Dennis Probst, Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, Gregg
Larson, and Lois Rem.
Absent:
Councilmember David Grant with prior notice.
Also present were City Administrator, Joe Lynch; Public Works Director, Dwayne
Stafford; and City Planner, Jennifer Chaput.
TWIN CITIES ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT (TCAAP) DISCUSSION
RECESS
Councilmember Larson brought forward a list of ten (10) proposed TCAAP development
outcomes, which the City Council discussed and reviewed,
Mayor Probst then reviewed his logic and assumptions in going forward for the
acquisition of TCAAP property for the City,
It was discussed once again that the basic premise for the development of TCAAP was to
ensure that the cost for infrastructure development were offset so there was no fiscal
drain on the remainder of the City, Mayor Probst proposed that the City proceed with
their focus on obtaining special legislation for acquisition of excess property,
RECESS
At 7:28 p.m., Mayor Probst recessed the meeting and reconvened the regular meeting in
the City Hall Council Chambers.
Dennis Probst
Mayor
Joe Lynch
City Administrator
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 12, 2001
7:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
RECONVENE/CALL TO ORDERlROLL CALL
Pursuant to due can and notice thereof, Mayor Dennis Probst reconvened the regular City
Council meeting at 7:30 p,m,
Present:
Mayor Dennis Probst, Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, David Grant,
Gregg Larson, and Lois Rem,
Absent:
Council member David Grant.
Also present were City Administrator, Joe Lynch; Public Works Director, Dwayne
Stafford; City Planner, Jennifer Chaput; and Recording Secretary, Nancy Czajkowski.
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
MOTION:
Councilmember Rem moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion
to adopt the agenda for the March 12,2001, regular City Council meeting, The
motion carried unanimously (4-0).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. February 26, 2001 Regular Council Meeting
Mayor Probst requested the following changes: on pages 12 and 13, there are a couple of blanks
and spelling errors. In the second to the last paragraph on Page 12, "Chatham" is not spelled that
way, At the top of page 13, the missing last name should be "Ostby", On page 13, in the third
paragraph down, he questioned whether there is a "Carver Circle", At the bottom of page 16
and 17, some ofthe discussion does not help with the understanding of the meeting, He noted
less might be better than more, when it comes to Minutes,
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a
motion to approve the February 26, 2001 Regular Council Meeting minutes as
corrected above. The motion carried unanimously (4-0),
CONSENT CALENDAR
A.
B.
Claims and Payroll
Citv Hall
1. Architectural Alliance, Reimbursables Payment, $12,408,03
2, Rochon Corporation, Payment #5, $266,008,91
200 I Approved Capital Improvement Expenditure, Playground Structures, Sampson Park
2001 Approved Capital Improvement Expenditure, Toro Groundsmaster
C,
D.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12, 2001
1>-'"
I
!,',;,;;,'
(:~'~ r~T.
-'";':' ~
2
'\'~, /.:
E.
F,
2001 Approved Capital Improvement Expenditure, Toro Groomer
Pay Request #2, Gridor Construction, Inc., 200 I Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project,
$40,231,50
MOTION:
Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a
motion to approve the Consent Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary
documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (4-0),
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Probst invited those present to come forward and address the Council on any items not
already on the agenda,
No public comments were made.
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
A. Storm Water Management Plan, Receipt of Requests for Proposal (RFP), Award of
Contract
Mr. Lynch explained the council should have the memorandum from the City Planner and Public
Works Director. He noted staff is recommending the council award the contract to SEH, Inc, at
$24, 941, He added that after review this is the response that is most appropriate to the proposal
list. He stated they have the list of items necessary and required by law, He noted staff believes
SEH, lnc, has the staff and ability to perform on time and as requested,
Councilmember Larson stated in the SEI-l, Inc, proposal on page 14 there was a detailed cost
estimate, He noted with the two items listed there is one price $10,000 less than the other. He
added two of items did not have dollar items associated with them, He asked if this was because
there were no charges. He stated he wanted to make sure it was not an oversight. Mr. Lynch
responded on page 15 there is list of tasks, which has the amount of hours and some of the
associated costs,
Councilmember Larson asked if it is wrapped up in public education. Mr, Lynch responded the
total hours column was not calculated correctly,
Mayor Probst asked if they are standing by their price, Mr. Lynch responded in the affirmative,
Councilmember Larson stated the two proposals are very different in the deliverables, He noted
one has 60% in modeling work, He stated the fact that they are so diflerent has him wondering
if they are going to get what is needed since so much is tied up in the modeling. He noted he did
not know what role modeling plays in the stormwater plan,
Council member Rem stated she found it difficult to compare details for the tviO. She noted it is
difficult to know what could be compared between the proposals. She added she hoped staff
would have figured that out for them,
.
.
.
\'''--'
~j,
V)I'!!:\:crFJ
~"_. ~
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12, 200 I
3
Ms. Chaput stated the City Engineer drafted what brought in these proposals. She noted she
knows this is a required document for the Comprehensive Plan. She added they all sat down and
looked at the proposals together. She stated it was forwarded to Greg Brown and she asked him
to contact her ifhe had a problem with staffs proposal. She noted Mr. Brown had indicated the
SEH, Inc. proposal is sufficient to meet the requirements, She added she does not know if they
need the extras,
Mayor Probst stated at the end ofthis project they are looking for documentation that will satisfy
the Comprehensive Plan review by the Metropolitan Council. He noted both firms have done
that work and hopefully understand what is needed. He added SEH, Inc, has appeared to work
with more cities in this area. He stated he is comfortable with staffs recommendation. He noted
it is one third less.
Councilmember Rem stated she realizes they are doing it to meet the Metropolitan Council
requirement. She noted she hopes to get some information for the Water Quality Task Force,
She added it looks like they are going to get some information for that purpose,
Councilmember Larson stated she agrees they would certainly have what is needed to meet the
requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. She noted it is still not clear if they will get what they
need, She added they both do this type of work and have done a lot of this type of work, She
stated the plans just seem so totally different from one another. She noted the input is so totally
different for the same outcome. She added one is so based on modeling and the other is not.
Councilmember Aplikowski asked what would be the compliment for the modeling in the other
plan, She stated they are basically the same price, but one has a few more hours, She questioned
whether they would get modeling.
Councilmember Larson stated there is limited hydrologic work. He noted it might be worth
another $12,000 to have more modeling or maybe the little bit there is enough, He asked if the
city engineer showed anyone at BRW these proposals, Ms. Chaput responded she did not
know.
Councilmember Rem stated she did not know enough about it to know what is appropriate,
Ms, Chaput stated they did have a representative from Boonestroo,
Mayor Probst stated it might be a function of how the two firms chose to distribute their hours.
He noted they use almost the idcnticallanguage to describe the model.
Councilmember Larson stated the language might have come out ofthe city's proposal.
Mayor Probst stated he is hesitant to allow one party to speak since both parties are not
represented,
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12,2001
f
4
"',,).,' '"
.
Councilmember Larson stated they were both aware the matter would come before the council
tonight, He noted as long as someone is here they should hear him, He added they both had the
opportunity to come.
Mr. Drew Budalis stated he would make himself available for questions, He noted the modeling
may differ. He added they propose to model as needed. He added they were not sure what
amount would be needed. He stated they estimated 20% to 40%. He noted if after speaking
with staff the amount needed is less it would not be included in the final price, He added they
weighted the proposal more heavily on implementation, He stated they wanted to make it is a
plan that could be used by staff to implement. He noted he is not sure who would be
implementing it the staff or the city engineer. He added they included a fair amount of time
working with the various agencies to get approval.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated the initial kick off meeting has the only time listed, She
noted she is not sure the prices are off since the hours differ. She added this is not her area of
expertise, She stated one would want to go with staff if they are more comfortable with the
subject matter. She noted she liked the other package and its picture. She added she would have
to go with staffs recommendation because she does not know any differently,
Councilmember Larson stated he is comfortable going with the staffs recommendation because
he does not have expertise, He noted the city engineer has reviewed the recommendation so he
feels comfortable,
. Councilmember Aplikowski questioned Mr. Stafford about switching his opinion.
Mr. Stafford stated all three of them reviewed the proposals independently, He noted they did
not hash it out until they made conclusions, He added he had felt that Bonestroo, Rosene,
Anderlik, & Associates had too many options with unknown figures. He stated SEH, Inc. had
only two, He noted he felt both would meet the requirements. He added he is not an expert. He
stated he gave his comments to Ms. Chaput and she had come to the same conclusion. He noted
the City Engineer left message a that SEH, Inc. was his choice also. He added they had all come
to the same conclusion independently,
Councilmember Rem stated she had hoped that somehow this document would give them more
as a finished project, She noted on the other hand if SEH, Inc, gives them what they need they
should not pay for more than they need, She added if one goes turther that is great, but it might
not be what is needed,
Mayor Probst stated that there are two firms qualified to do work, I-Ie noted not having
participated as fully as staff, he is comfortable they have two qualitied parties, He added staff
feels they can do the job and if they save the city some money great,
.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated she does feel it is saving money. She noted she thinks the
scope is different and that is why the price is different.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12,2001
5
MOTION:
Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to
receive the Requests for Proposals for the Storm Water Management Plan and
award the contract to SEH, Inc, for $24,941 as recommended by Staff. The
motion carried unanimously (3-1 Aplikowski opposed),
.
B. Labor Relations Associates (LRA)/Metropolitan Area Management Association
(M.A.M.A.), Proposal to Pay Flat Fee for LRA Services as Part of a Larger
Organization
Mr. Lynch explained the city currently uses this firm on an hourly basis for contract negotiations
and labor issues. He stated this proposal is to change the relationship to make it a flat fee
relationship, He added that at this point the city is not contractually required to use this firm, He
stated they have because of the history, He noted he has outlined the benefits and four options.
He added staff recommends waiting until 2002 and budgeting these amounts in that budget. He
stated they could take advantage of these services at that time.
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a
motion to approve staff's recommendation to wait until the 2002 budget to enter
into this agreement to pay a flat fee for Labor Relations Associates services as
part ofa larger organization. The motion carried unanimously (4-0).
.
Councilmember Larson asked ifthey would get an unlimited number of hours or if there is some
upper limit. Mr. Lynch responded Arbitration and Mediations would not be covered under the
flat fee agreement.
ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS
Mr. Lynch stated he has heard back from all the Councilmembers on the organizational structure,
He noted they needed to set a work session or special meeting to discuss it further.
Mr. Lynch noted they have received information from Ramsey County called "Community
Watch", He stated it is not a technical report, but identifies suspects and victims, He added he is
not thrilled to present it in a public fashion, He stated it does give the council a sense of
repeating patterns and areas being watched by Ramsey County. He noted if the council would
like it, staff can make it available. He added they get information on other communities, He
stated it does not report in a statistical way,
Mr. Lynch added a representative from the National Guard would like to meet with the Mayor
and him, He stated they have been lobbied extensively by other groups to use the property, He
noted the council might like to see the National Guard comply more with the revitalization plan,
Councilmember Aplikowski stated the sooner the better. She noted they are fighting the fact
that the National Guard does control it.
.
Mayor Probst stated Mr. Lynch needs to work to schedule a discussion of the organizational
structure, He noted he liked the look ahead that Mr. Lynch had presented, He added the work
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12,2001
6
.
session is very full. He asked Mr. Lynch about the timing for moving forward on this, Mr,
Lynch responded they have advertised the support staff position, He stated it would be nice to
know if they have discretion to hire one or two support staff persons, He noted one position is to
replace the position held by Ms, Susan Holmes, He added they also have to advertise another
position for a part-time billing clerk, He stated the structure has some impact on whom they hire
and how much they could work,
Mayor Probst stated the work scssion agenda is robust and he suggests that some items could
come off. He noted the Right of Way and website issues would have to be pulled off to have
this discussion,
Mr. Lynch stated MnDot has been invited to talk about the traffic study on the various points,
Mr. Stafford stated Highway 96 seems to be holding up this project. He noted he had asked
MnDot to get the city's input and thoughts, He added Mr. Robinson would be at a point now to
talk to the city, He stated he was hoping to get Mr. Robinson on the agenda this month.
Councilmember Rem stated she did not know how extensive they needed to discuss this structure
to hire a departmental secretary. She noted that even under reorganization they need a couple of
support staff.
.
Ms, Chaput stated all of the Planning Commission items would also be going to that regular
meeting.
Mayor Probst stated he would offer the first Monday in April and noted they could start early on
March 26,2001.
Councilmember Larson stated here are five Mondays in April, so there is still one free Monday,
Mayor Probst asked if the April 2 meeting would be all right for the organizational discussion,
Mr. Lynch responded that would be fine.
Mayor Probst stated there would be a 5:00 p.m. meeting on April 2, 2001. He noted it would be
a single-issue discussion. He added if after the next two meetings they need to add to the agenda,
they could certainly do that. He stated everyone seems to be agreeable to that.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Larson stated there was a Parks, Trails and Recreation meeting scheduled for
March 27, He noted in attending the committee meeting he noted there are no women on that
committee. He added this is important particularly when they are developing park plans for the
entire city. He stated he suggests staff and the City Council look at the possibility of expanding
the committee to have women participate again.
. Mayor Probst stated he concurred, He noted that not long ago the committee had five women
and two men,
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 12,2001
"~:r'
~
7
Council member Larson stated sometimes different perspectives are brought to table and without
women on the committee some perspectives might be left out.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated there is a City Events Task Force meeting on Wednesday,
She noted it is the time for things to really pop and go crazy, She added she thinks it is going
quite well. She stated she likes the commentary at the end of the minutes, She noted she thinks
it is important and a good comment on where people are coming from, which is worthwhile,
She added somewhere in the future they should take a look at armcxation of an area that is now
part of Roseville, She stated they are going to look at repairing the roads, She noted it would be
good public policy to make it a city project.
Councilmember Rem stated on Wednesday there is a Website Task Force meeting. She noted
they are at the end ofthe review, She added there is still time to add a short note to the
newsletter, She stated the Communications Committee does not meet until the end of the month,
yet the deadline is Friday of this week,
Mayor Probst stated there is a Grand opening for the Children Safety Center on March 21, He
noted he would not be able to attend if anyone is interested, He added the I-35W Corridor
Coalition has invited them to participate on the Northeast Diagonal Corridor Study, He stated he
is anticipating someone from that coalition will be involved in appointing someone here, He
noted they did mect last Wednesday night to look at legislative issues. He added the Executive
Director and staff are working on making contacts, He stated Mayors and administrators are
invited to speak. He noted they are pursuing operating dollars for organization and project
moneys for two projects identificd in the Coalition. He added they are trying to convince the
legislature to approve a funding source out of the box, I-Ie stated that right now the fastest one
could get project started is five years, He noted the average time eight to ten years. He added
hopefully if they work as a coalition they could work more quickly, He stated that although
Arden Hills does not have a project now clearly with the arsenal property there time is going to
come. He noted it would be critical to have that support,
Mayor Probst explained his opposition to have the County using cold in place instead of
recycling, He gave an example of where it was done and noted the road is in as bad of shape as
before the work was done, He stated he would like a more aggressive approach to
reconstruction, He noted he thinks the council has to come to a decision on where they want to
proceed,
Mayor Probst noted he met with Mr. Fred McCoy, President of CPI Guidant, on Friday, He
added he got a tour of the facility and was questioned about the city's view of business' role in
the city. He stated he suggested one thing most valuable to the city is for people like himself
involved in committees and commissions, He noted this would in a positive way take advantage
of their integrity and ideas, I-Ie added it seems that Guidant as a company seems to want to be
come part of the community, He stated it had occurred to him while he was there that they could
be doing more with the business community. He noted while it is not physically possible to
meet everyone, it is a good idea to go to the major employers to talk and to invite them into the
process,
[, ,
, jL\.
"*,e.",,
~'~ y
.
MEETING MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION
MONDAY, MARCH 19,2001
4:45 P.M. - CITY HALL, 4364 WEST ROUND LAKE ROAD
CALL TO ORDER
Acting Mayor David Grant called the meeting to order at 4:49 p.m, Those present
included Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, David Grant, Gregg Larson and
Lois Rem,
Staff present included City Administrator, Joe Lynch; City Accountant, Terry
Post; Public Works Director, Dwayne Stafford; Planner, Jennifer Chaput; City
Engineer, Greg Brown; Recreation Supervisor, Michelle Olson; Parks and
Recreation Director, Tom Moore.
Ferrol Robinson, SRF Consulting,
Mayor Dennis Probst was absent from the meeting with prior notice.
ST AFF DISCUSSION ITEMS
.
HIGHWAYS 10/96 AND 1-694 TRAFFIC STUDY
Mr. Robinson gave a report on what has been discussed with Ramsey County and
MNDOT. SRF Consulting is asking for suggestions and ideas regarding Hwy,
10/96 and 1-694 and potential ways that traffic would flow and be directed
comparative to how heavy the traffic flow is for this area, SRF Consulting is
hoping to give MNDOT enough information regarding this area for MNDOT to
start making decisions as to future plans for I 35W, Highway 10/96, and 1-694,
CASE #00-45. SEMPER (W ALGREENS). COUNTY ROAD E &
LEXINGTON AVENUE NORTH. SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUP)/SITE
PLAN/V ARIANCE/LOTSPLlT
.
It was brought to City Planner Chaput's attention that the Holiday Inn would not
have the required greenspace if Walgreen's goes in on the comer. A variance
would be required for Holiday Inn and a hardship found to exist. Chaput stated
that a decision needed to be made at the next Council meeting and that this case
would not go back to the Planning Commission, Chaput will be preparing a
memo with the options that the Council has available to them for their next
meeting, The memo will also state that her recommendation is to deny the
application due to the greenspace issue, Currently if the Council were to allow
the application, they would be approving Walgreen's without a variance
application from Holiday Inn.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION - March 19, 2001
.
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN (PMP)
There was a discussion by the staff after the retreat regarding the PMP,
Some issues that Council needs to give direction to staff on includes the
following:
Are projects to be approached on a neighborhood or "worst first" basis?
Standards need to be set and an expectation that these standards are followed,
To what extent should ratings include a factor for storm water management in
addition to pavement condition ratings?
The urgency for trying to resolve these issues in the near future is to assist staff in
preparing the preliminary 2002 budget,
Councilmember Larson believes that if we begin with a plan ofreconstructing
streets based solely on worst first basis, we would never be able to start working
on an integrated drainage system.
.
Councilmember Aplikowski thinks that we should determine first what our goal
or program is, Then we need to let the residents know at least a year in advance,
giving them time to adjust to it. Councilmember Rem also agreed to the advanced
communication to allow us time to resolve issues regarding land ownership,
easement, and other details that are usually brought to attention at the beginning
of new projects. Councilmember Larson also agreed to the advance notice to a
neighborhood, due to prior experience when dealing with a neighborhood project,
He believes that if the neighborhood gets involved it will help solve arising
problems,
Post noted that it is also more costly to reconstruct roads that do not have drainage
systems. It is important to look at this financial reality when deciding how to plan
future road projects,
Post proposed that the city include work on non-residential streets that need repair
in the pavement management plan,
City Engineer, Greg Brown reminded everyone to browse through the historical
sheets and handouts to refresh everyone's memory prior to the next meeting on
this subject.
.
Councilmember Grant left at 6:47 p,m.; at this time Councilmember Larson took
over as Acting Mayor and asked to table this discussion until all the
COLLcilmembers could be present.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION - March 19,2001
.
COUNTY ROAD E-2. PROPOSED RAMSEY COUNTY COLD-IN-PLACE
RECYCLING
City Administrator Lynch stated that Ramsey County would like us to sign off on
a Cold-In Place recycling for County Road E-2 this summer. However, the
Mayor has asked that reconstmction be investigated as an alternative, Staff needs
the City Council to give direction on how they would like to proceed with this
proposal. Public Works Director Stafford read information received from
Ramsey County, stating what would the cost share for the City and Ramsey
County would be, Stafford recommended that the council approve the Cold-In
Place recycling option,
The decision that needs to be made is if we do Cold-In Place with a trail or we
hold off for a few years, It was also brought up that we could bring a proposal to
Ramsey County that ifthe City were willing to pay additional would the
reconstruction of this road be accelerated in County plans,
Stafford will be checking with Ramsey County regarding monies beyond the City
share to determine how much funding it would take and how long before
reconstruction could be scheduled.
.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
COUNCIL AND STAFF REPORTS
Councilmember Rem questioned the easement regarding property next to the high
school. Stafford reported that the owner retained a lawyer and requested a
drawing of what the city is planning, City Engineer Brown is currently working
with the resident.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 7:35 p.m,
Respectfully submitted,
Joseph p, Lynch
City Administrator
.
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT
TO BE APPROVED AT 03/26/01 COUNCIL MEETING
PAGE I OF 3
CLAIMS PAID SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING (03112101)
":J)i:i)k' ::~K::.tfAT~/: ,:lmNMlf::,' ',',',...............................'..'.......',..(: };.Mp.ti~'i~:t::::I::. ::,i:WMIiIIlNt~:::',,:'" .
...,",.,...-..-................-.--.,...,........,....,..,...
:-'"-:.....;...:..;-;-:-:.:-:.:-:-:-:-:-:-:.:-.;...,::;::-:::':-:';':'::::;"':(:::::;
19124 03/13/01 Affinitv Plus Federal Credit Union 3,586,96 Second March Pavroll
19125 03/14/01 LeMA Retirement Trust - 457 1,871.32 Second March Payroll
19126 03/14/0] Public Emolovccs Retirement Association 3,241.68 Second March Pa~~oll
19]27 03114/0] Stanton Grano - FSA Denartment 109,20 Davcare Reimbursement 03/02/01
19]28 03/14/01 Architectural Alliance 20,533,03 2000 Rcimbursemcnts/Prof Svcs thm 1/26101
19]29 03114/01 Gridor Construction, Inc. 40,231.50 Pay #2 - Li n #8 Reconstruction
19130 03/14/01 Rochon Comoration 266,00891 Pay #5 . New Citv Hall Construction
19131 03115/01 MN Dcnartmcnt of Revenue ],]83,00 Sales Tax - F ebruarv 2001
19132 03/16/01 Public Emplovees Retirement Association 246.51 E. Nordeen-Ad;ustment~PR#I-PR#S
19133 03116/01 I,akes Country Service CooneratLve 3,254,36 Insurance - ~ril
19134 03116/01 Lakes COWltrv Service Coonerative 48873 Insurance - Anril- COBRA.
19135 03116/01 Postmaster 200.00 Park & Rec Survey - Business ReD]v Postae:e
]9136 03/20/01 Health Partners 395.04 Dental Insurance - Anril
19137 03120/01 "MN MuLual Life 273. 00 Anril Life Insurance
19138 03/2110] ICI\1A Rctirement Trust - 457 424,28 S-;;;;;;]cmcntal PR #6,5 - D. Stafford
19139 03/21/01 Public Emnlovees Retirement Association 421.30 SUDolementaI PR #6,S - D. Stafford
19140 0312]/0] LealJuc of MN" Cities 20,00 2001 Loss Control Workshon - S. Stowell
19]41 03/21/0 I Postmaster 200,00 Business Renlv - Park & Rec Survev
19]42 03/2]/01 Dakotah Soort & Fitness 443,00 Vacation Dav Trio 3122/0 I
19]43 03/21/01 Plavworks 141.00 Vacation Dav Trio 3/22/0]
I I
I Subtotal - Paid Claims 343,272.82 II
Paid Claims From Above -
343,272.82
Add Unpaid Claims, Page 3 of 3 -
42 172.44
Total Accounts Payable Claims
for Council Approval, 03/26101-
385,445,26
Note: Checks for unpaid claims totaling $79,936.83 were mailed on March 13,2001
after approval at the March ]2,2001 Council Meeting. They were check numbers
19067 -] 9123_ This sequence corresponds to unpaid temporary numbers TOl - T57
Check numbers 19065-19066 were used for alignment.
"nd~"""""Wpo'''l>k']"'''''1
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT
TO BE APPROVED AT 03/26/01 COUNCIL MEETING
UNPAID CLAIMS REGISTER:
PAGE 2 OF J
11......ttIilU...i...tKi1A1K.. . :VMlll'llf'" , . :::;':):::!':::'::\\MOUNm:::r:r: :i:!oMliltNfW:...:.....,...
I I
TOl 03/27/01 Accurate Press, Inc. 591.08 Februan' Newsletter
T02 03/27/01 Akana Cornoration 131.00 Field Chalk (40) Baes
T03 03/27/01 Apple Business Forms, Inc. 208.72 Utilit\' Ei!lina Statements
T04 03/27/01 Automatic Garage Door Co. 119.11 Garage Door Repair
T05 03/27/01 Berres, Sandra 27,89 MileagelExoense Reimbursement
T06 03/27/01 Braun lntertec Coruoration 1.555,00 Construction TestinQ:~E1H1:ineeril1Q
'107 03/27/01 Brimeyer Group, Inc. 4,160.00 Consulting Services
T08 03/27/01 BruM. Lu AM 240.00 March Cleaning - City Hall
T09 03/27101 BRW, Inc. 8,969.63 Engineerinu Services - Januarv
T]O 03/27/01 Comorate Exnress 358.36 Office Sunnlies/Conv Paner
III OJ/27/01 Davanni's 119, ]7 CC Worksession 3/19-StaffMtg 3/20
Il2 03/27/0] Dept. of Administration 36,00 Intercept Fcc 1/31/01-Main Phone Lines
T13 03/27/01 Eagan Parks & Recreation 200.00 Deoosit-Cascade Bav 7/13 (Park & Rec)
Il4 03/27/0] Electro Watchman. Inc. 322,82 AlannSvstcm3/l-5/31 PW
TI5 03/27/0] Electronic Interiors, Inc. 848,17 Elec Tech Design-CC Chambers
T16 03/27/01 Gooher State One-Calt 38.40 Februarv Service
TI7 03/27/01 Government Training Service 250,00 Worksession-Pakulski & Baker
T18 03/27/01 Hanzalik, Sharon 240,00 Februarv & March Newsletter
T19 03/27/01 leI DlIlllx Paint Centers 265,72 5 Gal Field Marking Paint
T20 03/27/01 lnd School District #621 286,38 Building Sunervisor 9/00-12/00
'121 03/27/01 LU.O.E. Local 49 26200 March Pavroll Deductions
T22 03/27/01 Kath Auto Parts 230,07 March Purchases
T23 03/27/01 Mac Queen Equipment Co. 77.31 Repair Wing Strut-Snow Plow
'1'24 03/27/01 Me Donald Battery Companv 140,53 Batteries (Parks)
T25 03/27/01 MCl1ards 67,86 Fence Posts
T26 03/27/01 Me1rocall 12,50 Reolacement Pa!:!:er-Shiooinl! Fee
T27 03/27/01 MN WalUler Co. 199.42 Parts for Sprayer-Toro
T28 03/27/01 MTI Distributing Co, 129.26 Brake Shocs/Filtcrs
T29 03/27/01 Nott Company 37.45 FP Hose Kit
no 03/27/01 Pace Analvtical 3]9.00 Water Testing 0103-002
T31 03/27/01 Peterson, Fram & Bergman 7,178.49 Fcbruarv Legal Fees
T32 03/27/01 Pitney Bowes 247.10 Postage Meter Rental 4/01-7/01
T33 03/27/01 Plarming Commissioners Journal ] 15.00 I vr SubscrLotion-Planninq Commissioners
I I
Total- Unpaid Claims ---
27,983.44 I
""ndyl,c<o,""p'j,bleid.i,,,j
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT
TO BE APPROVED AT 03/26/01 COUNCIL MEETING
PAGE 3 OF 3
UNPAID CLAIMS REGISTER:
I~tt~ll@i .. J)K.I1AtE"" ,."VMIJlffil:,.,',. .."";:'.'.'.'.'.'."""".,,:,:i.,.!:.,:.\.Mi1irm"'! 't;ijMMIiN/si:.:......,.
I I
T34 03/27/01 Post, Terrance 34.50 Mileage Reimbursement
T35 03/27/01 Rams-;;- Couni~- 1.878.70 Fuel Purchascs-Fcbnl}l~
1'36 03/27/01 Ranstad 1,990,11 omce 1'emns-W/E 3/04 & W/E 3/11
T37 03/27/01 Schifskv & Sons 98.41 Winter Asnhalt
138 03/27/01 Sensible Land Use Coalition 30,00 Luncheon Mta 3/2810 1-1 Chanut
139 03/27/01 s,:;;-intPCS 68,29 Cellular Phones
1'40 03/27/01 Standard Snrimz of Minneanolis 999,89 Sorin. Renoir #110
1'41 03/27/01 Stanton Groun 100,00 FSA Admin fees-Fehruarv
1'42 03/27/01 Star Tribune 968.40 Ad-Administrativc~3/11
1'43 03/27/01 Steichen's Snortino Goods 1,339.41 (34) Dozen Softballs
1'44 03/27/01 Stowell, Sheila 41.91 Mileal!elExDense Reimbursement
1'45 03/27/01 Tarpet Stores 52,72 Easter ElZQ HUllt-Candv
1'46 03/27/01 TimeSaver Off-Site Secretarial 262,25 Rec See-Pe-3!O?
1'47 03/27/01 Truck Utilities Mr;;:- Co~nv 116.47 Lift Cvlinder # 107
1'48 03/27/01 XcelEner01.! 5,655.07 Februarvfiv1arch Service
1'49 03/27/01 Xerox Comoration 552,87 2000 June Base Ch2:/Exccss Prints
I I
Subtotal, Page 3 of3 - 14,18900
Pap"c 2 on BrouP'ht Forward ~ 27,983.44
Total Vnpaid Claims---
42,172.44 I
"ndv;''''''';':'p'pNo'oI,j",,]
.
of.'< " " " " " " "
" " " " " " "
.~ " " " 0 0 " "
s '!;1
..
~ s
~ ''4.
N '" '" " " " " " 00 :: :s
" " ~ " ~ " " ~ N
.i4 ~ '" ~ '" '" 0 00 " ~ " ~ '"
::; 00 ~ 00 :: 00 ~ ~ ~ '"
N '~ ~. 00_ 'c ~ O'. ~
::t'!: '" '" N
~
~
0
(j; "
~ .ri ::"- ;0
M s ":;l1!:: .0
" )~ "
0 0 .ri ~ " -<
0 " E cJ ? u ~
" ';;; ~ ..'1\' 8 .~ " t;; " ~
w > :::!If.< .',. '2 u
.... 0 '" . ..~. " 2 0 E N "
<C 0 ~ u :l'i '0 g 0 'CO
0 U " C .~~' cf " E U @1 u
" U " " .s 2 u :;
(J) ;; " Il IE 0 Ii' ~ u
oS 0 " '" -0 0 -0
II:: E " 0 :'~ " 00 "
if ::I;lf;- ::=:: O' .:i " '"
() " " u 0 ~ 0 ;;;:
P: :-;j;jl j ~ "
w :r 0 :;~ ;:i -< "' e ;:i " -< <:
"
:J: <: -< -< ;;;: 0 01 oS ~ U u '"
00 00 00 ." "' 2 "' u t;;
() "' "' "- .s
ITD '" 'c
N N
O' O'
. ..J
..J ~
0 $!
a:: '"
>- $!
<( ..,
0
a.. 0
J: -
~
U 0
a:: ;r
<( !:!
::iE N
0
C >.
Z 3<
o '"
u ~
W'-
en~
.
en
..J
..J
:r
Z
W
c
a::
<(
LL
o
>-
I-
o
u
~ ;; u
>, g ~
0 -g 0
u ~ ~ u
~ u S 0
u '" ~ :; 2 N U "
'" " E C " " ~ ;; ;; u 0
~ ~ > '" 0
~ Vi 0 '" US > ~
" ~ p " ~ , 0
~ :E ~ '" '"
~ ~ ~ '" " , '" " ;: ]
oS " t 0 g "
~ ~ 00 M ~ '^ 00 ~ 00 ~
lil 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
9 ~ ~ N ~ ,,; 00
g 0 . 0 , " 0 8 0 0 8 0 0 :; :; 0 0 j ~
0 ~ 0 ~ :;: 0 :;: 0 c 0 0 0 8
c ~ ~ ~ 0 g g 0 g ~ c g ~ '> 0 0 '> N
00 '" 00 00 ~ 0 g f1
~ N N N ~ N N N 00 N
O' ~ N '" ~ " " ~ '" ~ 'CO ~ 00 ~ ~ N 'c 00 ~ M ,....
~ ~ " '" '" N " - N ~ " - " " ~ ~ N M ~ " ~,
... '" '" '" ~ " '" "' :3 '" ;;: e, ;:: ~ '" '" N 0; '" " - ~ iil.
'CO ~ ~ 00 '" N '" N 'CO 'CO " '" 00 ~ '"
'" 00 M, " "'. ". ~ N " ~ '" ~. N. N, - " " 0-. N ~.
? :Q!Z
- - - - - :g'
" ~ C ~ " " ~ " 00 - " ~ N " 00 00 " N C 00 00 :~:
w c ~ N - " " c " M 00 00 M C O' ~, '" N ~ 00 M M
'" ~ <i '" ,~ "' c ai N 6 00 N ai '" 00 N '" -, 00 N 0 .~.
0 00 " ~ C " ~ 0-. - '" " " ~ 'c N 00 N '" '" M 'CO
~- 00. q ~ '" '" e' N. 00, '" "\ N 00. ", 00, "\ 'c, N, ~. M
~ - - N - N' - - - N' - - ei - - - ~
-~:
'" 1j "
i;i' N " ~ "" 13 v ~
."1 iii " 13 <8 u " "" ~ ~ " ~ "
E ';:: 8 "" 0 " ::;: "" " " -'" " u p
?i ob 'ii fr '8 u u ~ u 0 ~ p " 8 0 ';:: CO 13 '"
'" '" " 'C p " ::;: ~ V V ~ 'C "" X
iii '" c:: '" p '" Iii ,; 0 8 "" " 0 v " "' u V
@ 00 v ~ " ~ " "" " :;;
CO ,; 0 ~ p' CO V V Ie: " 1! 1-< " v ::;:
" ~ " p " >; ~ '0' V 2!'
2 0 13 of: " .2 '5 " c- cO' p "' -'" ~ ci CO ~ v' >.t " " "'
u P V "" @ ci
~ 0 , V U U " '2 ~ u i2 -0 i3 2 oJ' i3 -'" "'" s: ,~
2 0 P " t u :c p '"
~ 0 '" , 0 ~ u 0 ~ !d '" 0 - u "
UO OJ '" "" 0 V :'E OJ u :'E u UO :'E u ~ " is
'" " CO CO -l U Z '" '" '" CO '" CO '" "' Z
'" or; '" 0 - N 0 or; N '" .". or; "" " 00 0 N '" "" N r---
:5 - N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
N N N N N N N N '" '" '" '" M '" '" .". .". .,. .". .". .,.
00 " 0 - N M ~ ~ '" " 00 0- 0 ;;; N M ~ ~ ~ " 00
:3 N N e, N N N N N e, N ~ M '0, M M M ~ M
" 0 " 0 0 " " 0 " " 0 " 0 0 00 " " " " c
0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 00
~ ~ *-
~ ~
"
0 ~ '0
" " j;-
~ ~
11 ~
"
~ ~
~ "
~ g ;;-
g ~ ~
~ ~
0 j
" ,
0
0 B
~ ~
~ w
! ~ "
] ]
~ B
* 0 i
'^ -S
] ~ t
.. ~ ~
" ,
11 0 '"
~
~
Z
'" 00 00 '" Co '" 'n N
'" N " '" Co '" Co ~
N N 0 N 0 N '"
" Co " " " '" '"
N ~, '" N N ~,
,,' N' ,,' ,,-
~ ~ 'I'ii'
frJ-
c 0; *
~ ,8 <(
tl %I u ~
~ " '5 '" S * "
~ 0;
, -n y ~ Co
0 ~ ~ S -" N @
.2 Cl ~ v -0
r " j.:: '" ill: U ~
0;- " -n >:: ~ @; "
"- '2 6- '0 @ i<:. B 'i3 u
c 0. '2 !;, "- ~ ~ 'i3
e >, en ~ "
c " c " q .~.
0 ~ "- ci] ~ "- ~ 0 ;;:
E "@ ~ " "- ~ U H <( <(
c ~ ~ ~
.eo 0 '0 '" 8 ~ Q U u u
0 is "
<' r H Z 0 0: .. ~ Z 0; r;:
Co
Co
0
:0:
:-: Co Co 'n
,._, Co Co Co
I>i 0 0 ,0
.", '"
F :z N
... .~
?'i :i;Q
a
....
q
~ '" ~ N '" 00
Co 00 Co ~ ~ N
B -0 vi '" :0 0 '"
N N '" N
'" N N N "
ill:
Q
Iii"
.",.
d
8 .~
:;;> ,\<l
'A :::;
:... '\<l
A. :~:
:ii<:
~. ~
;ii ~
c
... " .i:l.
~. ;H .~:
ill. "'.
' .
Oil. t;:; V) ~u Q'
"-- H'
~
~ ~
* * ~ ~
.
'"
.;
..
~
~
o
a
'"
M
o
o
w
....
<(
o
'"
>0:
tl
w
:I:
tl
.
-'
-'
o
II:
>-
<I:
0.
:I:
U
II:
<I:
:;;
-'
<I:
....
Z
W
:;;
W
-'
0.
0.
::::l
Ul
.
Ul
-'
-'
:I:
Z
W
C
II:
<I:
LL
o
>-
!:::
u
c " .
" e ~
E
~ 0 1
~ ]
~
~ *
.~ 1 ~
t
* 8 ~
c * c
*
.~ e ~
", "I
~ ]
0
*
ill !
I ~ .
~
" 1
~
~ c ,
~
~ ~ .~
c
l ~ .
" *
~ ~ ~
c
z
'E
i
t
.
<D
.;
'"
0::
~
~
Q
<3
N
M
Q
0
W
t-
..:
0
en
l<:
() ^
w :E
:I:
() '"
~
~,
~
u
~
"
E @
c U
.~ll >
<' 0
~
...J
...J
0 0
a:: 0
'"
. >- C-
..:
0..
:I:
U
a::
..:
:;;
...J
~
Z
lU
:;; ~
lU
...J
0.. ~
0.. C
::>
rJ)
.
rJ)
...J
...J
J:
z
w
c
a::
..:
u.
o
~
U
''"'
~
;;:
W
~
;;.
o
"il
", N N ", 00 i+i:
C- ", ~ C- O ~
~ N '" vi 00 .~
~ N M ", ~;
00_ 'n "', OC. - -~
- - N,
" .!;)
" 0
..5
u ""
" " - :4
'"
0 q 0 6
0 "
~ 0
" C< '" :<II
~ '" ;;.
-0 0 -0 '~ ~'
~ 0. '8 ~ '" ~:.
""
" '" c ;4
"- 01 i;' "- c ~
~ "- "
OJ 8 " ,S
0 '0 - "
c 0 (5
C< Z 0; .~:
0 ", N c-
o c- o 0
0 vi 0 00
~ :! N
00,
~ ""
u ~
"" ",
t;; 0
0
2 N @
-0
13 @; ~
0 '"
:2 '5 0
" '5
C/O ~ 0
~ 0 :;:
;P. ~ <(
1:; U U
" Z t;; t;;
...J
0 ,
0 ~ ~
E
0 "
" ] ~
0
.~ ~ .
0 Ii ~
0 ,
2
.~ , 0
- '€ @ ]
,
Z ~ " !
~ l .
l!' ~ ~
1'1. ~ E
e ,
, 0 0 ,
tj. ~ ~
" ~ .~
'~' , ~ ,
.. ,
] ~ ~
" 0
~
,
S
2:
~
l
'...
e
e
e
.
~
~~HILLS
March 19,2001
The Honorable Dennis Probst
Members of the City Council
City of Arden Hills
4364 West Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Dear Mayor Probst and Councilmembers:
I am respectfully submitting the attached report on the investment portfolio of the City for
the year 2000, as required by the Investment Policy, The report is due within ninety (90)
days following year-end,
Please let me know if you have any questions. This is the tenth such annual report, and the
ninth prepared by myself. As always, I am particularly interested in any suggestions you
may have as to its content and scope,
Sincerely,
(')
~~ :Mfb
Terrance R. Post
City Treasurer
Enclosure
City of Arden Hills . 4364 West Round Lake Road . Arden Hills, MN . 55112-5794
Phoue (651) 633-5676 . Fax: (651) 633.7839 . www,ci.arden-hills,mn,us
,
.'
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
ANNUAL REPORT OF INVESTMENT PROGRAM
AND INVESTMENT ACTIVITY
2000
.
The City's Investment Policy requires that a comprehensive annual report be provided by the
Treasurer that summarizes the following:
Investment Stratel!ies
The investment strategy is to approximate the yield on the benchmark two year Treasury Note
while meeting the daily cash needs of the City and conforming to regulatory requirements, The
objectives of safety and liquidity are balanced through the process of diversification, while
maintaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles,
Specifically, the objectives for 2000 were to maintain a position where the investment
instruments were diversified by type as suggested by the policy diversification goals, as well as
by maturity, The portfolio maintained a much stronger position in cash and cash equivalents than
that required by policy goals because of the following considerations:
. City Hall facility construction costs are currently estimated in the $2,900,000 range;
and
. Ingerson neighborhood street reconstruction project installation costs were estimated .
in the $2,200,000 range,
Descrintion of Portfolio (as of 12/31199 and 12/31100)
Cash or Equivalents
Fixed Rate Instruments (FRI)
Zero Coupon Instruments
Recommended
Policv Goals Actual Portfolio Mix
12/31/99 12/31/00
37% 45%
48% 44%
15% 11%
15%
65%
20%
Pro Forma
12/31/00*
25%
64%
11%
*Restated mix based upon $2,900,000 reduction in cash for City Hall facility funding
requirements,
2
.
Portfolio Maturities
. Maturities should be varied, with not more than twenty percent (20%) of the portfolio invested
out five years (maximum term),
},
Maturities ($ in OOO's)
Annual Maturities Al!:l!:rel!ate Maturities
Investment Bv Catel!orv Annual Entire
Year Catel!orv Amount Pct Amount Pct Portfolio
2001 Cash $ 6,679 100%
FRl $ 2,100 31%
Zero $ 476 28% $ 9,255 62% 62%
2002 FRl $ 1,296 20%
Zero $ 280 17% $ 1,576 10% 72%
2003 FRl $ 1,090 16%
Zero $ 346 20% $ 1,436 10% 82%
2004 FRl $ 1,092 16%
Zero $ 297 18% $ 1,389 9% 91%
2005 FRl $ 1,100 17%
Zero $ 286 17% $ L386 9% 100%
. $15,042 $15,042
Risk Characteristics
The risk to principal due to credit quality is low as almost all investments are either insured by,
or are an obligation of, the D,S, Government. Fixed rate investments, and zero coupon
investments, are all subject to market risk if required to liquidate on short notice, In the case of
fixed rate instruments and zero coupon instruments, this market risk is mitigated by an
investment policy to hold for the duration of a maturity, Accordingly, internal reports reflect
original costs,
Maturity Philosouhv
The concept of "laddering" maturities is a commonly used technique that, in this case, supports
an objective that overall return will tend to more nearly approximate two year Treasury Note
interest rates, as investments are made at then current five year intermediate term rates with
varying maturities. This also allows for a consistent stream of maturities and the opportunity for
investing in smaller, more frequently available amounts than if large amounts were invested in
"lumps." This is a source ofliquid funds that can either be reinvested or used for current needs
as appropriate,
.
3
The renort shall exnlain the total investment return and comnare the return and comnare .
the return with budl!:etarv exnectations.
The total return for 2000 was $835,514 on an average portfolio balance (including cash
equivalents) of $13,987,888, which equates to an average yield of 5.97% for the year, This
compares favorably to 2000 interest income expectations in the range of 5,0% to 5,5%, The 2000
yield also compares closely to the benchmark 2000 average rate for a two year U,S, Treasury
note of 6,25%.
2000 interest income of$835,5l4 resulted in a $285,714 positive deviation (52,0%) against
budget, The primary reasons for this performance were higher than expected yields and a larger
than expected portfolio balance arising from construction start delays for the City Hall facility
construction project and the approximate $2,200,000 Ingerson neighborhood street improvement
project not moving forward,
The report shall contain a discussion of the outlook for interest rates and the economic
trend for the upcoming year investment strategies to be implemented, and budgetary
expectations for investment income.
The general outlook for interest rates in 2001 is for them to be lower than average 2000 levels,
Many economists believe the United States economy will be negatively impacted by slow
growth and by concerns in other international economies with Japan being the most noteworthy,
Slower growth and lower import prices should keep inflation low and stable, around 2,5%, By
year-end 2001, we may be seeing the yield curve for all maturities in the range of 4,0% to 4,75%, .
The estimated annualized rate of return for 2001 should be in the range of 4.5% to 5.25%,
2001 interest was budgeted at $656,000 on an expected average portfolio balance of $13,500,000
with an expected yield of 4,90%,
Attached Schedules
Attached are related schedules for your further review:
1, Investment Portfolio Analysis, December 31, 2000
2, Annualized Investment Portfolio Return, 2000
3, Investment Ladder, Note and Zero Maturities by Year, 2001 - 2005
This report will be discussed with the Operations and Finance Committee at their April 2001
meeting, I herewith submit this annual report to the City Council pursuant to the annual
rep~:~nt of the Investment Policy,
Terrance R. Post
City Treasurer
4
.
(Enclosures)
.
...
~
i1'J'iii =
=~:5
.~.S!N
!~~
., 0 .
~...o
0_ E
~Il~.
,- E
u_
~
>
,!;
.
"" ....~", ....'*.
>'_'.'_ r-..,....,...."Q'>:
\:/!~~g~;~
:]:<E::g....::;..., M~
~:::-.... :i.';
:=1:',11;
~..;;
.{:..~
!~
~d;
~:~
;:f:"
~
'"
~
E
..
] ::::
I:<< Os '3
~'g~:;~!;
~~C:~ E'.g
~::;~-.;.t'f
",,,,,...::tU'l:':.
~
~
~:
o
r--
~
~
~~~gM""O~""~OO""O~O=~~~~~O"''''~€
~~~~~~~;~~g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~R
l~gg8S~~a~~Eg8~~t~g=sa~~~~~
- ....~""..,.-..,....."" M_.... ......., "".... ..,....,,,,_~
"
~
;g,
8888888g8gggggg~ggg8g888gg.
~~~gggdg~gd~ddd~~~~~dg~gdg~.
~~~~.... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~....~~~....
-.......,,,,~~~~...,........~~,,,............o~...........,~~=~
- -...,........ ....-.... M __...._ ............
~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*~
~~~~~~=~2~~~~~~~g8~~....~~~~~S
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~
8g8g8g888g8g888ggg8g88888g8
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g
g8g28gggggtgggt~~ggtgg~ggg~
....-....~..,.",......,.......,. ....-.... .......,,,,.... ",...,..,.~
'i
.~
.""
'i
~
.
0':
.. e S
.~~Il .!till. III ;I u:
= II g is :I ~ c: ~ = .~..lI" ~ :'"
gi!lo;ll1:0...S= ~ c::!:l
.. .UU~ .U~=~ u a ~~ =~
.~$~ =~~a~ ~ ~~ '-S ..=~
~~=~~~~~~l ~~~= ~~ ~u ~o~
._~ '~_~_~,~~~~Z _ _~ _Y~
1;;=""~Iol!I;;..I;;~I':l:l.,)_" .....=.. "'~8
o~~""e~ ~ ._.~~ =~ I;;~.~
=="~'5z=-=..lo!5"'!::.. (lIl:l ~ e"'Q':t
a6=Q1u;a~ai~:I~~_~5a_S'~g~8~
~~~~~~j~=~~~og~~~u~~u1,u;~E
~~~~=~"~~~~N~~~~E~~=~~~~~=~
~~~a~~~:~~~~~5z;~i~~~~A~~~~
_.....~-~-=--,<~-~==].,)~~~Q<~>>-
>>>>>>->>> >>>'~f-eo__~_~~~
~~~~~~t~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~e~~~e~~Z~e==~=~~!
~~~Q~~~PO~~PPQ~~~~O=~~~~~P~
~~~~~~~~~~Qa~~QQQ~~Q~~Q~~l~F:l
~~zz~~zzz~uz~zuuuzzUzzuzz
... '5 ... ...... ~ ~ ~ ......
~...>~>......>...>...>~>.....................>...~...>
>>~~->>~>~>~N~>>>>>>>~>>>~
~~~~~~~~M~.~ .~~~~~~~~~~~~.,)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~-~~--9~~__~__~___
NN~""""",M~~~aN~~a~e~~~~~N~~~
QQOOOO-QOQ__Qe____eOQ__==~
~~~~~~~~8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g20
~~~~~~~~~~~S~~~$$~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ss~=QS~~~8_S~S~__=~8Q~=S~S
. ..
~ ..... ...~..E ...E....E~E.....E.........
o e 0" eo".. OOl"o",e"'''"'''oe,,
U U UU UUU= U=UU=U=UU=UUU
.. ... ...... .. .......c ....e .......c.....e .......c.......
loi JJ IJlio J=IJ=J=JJ=~JJ;~
=...;:~~~~~~~..~~I~~I~I~~J~~~i
=~=~=~~=== ;:~.; ;Q!Q!;= ;';:Q! ;==.a:~
~~~~,5~~,5.5Ej~i~JE.5j,5JE~I.5~E$
~~O~~C~Q~~~~~Q~QQ~Q~QQ~OOQ.
=g2\COe...=~~
gQ<3::;g;:~:ri~
~gg:ig;;~~Fi
t"I_.....,_M<")__
g . ;
~
0; ..;
~, " t:'.
g ~
.- "
~
~
'"
>,-
OJ
.~
'1:%
~
~
~
'"
:
,
.
"
Z
...
~
"'
;:
N
~
,
l< ~
.
'" '"
N ~
:1 ;
::;
~ ;;;
;; "
~
t ~
f.R ,.,
g:::8g~8gg~~~:
~ . . . . . ..,{ .'.........
~~~a~H~std~ii
r-: ~O\...;~,.:~;,jil>i
~.~~...~~~~~~
l;;
'$
.
.
~"$.
~l!
"''''
~
;g
:;..
i
.: i 'i
- 8._3':: ;:
-. -... ",.c 6" .,..
,;:E "'~::; -M::;:~
';:.c-i:Q'::_ .~~_;<'
!.~!U..lo!~i ,"""
:,i.:l!lS;io:1lg;;iii :!
_8;;_U~.. ._ :i!
.. -. '" ~ is
g;e~!if;;'E;e. :1
~U~:; &~~'Z :;
.. Q I':"!- ':a:
'" JlI"'z ,"'"
g~;gr;:~~i1l'E ''f
"'"~=~I':~..U(,I'j "="
~'-~(,I'j::t< <- :Q
~u!i=~~~~~ 'M
.
..
~
"
.:I
e
,:j
.
;;
.
..
.S
i
&
;;
>
'"
..
"
...
~
~
~
~
.
. .
~:o:
;i~
~ '
. .
~~
..~
!'"
.- .
i;;
...
~]
em
. .
. .
> .
0-<
. .
E E E E
~ ~==
: :'15'15
'E 0 0 0 ,,'E-e'E eo]
~... .... </'Jv.lrn ....:...
I': ~ '" .. '" = I': I': .. ~
.. 10. 10. ~ l>. .. .. 01 "'"11
E .. ~ .. .. E E E ..;~
0==== 0" ...=tl'l
~~;~~J~~~:'
0_
00
>-0'
~-
~-
>0
~ ~
~
a
-:z
<lI
'?
't>
:J:
()
V>
'-../
t:
i
-'"
L.
't!
,
~
.,.
"
\.:.
()
~
c
~
;;
a:
,9
.0
",1:
J: 0
..
c~
~cc
.,,~C
<.s~
'5 ~
~~
(j~
N
'ij
~
C
C
<
*
'"
"!
co
~'~ 8l tt
,co,... N N
V"OCO'O
COQ)I'--LO
(0-,...,...
.. ..
01'-0
000'"
~O_
OCJ-'<t-~
01'-00
"""'00
(\j(\jcrj"
00
(OJ
,...
.,;
~i
co
-
..
ill; 0 '" '" 00 '" '" 0 co co '" I'- '" ., * *' co co .. .. ~
., 0 '" '" .. '" 00 00 ,... (OJ '" '" ., 00 '" .. ~
.. '" 00 "! 00 00 .. '" I'- '" '" ., cO' co .., "'- '"
N of ,.: .. of <<i oj oS 0 ,.: oj ,.: 00 ,.: .; 0>
,... '" .,;
(; .. '" .. ,... "' 0> "' '" 00 .. ., 00 0 co 0> co
"'- I'- "! "-. '" '" 0 ,... ., 0 .,....'P'"_
'" <'i <'i .. .. .. <'i <'i .0 0> ,... ~ .,
~iil '" '" '" .; .. ..
'I <ii ~ ~ - - - -
:~t ; ..
"1 <
N:~.' .
~1~~1ill
:~;m:::w. .. ;i\ '" (OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :!f '" * *' c 0 (OJ (OJ *
"' '" co ,... .. '" '"
'~I 00 00 ",' "'- '" '" '" "'. '" '" "' 0 "' (1')0 (OJ '" 0
<'i <'i oj (OJ .0 '" NO ,.: ,.: .,
0 0 '" '" 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; "' - (OJ .,;,
"-. "-. "! "'. 1'-- "-. "-. "-. "-. "-. "' "! (OJ ~ -
,~ "-. ~ ~
<ii - - ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ..
. , ~" ..
Ii'"
~. 'm .
:',:;m I
W0M.
'(I' '" 0; co ,... '" '" 0 co '" '" I'- '" co ~.~ co co (OJ (OJ *
,;: 00 '" '" I'- "' '" '" 0 '" 00 - ~ 0> '" 0> co
.. '" '" '" '" "! .. 00 0 0. co .. 0> (OJ co
g '" '" <6 af oS '" 0; ,.: ,<6 <6 ,.: co "0 ,.: ,.: ,.: ,; 'Xl
'{ t. .. 00 0 '" '" 0 '" '" 0 "' co co.tQ; 0 lQ. ,... ~ '"
00 0 "! '" "!. '" '" (OJ "!. '" '"
II N N N N oj oj N o? '" ,... I'-
~ ~ - ;: N .. ..
- - - ~ ~ ~ ~
~lJiim~i '" ..
;~~Ij 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *'* c 0 0 0
'" .. 00 .. ..
06 I~
I~ z
'mjilif:tt
11M 0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 *'*' 0> co '" ., ~
0 c ., '" 0> '"
'I' c 0 0 0 0 q 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" V'O 0> .. 0> '"
af af af <'i af " af o? M af .; .; .; cOiri '" ,.: ,.: .; '"
I' I'- I'- ,... ,... ,... I'- I'- I'- I'- ,... I'- ,... .. ., .,;
"' '" "', '" '" 00 0>, I'- I'- ,... '" '" Ie co !e ,... I'-
<ti <ti '" <6 ,.: <6 co <ti <6 <6 <6 <ti co co
,; .. ..
. .....~." '"
Ij~~ili: ..
II' co 0; gj ,... '" ill @ gJ 8 :;; [;; "' '" *' *' .. c c .. *
00 '" ,... u; c c
.. '" '" "' "' '" .. 00 0 (1')0 ,... ,... co
~. ,.~. '" N N .0 0 '" N .; .. '" <6 00 ,.: oj -It) N N '"
~ ::!: .~ '" ,... (OJ co - 00 co .. 00 (OJ I'- co 'l'"' .,;
'" '" "' c "'- co ,..... N '" '" 0> .. ..
'" .0 .0 .0 .. .. .0 1O"1lt) '" .0 <ti .. co co
I' . .. .; .. ..
n._. ..
jilij~j~fl~i
:;-:::.:=:::.:=:::. ~ ~
r . .
~ ~
, ~
,!! ~
c .E .E c
~: W ; 0 'ijl ." ~
,: ~':~ ~;- ~
.; :}. j;CI ." ~ ~ ;;
( if. .c 0 ~ , ~ a: ."
, ~ 'c Cl .~ CJ Oi
I u .~ ~ ..';! u u
::- ':~ . , c c u < 'ii >=
: . ::~ : . C ;2 ~ 0) c () ."
I': :. 'ii 0 1ii a: e.e.o ~
CD:: ~ ~ ,~
~~ . ~-I-
~ ~~..... 'ii
, ~ ~ ;( ~ (OJ",. ~
~ . 0 ,...,...!!!
I~ ,., .c ~ c
," :,:o"{- ~ ~ .c .c ~.. .9 .E ~ c
'lllll! .. E E E >- ~ ~ ." E <
. ~ J:; ~I~ .c < . . .
~ .Q u - ~ I~ 0 ~ ~ . ." - 0
c ~ ';: a:s c 13 > u ~ 0 ~ < ~ 0
~'G ..J
. ~ :l! ~:l! ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0
..., II.. ..., < <1l Z C >< .. z (OJ
i~
U
rn*'
""0:
lit: .In
IIi 10
~D
m
,~
rr* *
0).'.
"!..,
"'In
E E
88
*i*,~ I
~r~1
ui It')
,
I
.
U
l();:rD
1ri:1O
U
'lr':COI
t6;ui
.
N'
ci
z
~
'5
II
J:;
u
!2
1::
0
..
~
.
"
~
~
~
~ .
0
0
0
'"
, .
It
<.c It)
co 0
M 0
.... N
0
~
Q)
"C ~
"C ca
ca Q) O'l
..J >- o::t
CO 0
... > M 0 C/)
I: .c .... N
Q) 0 0
-
E en en a:
Q) . W
... .- 0 N
en +'"
.- 0 I
Q) ~
> ::::l 0 <.c
I: +'" M
- ca I: M 0
~ .- o::t 0
en en .... N
e - 0,
.- 0 ~ C/)
::I: ~ ca w
Q) - l-
I: N 0 0
Q) C Z
"C "C - D
~ I: N
c:( ca 0
0 -
- Q) N (\')
0 +'" 0
> 0 Z
Z III
... :;
.-
() "C
III
.r::
U
<.c .... ~
"'" 0 ...
Il') 0 ...
N N 0
c.
0 III
ex:
'"
....
III
...
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::l
'"
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cll
0 It) 0 It) 0 It) III
...
M N N .... .... 0 I-
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
e 0
N
e
e
e
ARCHITHTURAl ALLIANCE
March 12,2001
400 eLl FTDN AVEN U E SOUTH
MI NNEAPOLIS, MIN NESOTA 55403.3299
Mr. Joe Lynch - City Administrator
Arden Hills City Hall
Round Lake Business Center
4364 West Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, MN 55112,5794
'-"'-D
'.'''.-
R,r::<'
. ^~, ;,...- '-.'
TEL E P H 0 N E IS 121 871- 5 703
G: \; '...-:i i
',;ii I S
" I i j ~_'-
FAX (6121 871-7212
Re: Arden Hills City Hall
Payment Application Number 06
Comm, No. 1997149
Dear Joe:
We have reviewed Rochon Corporation's Application and Certificate for Payment No 6 for the Arden Hills City
Hall Project. We have visited the site and find that the percentages for work completed is correct. This pay
application covers the period ending February 28, 2001. The percentage of the contract amount applied for is
42,93% (minus a 5% retainage of $63,429,74), We recommend payment in the amount of $388,213.37, 1 have
enclosed a spreadsheet that summarizes payments to date for your reference, Please call me if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
/JjiA I
fl()tlL1J(j
( )
~
PETER VESTERHOL T
Principal
cc:
Jeanne Sterner, file
3 copies of Payment Application, spreadsheet
Enclosure:
1997149 \6-CA\Pay Applications\PA Y APP06.DOC
;;?~
~ -<
~ s:
m
s.~
<fl
C
s:
s:
"
"
-<
"..
a.'"
~ 2:
o :;
;E(I)
.ill!:1
"0
o ::.:
c-<
~S?.
r"
m a.
~~
" ~ "
s: 0 OJ
z 5 ~ ~
01 C. S. or
~r~
m ~
~~
"'roo
"ro
o 0
~~
.
~
'"
~
iw 'w i~
!N I.N I""
:Q:1iW W' '-(,')[<0 i"w
,Q:1;Ul UlI-(,')!c.nI~ I~
:~i.~!~il~II~!6 !6
"":~INiW:N ~ <010 w'o
6'0 PI'~IPI~I~I~9:P
olN ~ o;~I<o!mlo;olo
~ ml~!o!.iw!~:o:o 0
I
I, !
i-w: ;! wi iw
i.N w 'wi wi.!": ;.!"
I~ ......~.....: .....;C'O, Ic,o
I~~~~i~:~i~i :~
m t ~ ~ ~!~!~'Igiwg
ml~ ~ w .....:m!~o!o 0
~ ~ ~ ~,~ IDlo'o'o'o
~,"'" 01 ~!(!) 0 <o:o!o:o
.
~ Z
l> -1 -I' m. 0
Z ,0 0 o2;?
G') (I) ~ ~I ~ ~
-1 m""'O ("'J ~ m ('), :J Z
O~~ i~""'03 3' ~F:
~ ~ &; ctIlg: ~ ~ ~ ~ no
::I .'. :J'tIll_ 0 _
co ~iii!~,,~.'{j) (I)' Qz
(I) (n1D1::JIQ! enlen c.Cf.lQ)--f
o C CD'I@I'<Oenll.ll::::IAl
a. i: 0 _13 <P I~i~ 5.. 3 cg f)
~ :i!!:03Io!g:al-iiiiqJ.o-o-<
z> 'Tl1.... ~!~.i-. ~
~"E. ::ric &l':Jliil 0 c. en
P -< S-IW'I" ro-l,8 .I(O@'Ill';C
<P :::r III ,(1) <P C.ictiCi5 s::
, I , ': ; r
'Iri~irlr:rjrlrir r
B ~ 5"1~15' 515:5"i,5I,5 S"
o CD rn =j<p,rn<pI<p;<p,(1) <P
o l~i~!~!mOli~iw!N,
1
, : ;
W" j: rW :i,R
'~~I~:~I'Wi~i~ i~
_'I;~ fl~l~ ~liB:lg I~
N ~ ~'~10l Q:1 (oJ 0 EF.IIO
~ ~:~I~ ~I'~i~~~ 9:~
~ ~1~I<Olm!m!N'O gig
I,! I
1~I~i~i~ w~,~ I.~
(!) <01c.n1c.n N ~:~ .
-'~I<.n 0 Q:1 <01"" ,N
-Ioi~o~:~~,oo
~I~ ~ ~I~~ ~i~~~
OJ..... .!w CD c.o ~o 0,0
*c.o:Ol!m ..... c,o OiO oio
i
! ii, : I
-Etiol ;' iW I'"
~IYllwIW YlI~ .!"
~1~i~I~~ ~!f f
.UlI.m:?5">.""_W:.!'J :.N
~,~18;f ~ ffi f'8 wl8
~i~ ~'~I~ ~ ~ ~ 6'lg
~Io!"'" ->'iN OJ 00 0 0 0
,
'"
'"
c.,.,c.,.,
.. ..
'" ..
b
o
~ 'w ~-(,') ~
+ <0w!+...... +.!" .!'J
~WOON(RN(OYl<O
."..03->.ocnmU'l Jlo.
'c.o 03 OJ Ul w ~ -'" NN
~Iw 'No Co ~ 'i:.n in in '0
"'I~.... U'l cn "" c,o.J>.. 0
ID ~ ~ :-".?1 ~ ~ -!>- 7'- ~
W <0 W ~IO ~ 00 000
~i->' """ !\.:I!eD .;.. woo 0
:=
=
~
=
~
~
~
=
=
:==:
=-
,.....
,.....
s;:
2:
.."
~
e
-
'"
'"
~
..
~
e
e
e
.,
WAIVER OF CONSTRUCTION LIEN, PAYMENT
BOND AND LIEN FUNDS
March I, 2001
For good and valuable consideration, the undersigned hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives and
releases any and all (a) rights and claims for a constmction or other lien on land and buildings being
constructed, altered, erected or repaired and to the appurtenances thereunto, (b) rights and claims on any
payment boud(s) furnished in conjunction with said construction, alteration, erection or repair, and (c)
rights and claims for lien on money, bonds, or warrants due or to become due to the prime contractor
therefor. The property covered by this waiver is owned by the City of Arden Hills (owner), is located at
1245 West Hivbwav 96 Arden Hills MN is described as Arden Hills City Hall and this waiver pertains to
a portion of the work to be performed by Rochon COI:poration (prime contractor),
This waiver covers all labor, material and supplies for construction, alteration, erection, and repairs
furnished by the undersigned under a contract witb Citv of Arden Hills through the date of this waiver in
the amount of THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN AND
371100 Dollars ($388213.37)
This lien waiver is not valid until the amount listed above has been received.
Company Name Rochon Corporation
BY~ (/c;AA/~
Its ce Pr side~t
Contractor Waiver Form
APPLICATION ANO CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT (SUBSTITUTE AlA DOCUMENT G7021
PAGE ONE OF 2 PAGES
e
TO (OWNER): City of Arden Hills
4364 West Round Lake Rd
Arden Hills, MN 55112.5794
PROJECT: Arden Hills City Hall
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
FROM (CONTRACTOR]: Rochon Corporation
APPLlCA liON NO:
6
PERIOD TO:
2B-Feb.Ol
VIA IARCHITECTI: Architectural Alliance
ARCHITECT'S
PROJECT NO:
3650 Annapolis Lane North, Suite 101
Plymoutl1, MN 55447
400 Clifton Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55403
CONTRACT FOR: General Construction
CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT
CONTRACT DATE:
8/15/00
CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY
Change Orders approved in ADDITIONS DEOUCTIONS
previous months by Owner
TOTAL 0.00
Approved this Month
Number Date Approved
1 1/22/2001 12,544.00
TOTALS 0.00
Net change by Change Orders 12,544.00
The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's
knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application
far Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract
Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for
which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received
from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due.
CONTRACTOR: Rochon Corporation
By:
'2
"'"
n. Vice President
ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT
In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on.site observations
and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the
Owner that to the best 01 the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the
Work has progressed as indicated, the quality 01 the Work is in acc ardance
with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment
of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED.
Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection
with the Contract, Continuation Sheet, Substitute AlA Document
G703 is attached.
1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM..
2. Net Change by Change Orders..
3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE IUne 1 +/-21.
2,942,000.00
12,544.00
2,954,544.00
1,266,594.83
"
4. TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE..... ..... $
(Column G on G7031
5. RETAINAGE:
a._% of Completed Work
lColumn D + E on G703}
b. % of Stored Material
lCalumn Fan G703)
Total Retainage lUne 5a + 5b or
Total in Column I of G7031...
63,429.74
1,205,165.09
e
6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE..
....$
(line 4 less line 5 Totall
7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES fOR
PAYMENT ILine 6 from prior Certificatel...
816,951.72
388,213.37
1,749,378.91
6. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE.....
9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE.
(Line 3 less Line 61
State 01; Minnesota
County of: Hennepin
Subscribed and Sworn to before me this 1st day of March, 2001
Notary Public:
My Comm;,,;o" r;i8";;;:g;'
AMOUNT CERTIFIED........}...........,.... .....$
(Attach explanation if amount certified differs from the amount applied for.)
This certificate is not negotiable. The AM
only to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance
01 payment are wilhout prejUdice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor
under this Contract.
e
.-
e
e
e
PAGE 2 OF 2
CONTINUATION SHEET
Substitute AlA Document G703
APPLICATION NUMBER:
APPLlCA liON DATE:
PERIOD FROM:
TO:
CONTRACTOR'S PROJECT NO:
6
1.Mar.Ol
1.Feb.Ol
28-Feb-Ol
0028
Arden Hills City Hall
SCHEOULEO PREVIOUS THIS STORED TOTAL BALANCE
CODE DESCRIPTION VALUE APPLICATION API'LlCATION MATERIAL TO DATE % rQFINISH AETAINAGE
01000 GEN'L AQMTS 154.896.00 80,569.24 10,00B.82 0.00 90.578.06 58 64,317 .94 4,528.90
02200 EARTHWORK 61,580.00 39.575.00 1,280.00 0.00 40,855.00 66 20,725.00 2,042.75
02480 LANDSCAPING 32,797.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 32,797.00 0.00
02513 ASPHALT PAVING 57,252.00 9,790.09 0.00 0.00 9,790.09 17 47,461.91 489.50
02600 SITE UTILITIES , 43,700.00 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 40,000.00 28 103,700.00 2,000.00
04200 CONCRETE/MASONRY 834,892.00 211,000.00 169,100.00 0.00 380,100.00 46 454,792.00 19,005.00
03410 PRECAST CONCRETE 44,565.00 44,565.00 0.00 0.00 44,565.00 100 0.00 2,228.25
05100 STEEL FABRICATION 107,489.50 82,500.00 0.00 0.00 82,500,00 77 24,989.50 4,125.00
05600 STEEL ERECTION 71,568,50 55,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 70,000.00 98 1,568.50 3,500.00
05500 EXPANSIN JT COVERS 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,000.00 0.00
06100 CARPENTRY 203,699.00 62,800,00 52,100.00 0.00 114,900.00 56 88,799.00 5,745.00
06400 MILLWORK 56,438.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 56.438.00 0.00
07160 WATERPROOFING 10,000.00 9,250.00 0.00 0.00 9,250.00 93 750.00 462,50
07530 ROOFING 62,670.00 0.00 40,780.00 0.00 40,780.00 65 21,890.00 2,039.00
07900 CAULK ING 3,342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3,342.00 0.00
08100 HM/DOORS/HAROWARE 27,120.00 6,795.65 312.23 0.00 7,107.88 26 20,012.12 355.39
08360 OH DOORS/AUTO OPERA 6,031.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6,031.00 0.00
08BOO ALUM STOREFRONT 193,559.00 58,645.00 5,940.00 0.00 64,585.00 33 128,974.00 3,229.25
09300 CERAMIC/QUARRY TILE 40,545.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 40,545.00 0.00
09500 ACOUSTICAL CEILING TI 17,847.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 17,847.00 0.00
09680 CARPTENINYL TILE 32,240.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0 32,240.00 0.00
09900 PAINTING 12,125,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12,125.00 0.00
? ACCESS PANELS 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 300.00 0.00
10200 LOUvERS 1,900.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,900.00 0.00
10100 VISUAL DISPLAY BOARD 2,185,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,185.00 0.00
10160 TOILET PARTITIONS 1,971.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,971.00 0.00
10800 TOILET ACCESSORIES 3,057.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3,057,00 0.00
12690 FLOOR MATS 2,519,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,519.00 0.00
10520 FIRE EXTINGISHERS 1,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,200.00 0.00
12490 WINDOW BLINDS 1,675.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,675.00 0.00
10990 WARDROBE SPECIALT!ES 243.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 243.00 0.00
10440 SIGNS/FLAGPOLE 6,987.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6,987.00 0.00
11500 FIREPLACE 1,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,500.00 0.00
, AUDIO VISUAL EQUIP 4,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4,250.00 0.00
14200 ELEVATOR 36,900.00 0.00 5,535.00 0.00 5,535.00 15 31,365,00 276.75
15500 MECHANICAL 364,552.00 85,979.20 79,889.60 0.00 165,868.80 45 198,683,20 8,293.44
15300 FIRE SPRINKLER 19,526.00 12,430.00 4,200.00 0.00 16,630.00 85 2,896,00 831.50
16000 ELECTRICAL 154,423.00 10,300.00 0.00 0.00 10,300.00 7 144,123.00 515.00
SUBTOTAL 2,779,544.00 809,199,18 384,145.65 0.00 1,193,344.83 43 1,586,199.17 59,687.24
FEE 175,000.00 50,750.00 24,500.00 0.00 75,250.00 43 99,750.00 3,762.50
TOTAL 2,954,544.00 859,949.18 408,645.65 0.00 1,268,594.83 43 1,685,949.17 63,429.74
.
WAIVER OF CONSTRUCTION LIEN, PAYMENT
BOND AND LIEN FUNDS
March I, 200 I
For good and valuable consideration, the undersigned hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives and
releases any and all (a) rights and claims for a constmction or other lien on land and buildings being
constructed, altered, erected or repaired and to the appurtenances thereunto, (b) rights and claims on any
payment bond(s) furnished in conjunction with said construction, alteration, erection or repair, and (c)
rights and claims for lien on money, bonds, or warrants due or to become due to the prime contractor
therefor. The property covered by this waiver is owned by the City of Arden Hills (owner), is located at
1245 West Hiohway 96 Arden Hills MN is described as Arden Hills City Hall and this waiver pertains to
a portion of the work to be performed by Rochon COI:poration (prime contractor),
This waiver covers all labor, material and supplies for constnlction, alteration, erection, and repairs
furnished by the undersigned under a contract with City of Arden Hills through the date of this waiver in
the amount of THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN AND
37/l00 Dollars ($388213.371
.
This lien waiver is not valid until the amount listed above has been received.
Company Name
Contractor Waiver Form
.
e
e
e
APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT (SUBSTITUTE AlA DOCUMENT G702)
PAGE ONE OF 2 PAGES
TO 40WNER): City 01 Arden Hills
4364 West Round lake Rd
Arden Hills, MN 55112.5794
PROJECT: Arden Hills City Hall
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55 t 12
FROM [CONTRACTORi: Rochon Corporation
APPLICATION NO:
6
PERIOD TO:
28.Feb.Ql
3650 Annapolis Lane North, Suite 101
Plymouth, MN 55447
VIA [ARCHITECT!: Architectural Allian<;e
400 Clifton Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55403
ARCHITECT'S
PROJECT NO:
CONTRACT fOR: General Construction
CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT
CONTRACT DATE;
8/15/00
CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY
Change Orders approved in ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS
previous months by Owner
TOTAL 0.00
Approved this Month
Number Date Approved
1 1122/2001 12,544.00
TOTALS 0.00
Net change by Change Orders 12,544.00
The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's
knowledge, information and belief the Work covered by this Application
for Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract
Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for
which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received
from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due.
CONTRACTOR: Rochon Corporation
/
Date: March 1, 2001
By:
L.;.
ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT
In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site observations
and the data comprising the above application, Ihe Architect certifies to the
Owner that to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the
Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance
with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entitled to payment
of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED.
Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection
with the Contract, Continuation Sheet, Substitute AlA Document
G703 is attached.
" ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM $ 2.942,000.00
2, Net Change by Change Orders... $ 12,544.00
3, CONTRACT SUM TO DATE (Line 1 +1-21 ..$ 2,954,544.00
4, TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE... .... $ 1.266,594.63
(Column G 011 G7031
5, RETAINAGE:
a. % of Completed Work
(Columll O+E 011 G703l
b. % of Stored Material
[Column F on G703l
Total Retainage (Line 5a+5b or
Total in Column I of (703)..
6. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE..
....$
63,429.74
1,205.165.09
(line 4less Une 5 Totall
7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR
PAYMENT iUne 6 ffom prior Certificate)..
816,951.-72
386.213.37
1,749,378.91
8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE..........
9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAIN AGE
$
tUne 3 less line 6)
State of: Minnesota
County 01; Hennepin
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of March, 2001
Notary Public:
My Comm;,,;oo r;;;;;:8;5
AMOUNT CERTIFIED..n...nl.....m........._...$
(Attach explanation if emount certified differs from the amount applied for.)
This certilicate is not negotiable. The AM
only to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance
of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor
under this Contract.
,
PAGE 2 OF 2
CONTINUATION SHEET
Substitute AlA Document G703
APPllCA liON NUMBER:
APPlICA lION OA TE:
PERIOD FROM:
TO:
CONTRACTOR'S PROJECT NO:
6
.
1.Milr-01
Arden Hills City Hall
'-Feb-Ql
2S.Feb.01
0028
SCHEDULED PREVIOUS THIS STORED TOTAL BALANCE
CODE OESCRIPTION VALUE APPLICATION APPLICATION MATERIAL TO DATE % rDFINISH RETAINAGE
01000 GEN'l ROMTS 154,896.00 80,569.24 10,006.82 0.00 90.578.06 58 64,317.94 4,528.90
02200 EARTHWORK 61,560.00 39,575.00 1,280.00 0,00 40,855.00 66 20.725.00 2.042.75
02480 LANDSCAPING 32,797.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 32.797.00 0.00
02513 ASPHALT PAVING 57,252.00 9,790.09 0.00 0.00 g,790.09 17 47,461.91 489.50
02600 SITE UTIUTIES 143,700.00 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 40,000.00 28 103,700.00 2,000.00
04200 CONCRETE/MASONRY 834,892.00 211,000.00 169,100.00 0.00 380,100.00 46 454,792.00 19.005.00
03410 PRECAST CONCRETE 44,565.00 44,565.00 0.00 0.00 44.565.00 100 0.00 2,228.25
05100 STEEL FABRICATION 107,489.50 82,500.00 0.00 0.00 82,500.00 77 24,989.50 4,125.00
05600 STEEL ERECTION 71,568.50 55,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 70,000.00 98 1,568.50 3,500.00
05500 EXPANSIN JT COVERS 2.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,000.00 0.00
05100 CARPENTRY 203,699.00 62,800.00 52,100.00 0.00 114,900.00 56 B8,799.00 5,745.00
06400 MiLLWORK 56,438.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 56,438.00 0.00
07160 WATERPROOFING 10,000.00 9,250.00 0.00 0.00 9,250.00 93 750.00 452.50
07530 ROOFING 52,670.00 0.00 40,780.00 0.00 40,780,00 65 21,890.00 2,039.00
07900 CAULKING 3,342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3,342.00 0.00
08100 HMfDOORS/HARDWARE 27,120.00 6,795.65 312.23 0.00 7,107.88 26 20,012.12 355.39
08350 OH DOORSfAUTO OPERA 6,031.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5,031.00 0.00
08BOO ALUM STOREFRONT 193,559.00 58,645.00 5,940.00 0.00 64,585.00 33 128,974.00 3,229.25
09300 CERAMIC/OUARRY TILE 40,545.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 40,545.00 0.00
09500 ACOUSTICAL CEILING TI 17,847.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 17,847.00 0.00
09680 CARPTE/VINYL TILE 32,240.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 32,240.00 0.00
09900 PAINTING 12,125.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12,125.00 0.00
, ACCESS PANELS 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 300.00 0.00
10200 LOUVERS 1,900.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,900.00 0.00
10100 VISUAL DISPLAY BOARD 2,185.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2.185.00 0.00
10160 TOILET PARTITIONS 1,971.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,971.00 0.00
10800 TOILET ACCESSORIES 3,057.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3,057.00 0.00
12690 FLOOR MATS 2,519.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,519.00 0.00
10520 FIRE EXTtNGISHERS 1,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,200.00 0.00
12490 WINDOW BLINDS 1,675.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,675.00 0.00
10990 WARDROBE SPECIALTIES 243.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 243.00 0.00
10440 SIGNS/FLAGPOLE 6,987.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6,987.00 0.00
11500 FIREPLACE 1,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,500.00 0.00
? AUDIO VISUAL EQUIP 4,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4,250.00 0.00
14200 ELEVATOR 36,900.00 0.00 5,535.00 0.00 5,535.00 15 31,365.00 276.75
15500 MECHANICAL 364,552.00 85,979.20 79,889.60 0.00 165,868.80 45 198,683.20 8,293.44
15300 FIRE SPRINKLER 19,526.00 12,430.00 4,200.00 0.00 16,630.00 85 2,896.00 831.50
16000 ELECTRICAL 154,423.00 10,300.00 0.00 0.00 10,300.00 7 144,123.00 515.00
SUBTOTAL 2,779,544.00 809,199.18 384,145.65 0.00 1,193,344.83 43 1,586,199.t7 59,667.24
FEE 175,000.00 50,750.00 24,500.00 0.00 75,250.00 43 99,750.00 3,162.50
TOTAL 2,954,544.00 859,949.18 408,645.55 0.00 1,268,594.83 43 1,585,949.17 63,429.74
e
.
.
WAIVER OF CONSTRUCTION LIEN, PAYMENT
BOND AND LIEN FUNDS
March 1, 2001
For good and valuable consideration, the undersigned hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives and
releases any and all (a) rights and claims for a construction or other lien on land and buildings being
constructed, altered, erected or repaired and to the appurtenances thereunto, (b) rights and claims on any
payment bond(s) furnished in conjunction with said construction, alteration, erection or repair, and (c)
rights and claims for lien on money, bonds, or warrants due or to become due to the prime contractor
therefor. The property covered by this waiver is owned by the City of Arden Hills (owner), is located at
1245 West Hi~hwav 96 Arden Hills MN is described as Arden Hills City Hall and this waiver pertains to
a portion of the work to be performed by Rochon COI:poration (prime contractor).
.
This waiver covers all1abor, material and supplies for construction, alteration, erection, and repairs
furnished by the undersigned under a contract with City of Arden Hills through the date of this waiver in
the amount of THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT THOl JSAND TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN AND
37/100 Dollars 1$38821337)
This lien waiver is not valid until the amount listed above has been received.
Company Name Rochon C01:poration
By J~;j.a: tAlA /~
Its Vice President
Contractor Waiver Form
.
PAGE ONE OF 2 PAGES
.
APPLICATION ANO CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT ISUBSTITUTE AlA DOCUMENT G7021
TO (OWNER!: City ot Arden Hills
4364 West Round lake Rd
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
PROJECT: Arden Hills City Hall
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
FROM (CONTRACTOR): Rochon Corporation
APPLICATION NO:
6
PERIOD TO:
28.Feb.Ql
VIA (ARCHITECTI: Architecwral Alliance
ARCHITECT'S
PROJECT NO:
3650 Annapolis lane North, Suite 101
Plymouth_ MN 55447
400 Clitton Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55403
CONTRACT FOR: General Construction
CONTRACT DATE:
8115/00
CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT
CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY
Change Orders approved in ADOITiONS DEOUCTlONS
previous months by Owner
TOTAL 0.00
Approved this Month
Number Date Approved
1 1/22/2001 12,544.00
TOTALS 0.00
Net change by Change Orders 12,544.00
The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's
knowledge, information (Ind belief the Work covered by this Application
for Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract
Documents, that all amounts have been paid by the Contractor for Work for
which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received
from the Owner, and that current payment shown herein is now due.
CONTRACTOR: Rochon Corporation
Date: March 1. 2001
By:
ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT
In accordance with the Contracl Documents, based on on-site observations
and the data comprising the above application, the Architect certifies to the
Owner that to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the
Work has progressed as indicated, the quality of the Work is in accordance
with the Contract Documents, and the Contractor is entilled 10 payment
of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED.
Application is made tor Payment, as shown below, in connection
with the Contract, Continuation Sheet, Substitute AlA Document
G703 is attached.
1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM........... 2,942,000.00
2, Net Change by Change Orders....... ............"...... 12,544.00
3, CONTRACT SUM TO DATE IUne 1 +1.21 2,954,544.00
4, TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE 1,268,594.83
(Column G on G7031
5, RETAINAGE:
, % of Completed Work
(Column O+E on G703)
b - % of Stored Material
(Column Fan G703)
Total Relainage (line Sa + 5b or
Total in Column I of G7031 .......$ 63,429.74
6, TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE.. ,,$ 1,205,165.09
.
(line 4 less Line 5 TOla1]
7. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR
PAYMENT (line 6 from prior Certificate)..... $
816,951.72
388,213.37
1,749,378.91
8. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE
9. BALANCE TO FINISH, PLUS RETAINAGE
(Une 3 less line 6)
$
State of: Minnesota
County of: Hennepin
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of M<lrch, 2001
Notary Public:
My Comm'''''o r;~0;;;~8;5
AMOUNT CERTIFIEO.........lmmm............$
(Attach explanation it amount certified differs from the amount applied for.1
:p;;'~~/f~~/~
Thi, ","Ii"" i, oot o",,,,bl,, Th. AM"'~ci~D i, p'y,bl,
only to the Contractor named herein. Issuance, payment and acceptance
of payment are without prejudice to any righls of the Owner or Contractor
under this Contract.
.
..
e
.
e
PAGE 2 OF 2
CONTINUATION SHEET
Substitute AlA Document G703
6
APPLICATION NUMBER:
APPLICATION DATE:
PERIOD FROM:
TO:
CONTRACTOR'S PROJECT NO:
1-Mar-01
'-Feb-Q1
28-Feb.01
0028
Arden Hills City Hall
SCHEDULED PREVIOUS THIS STORED TOTAL BALANCE
CODE DESCRIPTION VALUE APPLICATION APPLICATION MATERIAL TO DATE " TO FINISH RETAINAGE
01000 GEN'L ROMTS 154,896.00 80,569.24 10,008.82 0.00 90,578.06 56 64,317.94 4,528.90
02200 EARTHWORK 61,580.00 39,575.00 1,280,00 0.00 40,855.00 66 20,725.00 2,042.75
02480 LANDSCAPING 32,797.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 32,797.00 0.00
02513 ASPHALT PAVING 57,252.00 9,790.09 0.00 0.00 9,790.09 17 47,461,91 489.50
02600 SITE UTILITIES 143,700.00 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 40,000.00 26 103,700.00 2,000.00
04200 CONCRETE/MASONRY 834,892.00 211,000.00 169,100.00 0.00 380,100.00 46 454,792,00 19,005,00
03410 PRECAST CONCRETE 44,565.00 44,565.00 0.00 0,00 44,565.00 100 0.00 2,228.25
05100 STEEL FABRICATION 107,489.50 82,500.00 0.00 0.00 82,500.00 77 24,989.50 4,125.00
05600 STEEL ERECTION 71,568.50 55,000,00 15,000.00 0.00 70,000,00 98 1,568,50 3,500,00
05500 EXPANSIN JT COVERS 2,000,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,000.00 0,00
06100 CARPENTRY 203,699.00 62,800.00 52,100.00 0.00 114,900.00 56 88,799,00 5,745.00
06400 MILLWORK 56A38.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 56,438.00 0.00
07160 WATERPROOFING 10,000.00 9,250.00 0.00 0.00 9,250.00 93 750.00 462.50
07530 ROOFING 62,670.00 0.00 40,780.00 0.00 40,780.00 65 21,890.00 2,039,00
07900 CAULKING 3,342,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3,342.00 0.00
08100 HM/DOORS/HARDWARE 27,120.00 6,795.65 312.23 0.00 7,107.88 26 20,012.12 355.39
08360 OH DOORS/AUTO OPERA 6,031.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6,031.00 0.00
08800 ALUM STOREFRONT 193,559.00 58,645.00 5,940.00 0.00 64,585.00 33 128,974.00 3,229.25
09300 CERAMIC/QUARRY TilE 40,545.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 40,545.00 0.00
09500 ACOUSTICAL CElllNG TI 17,847,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 17,847,00 0.00
09680 CARPTE/VINYl TilE 32,240.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 32,240.00 0.00
09900 PAINTING 12,125.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0 12,125,00 0.00
? ACCESS PANELS 300,00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0 300.00 0.00
10200 lOUVERS 1,900.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,900.00 0,00
10100 VISUAL DISPLAY BOARD 2,185.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0 2,lB5.00 0.00
10160 TOILET PARTITIONS 1,971.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,971.00 0,00
10800 TOilET ACCESSORIES 3,057,00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0 3,057.00 0.00
12690 FLOOR MATS 2,519.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2,519.00 0,00
10520 FIRE EXTINGISHERS 1,200,00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,200.00 0,00
12490 WINDOW BLINDS 1,6715.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,675,00 0,00
10990 WARDROBE SPECIALTIES 243,00 0,00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0 243.00 0.00
10440 SIGNS/FLAGPOLE 6,987,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6,987.00 0.00
11500 FIREPLACE 1,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1,500,00 0.00
? AUDIOVISUAL EQUIP 4,250,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4,250.00 0,00
14200 ELEVATOR 36,900.00 0.00 5,535.00 0.00 5,535.00 15 31,365.00 276.75
15500 MECHAN ICAl 364,552.00 85,979,20 79,889.60 0,00 165,868.80 45 198,683.20 8,293.44
15300 FIRE SPRINKLER 19,526.00 12.430.00 4,200.00 0.00 16,630.00 85 2,896.00 831.50
16000 ELECTRICAL 154,423.00 10,300.00 0.00 0.00 10,300.00 7 144,123.00 515,00
SUBTOTAL 2,779,544.00 809,199.18 384,145.65 0,00 1,193,344.83 43 1,586,199.17 59,667,24
FEE 175,000.00 50,750.00 24,500.00 0.00 75,250.00 43 99,750.00 3,762,50
TOTAL 2,954,544.00 859.949,18 408,645.65 0.00 1,268,594.83 43 1,685,949.17 63,429,74
Invoice I
March 7, 2001
Invoice No: 0000015
MR. JOE LYNCH
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
4364 WEST ROUND LAKE ROAD
ARDEN HILLS MN 55112-5794
Project: 1997149-00-0
ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
'-'~,r~F'
r-), I:: \_/
ARCHITHTURAl ALLIANCE
tv~;~R [I ~i 2UC:l
c,
{,-,.
l)i
Fee
Professional Services: December 30, 2000 through January 26, 2001
400 Cl,nON AVHOUE SOUTH
MIN/oifAFOUS, MlllNESOiA 55403.3299
TE l E PI'! Q N t {Sl21 811-5703
FAX 16121 871.72 \2
Phase
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOP.
CONST, DOCUMENTS
BIDDING PHASE
CONSTRUCTION
Total Fee
FAX SERVICE (AA)
DELlVERY/MISC, (AA)
DELlVERY/MISC, (CAIN OUSE)
Fee
24,375,00
32,500,00
65,000,00
8,125,00
46,664,00
176,664,00
Please indicate project and invoice number on remittance. Thank you!
Percent
Complete
100.00
100.00
100,00
100,00
60,00
Total Earned
Previous Fee Billing
Current Fee Billing
Total Fee
Earned
24,375,00
32,500,00
65,000,00
8,125,00
27,998.40
157,998.40
146,250,00
11,748.40
11,748.40
72,50
287.99
17.40
.
e
.
e
e
e
Project: 1997149-00-0
ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
Billings to date
Fee
Expense
Totals
Respectfully Submitted,
ARCHITECTURAL ALLIANCE
~
PETER VESTERHOL T,AIA
Principal
Please indicate project and invoice number on remittance. Thank you!
TOTAL THIS INVOICE
$12.126.29
Current
11,748.40
377.89
12,126.29
Prior
146,250.00
12,515.30
158,765.30
Total
157,998.40
12,893,19
170,891.59
Page 2
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
e
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 22, 2001
TO:
Mayor and City Councilmembers t III J/~
Joe Lynch, City Administrator JLW""-
City Hall - Costs
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Previously, you directed that the City Administrator was authorized to make changes to City Hall
construction, up to an amount totaling $5,000, but to bring that information back to the City
Council on a timely basis for a decision. The following are items that you need to be aware of, I
have estimated the specific costs of those items as determined by either the architect, the
contractor, or both. These are items that need to be determined by the City Council, so the
contractor can move forward,
Roof Drains
Two (2) roof drains were missed in the design plans for the proper drainage and function of the
roof system, These are necessary and required by code, I have indicated to Peter Vesterholt that _
Staff feels that the City should not be responsible for these costs; that either the architect or .
mechanical engineer is responsible for these costs, The fact remains that they need to be
installed now, The estimated cost is $6,340.00,
Staff would recommend that the City Council authorize the installation of the roof drains and
authorize the City Administrator to continue negotiating payment of this cost.
Roof Ladders
A previous Fire Inspector required that two (2) roof ladders be installed to be used by Fire
Department personnel in the event of a fire, given the fact that we have a multi-story structure.
Our current Fire Inspector finds that these are not necessary, and is recommending that they be
deleted from the contract. This would be a $759.00 deduct.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the deletion of these two roof ladders from the
contract.
Electrical Outlets
In reviewing the changes on the second story, there were two (2) electrical outlets located on the
north wall of the conference room that could not be placed as indicated, due to the fact that there
was a glass window from ceiling to floor, These two outlets have been relocated to the south
wall, and one additional outlet would be located in the center of the room to provide some
flexibility for future teleconferencing needs,
e
1
t
.
.
.
MINUTES
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2001
6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
DRAFT
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Steve Baker called the meeting to order at 6:35 p,m.
ROLL CALL
Present were Chair Steve Baker, Commissioners Warren Pakulski, Clayton Zimmerman,
Terri Duchenes and Therese Galatowitsch. Commissioner Steve Ericckson arrived at 7: 10
p,m.
Commissioner Dave Sand was absent with prior notice,
Also present were Councilmember Beverly Aplikowski and Planner Jennifer Chaput.
DISCUSSION
Discussion for the session focussed on Planning Case #01-05, master POD for
Chesapeake Companies, Planner Chaput reviewed the case and the choices for action to
be taken in the regular meeting. The POD process was reviewed and discussed at length.
Planner Chaput explained that the POD allowed for flexibility from the Zoning
Ordinance, although no specific guidelines are provided, The Planning Commission
determined that they needed to establish what trade-offs could be made for the granting of
flexibility,
The Commissioners discussed the traffic study that was conducted in 1997 and if it
should be updated for this study since different uses were being proposed than those
originally presumed for this development. There was also discussion regarding the impact
of the Highway 96/10 intersection and access to Round Lake Road.
There was a considerable amount of discussion surrounding the proposed eight story
height of the structure(s), The Gateway Business District only allows for a maximum
height of thirty-five feet which was more acceptable by some Planning Commissioners,
However, the Zoning Ordinance language was conflicting in that it focuses on a signature
building for this site, There was also some confusion on the difference between the
minimum and maximum building size proposed for the site, The plans provided varied
greatly and there were some extreme difference between them and the proposed concepts,
The Commissioners established that their main focus should be on the Design Standards
document, not on the plans since they were not an accurate representation of what may be
built. Materials were discussed and it was decided that any reference to decorative block
should be stricken, There was also concern regarding synthetic stucco and EIFS, The
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION - MARCH 7, 2001
materials for the parking structure were also discussed and it was thought that it should be
brick,
There was some discussion regarding mechanical equipment on the rooftop, It was
thought they would best be screened structurally, Also, parking areas and loading docks
should be screened with both landscaping and decorative wall. Finally, all final decisions
on colors and materials should not be made by staff but by the Planning Commission,
ADJOURNMENT
The worksession adjourned at 7:30 p.m. and the Planning Commission moved to the
regular meeting's agenda,
,
2
.
.
.
i
.
.
MINUTES
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2001
7:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
DRAFT
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Steve Baker called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
OATH OF OFFICE
Terri Duchenes recited the oath of office.
ROLL CALL
Present were Chair Steve Baker, Commissioners Terri Duchenes, Warren Pakulski,
Steven Erickson, Clayton Zimmerman, and Therese Galatowitsch,
Absent was Commissioner Dave Sand with prior notice.
Also present were Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski and Lois Rem, Planner Jennifer
Chaput, and Recording Secretary Carla Wirth,
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON
FEBRUARY 7, 2001
Commissioner Erickson requested that the spelling of his first name be corrected to reflect
"Steven" and reference to Chair Erickson be changed to Commissioner Erickson or Chair Baker,
- -
as appropriate,
Commissioner Zimmerman requested the following corrections:
Page 4, second paragraph, ....,the parking ramp is proposed to moved to the west of where it was
approved.., "
Page 7, seventh paragraph, end sentence with the word "City,"
Page 8, Staff report of Planning Case #00-45, item 3, correct spelling of "drive-in"
Page 10, tenth paragraph, "the traffic would be greater dis~rsed..,"
Page 13, last line, correct spelling of "W algreegs."
Page 15, Adjourlllllent motion, correct vote to reflect "(2-0)."
Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, to approve the
February 7,2001 minutes as corrected above, The motion carried unanimously (6-0).
PLANNING CASE #01-05 - CHESAPEAKE COMPANIES - MASTER PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT - 1-35W AND 1-694 - PUBLIC HEARING
. Chair Baker opened the public hearing at 7:43 p,m,
.
ARDEN HILLS PLA]\;'NTNG COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
2
Ms. Chaput explained that the applicant, Chesapeake Companies, is requesting a Master Planned
Unit Development of the properties located in the Northeast quadrant ofl-694 and I-35W,
.
Ms, Chaput advised that a Concept PUD and preliminary plat of the properties in question was
reviewed and commented on at the December Planning Commission meeting, The City Council
approved the preliminary plat and provided comments on the Concept PUD, With this feedback
in mind, the applicant is now making formal application for a Master PUD.
Ms, Chaput explained that to eventually make the proposed PUD a reality, Chesapeake
Companies is continuing discussions with property owners on the potential acquisition of parcels
owned by Morris Communications, A TS Steel, and Burlington Northern Rail (currently unused
rail right-of-way), Although not all of the properties are currently secured, the applicant wishes
to proceed with a Master PUD so that the site can be marketed for development according to
approved standards.
Ms. Chaput explained that the Master PUD application is the first step in the PUD approval
process, The applicant has already made application and received comments on a concept PUD
that is an optional application. The applicant must first obtain Master PUD approval and then
make application for Pinal Plan approval and go through the same process, Application for the
Pinal Plan must be made no later than six months following Master PUD approval, Application
for final plat of the properties must also be made no later than six months following Master PUD
approval. She advised that the applicant has requested this six-month deadline be extended. The
City Attorney has recommended that a date be stipulated should the Planning Commission
consider the request for ao extension,
.
Ms, Chaput reviewed the special requirements for the Gateway Business District as outlined in
Section 5 (M) of the Zoning Ordinance. The following is a review of those components,
according to the submittal information:
1. Allowable Uses
a) Permitted Uses. The uses are acceptable by the Zoning Ordinance with the following
additional restrictions:
i) All antennas are special accessory uses;
ii) Offices are permitted as long as they are not less than 25% or greater than 50% of
the total floor area;
iii) Hotels are permitted with a Special Use Permit.
b) Permitted Accessory Uses. All accessory uses identified are acceptable with the
following additional restrictions:
i) Class II manufacturing is not permitted (requires outdoor storage);
ii) Day cares are permitted as an accessory use as long as there are less than 10
children on the premises; and
iii) All antennas are special accessory uses.
2. Development Standards.
a) Minimum Project and Lot Size.
i) Lot Size. Single use projects must be no less than 10 acres whereas multiple use .
projects must be no less thao 20 acres, with lots no less than 5 acres each, The
proposed project area is approximately 14.6 acres in total. The Design Standards
mistakenly identify a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. This should be referred
to for minimum building size,
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
3
.
ii) Building Size. The minimum building size in the G-B District is 20,000 square feet
of ground floor area with 100 foot width and 130 foot depth. The Design
Standards propose a minimum building size of not less than 6,000 square feet, 50
foot width and 120 foot depth, The applicant has requested a 6,000 square foot
building size due to the possibility of a smaller free standing structure (ex. a bank)
as a potential user within a larger complex,
b) Bnilding & Parking Structure Setbacks. Accessory structures, by Zoning Ordinance,
are not permitted in the front or side/comer yard, The Design Standards refer to parking
ramps and decks as accessory structures. Therefore, they are subject to accessory
structure standards, The applicant needs to have the flexibility to build parking
ramps/decks within the front yard within ten feet of the right of way, The reduced setback
is needed to allow intense and unified development of the central part ofthe site,
Ms, Chaput noted the comparison of the Zoning Ordinance requirements to the proposed Design
Standards as detailed in her staff report, She then continued with her presentation as follows:
.
c) Building Height & Floor Area Ratio. The Gateway Business District language
encourages multi-story structures, However, the maximum building height for the
District is 35 feet by the Zoning Ordinance, The Design Standards state a height of a
maximum of eight stories, The maximum floor area ratio (total floor area of buildings
divided by total lot area) can not exceed 0.5 by Ordinance, According to Section 5 (M)
#5, this can only be accomplished by a structure that does not exceed three floors and
meets the minimum 35% landscape area, However, the maximum build-out plan shows a
total square footage of 499,900 over 26.5 acres, totaling a FAR of 0.43 (less than the
maximum, even with an eight story structure).
d) Landscaping, The proposed Design Standards refer to landscaped area within the
developable portion ofthe site, not the total percentage of greenspace within the
development (as shown in Exhibit E), The Zoning Ordinance requires that a minimum of
35% of the total area of the parcels be landscaped, Within the developable portion ofthe
site, 2,35 acres oflandscaping have been provided (or 9% of the developable area),
However, the total site contains an additional 11,9 acres of permanent greenspace
(wetlands and ponds), totaling 45% of the entire site area, In total, 54% of the entire site
is considered landscaped area (14.25 acres), exceeding the minimum Zoning Ordinance
requirement.
Ms, Chaput presented the landscape requirements from the Zoning Ordinance, in comparison to
the requirements outlined in the Applicant's Design Standards, She advised that Appendix A
also outlines minimum landscaping requirements relating to the square footage of the floors of a
building and the building height, The maximum buildout plan identifies 499,900 square feet of
building area, The area (499,900), divided by 320, requires 1,562 minimum total caliper inches
for this plan, Appendix A also outlines required percentages of trees at various caliper inches
according to the building height. For buildings over 5 stories in height, 30% must be 2.0" to 3,0",
50% must be 3.5" to 4.0" and 20% must be 4,5" to 5,0",
.
Ms. Chaput advised that the applicant has stated that landscape standards and practices have
changed significantly over the last decade which is why they are proposing differing Design
Standards. One of the changes involves on-going recommendations from horticultural, forestry
and nursery professionals to plant smaller overstory and understory trees due to significant local
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001 4
shortages of commonly planted varieties and sizes of trees and to minimize transplant shock and
tree loss, She noted that smaller trees are easily handled, less susceptible to planting damage, .
more adaptable to their environment, and less likely to decline or die,
Ms. Chaput noted that a landscape performance bond at 125% ofthe cost of materials and
installation must be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed PUD will
also require replatting of all of the properties into one developable property, requiring park land
dedication by the Subdivision Ordinance requirements. Section 22-9 of the City Code requires
dedication ofland or cash or both, not to exceed ten percent of the area of the property or the fair
market value of the property at the time of project approval. Park land dedication should be
easily satisfied through the preservation of 54% of the site as landscape area,
e) Building Exteriors. The Desigo Standards identify primary (brick, stone, glass integrally
colored architectural precast) and secondary (decorative block, integrally colored stucco,
heavy gauge aluminum, prefinished architectural metal) exterior building materials which
are acceptable by the Zoning Ordinance and will compliment surrounding buildings, All
service entrance areas and loading docks, mechanical equipment and trash handling
devices are proposed to be screened to match the building materials, as required by
Ordinance.
1) Parking, The Design Standards propose to meet the Ordinance requirements for
individual parking space size and aisle width, Parking areas will also be screened, All off-
street parking areas will have a paved surface, be curbed and accessible to a public street.
The Desigo Standards propose a parking ratio of one space per 200 square feet of floor
area, one ofthe stricter parking requirements in the Ordinance, with the stipulation that .
those uses requiring additional parking by Ordinance will be required to adhere to the
Ordinance, Landscape islands of approximately ten percent of the total surfaced parking
area, are required by Ordinance and outlined in the landscaping section of the Design
Standards.
g) Traffic Impact Study. A traffic study for the District was completed by BRW in 1998,
analyzing potential development and still keeping Highway 96 and Round Lake Road
within desigo capacity. The conclusion was that the roadway could accommodate 1,100
additional trips in the afternoon peak hours. The maximum buildout plan was evaluated
by the applicant's engineers, SEH, during the Concept PUD phase and found that the
maximum number oftrips generated during this time, as a result of this development,
would be 675 trips,
h) Signs. All proposed signs must comply with the City's Sigo Ordinance, Schedule VII,
business and industrial districts and Section VI, special regulations for multiple
occupancy structures and planned unit developments. The following proposed sigos
conflict with the Sigo Ordinance:
i) A monument sigo on the comer of Highway 96 and Round Lake Road, with the
wording "Gateway Business Park", Signs are not permitted in the road right-of-way.
Since the applicant is proposing to locate this sigo on the City's properly, the City
would have to agree that a sigo is permissible and the City would have to determine
the standards to which the sigo would be constructed; .
ii) Wall signs will be 10% of the building fa<;ade, not to exceed 100 square feet in area.
The Desigo Standards calculate allowable area of wall signs in a different manner;
and
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
5
.
iii) Temporary leasing and marketing signs will only be allowed up to six months
following issuance of the certificate of occupancy or when 85% ofthe units are sold
or rented, whichever is earlier. The applicant does not believe that they can
successfully market the site and meet this requirement. They would like to have the
opportunity to utilize this type of sign on an ongoing basis, The Sign Ordinance is
proposed to be revised in its entirety in the near future, This issue has been raised by
other property management companies within the City and it will be addressed in the
Ordinance revision. Staff suggests that no action be taken on this item until the Sign
Ordinance is revised or final PUD application is made, whichever comes first.
i) Lighting. The Zoning Ordinance requires that all sources of illumination be hooded,
concealed or controlled in a manner so as not to be visible from adjoining lots, streets or
highways or residential areas east and south of Round Lake. The Design Standards meet
these requirements,
j) Pedestrian Circulation. The City has identified a potential pedestrian trail along Round
Lake, connecting to this property and possibly across the railway bridge to New
Brighton, The parkland dedication required as part of the replatting the property for this
project is proposed to be partially utilized for pedestrian circulation, This will be a
requirement at the time of development ofthis property.
.
k) Drainage, Wetlauds and Flood Plain. The Engineer's comments state that the applicant
has met all of the requirements stated earlier in the Concept PUD, The applicant has
submitted a full EA W, with comments received by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Historical Society,
This document includes a map of existing conditions, showing all significant natural
features, and grading, utility and erosion control plan. Development of the project will
require a limited amount of wetland encroachment, Proposed mitigation includes 2:1
replacement of the impacted wetland with on-site ponding, A permit will be required
from Rice Creek Watershed District.
I) Shoreland Ordinance. The subject property is located in the Shoreland Management
area, per the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), The City Code, in
Chapter 20.5-22, subpart 12 (a) defines a Shoreland as land located within 1,000 feet
from the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond or flowage, The subject property is
within 1,000 feet of Round Lake, a DNR protected water.
The City Code, in Chapter 20.5-47 (a)#l permits the selective removal of natural
vegetation, provided that sufficient vegetative covers remains to screen cars, dwellings
and other structures when viewed from the water. Grading and excavation is allowed in a
shoreland area, as long as the following conditions are satisfied:
i)
ii)
The smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for as short a time as feasible;
Temporary ground cover, such as mulch, is used and permanent ground cover,
such as sod, is established;
Methods to prevent erosion and trap sediments are employed; and
Fill is stabilized to accepted engineering standards, approved by the City
Engineer.
.
iii)
iv)
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
6
m) Easements & Utilities. There are a total of eight easements on the site. Utility lines are
required to be underground in all development within the Gateway Business District by
the Zoning Ordinance, There are abandoned water and sewer lines running east to west
through the property. There is also an abandoned gas main filled (presumed) with
concrete running north to south across the west edge of the property,
.
Ms. Chaput advised that the Gateway Business District was, "., .established specifically to
provide a flexible framework for the development of the area of the City generally located in the
northeast quadrant of the interchange at 1-694 and I-35W", She explained that the purpose of a
PUD is to relax the strict application of standard zoning and subdivision requirements to realize
benefits of custom site design. However, the Zoning Ordinance language is vague regarding
flexibility of standards within a PUD, Therefore, past PUDs have been evaluated according to
the underlying zoning and proposed "flexibility" to the Zoning Ordinance language has been
addressed through a variance review as part of the PUD,
Ms, Chaput explained that the "flexibility" issue as it relates to PUD consideration and
advised that according to the City Attorney, it is not same as a variance consideration. She
reviewed the requested variances and findings as follows:
2. Requested Variances and Findings
To avoid redundancy, each variance request does not impair the health, safety, comfort or
general welfare of the public. Each request also meets the spirit and intent ofthe
Comprehensive Plan and Gateway Business Zoning District by allowing, ",.. development
that will create an attractive environment and a positive image for the site..," and .
"., .promoting high quality, unified, large-scale development.,,", The requested variances
may be sUflllllarized as follows:
a) Maximum office component requirement be increased from 50% to 100% (Zoning
Ordinance Section 5 (M) #3 (a)).
i, A traffic study completed for the District, outlining maximum traffic by a certain type
of build out, and the Welsh Development was restricted in its use, with approvals for
variances (P.C, #97-06) for less office space and greater warehouse. These restrictions
have been put in place so that the future development of the comer property could
increase the amount of permitted office space and have a prominent image; and
11. The proposed use is a reasonable use for the property and can be accommodated due to
regulations placed on other developments in the District in the past,
b) Minimum building size reduced from 20,000 square feet to 6,000 square feet (Zoning
Ordinance Section 5 (M) #5 (a) #4 (a)).
j, The applicant is requesting a smaller building size for marketing reasons. Depending
on the tenants, buildings may be on individual parcels or part of a larger whole. The
applicant wants the flexibility of marketing the site to potentially smaller tenants (ex.
banks) within a predominately office-oriented complex; and
11. The proposed building size is reasonable for the uses being proposed and flexibility in
building size should be permitted to allow for, ",. ,mix, relationship and intensity of
uses and buildings (that) will be compatible and complimentary both internally and .
with adjacent uses",
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
7
.
c) Maximum building height be increased from 35 feet to eight stories (Zoning
Ordinance Section 5 (F)) and to accommodate proper wall signage at a height to be
determined during final design.
i. It was the intent ofthe Gateway Business District to have the comer ofI694 and
135W display prominent office building(s), The Zoning Ordinance states that,
"" .multi-story buildings will be encouraged,.." within the District; and
n. The proposed use is reasonable for the District and should be established according to
the vision outlined by the Gateway Business Zoning District.
d) Parking ramps/decks be permitted within the front yard setback (10' where not
currently permitted) and the side yard/corner setback (20' where not currently
permitted) (Zoning Ordinance Section 5 (F)).
i, The Zoning Ordinance does not define parking ramps/decks nor does it allow for
accessory structures in the front yard setback, The Design Standards define these
structures as accessory structures, The proposed parcel fronts onto many public
streets, The best location for large parking structures is out of view from the
prominent comer of 135W and 1694, although this is considered the "front" of the
property; and
11, The applicant needs to have the flexibility to build parking ramps/decks in the
front yard within ten feet of the right of way. The reduced setback is needed to
allow intense and unified development of the central part of the site, where it is
developable, and preserve the rest ofthe site,
.
e) Side yard setbacks for the principal structure(s) be decreased to la' on the interior
(where 20' is required) and 20' on the corner (where 50' is required) (Zoning
Ordinance Section 5 (F)).
I. In order to develop the central part ofthe site as an intense and unified project, the
applicant requires the reduced setbacks identified in the proposed Design
Standards. The reduced setbacks will also be needed to allow development of
individual phases and any lots replatted for those phases; and
ll, The proposed development may include shared drives, parking and cross
parking/access easements/agreements, In order to develop in this manner, side
yard interior and comer setbacks will need to be reduced,
f) Reducing the specific landscape requirements (caliper inches) outlined in Appendix
A, Zoning Ordinance, relating to the square footage of floors of a building and
building height to reflect the proposed requirements in the applicant's Design
Standards.
I. The requirements in Appendix A are outdated according to ongoing
recommendations from horticultural, forestry and nursery professionals;
ll, The landscape industry has experienced significant local shortages of commonly
planted varieties and sizes oftrees;
iii, Smaller tree sizes minimize transplant shock and tree loss, often outgrowing and
overtaking larger trees. Smaller trees are more easily handled, less susceptible to
planting damage and more adaptable to their environment.
.
Ms. Chaput reported the City of Arden Hills received the complete application for this request on
February 14,2001. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue the City must act on this request by April
15,2001(60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60
day review period, The additional review period would extend to June 14, 2001, The City may,
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
8
with the petitioner's consent, extend the review period beyond the June 14, 2001 date. However, if
the City denies the petitioner's request, "", it must state in writing the reason for the denial at the .
time that it denies the request."
Ms, Chaput presented the Commission's options for consideration of this application and advised
that Staff recommends approval of a Master Planned Unit Development ofthe properties located
in the Northeast quadrant ofI-694 and I-35W, with the 12 conditions as outlined in the staff
report revising Condition #12 to extend the time line and adding Condition 13 to indicate:
13, Approval of the Master Plan is contingent on the Applicant's acquisition of all properties
shown in the proposal.
John Shardlow, Dalllgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc" consulting planner representing the
applicant, introduced the design team in attendance and thanked Ms, Chaput for her assistance in
review and recommendations on this project. He stated the issues have been well summarized
and they take exception with none of the comments or recommended conditions, Mr. Shardlow
stated they have identified the maximum development area, building site, parking area, points of
access, and larger permanent open spaces, He stated they have prepared two site plans
identifying the development area showing the same elements, He explained that one diagram
shows the scope of maximum development and the other shows the scope of mid-range
development.
Mr. Shardlow reviewed the amended design standards dated March 7, 2001 and advised of the
changes made since the February, 2001, version,
.
With regard to signage, Mr. Shardlow stated he is unsure they will be able to write sign design
standards until the exact project has been identified. He reviewed their past discussion about
having a sign barmer on the building and desire to have the ability to have a proj ect identification
sign limited to the building or single anchor tenant. Mr. Shardlow read the language they have
added to Section 2A. He stated they would like to defer the issue of signage until the project is
identified and they are in a better position to know what the needs are,
Mr. Shardlow read added section 2K on Page 9 indicating: "It is not the intent of these design
standards to anticipate and define all aspects of the project identification signage but rather to
highlight the key issues related to the proposed scale of the development. The size, location and
design of identification signs for single story multi-tenant buildings in this development shall be
determined at a later time through the review and development of a comprehensive sign
standard,"
With regard to landscaping, Mr. Shardlow stated they serve as planners to some area
communities and provide recommendations on landscaping, In that work, they have found it to
be difficult to find five inch caliper trees, He advised that due to the low survivability of
transplanted large sized trees, landscapers are also recommending 2 two-inch caliper trees be
planted instead of a larger sized tree,
Chair Baker requested an explanation of the reason two plans are being presented, Mr. Shardlow
explained that with the Master Plan requirements, the developer would come in with a defined .
plan. However with this project, property acquisition and tenant identification is still on-going,
In order to be able to go forward with negotiations on financing and tenants, a project needs to be
defined. Thus, they have presented a Master Planned Unit Development (PUD). He explained
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
9
.
that unless a certain minimum level of development is obtained, the project cannot be financed
successfullyHe explained the need for these elements to be identified so the property can be
marketed, However, the final detailed plans will be reviewed and analyzed by the Planning
Commission during the final Pun process, Mr, Shardlow stated the two plans presented show
the range of what can happen on the property at a maximum and medium level.
Commissioner Erickson noted the maximum plan identifies an eight-story building and asked
about the height of the parking ramp in that plan, He also asked the height of the building and
parking deck on the mid-range plan,
Steve Dowdy, Pope & Associates, stated the maximum plan would have an elevated parking
deck with the possibility of adding another level ifthe full eight story office building is
constructed, He explained that the height of the parking deck could vary depending on the size
of office building. He stated on the mid-range plan, the office buildings would be single story
and the parking area a single parking deck.
Commissioner Erickson asked ifthe parking ramp encroaches the setbacks on Gateway
Boulevard, Mr. Dowdy stated the picture does make that appearance but when the Pinal Plan is
determined, they will adjust the boundaries and follow the City's guidelines.
Commissioner Pakulski asked where a bank building could be located on the plan,
.
John McClure, Chesapeake Companies, stated he is not sure where it would go but if they get
large corporate users, they will determine the type of ancillary uses that would best fit. He stated
it is not their intention to fill the project with 6,000 square foot buildings; they just want
flexibility.
Mr. McClure stated they are presenting these plans to identify the site constraints, wetland areas,
topography, etc, However, the Pinal Plan will be driven to a great extent by the desires of the
user and will probably not appear like either of these plans,
Mr. McClure stated it is important to understand that this Master Plan identifies a scale of
development, maximum to minimum. He stated when they talk to users, they want the ability to
show the criteria and have some of the up-front entitlement work out of the way, It also shows
the City embraces this project which makes the potential tenants more comfortable with moving
forward, Mr. McClure stated their primary goal is to make this as attractive as possible to
potential tenants and make it easy to begin construction,
Commissioner Erickson questioned the rationale for setback changes at this concept stage.
.
Mr, Shardlow suggested a mutual desire to maximize development on this site for a high profile
project He stated this is one ofthe best areas left in Arden Hills to achieve a high tax base
project. He noted that 54% of the site is open space due to site constraints, Thus, it is not
uncommon to relax constraints within the center of the project. Mr, Shardlow noted this is an
integrated development rather than having the buildings sit on individual lots, He explained this
is a Pun approach with the buildings clustered into the middle of the site. That is the rationale
for considering the setback variances, However, when the Pinal Plan is completed they will
make every effort to minimize the setback variances,
Chair Baker closed the public hearing at 8:17 p,m,
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
10
Chair Baker stated the City shares the vision to create a high quality development and asked how .
the City can assure that objective is met by the developer. He asked about a commitment to a
certain size of development, noting the large range that is being discussed. He asked if the
developer would object to including a "window" of size in the PUD.
Mr. Shardlow stated the 6,000 square foot building is only a possible scenario with multi tenants,
From a financial standpoint, they are not yet in a position to identify the base level of square
footage needed to drive the project. He advised that no developer will come in with a
speculation project and give a guarantee on the square footage, Instead, they are asking for a
partnership by identifying the design standards they will abide within for a high quality
development.
Commissioner Zimmerman stated he understands the developer's desire for flexibility and to be
able to bring the project to market as quickly as possible, He stated he also appreciates the
design standards and inability to identify the final square footage or project design until the
tenant is identified, Commissioner Zimmerman recommended that these design standards be
considered as "proposed" design standards since exactly what is needed is not yet known,
Commissioner Zimmerman stated he would like the Plarming Commission to have the ability to
re-address the design standards once the tenant is identified and the Final Plan is submitted, At
that point, an intelligent decision can be made about what is appropriate,
Mr. Shardlow asked the Planning Commission to remember that the PUD process would create .
an ordinance for tbis project and would have no status until the project is fmally approved, He
stated approval of the PUD is not complete until it is at the final stage and the ordinance is
adopted by the City Council. He stated that what is being suggested by Commissioner
Zimmerman is exactly what will happen. Mr. Shardlow stated the only thing that does not fit
conceptually is that the Gateway Ordinance is a bit out-of-date since it was based on a past-dated
concept. He stated if the Planning Commission wants to maintain 50 foot setbacks, it would not
be workable on this project.
Mr. Shardlow stated again that approving these design standards would not grant approval of the
Final Plan.
Ms, Chaput stated Mr. Shardlow is correct that the Master Plan is the guide used to place
restrictions on the final plan, At the final PUD stage, the building plan and criteria are reviewed
to assure conformance with the Design Standards. Ms. Chaput stated the concept PUD is not
binding but the Master Plan is binding,
Mr. Shardlow stated the applicant is vested in the plan and has reasonable certainty they would
obtain approval if the Final Plan is in compliance with the approved Master Plan.
Mr. McClure stated the problem they have seen with going first to find tenants is the perceived
uncertainty felt by the tenants, He stated they are attempting to key this site up to make it as
attractive as possible. Mr. McClure stated they have worked closely with staff to, collectively, .
get this project done. He stated the PUD identifies the issues they feel specifically need to be
addressed, Mr. McClure stated he is concerned about making these standards "loose" since it
effectively "cuts the heart out" of what they are attempting to address,
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
11
.
Mr. McClure suggested caution about including too many contingencies into the Master Plan
PUD, however, they do understand this is not the Final Plan POO consideration. He noted that
when the Final Plan is submitted, it will provide another opportunity for Planning Commission
and Council input and direction,
Chair Baker asked that each of the sections in the Design Standards be addressed.
Mr. Shardlow stated they will identify the areas they believe need to be addressed, He stated he
does not think they need to bring back any antennas but would like the flexibility to go with
100% office development. He stated he would like to know ifthey would be permitted a 6,000
square foot free standing building and the ability to go to eight stories, He stated if a parking
ramp is an accessory structure, it would not work if it cannot encroach into the 50 foot setback
area. He stated it is important to have a monument sign on Highway 96, With the time
requirement, he stated they may need to push that out since it will definitely not happen within
six months due to the site acquisition activity that is still on-going, He suggested that a time
limit be established at the point of final approval,
Ms, Chaput stated the Code requirement between Final POO and Master POO consideration is
six months, She read the Code section which explained the POO stages,
Commissioner Erickson stated some of the issues, such as setbacks, would be easier to discuss
when the building has been determined, He noted the Planning Commission needs to address
justification for granting a variance, At this point, he finds no justification for the decreased
setbacks since no hardship has been proven,
.
Commissioner Erickson noted the interior sideyard setbacks are governed more by the Building
Code than the Zoning Code so that may be a non-issue. He stated he fully supports what Chair
Baker indicated about the support ofthe City but it is more a matter of trying to come up with
standards all will be held to so they cannot be left vague,
Mr. Shardlow suggested they defer the setback issues,
Chair Baker noted this has been approached as an office complex, Mr. Shardlow stated the Code
allows 50% office and 50% service, He suggested that, other than office, no uses would be more
than 50%.
Chair Baker asked if they are contemplating building a health club, Mr, McClure stated they are
not unless it is integrated into the office facility as an accessory use, He suggested that wording
be added to clarify it would be a service use to the tenants of the facility,
Ms, Chaput noted the section title is "Permitted Accessory Uses" , stating certain uses may only
be accessory to the primary use on the property, but more language could be added to provide
clarity,
Mr. Shardlow suggested language be added to the "Purpose and Intent" section to indicate "It
shall consist of predominantly office development and supporting ancillary uses,.."
.
Mr. McClure stated he does not think added language is needed since the percentage of uses is
already included.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
12
Chair Baker reviewed the "Lot Area, Lot Width, and Yard Requirements" section and asked if
there were any concerns with the change to identify the lot area is one acre minimum, He asked
ifthe number oflots can be reduced, Mr. McClure stated he cannot imagine more than two lots,
Mr. Shardlow stated they would agree to a maximum of up to one lot.
.
Commissioner Erickson asked if Arden Hills considered parking decks to be accessory uses, Ms,
Chaput stated the Code does not define parking structures, However, in the Guidantproject,
parking structures were being looked at according to surface parking regulations, not as
accessory structures,. She advised that the parking setback is 50 feet in the Gateway Business
District but the accessory structure setback is only 10 feet and not permitted within front yards,
Mr. Shardlow stated they need to know the City would agree to allow parking areas within the 50
foot front yard setback,
Chair Baker asked if the City Engineer would address the issues related with drive-thru lanes,
Ms, Chaput stated a drive-thru lane would require a SUP process so that would be reviewed
anyway, even with a PUD.
Mr. Dowdy estimated that an eight story high building would be approximately 100 feet high
although he could not be certain as each story may vary between ten and twenty feet, depending
on what type of tenant that the building is constructed for.
Commissioner Galatowitsch stated she is concerned that an eight-story building would appear to
be a "Goliath" since there is nothing like it for miles, She expressed concern that it would not .
blend into the area and asked if there will be a similar project across the street.
Mr. McClure stated their hope is to provide flexibility to users in the marketplace while keeping
in mind the size constraints of this building envelope, He stated he would not be adverse to
consider lower profile buildings with bigger floor plates if there were not so much wetland,
However, the developable envelope of this project is very squeezed, Mr, McClure stated he
thinks one ofthe strong appeals is that this site is at I-35W and 1-694 and the presence it would
provide to the prospective user, He stated this site sits substantially below the road elevation, at
least 15 feet, so the first floor elevation would be about the same elevation as Gateway
Boulevard.
Mr, McClure stated if they have to limit the height, they will not get the tenants they desire,
Commissioner Galatowitsch stated it appears their concern is that it would cut into their
profitability.
Mr. McClure stated a tenant may request larger square footage to accommodate their entire
business operation. He commented on the difficulty oftrying to anticipate all the issues that can
come up once a tenant is identified,
Mr. Dowdy stated the Normanpoint project is eight to nine stories high and on a similar site, He .
noted the building shape depicted on the plan is only a concept.
Mr. McClure stated a lot of the larger users of single-tenant buildings are between 200,000 and
250,000 square feet and the typical floor plates are 20,000 to 30,000 square feet per floor plate.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
13
Commissioner Erickson asked what square footage is represented on the Maximum Plan, Mr.
Dowdy stated this scheme originated from a three-story building but could be composed of two
eight story towers connected by a two to three story atrium, or any variation to reach that square
footage,
Commissioner Erickson mentioned a building that is being constructed in Roseville, Mr,
McClure stated that is a five-story building, Commissioner Erickson stated he does not object to
an eight-story building and feels this would be an appropriate location for such a scale of
building, He commented on the surrounding buffer space and adjacent freeway.
Commissioner Erickson stated the maximum height of the ramp would need to stay within the
Code of 35 feet in height. Ms, Chaput stated parking would need to accommodate the building
SIze,
Mr. Dowdy reviewed heights of various parking deck configurations,
Chair Baker indicated support that the 35 foot height restriction be measured from Gateway
Boulevard since that is what will be seen.
Commissioner Erickson agreed that using the elevation of Gateway Boulevard would be an
appropriate benchmark,
The Commission concurred.
Commissioner Duchenes stated she shares the concern expressed by Commissioner Galatowitsch
about the impact of an eight-story high building in this location, However, she has no problem
with five or six stories in height, She asked if it is common to express this limitation in feet
above grade,
Mr. McClure stated they have decided to not do that since the floor elevations have not stayed
static due to new technology issues, Mr. Dowdy explained the ranges in feet that a story could
be and advised that it is somewhat user defined.
Mr. McClure suggested the foot measurement per story not be addressed since different users
may have different requirements.
Commissioner Erickson suggested that mechanical penthouses be included within the eight story
requirement. Ms. Chaput stated the Code measures to the flat roof and does not include the
measurement of mechanical equipment. Commissioner Erickson stated he is addressing
equipment contained within an enclosed story,
Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the intent is for underground parking, Mr. McClure stated if
the building is three to four stories or more, they would have underground parking so the first
floor would be at the level of the elevated deck, Mr, Dowdy stated the parking would be at grade
elevation within the site,
Chair Baker reviewed the "Building Design and Materials" section.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
14
Commissioner Erickson stated he would support eliminating the use of decorative block, since it
would probably not be appropriate with a high-rise office building which would probably be a .
brick and glass type of structure,
Mr. McClure stated the use of decorative block would be applicable with a single-story office
building, He suggested decorative block be limited to single structure buildings and remain
within the secondary materials at 30%.
Commissioner Erickson stated he does not support the use of Exterior Insulation and Finish
System (EIFS) on a high-rise building, Mr. Dowdy noted that EIFS canoot exceed 30% but
more definition could be included, Commissioner Erickson stated he believes there are concerns
with EIFS related to durability and longevity,
The Planoing Commission agreed that EIFS would be added to the secondary materials list
(Section 4B) and be limited to 10%.
Commissioner Erickson asked what was intended with decorative masonry. Mr. Dowdy stated it
would be integral colored split face, not brick,
Chair Baker suggested use of the term "decorative clay masonry," especially given the
discussion that the height of the ramps is not yet known,
The Planoing Commission agreed that Section 4F would be revised to state: "Structured parking
facilities shall meet the same architectural standards as primary structures."
.
Commissioner Erickson questioned Section 7 which addressed roof-top units. Mr. Dowdy
explained the rationale for requiring an organized pattern of roof-top units.
Commissioner Erickson noted that the rooftop of a one-story unit would be visible from the
freeway. Mr. Shardlow agreed that would be the case, Commissioner Erickson stated the
organization would be appreciated in that situation but a parapet would be a more desirable way
to do it. Mr. Shardlow suggested the standard be set and addressed when the Final Plan is
submitted. He noted that in this case, the standard is clear that the rooftop equipment shall be
completely screened from the ground-level view,
The Commission agreed to strike Section 10 and revise Section II to indicate: "A color and
materials [mish board, elevations, and architectural renderings shall be submitted for Planoing
Commission review and City Council approval at the time of submittal for final plat."
Chair Baker stated there were no questions on the "Accessory Buildings" section. He reviewed
the "Parking Requirement" section and asked about the term "decorative wall."
The Planoing Commission agreed to revise Section 3 to indicate: "".such frontage shall be
screened with a decorative wall of compatible material with the primary building, railing,
hedge","
The Planoing Commission agreed to revise "Loading Docks" to indicate: "",80% opaque within .
two years, and by a screen wall of the same materials and colors as the principal building."
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
15
Chair Baker stated it was agreed earlier that the issue of caliper inch will be addressed when the
landscape plan is submitted. With regard to signage, that will also be addressed when the Final
Plan is submitted,
Mr, McClure stated it is their hope to take advantage of the freeway frontage and erect some type
of signage to further their marketing effort, once approved by the Council. Ms. Chaput stated
that was not her understanding and such a sign is not permitted in the Ordinance.
Ms. Chaput stated staff intends to review the Sign Ordinance this year so she had suggested the
applicant's sign request be considered after that review. However, now it has been indicated
there is an immediate need,
Mr. McClure stated he does not have the information yet on the size of sign and suggested they
meet with staff to provide that information prior to a recommendation to the Council.
Mr. Shardlow suggested they present their permanent sign package when the Final Plan is
submitted, The Plarming Commission agreed,
The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant on their request for an
advertisement sign prior to construction.
The Plarming Commission agreed to strike the entire "Signage" section and only indicate:
"Temporary leasing signs and marketing signs will be allowed as approved by staff and City
Council."
The Plarming Commission had no changes to the "Lighting" section.
Chair Baker stated the City Attorney has indicated the Plarming Commission carmot have an
open time period and the applicant has indicated that six months is not adequate,
Mr. Shardlow asked when the land becomes zoned PUD under the Code, Ms, Chaput stated she
asked the same question and the City Attorney indicated the land is not zoned PUD overlay
district.
Mr. Shardlow explained that in most communities, once you get concept approval, the land is
zoned PUD, the developer is vested in the project, and ifthe Final Plan is consistent with the
Concept Plan, it is approved by staff, He stated that the sunset provision of six months does not
make a lot of sense to him since the City can hold hearings for rezoning at any time.
Chair Baker suggested that a period of one year be considered and the applicant be allowed to
request an extension, if needed, Mr. McClure reviewed the aspects that remain to be addressed
and timelines needed from the point the tenant is identified until move in, He noted another
issue is the winter season which can impact construction, Mr. McClure stated this must be a
collaborative effort and he would hate to go through all that work and then be told in one year
that it would not be extended, He stated that a year may seem like a long time but in a
construction calendar, it is not a long time, He stated they do not want to pay taxes on a property
that produces no income and are interested in moving forward but would suggest a longer time
period.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
16
The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant on their request for an
advertisement sign prior to construction,
.
Commissioner Galatowitsch stated the one year time period would not start the process over at
"square one" but would allow the opportunity to communicate with the City on the progress of
the project and to request an extension,
Mr. Shardlow noted the Code requires the Final Plan to be filed within six months. However, he
would support writing new language to extend the time period and provide an opportunity to
request an extension. He stated his concern is the "sunset" of the approval in six months,
Commissioner Erickson suggested revising the language to add a year to the time period,
allowing 18 months. Mr. Shardlow stated that would be acceptable,
The Commission agreed to extend the time period by one year to 18 months.
Commissioner Erickson noted that numerous changes have been made to the Design Standards
and should be included in the motion.
Ms. Chaput asked that the Planning Commission address the issue of building height.
Commissioner Zimmerman stated it was mentioned that the Commissioners realize they may be
asked to approve an eight-story building depending on the tenant but that is not known today.
Commissioner Erickson stated he was asking for definition on what comprises the eight stories .
and ifit includes the underground parking and roof-top mechanical equipment. Mr. McClure
stated it would include the occupied stories,
Commissioner Duchenes noted it was mentioned that groundwater is a concern so the site could
not be lowered. Mr. McClure stated that is correct.
Commissioner Zimmerman asked if, under "Purpose and Intent," it will indicate these design
standards govern over and above applicable City Ordinances, It was indicated that was the case.
Commissioner Pakulski and Chair Baker stated they can live with eight stories, Commissioner
Erickson stated he is in concurrence with a generally tall building, whether it is eight stories or
some other design,
Commissioner Zimmerman stated if the revised design standards are included in the motion, he
believes the applicant should also have the opportunity to consider approval of the standards,
Mr. Shardlow stated they will revise the design standards in a redline version and provide it to
the City.
Ms, Chaput stated she will provide that document to the Planning Commission prior to Council
consideration.
.
Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, to accept the Design
Standards as revised during the discussion this evening and recommend approval of Planning
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
17
Case #01-05, Master Planned Unit Development ofthe properties located in the Northeast
quadrant ofI-694 and I-35W, with the following conditions:
1. The proposed document "Gateway Business Center--Arden Hills, MN, Proposed Planned
Unit Development Design Standards", revision dated March 7,2001, be amended
accordingly (additions are shown in CAPS, language removed is ,trickon):
a) Page I, Purpose and Intent, third line of the first paragraph should read, ",. ,consist of A
PREDOMINATELY office DEVELOPMENT and supporting ancillary uses.., ";
b) Page I, Permitted Uses, strike #1 relating to antennas and add it under Permitted Accessory
Uses;
c) Page I, Permitted Accessory Uses, #1 should read, "Any incidental assembly, repair,
processing, CLASS I manufacturing"."
d) Page 2, Permitted Accessory Uses, #7 should read, "Day Care Nursery WITH LESS THAN
TEN CHILDREN";
e) Page 2, Lot Area, Lot Width, and yard Requirements, #1, should read, "Lot Area: One acre
minimum, NOT TO EXCEED TWO LOTS OF THIS SIZE"
f) Page 4, Building Design and Materials, #4, last line ofthe paragraph, should read, "" .ofthe
fayade. ACCESSORY BUlLDINGS SHALL MEET THE SAME BUlLDING MATERIAL
REQUlREMENTS AS PRINCIPAL BUlLDINGS, Allowable materials". ";
g) Page 4, Building Design and Materials, #4 B, should read as follows, "Secondary exterior
building materials may be decorative block (LIMITED TO SINGLE STORY
STRUCTURES), integrally colored stucco, or heavy guage aluminum or prefinished
architectural metal panels OR EIFS (TO A MAXIMUM OF 10% OR THE STRUCTURE);
h) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #4 C, should read as follows, "Synthetic stucco eF
ElliS (Exterior Insulation ami Finish Systems) may be permitted as a secondary material on
upper floors only";
i) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #4 F, should be stricken completely;
j) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #10 should be stricken completely;
k) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #11, second line, should read as follows,
"" ,submitted for staff PLANNING COMMISSION review AND CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL at the time of submittal for building permit(s) FINAL PUD";
I) Page 6, parking Requirements, #3, second line should read, ".. ,shall be screened with a
decorative wall OF COMPATIBLE MATERIALS..,";
m) Page 6, Loading Docks, third line, should read, "" .by means oflandscaping which is at least
80% opaque within two years eF AND by a screen walL,," and
n) Pages 8 and 9, Signage, be removed in its entirety from the document for review during the
final PUD process, with the exception of#2 J, which should read as follows, "Temporary
leasing signs and marketing signs will be allowed AS RECOMMENDED TO CITY
COUNCIL BY STAFF".
2. Maximum office component requirement be increased from 50% to 100% as per the
"Variance Requests and Findings, (a)" section of the staff memorandum;
3. Minimum building size be reduced from 20,000 square feet to 6,000 square feet, as per the
"Variance Requests and Findings, (b)" section of the staff memorandum, allowing no more
than two structures of this size on the property;
4. Maximum building height be increased from 35 feet to eight stories as per the "Variance
Requests and Findings, (c)" section of the staffmemorandlUll;
5. Parking ramps/decks be permitted within the front yard setback and the side yard/comer
setback as per the "Variance Requests and Findings, (d)" section of the staff memorandum;
6. Side yard interior and comer setbacks for the principal structure(s) must meet the
requirements of the Gateway Business District and are not permitted as proposed to be
decreased to 10' on the interior (where 20' is required) and 20' on the comer (where 50' is
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ~ MARCH 7, 2001
18
required) ;
7. Reducing the specific landscape requirements (caliper inches) outlined in Appendix A, .
Zoning Ordinance, relating to the square footage of floors of a building and building height
to reflect the proposed requirements in the applicant's Design Standards as per the "Variance
Requests and Findings, (f)" section ofthe staff memorandum;
8, A landscape performance bond at 125% of the cost of materials and installation must be
provided prior to the issuance of a building permit;
9. Park land dedication will be required as part of the final plat, not to exceed ten percent of the
area of the property or, if providing cash in lieu of land, the fair market value of the property
at the time of approval;
10. A permit from Rice Creek Watershed District will be required following City approval;
11. A monument sign at the comer of Highway 96 and Round Lake Road (City property) would
need to be reviewed and approved by the City Council prior to construction;
12. Due to the time requirements ofland acquisition and securing major tenants, the time
requirement for the final plan to be submitted no more than six months after the date of the
City Council's approval ofthe Master PUD be changed to eighteen months for this proposal;
and
13, Approval of the master plan is contingent on the applicant's acquisition of all properties
shown in the proposal.
The motion carried (5-1 Galatowitsch).
This Planning Case will be reviewed at the Monday, March 26, 2001, City Council meeting,
Commissioner Erickson was excused from the meeting at 10: 11 p,m,
.
PLANNING CASE # 01-06 - CITY OF ARDEN HILLS - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT - PUBLIC HEARING
Chair Baker opened the public hearing at 10: 12 p.m.
Ms. Chaput explained that the City of Arden Hills is requesting amendment of Figure 7.1, Road
Classifications, of the 1998 Comprehensive Plan to correct the locations ofthe identified
"Community Gateways," reflecting the findings ofthe 1985 Parkway System Feasibility Study.
Ms, Chaput reviewed that in November 1998, the City's Comprehensive Plan was updated and
adopted by the City Council. It is currently undergoing approval with the Metropolitan Council
and expected to be approved in March, 2001. The Metropolitan Council has been contacted
regarding this potential amendment and have stated that there are no issues from their
perspective in making these minor changes. To amend the Comprehensive Plan, a public hearing
is required at the Planning Commission level and final approval must be made by the City
Council.
Ms. Chaput explained that "Community Gateways" have been discussed by a number of City
committees over the last two decades, namely the Parks Committee and the Operations and
Finance Committee, The 1998 Comprehensive Plan update identified "Community Gateway"
locations in Figure 7,1, Road Classifications, This map was generated from the 1985 Parkways
System Feasibility Study, as identified by the Parkway Task Force and Wehrman Consultants at
that time,
.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
19
Ms, Chaput noted that Figure 7,1 of the Comprehensive Plan, as adopted, does not correctly
match the identified "Community Gateways" in the Parkway System Feasibility Study. The
Comprehensive Plan map does not identify the comer of Lexington Avenue and County Road E
or the comer of County Road E2 and Cleveland Avenue as a "Community Gateways," Figure
7.1 ofthe Comprehensive Plan does not match the Parkway System Feasibility Study map due to
these errors, Ms, Chaput explained that Figure 7,1 has been anlended to identify all of the
locations shown in the Parkway System Feasibility Study,
Ms. Chaput presented the Commission's options for consideration of this application and advised
that Staffrecommends approval of the amendment of Figure 7,1, Road Classifications, of the
1998 Comprehensive Plan to correct the locations of the identified "Community Gateways,"
reflecting the findings of the 1985 Parkway System Feasibility Study.
Ms. Chaput advised that the Metropolitan Council is still reviewing the City's Comprehensive
Plan, She stated she did mention to them that one ofthe maps needed to be amended and they
indicated that would not be a problem or slow their review,
Commissioner Zimmerman noted the "Gateway" indication is not on County Road E, Ms,
Chaput explained that the wording "County Road E" is in the wrong location and will be
corrected,
Chair Baker closed the public hearing at 9: 17 p,m,
Commissioner Duchenes moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to recommend
approval of Planning Case #01-06, City of Arden Hills, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, for
the amendment of Figure 7.1, Road Classifications, ofthe 1998 Comprehensive Plan to correct
the locations of the identified "Community Gateways," reflecting the findings of the 1985
Parkway System Feasibility Study, as shown in Exhibit A with the correction that the wording
"County Road E" be correctly placed on the map, The motion carried unanimously (5-0),
This Planning Case will be reviewed at the Monday, March 26,2001, City Council meeting,
REPORTS
A. Council Liaison
Since Councilmember Aplikowski was no longer present, Councilmember Rem reported on the
annual Council retreats, She advised that the Corporate Express application was approved and
the Walgreens application was tabled due to concerns with traffic and access, Councilmember
Rem advised that there has also been additional discussion with the County on what would be
acceptable to them.
B. Planning Commissioners
There were no report from the Planning Commissioners,
C.
Staff
Ms. Chaput asked interested Planning Commissioners to advise her if they are interested in
attending any of the upcoming workshops.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 7, 2001
Ms, Chaput stated a planning consultant has been budgeted and recommended he work on the
Sign Ordinance and Antenna Ordinance,
The Planning Commission agreed with this recommendation and suggested that revisions to the
lakeshore setbacks section of the Ordinance also be included,
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Pakulski, to adjourn the meeting
at 10:27 p,m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0),
20
.
.
.
~
e
e
e
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 20, 2001
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jennifer Chaput, City Planner ri!
SUBJECT: Case #00-45, Lot Split/Variance/SUP/Site Plan Review
NW Quadrant of County Road E & Lexington Avenue
Request
The applicant has made the following requests for the property located in the Northwest quadrant
of County Road E and Lexington A venue, zoned B-2, General Business District:
1. a lot split of the property located at 1201 County Road E creating two parcels from one;
2. a variance from Section 6 (D) #1 (b), proximity to drive-in businesses;
3, a Special Use Permit for a drive-in business in a B-2 District; and
4. a site plan review of a proposed Walgreens on the newly created parcel.
All of the required plans for the applications were provided to the City Council in the February
26,2001, City Council packet.
Backl!round
The Planning Commission beard the applicant's request at the January 3,2001 Planning
Commission meeting. The applications were tabled, pending submission of additional
information, and heard again at the February 7, 2001 Planning Commission meeting, A
recommendation was made to the City Council, heard at the February 26, 2001 City Council
meeting. The City Council tabled the application until the March 26,2001, regular meeting for
clarification of some issues.
On March 15, a resident identified an issue with the minor subdivision, in turn effecting all of the
applications, The minor subdivision application, creating two parcels from the existing Holiday
Inn site, eliminates all landscape area from the Holiday Inn, It was pointed out to staff that the
Holiday Inn was developed with all of their landscape requirements on the eastern portion of the
site (where Walgreens proposes to locate) and by subdividing that area from the Holiday Inn,
they become nonconforming by landscape area, Staff alerted the applicant, City Council and the
Planning Commission to this issue, after further research, The City Council was again informed
of this information at the Worksession on March 19 and was informed that this Planning Case
would come before them at the next regular meeting with a staff recommendation for final
action,
,
Zoning Review
Section 22-12, (e) of the City Code authorizes the division of platted lots according to certain
criteria, as outlined in previous staff memorandums. The minor subdivision proposes the division
of the Holiday Inn parcel (-8,2 acres) into two lots, creating a lot for Walgreens (-1.8 acres) and
leaving the remaining parcel for the Holiday Inn (6.4 acres), Both of the lots, as a result of the
minor subdivision, meet the dimensional and parking requirements ofthe Zoning Ordinance, as
presented in previous staff memorandums.
e
In Planning Case #71-37, the City Council approved a Special Use Permit to allow for the
construction of the Ramada Inn (Holiday Inn) as it stands today, It was approved for construction
to a height exceeding the 35' requirement of the Zoning Ordinance, Beyond this issue, it met all
other dimensional, landscape and parking requirements of the Ordinance, The required landscape
area was oddly placed at the eastern end of the site, meeting the 25% requirement of the area of
the site,
With the proposed split, the Holiday Inn loses all of the landscape area on the eastern end of the
site, leaving approximately 13% landscape area, However, the current Zoning Ordinance
continues to require 25% landscape area in the B-2 Zoning District. The Holiday Inn property did
not have previous City Council approval to have less than the required amount of landscape area.
To create a parcel that does not meet this requirement is creating a parcel that is nonconforming
by the Zoning Ordinance.
.
Options For Action
1. Recommend approval with conditions. Ifthe application is approved with conditions, a
landscape variance on the Holiday Inn parcel (-13% where 25% is required) would be
approved without an application from the property owner and without identifying a hardship,
2, Recommend denial with reasons for denial. The application for a minor subdivision can be
denied because one ofthe resulting lots is not able to meet the minimum landscape lot area
requirement of25%, creating a nonconforming lot. Denial of the minor subdivision, in turn,
denies all other applications since a parcel can not be created for the use,
3, The applicant could request an extension of time. The applicant may request to waive the
sixty day time limit, in writing, to the Council for additional time to address the landscaping
issue on the Holiday Inn parcel.
4. The applicant may choose to withdrawn the application. No action would be necessary, if
this is the case,
Deadline for Agencv Actions
The City of Arden Hills received a complete application for this request on December 6, 2000,
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes the City must act on this request by February 4,2001 (60
days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional60-day
review period, The applicant was notified, in writing, that the application would be extended .
2
.
.
.
.
sixty days to April 5, 2001, The City may, with the petitioners' consent, extend the review
period beyond the April 5, 2001 date.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommended approval of this proposal, with conditions, as outlined
in the memorandum prepared for the February 26, 2001 City Council meeting, Since that time,
an issue affecting all applications has been identified and an alternative recommendation is being
proposed,
Staff recommends denial of Planning Case #00-45, for the following reasons:
1. The proposed minor subdivision of the property located at 1201 County Road E, creating two
parcels from one, leaves the Holiday Inn's remaining parcel with less than 25% landscape
area which is unable to meet the requirements of Section 5 (F) of the Zoning Ordinance; and
2, Since a minor subdivision of 1201 County Road E can not create a developable lot for a
proposed Walgreens, the remaining applications for: a variance from Section 6 (D) #1 (b),
proximity to drive-in businesses; a special Use Permit for a drive-in business in a B-2
District; and site plan review, are not possible, All subsequent applications are denied based
on the fact that a minor subdivision of the property can not occur.
Notes
A majority vote from the City Council is required for action on the applications of this Plarullng
Case, If this application is denied, the application can not be resubmitted for a period of six (6)
months from the date of the denial.
Updates
The applicant is requesting that the City Council table the applications for the applicant to have a
chance to further review the issue currently raised on the Holiday Inn parcel. The applicant has
submitted a letter to the City Council to waive the sixty-day time limit (attached).
3
03/22/01 11:53 FAX 612 332 2428
SEMPER DEVELOPMENT LTD,
~002
~
SEMPER DEVELOPMENT, LTD.
600 Foshay Tower
821 Marquette Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Phone: (612) 332-1500
Fax; (612) 332-2428
e
March 22,2001
Jennifer Chaput
City Planner
4364 West Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112-5794
RE: Northwest Comer of West County RoadE and Lexington Avenue, Arden Hills, MN
Dear Jennifer:
We request that the above-referenced, Walgreens project be tabled for the Monday night council
meeting.
We also request that the sixty (60) day period be extended so that we may further study issues on
this proj eet.
e
Sincerely,
L}h~ k",h~ I~
John Kohler, AlA
JHKIlt
.
T
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 12, 2001
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Jennifer Chaput, City PlannerCf/
Planning Case #01-05 Master PUD
Chesapeake Companies, NE Quadrant ofI-694 and 1-35W
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Request
The applicant is requesting a Master Planned Unit Development ofthe properties located
in the Northeast quadrant ofI-694 and I-35W,
.
Backl!round
A Concept PUD and preliminary plat of the properties in question was reviewed and
commented on at the December Planning Commission meeting. The City Council
approved the preliminary plat and provided comments on the Concept PUD. With this
feedback in mind, the applicant is now making formal application for a Master PUD.
To eventually make the proposed PUD a reality, Chesapeake Companies is continuing
discussions with property owners on the potential acquisition of parcels owned by Morris
Communications, ATS Steel and Burlington Northern Rail (currently unused rail right-
of-way), Although not all of the properties are currently secured, the applicant wishes to
proceed with a Master PUD so that the site can be marketed for development according
to approved standards,
The applicant submitted the following information, provided to the City Council with the
Planning Commission packet for the March 7, 2001 meeting:
1. Letter ofIntent
2, Proposed PUD Design Standards
3, Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W)
4, Maximum Development Plan (maximum possible development on the site)
Landscape Concept Plan (general landscape plan with medium development on site)
.
The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #01-05 at their March 7, 2001
meeting, holding a one hour worksession prior to the meeting to review the major issues,
A revised "Design Standards" document was presented to the Planning Commission at
this time. The Planning Commission reviewed the document, item by item, and have
proposed changes to it as a part of their recommendations tot he City Council. For
.
.
additional information about the evaluation of this Planning Case, please refer to the
Planning Commission packet from the March 7, 2001 meeting,
e
Deadline for Ae:ency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the complete application for this request on February 14,
2001. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue the City must act on this request by April 15,
2001(60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional
60 day review period, The additional review period would extend to June 14, 2001. The
City may, with the petitioner's consent, extend the review period beyond the June 14,2001
date,
Lastly, if the City denies the petitioner's request, ".,. it must state in writing the reason for
the denial at the time that it denies the request."
Options
I. Recommend approval as submitted.
2, Recommend approval with conditions.
3. Recommend denial with reasons for denial.
4, Table for additional information.
Recommendations
The Planning Commission recommends approval of a Master Planned Unit Development
of the properties located in the Northeast quadrant ofI-694 and I-35W, with the
following conditions:
e
1. The proposed document "Gateway Business Center--Arden Hills, MN, Proposed
Planned Unit Development Design Standards", revision dated March 7, 2001(Exhibit
A), be amended accordingly (additions are shown in CAPS, language removed is ,trichn):
a) Page I, Purpose and Intent, third line of the first paragraph should read,
"" . consist of A PREDOMINATELY office DEVELOPMENT and supporting
ancillary uses, , , ";
b) Page 1, Permitted Uses, strike #1 relating to antennas and add it under Permitted
Accessory Uses;
c) Page I, Permitted Accessory Uses, #1 should read, "Any incidental assembly,
repair, processing, CLASS I manufacturing. .,"
d) Page 2, Permitted Accessory Uses, #7 should read, "Day Care Nursery WITH
LESS THAN TEN CHILDREN";
e) Page 2, Lot Area, Lot Width, and yard Requirements, #1, should read, "Lot Area:
One acre minimum, NOT TO EXCEED TWO LOTS OF THIS SIZE"
t) Page 4, Building Design and Materials, #4, last line of the paragraph, should read,
"., .ofthe fayade. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS SHALL MEET THE SAME
BUILDING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS AS PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS.
Allowable materials,.. ";
e
2
.
g) Page 4, Building Design and Materials, #4 B, should read as follows, "Secondary
exterior building materials may be decorative block (LIMITED TO SINGLE
STORY STRUCTURES), integrally colored stucco, or heavy guage aluminum or
prefinished architectural metal panels OR EIFS (TO A MAXIMUM OF 10% OR
THE STRUCTURE);
h) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #4 C, should read as follows, "Synthetic
stucco or EIFS (Exterior Inslllaticlll ami finish Systems) may be permitted as a
secondary material on upper floors only";
i) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #4 F, should be stricken completely;
j) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #10 should be stricken completely;
k) Page 5, Building Design and Materials, #11, second line, should read as follows,
"" ,submitted for staffPLANNlNG COMMISSION review AND CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL at the time of submittal for bllilding permit(s) FINAL
PUD";
I) Page 6, parking Requirements, #3, second line should read, "" ,shall be screened
with a decorative wall OF COMPATIBLE MATERIALS..,";
m) Page 6, Loading Docks, third line, should read, "., ,by means of landscaping
which is at least 80% opaque within two years 9f AND by a screen wall"," and
n) Pages 8 and 9, Signage, be removed in its entirety from the document for review
during the final PUD process, with the exception of#2 J, which should read as
follows, "Temporary leasing signs and marketing signs will be allowed AS
RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL BY STAFF".
2, Maximum office component requirement be increased from 50% to I 00% as per the
"Variance Requests and Findings, (a)" section of the staffmemorandum;
3, Minimum building size be reduced from 20,000 square feet to 6,000 square feet, as
per the "Variance Requests and Findings, (b)" section of the staff memorandum,
allowing no more than two structures of this size on the property;
4, Maximum building height be increased from 35 feet to eight stories as per the
"Variance Requests and Findings, (c)" section of the staff memorandum;
5. Parking ramps/decks be permitted within the front yard setback and the side
yard/corner setback as per the "Variance Requests and Findings, (d)" section of the
staff memorandum;
6, Side yard interior and corner setbacks for the principal structure(s) must meet the
requirements of the Gateway Business District and are not permitted as proposed to
be decreased to 10' on the interior (where 20' is required) and 20' on the corner (where
50' is required);
7, Reducing the specific landscape requirements (caliper inches) outlined in Appendix
A, Zoning Ordinance, relating to the square footage of floors of a building and
building height to reflect the proposed requirements in the applicant's Design
Standards as per the "Variance Requests and Findings, (f)" section of the staff
memorandum;
8, A landscape performance bond at 125% of the cost of materials and installation must
be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit;
9, Park land dedication will be required as part of the final plat, not to exceed ten
percent of the area of the property or, if providing cash in lieu ofland, the fair market
value of the property at the time of approval;
.
.
3
10, A permit from Rice Creek Watershed District will be required following City _
approval; ...
11. A monument sign at the corner of Highway 96 and Round Lake Road (City property)
would need to be reviewed and approved by the City Council prior to construction;
12, A temporary leasing sign (Exhibit B), at a height of fifteen feet (15') and with a sign
face of twelve feet (12') by eight feet (8'), located on the applicant's property, facing
Highway I -694 be permitted until corporate users are secured for the site;
13. Due to the time requirements ofland acquisition and securing major tenants, the time
requirement for the final plat and final POD to be submitted no more than six months
after the date of the City Council's approval of the Master POD be changed to
eighteen months for this proposal; and
14. Approval ofthe master plan is contingent on the applicant's acquisition of all
properties shown in the proposal.
Updates
Staff met with the applicant on March 20 to review the Planning Commission
recommendations. The applicant would like to propose the following amendments to the
Planning Commission conditions, as listed above:
1. Condition #l(d), do not impose any limitation on the number of children within
daycares;
2. Conditions #1(g) and (h), allow EIFS to be used as a secondary material, to be used
for up to 30% of the fayade; _
3, Condition #1 (i), do not strike this statement and allow for structured parking ..
facilities to be architectural precast or decorative masonry;
4. Condition #1 (I), add to the amended sentence, "., ,shall be screened with BERMING
AND LANDSCAPING OR a decorative wall of compatible materials.,,".
Attached are the applicant's revised Design Standards (Exhibit C), This document is
provided solely for your information and will be the basis of the Applicant's presentation.
Planning Commission comments were based on the March 7th version of this document,
as seen in Exhibit A.
.
4
-:ff{kC6 1:.)(Gk\€/tT ~
e
Gateway Business Center - Arden Hills, MN
Proposed Planned Unit Development
Design Standards
Prepared for:
e
Chesapeake Companies
11100 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 766
Minnetonka, MN 55305
By:
Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
Pope Associates
.
February 2001
March 7, 2001
I
11
February 8, 2()()1
March 7, 2001
A?[f
e
CHESAPEAKE GA TEW A Y CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
DESIGN STANDARDS
PURPOSE AND INTENT
The Purpose and Intent of the Chesapeake Gateway Center Planned Unit Development
(PUD) is to provide for a compact, concentrated, high quality development. It shall
consist of office and supporting ancillary uses, made mutually compatible through a
combination of careful design and coordinated public and private investment. These
standards are intended to implement and effectuate the objectives of the Arden Hills
Gateway District. Where these standards vary from the Gateway District or any other
applicable City Ordinance, these standards shall govern,
PERMITTED USES
Within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, no structure or land may be used, except
for one or more of the following uses:
I, Antennas mounted on an existing structure, if integrated architecturally into the
design of a building, not exceeding five (5) feet above the highest point of the
structure,
e
2, Banks,
3, Clinics for human care,
4, Medical and dental clinic,
5, Offices, both professional and medical,
6, Hotels
PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES
Within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, permitted accessory uses shall include the
following:
1, Any incidental assembly, repair, processing, manufacturing, laboratory, or storage
necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, as long as it does not occupy more
than 60% of the gross floor area of any building, provided that such use may not
exceed a maximum of 50% of the gross square footage ofth~ entire development.
e
2, Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a
period not to exceed the time necessary to complete construction,
1
Februery 8, 2(}01
March 7, 2001
A -'?;'1
3, Private garages, parking stmctures, off-street parking and loading spaces,
e
4. Project identification and directional signage, both on and off premises,
5, Convenience retail providing service primarily to the tenants of the development.
6. Coffee shops, restaurants, cafeterias providing service primarily to the tenants of the
development.
7, Day Care Nursery,
8, Dry cleaning and laundry pick up stations,
9, I'lorists,
10, Health clubs.
11. Newsstands,
12, Single satellite earth station antenna two (2) meters or less in diameter of a single
antenna design, to receive direct broadcast services or multi-channel distribution
services one (1) meter or less in diameter and antennas designed to receive
television broadcast signals, e
LOT AREA LOT WIDTH, AND YARD REOUIREMENTS
Within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, the lot area, lot width, yard and setback
requirements for principal and accessory structures and uses shall be as follows
(excluding outlots for existing billboard structures):
1. Lot Area:
6,000 square feet One acre minimum
2,Lot Width:
50 feet minimHHl.
3,Lot Depth:
120 feet minimllHl.
+'2, Setback - Principal Stmcture
I'ront Yard:
Side YardlInterior:
Side Yani/Corner:
Rear Yard:
50 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
20 feet minimum
20 feet minimum
~3, Setback - Accessory Structure (Including Parking Decks)
I'ront Yard:
10 feet minimum
e
2
F-cbruaryS,20Q! I A ~r
March 7. 2001
e
Side Yard/Interior:
Side Yard/Comer:
Rear Yard:
10 feet minimum
20 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
604, Setback - Surface Parking
Front Yard:
Side Yard/Interior:
Side Yard/Comer:
Rear Yard:
10 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
1-,5, On lots with more than one street frontage, the front yard setback shall apply to
each side fronting on a street.
&6, Parking Structures, A new parking structure shall maintain a setback equal to the
setbacks required in this section for other structures, except that where such parking
structure is adjacent to other parking in a side or rear yard condition, the parking
structure may have a zero setback. Where a new parking structure is adjacent to an
existing use in a side or rear yard condition, the parking structure must maintain at
least a ten (10) foot setback,
.
f), 7, Drive-Through Lanes, Drive-through or drive-in lanes are not allowed within the
front yard of any building; they must be located to the side or rear of a building,
This does not pertain to driveways,
8, Building Size: In the Gateway Center PUD, the minimum building size shall be
6,000 Sq, ft,
M.9. Building Height: In the Gateway Center PUD, the maximum building height shall
be up to eight stories, not including mechanical and screening appurtenances and
penthouse structures, Building height is defined as the vertical distance from the
average elevation of the adjoining ground or the established grade, whichever is
lower, to:
A, The top of the cornice of a flat roof;
B. The deck line of a mansard roof;
C, A point directly above the highest wall of a shed roof;
D. The uppermost point of a round or other arch-type;
E, The mean distance from the eave line to the peak of the highest gable on a
pitched or hip roof,
e
3
Febrlo/"I:Y 8. 2001
March 7, 2001
BUILDING DESIGN AND MATERlALS
1. All buildings shall be designed to accomplish the goals and policies of the
Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD and the Comprehensive Plan, Building materials
shall be attractive in appearance, durable with a permanent finish, and of a quality
that is consistent with the standards and intent of the Chesapeake Gateway Center
PUD, Where appropriate, buildings shall carry over materials and colors of
adjacent buildings, with the exception of prohibited materials,
2, All buildings shall include the following four elements:
A, Accent materials, which shall be wrapped around walls that are visible from a
public street or open space;
B. Buildings containing office and retail uses shall maintain 25% minimum
window coverage on each first floor front that faces a street or public open
space;
C. Complimentary major material colors; and
D, A combination of vertical and horizontal pattern designs III the building
facade.
3, Any exterior building wall adjacent to or visible from a public street, public open
space, or abutting property may not exceed sixty (60) feet in length without
significant visual relief consisting of one or more of the following:
A. The facade shall be divided architecturally by means of significantly different
materials or textures, or
B, Horizontal offsets of at least two (2) feet in depth, or
4, Exterior building materials shall be classified as primary, secondary, or accent
materials, Primary materials shall cover at least sixty percent (60%) of the facade
of a building. Secondary materials may cover no more than thirty percent (30%) of
the facade, Accent materials may include door and window frames, lintels,
cornices, and other minor elements, and may cover no more than ten percent (10%)
of the facade, Allowable materials are as follows:
A. Primary exterior building materials may be brick, stone, glass, or integrally
colored architectural precast. Allowable finishes of architectural precast are
retarded, sand blasted, or acid etched, Mirror glass is prohibited as an exterior
material in the Chesapeake Gateway PUD,
I A5/j1
e
e
B. Secondary exterior building materials may be decorative block, integrally- .-
colored stucco, or heavy gauge aluminum or prefinished architectural metal ,..
4
F-eimli5l."y8,2()()] I A ~I\
March 7, 2001
e
panels,
C, Synthetic stucco or EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System) may be
permitted as a secondary material on upper floors only,
D, Accent materials may be wood or metal if appropriately integrated into the
overall building design and not situated in areas that will be subject to
physical or environmental damage.
E, All primary and secondary materials shall be integrally colored,
F. Structured parking facilities to be architectural precast or decorative masonry,
5, Decorative block shall be colored only by means of a pigment integral to the block
material, not applied to the surface,
6. Sheet metal, corrugated metal, asbestos, iron, shakes, plain flat concrete block
(whether painted or integrally colored or not) are not acceptable as exterior wall
materials on buildings within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD,
e
7, All mechanical equipment, whether roof-mounted or ground-mounted, shall be
completely screened from the ground-level view of adjacent properties and public
streets, or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal
building, Wood screening shall not be allowed, Roof-top units to be located in an
organized pattern, and be placed in such a manner to minimize visual impact.
8, All exterior trash enclosures or other accessory structures shall be constructed of the
same materials and colors as the principal building,
9, Consistent interior window treatments are required for windows that are. visible
from a public street or open space in offices and multiple residential complexes,
10, All buildings containing non-residential uses on the ground floor shall have
entrances that are oriented conveniently to the street frontage and to on-street and
off-street parking serving the use,
II, A color and materials finish board, elevations, and architectural renderings shall be
submitted for staff review at the time of submittal for building permit(s),
ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
Accessory buildings will not be permitted in this PUD, with the exception of parking
decks and ramps and trash enclosures. No outdoor storage of any type other than that for
parking employee vehicles during business hours shall be permitted,
e
5
FciJrul1l) 8, 200! A '1\
March 7. 2001
PARKING REQUIREMENTS tit
I, Off-Street Parking Calculation, Off-street parking for office development shall be
provided as combination of surface parking, under building underground parking
and structure parking to a ratio of five (5) parking spaces per one thousand (1000)
square feet of parking gross floor area (GFAx 95%), Parking ratios for restaurants
and other uses with higher and lower parking demands are to be in accordance with
the parking provisions of the Arden Hills zoning ordinance,
2. Off-Street Parking Dimensions. With the exception of accessible parking spaces,
all off-street parking for the development shall have a dimension of nine (9) feet in
width by eighteen (18) feet in length. Accessible parking spaces shall meet the
current dimension, location and quantity guidelines and standards. The parking
aisle dimension for off-street parking areas shall be twenty-four (24) feet in width,
3. Screening of Parking Areas, Wherever a surface parking area faces a street
frontage, such frontage shall be screened with a decorative wall, railing, hedge, or a
combination of these elements, to a minimum height of three (3) feet and a
maximum height of four and one half (4-1/2) feet above the level of the parking lot.
LOADING DOCKS
Loading docks service areas shall be not located in the front yard and shall be completely a
screened from eyc level view of puelie streets and public open spaces off premise views, _
by means of landscaping which is at least 80% opaque within two years, or by a screen
wall of the same materials and colors as the principal building,
LANDSCAPING
I, All land area not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks, or other
hard surface shall be sodded, seeded with native grasses and forbes, or mulched and
landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers, shrubbery and trees,
2, At least ten percent (10%) of the total land area within the perimeter of private
parking and driveway areas shall be landscaped (excluding natural land areas), All
undeveloped existing natural land areas are to be included within the 10%
requirement,
3, Parking lot landscaped islands shall be a mlmmum of one hundred fifty (150)
square feet in area and include at least one overstory or evergreen tree meeting the
requirements of this ordinance, The minimum width of the parking island shall be
7-1/2 feet measured from the backs of the curb,
4, Where parking abuts the site perimeter there shall be provided at least one overstory
tree per twenty-five (25) feet of site perimeter. tit
6
e
5,
At least one overstory tree shall be provided for every five hundred (500) square
feet oflandscaped area on the entire site,
Fehruary 8, 200i I A ~I
March 7. 2001
6, The landscape plan shall include a full complement of overstory, ornamental and
evergreen trees, shrubbery, and ground covers that are hardy and appropriate for the
locations in which they are planted, and which provide year-round color and
interest.
7, The following trees may not be used to satisfy the landscaping requirement of this
section:
Acer negundo
Acer saccharinum
Catalpa speciosa
Elaegnus
Ginkgo Biloba
Morus alba
Populus deltoides
Populus species
Box Elder
Silver Maple
Northern Catalpa
Russian Olive
Ginkgo (female prohibited, male permitted)
Mulberry
Cottonwood
Poplars
The following trees may be used to satisfy the landscaping requirement of this
section, but only in areas that are reasonably protected from winter wind conditions:
.
Picea pungens glauca
Pinus alba
Pinus resinosa
Colorado Blue Spruce
White Pine
Red Pine
The following trees may be used to satisfy the landscaping requirement of this
section, but only in areas that are not on, or immediately adjacent to, a public street
boulevard:
Tilia cordata
Fraxinus mandshurica mancana
Little Leaf Linden
Mancana Ash
8, All landscaping shall meet the following minimum sizes and planting conditions:
A. Deciduous Overstory Trees
B, Deciduous Understory Trees
C, Evergreen Trees
D. Large Shrubs
E. Small Shrubs
F, Spreading Evergreen Shrubs
2 inch caliper
1-1/2 inch caliper
6 feet height
4 feet height
18 inch height
18 inch spread
BB
BB
BB
CG/BB
CG/BB
CG/BB
e
9, All landscaped areas are to be irrigated and maintained to meet the requirements of
the specific plantings throughout the life of the development,
7
Fehruary 8, 20M
March 7, 200]
A~J
SIGNAGE
e
I, All signs erected on any building or land within the Chesapeake Gateway Center
PUD must comply with the standards of this section,
A. A Gateway Business Park Monument sign will be allowed along Highway 96,
The sign location and design must follow all Gateway design guidelines and
be mutually acceptable to the developer and the City of Arden Hills,
B, Building monument signs will be allowed to identifY major anchor tenants
within the buildings
2, Wall signs:
A, 'Nall signage is allowed on buildings in the Chcsapeake Gateway CeHter PUD
witllill a llorizoHtal band HO morc ,11aB three feet (3') in height, at least tCII reet
(10') and HO mor-e than fifteen (IS') above the grollRd, Wall signage
identifYing the anchor tenant shall be allowed on UP to two facades per
building in the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, Identification signs are to
be located within fifteen feet (J 5') of the top of the building parapet. The
maximum height of each sign is limited to 24 inches or percent of the facade
height measured from the ground line to the top of the parapet. whichever is
greater. The maximum sign area is limited to 200 square feet per sign
measured from the outside extremities of the sign, The anchor tenant is
defined as occupying il.reater than 50 percent of the buildinil. space,
e
B, Wall signage may be either:
(1) Attached: flat and parallel to the surface of the building and projecting
no more than one (I) foot from it, or
(2) Projecting: perpendicular to the surface of the building and no more
than one (I) foot in thickness,
C, Attached wall signage shall consist of individual letters or script logos
mounted on the building,
D. Box signs or cabinet signs, whether on a wall or on canopies, are prohibited,
except for logo signs as approved as part of the overall signage plan,
E, Allowable area of wall signs is one and one half (1-1/2) square feet of signage
per lineal foot of building frontage on a public street, public open space, or
private parking area, Each wall shall be calculated individually and sign area
may not be transferred to another side of the building, In calculating the total
allowable area of wall signage, only one side of a two-sided projecting sign ...
shall be counted, ..
8
February 8, 2()()}
lv/are" 7. 2001
I A!9(,
II
e
F, The overall and maximum allowable sign sizes shall be as allowed under the
sign section of the City of Arden Hills zoning ordinance,
G, Temporary signs for the purpose of marketing leasing and build to suite
provisions shall be allowed for the duration of the project. The overall and
maximum size of these signs shall be as allowed under the sign section of the
City of Arden Hills zoning ordinance,
H,
All signs are to be reviewed and
COlmcilStaff,
approved by the Arden Hills Gtty I
1. Monument signage shall be designed to minimize direct glare to adjacent
roadways or adjacent uses, The monument signage shall be of a material
compatible with the buildings comprising the park,
J. Temporary leasing signs and marketing signs will be allowed.
e
K. It is not the intent of these design standards to anticioate and define all asoects
of the project identification signage but rather to highlight the key issues
related to the proposed scale of the development, The size, location and
design of identification signs for single story multi-tenant buildings in this
development shall be detemlined at a later time through the review and
development of a comprehensive sign standard,
LIGHTING
I, All exterior lighting in the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD shall be downcast
cutoff type fixtures. The styles and types are to be determined by the project
designers and approved by the Arden Hills City Council. No light source may be
more than twenty-five (25) feet above the ground, The fixture material selection
shall be consistent with the building materials,
2, The applicant shall provide light standard and fixture details, and a photometric
lighting diagram prepared by a qualified professional showing light levels, in foot-
candles, from all exterior artificial lighting for all points on and within ten (10) feet
of the site,
3, Lighting levels in exterior parking areas shall average one half (1/2) foot candle,
with a minimum of one tenth (1110) foot-candle in all locations,
4. Lighting levels in interior parking areas shall average two (2) foot-candles, with a
minimum of one half (112) foot-candle in all locations.
e
5, Lighting levels shall not exceed one half (1/2) foot-candle at the abutting property
line or right-of-way line, and no direct glare from lighting on site shall extend onto
9
Fa.9ruary 8, 2{J{J} I A !Y,'I
March 7. 200]
e
the public street, public open space or neighboring properties,
6, Lighting shall be provided at the entrances to the buildings to provide identity and
pedestrian accent. Additional accent building and signage lighting will be allowed,
TRASH HANDLING
All trash, recyclable materials, and equipment for handling them, including compactors,
shall be totally screened from eye level view from public streets and adjacent properties,
whether in the front, side or rear, either by being stored within the principal structure,
totally screened from. view by the principal building, or stored within an accessory
structure, Trash handling areas, if provided, shall be in enclosed areas built of the same
materials and colors as the principal building, with gates comprised of metal. Wood
fences and gates will not be allowed,
PROJECT NAME
I, The actual project name for the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD development will
be determined by the developer during the marketing and development of the
project,
e
e
]0
.
.
*0\-05" extnett e>t
.
11'.0"
..
TYPICAL
..- -. 3/4" EXTE
PAINTED
E> {TEXT TO
ic
~
:c
;,'l
w
:c
X
<(
1: -
~
'D
.....---". X b" T
E> (SET 3",11
;-
~RADE
I-
SI6NFACE
RIOR GRADE PL'1'WOOD
SU~ACE WI PAINTED LETTERING
BE DETERMINED)
REATED WOOD POSTS
6ELOIJ) GRADE)
AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGN
(ANNOUNCING NEW OFFICE PARK FOR LEASE)
1/4' : 1'-0"
POPE
ASSOCIATES
AlOOO1YCl'S
h,,9IOO D_NOS
C~ESAPEAKE COMPANIES
taailsiM 1:1
~"'\r
hi.
\Ioul
13211,00111
SRD
21 Milrch 2001
AI
f-1WY 0:J4/3~W
ARDEN I-lILLS, HN
11ll1<<-_......
kJ'NLMIiI_..
~--
fow.~~_'.'
~ 1-/J.-
~
~
~
~ ~
~
eM ,
(I I "
~ ,
r/tJatID! , ~ ,
I ~
~ / I
~ I ~
I ,.
~ ~~.
I ~~
f ~~,
I
I ,
~ ,,"
I {LO" 1
~ , o 61.~,Z:q
g ~I ~t.6t.6
."r,..J(l
('1..,101-' ,,~"
0' .
n !S' A ~I
, " ~ "'" e I
:f.
~i ~ I
;'1 =- I
~ I '.,
~.J:! l'I) )~
~h ~ I >1
.., "
.,oS I ~~
~~~ .'
.~~ ~ 9) I
~,- ~ "
~G; . rlDCl.
, - == -IS.. I
~ : ere. ~ .
<II ;;.... I
E SO.2f'29"E 456.00 .
~
~, ~
I......,OU..'~ .
l
- n n -
"'.
R.844.!JJ
tJ_/J",J6'2/"
L-2 0.64 .. :
....
i
/
/
/
_If(
;;l....
d""
If #^- /.-
!. f 1f~ A
;l fJ~,~:J
f
~
~
.
~
.
>
~
~
.
!
6
e
e
e
*0\-<:6
t;;XttlfJlT (:; ~,
March 21,2001
Ms, Jennifer Chaput
City Planner
City of Arden Hills
4364 West Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794
Dear Jennifer:
Enclosed is a revised form of our design standards. It does not address all of the items listed on
the summary from the Planning Commission,
We felt that we had excellent dialogue with the Planning Commission, We greatly appreciate
their input and willingness to work together to create a framework that will allow us to
effectively market the office park, yet provide the flexibility to meet the diverse needs of to day's
corporate users,
Although we agree with a number of changes that the planning commission has suggested, there
are still important items that we feel will impede the development of the office park. We look
forward to continue our discussion of these items in more detail with the City Council.
We have also included a copy of the design for the signs we propose for the announcement of
our new office park and solicitation of corporate users, Initially, we would like a sign along the
freeway (1-694) to have two sides in a "V" shape for maximum exposure from both directions,
Because of the sight line restriction, the sign is going to have to be setback quite a distance from
the property line, therefore, the need for the larger sign as requested,
Also, we would like a smaller version, one sided ("4 x 8") sign to be placed on our property in
the area of the Northwest entrance of the park at 13th Avenue and Gateway Boulevard,
Please call me at 952-847-2444 if you have any questions,
Sincerely,
~AKE CO~.1PANIES NLP GROUP, LLC
U~~ &-1.-~
Peter C, Carlson
President
PCClamb
Enclosure
cc: Diane fredeen
11100 \VAYZATA BOl'LE\'ARD . SUITE. 766 . MI)'\NI~TONKA, iYllKKESOTA 55305
TSLEPHO?\E (952) 847-2444 . F.i\.X (952) 595-8247
_.'--'---=:r~>
03/21/01 13: 26 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU, INC,
141 001
Co.'
e; cAeJ-Si:N
G
Fek::ar)' g, 2fJfJJ
Mareh 7, 2fJfJl
Mareh 8~
Revised Drafl March 8, 2001 as Modified March 21, 2001
c,~l
Post-it" Fax Note 7671
To
Phone It Phone #/P[2-3
Fa>' "'\5 1.--S'1G -?{'2.J.f'=r Fax' I:{; (2-
e
,~'"
~(D~v0
CHESAPEAKE GATEWAY CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
DESIGN STANDARDS
PURPOSE AND INTENT
The Purpose and Intent of the Chesapeake Gateway Center Planned Unit Development
(PUD) is to provide for a compact, concentrated, high quality development. It shall
consist of office and supporting ancillary uses, made mutually compatible through a
combination of careful design and coordinated public and private investment. These
standards are intended to implement and effectuate the objectives of the Arden Hills
Gateway District. Where these standards vary from the Gateway District or any other
applicable City Ordinance, these standards shall govern.
PERMITTED USES
Within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, no structure or land may be used, except
for one or more ofthe following uses:
1, Antennas mounted on an existing structure, if integrated architecturally into the
design of a building, not exceeding five (5) feet above the highest point of the .A
structure, -
2. Banks,
3, Clinics for human care.
4, Medical and dental clinic.
5, Offices, both professional and medical,
6, Hotels
PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES
Within the Chesapeake Gateway Center POO, permitted accessory uses shall include the
following:
I, Any incidental assembly, repair, processing, manufacturing, laboratory, or storage
necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, as long as it does not occupy more
than 60% of the gross floor area of any building, provided that such use may not
exceed a maximum of 50% of the gross square footage of the entire development.
2, Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a ..
period not to exceed the time necessary to complete construction. ,.,
1
03/21/01 13:26 FAX 612 337 S601
DSU, INC,
141 002
e
February 8, 2()()1
Ma:'ch 7, 21J()]
March 8, 2()()]
Revised Draft March 8 2001 as Modified March 2/.2001
C 7/11
3. Private garages, parking structures, off-street parking and loading spaces.
4, Project identification and directional signage, both on and off premises,
5, Convenience retail providing service primarily to the tenants of the development.
6. Coffee shops, restaurants, cafeterias providing service primarily to the tenants of the
development.
7, Day Care Nursery,
8. Dry cleaning and laundry pick up stations,
9. Florists,
10, Health clubs,
11, Newsstands.
e
12, Single satellite earth station antenna two (2) meters or less in diameter of a single
antenna design, to receive direct broadcast services or multi-channel distribution
services one (1) meter or less in diameter and antennas designed to receive
television broadcast signals.
LOT AREA. LOT WIDTH. AND YARD REOUIREMENTS
Within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, the lot area, lot width, yard and setback
requirements for principal and accessory structures and uses shall be as follows
(excluding outlots for existing billboard structures):
1. Lot Area:
One acre minimum
2. Setback - Principal Structure
Front Yard:
Side Yard/Interior:
Side Yard/Comer:
Rear Yard:
50 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
20 feet minimum
20 feet minimum
3,
Setback - Accessory Structure (Including Parking Decks)
e
Front Yard: 10 feet minimum
Side Yard/Interior: 10 feet minimum
2
-~
03! 2 J,I 0 1
13:26 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU, INC.
141 003
F-cbrul1ry 8, 2QQ 1
U<<reh :, 2f}f}!
March 8, 2(}QI
Revised Draft March 8,2001 as Modified March 21. 2001
Cr 4;,' I
e
Side Yard/Comer: 20 feet minimum
Rear Yard: 10 feet minimum
4, Setback - Surface Parking
Front Yard:
Side Yard/Interior:
Side Yard/Comer:
Rear Yard:
10 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
5, On lots with more than one street frontage, the front yard setback shall apply to
each side fronting on a street,
6. Parking Structures, A new parking structure shall maintain a setback equal to the
setbacks required in this section for other structures, except that where such parking
structure is adjacent to other parking in a side or rear yard condition, the parking
structure may have a zero setback, Where a new parking structure is adjacent to an
existing use in a side or rear yard condition, the parking structure must maintain at
least a ten (10) foot setback,
7. Drive-Through Lanes, Drive-through or drive-in lanes are not allowed within the
front yard of any building; they must be located to the side or rear of a building,
This does not pertain to driveways,
e
8, Building Size: In the Gateway Center PUD, the minimum building size shall be
6,000 sq, ft,
9. Building Height: In the Gateway Center PUD, the maximum building height shall
be up to eight stories, not including mechanical and screening appurtenances and
penthouse structures, Building height is defined as the vertical distance from the
average elevation of the adjoining ground or the established grade, whichever is
lower, to:
A, The top of the cornice of a flat roof;
B. The deck line of a mansard roof;
C, A point directly above the highest wall of a shed roof;
D. The uppermost point ofa round or other arch-type;
E. The mean distance from the eave line to the peak of the highest gable on a
pitched or hip roof, e
3
03/21/01 13:26 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU. INC,
141 004
e
.<:elm,W}' 8, 2gg1 C WI \
M&eh 7. 21Hil
lda1,e-h 8, 2Q01
Revised Draft March 8, 1001 as Modified March 1 I. 2001
BUILDING DESIGN AND MATERIALS
1, All buildings shall be designed to accomplish the goals and policies of the
Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD and the Comprehensive Plan. Building materials
shall be attractive in appearance, durable with a permanent finish, and of a quality
that is consistent with the standards and intent of the Chesapeake Gateway Center
PUD, Where appropriate, buildings shall carry over materials and colors of
adjacent buildings, with the exception of prohibited materials,
2, All buildings shall include the following four elements:
A, Accent materials, which shall be wrapped around walls that are visible from a
public street or open space;
B, Buildings containing office and retail uses shall maintain 25% minimum
window coverage on each first floor front that faces a street or public open
space;
C. Complimentary major material colors; and
e
D, A combination of vertical and horizontal pattern designs in the building
facade.
3, Any exterior building wall adjacent to or visible from a public street, public open
space, or abutting property may not exceed sixty (60) feet in length without
significant visual relief consisting of one or more of the following:
A. The facade shall be divided architecturally by means of significantly different
materials or textures, or
B, Horizontal offsets of at least two (2) feet in depth, or
4, Exterior building materials shall be classified as primary, secondary, or accent
materials. Primary materials shall cover at least sixty percent (60%) of the facade
of a building. Secondary materials may cover no more than thirty percent (30%) of
the facade, Accent materials may include door and window frames, lintels,
cornices, and other minor elements, and may cover no more than ten percent (10%)
of the facade, Allowable materials are as follows:
e
A, Primary exterior building materials may be brick, stone, glass, or integrally
colored architeclllral precast, Allowable finishes of architectural precast are
retarded, sand blasted, or acid etched, Mirror glass is prohibited as an exterior
material in the Chesapeake Gateway PUD.
4
03/2,/01 13:27 FAX 612 337 5601
-~
DSU, INC,
I4J 005
Februtl')' i!, 2001 C ~\
Mm-ch 7. 20(J 1
Marchi!, 2001 .
Revised Droll March 8. 2001 a, Modified March 21.2001
B, Secondary exterior building materials may be decorative black, integrally-
colored stucco, er--heavy gauge aluminum or prefmished architectural metal
panels, For single-story buildings only. secondary exterior building materials
mav also include decorative black. Synthetic stucco or EIFS (Exterior
Insulation and Finish System) may be oennitted as a secondary material on
upper floors onlv UP to a maximum of W 30 percent.
C,Syffibetie srneee er Elf'S (BJlterier lRsulatien and Finish Sj'Gtem) may be
permitted as a secendary material en upfleI' fleers eaiy,
l*C, Accent materials may be wood or metal if appropriately integrated into the
overall building design and not situated in areas that will be subject to
physical or environmental damage,
EoD, All primary and secondary materials shall be integrally colored,
F-,E, Structured parking facilities to be architectural precast or decorative masonry
shall meet the saa:e ellterior materill1s as the ooncillal structure,
5. Decorative block shall be colored only by means of a pigment integral to the block .
material, not applied to the surface,
6, Sheet metal, corrugated metal, asbestos, iron, shakes, plain flat concrete block
(whether painted or integrally colored or not) are not acceptable as exterior wall
materials on buildings within the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD,
7. AIl mechanical equipment, whether roof-mounted or ground-mounted, shall be
completely screened from the ground-level view of adjacent properties and public
streets, or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal
building, Wood screening shall not be allowed, Roof-top units to be located in an
organized pattern, and be placed in such a manner to minimize visual impact,
8, All exterior trash enclosures or other accessory structures shall be constructed of the
same materials and colors as the principal building,
9. Consistent interior window treatments are required far windows that are visible
from a public street or open space in offices and multiple residential complexes,
10 .AlllJlHldiags eontainiag ROR r-esiaeRtial uses OR the grBood fleor shall have enHances
that are erieated cOll'/eRieatly te the street froRtage lHld te en street aRd off street
parkir,g serving thEHlS&.
+hIO, A color and materials finish board, elevations, and architectural renderings shall .
be submitted for staff-Planning Commission review and Citv Council approval at
5
~~~3/2~/Ol 13:27 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU. INC,
141 006
e
['--ear"",.,. 8, 200! C "31';'1
!,18I'eh 7, 200!
Uareh 8, 2Q01
Revised Draft March 8. 200 I as Modified Murch 2] 200]
the time of submittal for eailding permit(s) final plan submission and final PUD
approval.
ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
Accessory buildings will not be permitted in this PUD, with the exception of parking
decks and ramps and trash enclosures, No outdoor storage of any type other than that for
parking employee vehicles during business hours shall be permitted,
PARKING REOUlREMENTS
1, Off-Street Parking Calculation. Off-street parking for office development shall be
provided as combination of surface parking, under building underground parking
and structure parking to a ratio of five (5) parking spaces per one thousand (1000)
square feet of parking gross floor area (GFAx 95%), Parking ratios for restaurants
and other uses with higher and lower parking demands are to be in accordance with
the parking provisions of the Arden Hills zoning ordinance,
e
2, Off-Street Parking Dimensions, With the exception of accessible parking spaces,
all off-street parking for the development shall have a dimension of nine (9) feet in
width by eighteen (18) feet in length, Accessible parking spaces shall meet the
current dimension, location and quantity guidelines and standards, The parking
aisle dimension for off-street parking areas shall be twenty-four (24) feet in width.
3, Screening of Parking Areas, Wherever a surface parking area faces a street
frontage, such frontage shall be screened with a landscaped berm or a decorative
wall of compatible materials. railing, hedge, or a combination of these elements, to
a minimwn height of three (3) feet and a maximum height of four and one half (4-
1/2) feet above the level of the parking lot,
LOADING DOCKS
Loading docks and service areas shall be not located in the front yard and shall be
screened from off premise views adiacent public streets, by means of landscaping which
is at least 80% opaque within two years, or by a screen wall of the same materials and
colors as the principal building,
LANDSCAPING
1, All land area not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks, or other
hard surface shall be sodded, seeded with native grasses and forbes, or mulched and
landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers, shrubbery and trees,
e
2, At least ten percent (10%) of the total land area within the perimeter of private
6
--~
03/2)-/01
DSU, INC,
13:27 FAX 612 337 5601
Feh""Il'}' 8, 20() 1
UJ/<e.~ 7, 20(}!
M8I3h 8, 2()(}]
Revised Drafi March 8.2001 as Modified March 21.2001
parking and driveway areas shall be landscaped (excluding natural land areas), All
undeveloped existing natural land areas are to be included within the 10%
requirement,
3, Parking lot landscaped islands shall be a minimum of one hundred fifty (150)
square feet in area and include at least one overstory or evergreen tree meeting the
requirements of this ordinance. The minimum width of the parking island shall be
7-112 feet measured from the backs of the curb,
4, Where parking abuts the site perimeter therc shall be provided at least one overstory
tree per twenty-five (25) feet of site perimeter,
5. At least one overstory tree shall be provided for every five hundred (500) square
feet oflandscaped area on the entire site.
141 007
c,~\
e
6, The landscape plan shall include a full complement of overstory, ornamental and
evergreen trees, shrubbery, and ground covers that are hardy and appropriate for the
locations in which they are planted, and which provide year-round color and
interest.
7, The following trees may not be used to satisfy the landscaping requirement of this e
section:
Acer negundo
Acer saccharinum
Catalpa speciosa
Elaegnus
Ginkgo Biloba
Moros alba
Populus deltoides
Populus species
Box Elder
Silver Maple
Northern Catalpa
Russian Olive
Ginkgo (female prohibited, male permitted)
Mulberry
Cottonwood
Poplars
The following trees may be used to satisfy the landscaping requirement of this
section, but only in areas that are reasonably protected from winter wind conditions:
Picea pungens glauca
Pinus alba
Pinus resinosa
Colorado Blue Spruce
White Pine
Red Pine
The following trees may be used to satisfy the landscaping requirement of this
section, but only in areas that are not on, or immediately adjacent to, a public street
boulevard:
Tilia cordata
Little Leaf Linden
.
7
~
03/2)/01 13:27 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU, INC,
I4J 008
e
PeblWD'}' 8, 2001 C 11,
!,1tl/'8.'l 7, 21!0!
!,{SI'eh 8, 2001
Revised Drafi March 8. 200] as Modified March 21.2001
Fraxinus mandshurica mancana
Mancana Ash
8. All landscaping shall meet the following minimum sizes and planting conditions:
A. Deciduous Overstory Trees
B. Deciduous Understory Trees
C, Evergreen Trees
D, Large Shrubs
E, Small Shrubs
F, Spreading Evergreen Shrubs
2 inch caliper
1-1/2 inch caliper
6 feet height
4 feet height
18 inch height
18 inch spread
BB
BB
BB
CG/BB
CG/BB
CG/BB
9, All landscaped areas are to be irrigated and maintained to meet the requirements of
the specific plantings throughout the life of the development.
SIGNAGE
1. All signs erected on any building or land within the Chesapeake Gateway Center
PUD must comply with the standards of this section,
.
A. A Gateway Business Park Monument sign will be allowed along Highway 96,
The sign location and design must follow all Gateway design guidelines and
be mutually acceptable to the developer and the City of Arden Hills,
B, Building monument signs will be allowed to identify major anchor tenants
within the buildings
2, Wall signs:
A. Wall signage identifying the anchor tenant shall be allowed on up to two
facades per building in the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD, Identification
signs are to be located within fifteen feet (15') of the top of the building
parapet. The maximum height of each sign is limited to 24 inches or percent
of the fa~ade height measured from the ground line to the top of the parapet,
whichever is greater, The maximum sign area is limited to 200 square feet per
sign measured from the outside extremities of the sign, The anchor tenant is
defmed as occupying greater than 50 percent of the building space,
B. Wall signage may be either:
(I) Attached: flat and parallel to the surface of the building and projecting
no more than one (l) foot from it, or
e
(2) Projecting: perpendicular to the surface of the building and no more
than one (1) foot in thickness,
8
03,21/01 13:28 FAX 612 337 5601
-~
DSU. 1NC,
141009
F-ebru<<Y}' 8, ]()()l
}.1artJh 7, 2()()l
March 8, 200!
Revised Draft March 8, 2001 as Modified March 21,2001
C \0/
/11
.
C, Attached wall signage shall consist of individual letters or script logos
mounted on the building.
D, Box signs or cabinet signs, whether on a wall or on canopies, are prohibited,
except for logo signs as approved as part of the overall signage plan,
E, Allowable area of wall signs is one and one half (1-1/2) square feet of signage
per lineal foot of building frontage on a public street, public open space, or
private parking area. Each wall shall be calculated individually and sign area
may not be transferred to another side of the building, In caleulating the total
allowable area of wall signage, only one side of a two-sided projecting sign
shall be counted,
F, The overall and maximum allowable sign sizes shall be as allowed under the
sign section of the City of Arden Hills zoning ordinance.
G, Temporary signs for the purpose of marketing leasing and build to suite
provisions shall be allowed for the duration of the projeet. The overall and
maximum size of these signs shall be as allowed under the sign section of the .
City of Arden Hills zoning ordinance,
H, All signs are to be reviewed and approved by the Arden Hills Staff,
1. Monument signage shall be designed to minimize direct glare to adjacent
roadways or adjacent uses, The monument signage shall be of a material
compatible with the buildings comprising the park,
J, Temporary leasing signs and marketing signs will be allowed as
recommended to the Citv Council bv Staff.
K. It is not the intent of these design standards to anticipate and define all aspects
of the project identification signage but rather to highlight the key issues
related to the proposed seale of the development, The size, location and
design of identification signs for single story multi-tenant buildings in this
development shall be determined at a later time through the review and
development of a comprehensive sign standard,
LIGHTING
1, All exterior lighting in the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD shall be downca~t
cutoff type fixtures, The styles and types are to be detenruned by the project
designers and approved by the Arden Hills City Council. No light source may be
more than twenty-five (25) feet above the ground, The fixture material selection
.
9
03/21/01
---------.,.
,
.
.
.
13'28 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU. INC,
141 010
Fchrum'}' 8,2001
.',1aPe!l 7, 2(}(} 1
A1areh 8, 20g 1
Revised Drafi March 8, 2001 as Modified March 21. 2001
0/1/
/( \
shall be consistent with the building materials,
2, The applicant shall provide light standard and fixture details, and a photometric
lighting diagram prepared by a qualified professional showing light levels, in foot-
candles, from all exterior artificial lighting for all points on and within ten (10) feet
of the site.
3, Lighting levels in exterior parking areas shall average one half (1/2) foot candle,
with a minimum of one tenth (1/10) foot-candle in all locations,
4. Lighting levels in interior parking areas shall average two (2) foot-candles, with a
minimum of one half (1/2) foot-candle in all locations,
5, Lighting levels shall not exceed one half (1/2) foot-candle at the abutting property
line or right-of-way line, and no direct glare from lighting on site shall extend onto
the public street, public open space or neighboring properties,
6, Lighting shall be provided at the entrances to the buildings to provide identity and
pedestrian accent, Additional accent building and signage lighting will be allowed,
TRASH HANDLING
All trash, recyclable materials, and equipment for handling them, including compactors,
shall be totally screened from eye level view from public streets and adjacent properties,
whether in the front, side or rear, either by being stored within the principal structure,
totally screened from view by the principal building, or stored within an accessory
structure, Trash handling areas, if provided, shall be in enclosed areas built of the same
materials and colors as the principal building, with gates comprised of metal. Wood
fences and gates will not be allowed,
PROJECT NAME
1, The actual project name for the Chesapeake Gateway Center PUD development will
be determined by the developer during the marketing and development of the
proj ect,
/0
e
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 12, 2001
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jennifer Chaput, City PlannerCfY
SUBJECT: Case #01-06, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
City of Arden Hills
Request
The City of Arden Hills requests amendment of Figure 7,1, Road Classifications, of the
1998 Comprehensive Plan to correct the locations of the identified "Community
Gateways", reflecting the findings ofthe 1985 Parkway System Feasibility Study,
e
Back2round
In November 1998, the City's Comprehensive Plan was updated and adopted by the City
Council. The 1998 Comprehensive Plan update identified "Community Gateway"
locations in Figure 7,1, Road Classifications, This map was generated from the 1985
Parkways System Feasibility Study, as identified by the Parkway Task Force and
Wehrman Consultants at that time, The Comprehensive Plan map does not identifY the
comer of Lexington Avenue and County Road E or the corner of County Road E2 and
Cleveland Avenue as a "Community Gateways", Therefore, Figure 7,1 of the
Comprehensive Plan does not match the Parkway System Feasibility Study map due to
these errors, Figure 7.1 has been amended to identifY all of the locations shown in the
Parkway System Feasibility Study. The amended map and information relating to this
case was provided to the City Council with the Planning Commission packet for the
March 7, 2001 meeting.
Options
I. Recommend approval as submitted,
2. Recommend approval with conditions,
3, Recommend denial with reasons for denial.
4. Table for additional information.
.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendment of Figure 7.1, Road
Classifications, of the 1998 Comprehensive Plan to correct the locations of the identified
"Community Gateways", reflecting the findings of the 1985 Parkway System Feasibility
Study,
Legend
* Community Gateway
N A Minor Arterial
N Reliever
N Principal Arterial
/\, / Minor Arterial
. ...~' Future Minor Arterial
N Collector Road
/' \ I future Collector Road
:.. : Parkway
$ .
Figure 7.1
ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS
November, 1998
Amended Map, March, 2001
-~. "'lf~~F~~a~l'~:~ o~~:S'~~
I ~i1-1" ~~,
I 1/)..'. l: , "\ ~Cj
~ j:' . ~if lj;
r>ll
I '
,,...' ,.
"~~'0J.
;1ll
'[ .
".
l'
I'
\ ,
\i 1-
\ f.\
1; "
\ 'il
\, ..
-, .
'L.. ~,.
"\''\",* ..
";r..0',,,~:. "',:..~,,~, "'~~"",,!, Iii' ,,"" :,,~ ~,":'''' o!'t
e
~"
-'
ji
I
i
,
.-
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
~.
County Road 0
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 22, 2001
TO:
Mayor and City Councilmembers tIll J./ ~
.Joe Lynch, City Administrator JI..W""'--
City Hall - Costs
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Previously, you directed that the City Administrator was authorized to make changes to City Hall
construction, up to an amount totaling $5,000, but to bring that information back to the City
Council on a timely basis for a decision. The following are items that you need to be aware of. I
have estimated the specific costs of those items as determined by either the architect, the
contractor, or both, These are items that need to be determined by the City Council, so the
contractor can move forward,
Roof Drains
Two (2) roof drains were missed in the design plans for the proper drainage and function of the
roof system, These are necessary and required by code, I have indicated to Peter Vesterholt that
Staff feels that the City should not be responsible for these costs; that either the architect or
mechanical engineer is responsible for these costs, The fact remains that they need to be
installed now. Thc estimated cost is $6,340.00,
Staff would recommend that the City Council authorize the installation of the roof drains and
authorize the City Administrator to continue negotiating payment of this cost.
Roof Ladders
A previous Fire Inspector required that two (2) roof ladders be installed to be used by Fire
Department personnel in the event of a fire, given the fact that we have a multi-story structure.
Our current Fire Inspector finds that these are not necessary, and is recommending that they be
deleted from the contract. This would be a $759.00 deduct.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the deletion of these two roof ladders from the
contract.
Electrical Ontlets
In reviewing the changes on the second story, there were two (2) electrical outlets located on the
north wall of the conference room that could not be placed as indicated, due to the fact that there
was a glass window from ceiling to floor, These two outlets have been relocated to the south
wall, and one additional outlet would be located in the center of the room to provide some
flexibility for future teleconferencing needs,
.
.
.
Memorandum, City Hall - Costs
Page Two
March 22,2001
The City would receive a $349.00 credit for the removal of the two (2) outlets from the north
wall.
In addition, an outlet located near the stairs from the administrative office access to the stair
landing on the second story will be moved north along the west wall to remove it from the
general path of stairway traffic. There is no additional cost for this item.
The following items have been identified as cost increases due to the fact that through further
review of design plans and layouts, City staff is requesting these changes. These are also items
that the contractor would need to have a decision on in order to proceed in a timely fashion, as
they are currently constructing walls, and beginning final layouts for office space.
Front Counter Reception Area
The previous plans were bare bones regarding the front counter area. There were no provisions
made for cabinets, drawers, or storage space. The areas for accommodating handicapped
accessibility, according to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), were not in full compliance.
The areas were originally designed for wheelchair access in a "side-straddle" fashion in the area,
and the writing counter space available was only about six inches (6") wide, so completing
applications, permits and other paperwork would be diflicult. We've asked the architect to look
at making a full eight inch (8") depth, to allow full front access. Also, other changes to this area
would include built-in cabinets and file drawers, as well as an area in the front counter to store
necessary paperwork (i.e., permits, etc.) for easier access and distribution to applicants.
The net changes to the area are estimated at $10,636.00. This includes new countertop space,
built-in cabinets and drawers, and changes to the ADA compliant areas. Staff would recommend
that the City Council authorize these changes to reflect a space that is fully handicapped
accessible, and provides for more visually effective and efficient storage area for access of
documents and information for distribution to the public.
Community Room
The downstairs community room had originally been planned to be cement block walls with bare
pipe exposure and painted surface. Due to the fact that we have expanded the basement to full
length, the community room has expanded in size, and will probably also expand in terms of
function and flexibility. 1 don't believe it's appropriate for the general public, classrooms, or
Army National Guard training take place in a space that doesn't reflect the overall quality and
value of the facility. The cost to enclose the space with sheetrock, taping and painting, as well as
carpet instead of tile flooring is estimated at $7,699.00.
StafT recommends that the City Council approve this community room change to allow for a
finished wall and carpet look.
.
Memorandum, City Hall- Costs
Page Three
March 22, 2001
Partition Wall/Door
On the main floor, the work area between the City Administrator's office and the Administrative
Secretary's office was for access to the Administrator's office through the workspace of the
Administrative Secretary. Staff felt that this was not conducive to the type of work and work
space privacy for both the Administrator and Secretary. In order to fully separate these rooms,
and have access to the City Administrator from the main office lobby, a partition wall and door,
an air volume controller, and minor changes to heating and ventilating would need to be installed
in the office of the Administrative Secretary. The cost to accommodate this change is estimated
to be $5,022.00.
Staff would recommend that the City Council approve those changes as described.
Armv National Guard Space
As previously mentioned, the Army National Guard has approached the City about changes to
the space to be provided by the City. Previously, they had asked for space on the lower level, per
our agreement, up to 320 square foot of office space. At subsequent meetings, they've indicated
that the lower level space could be reduced sufficiently for the "trainers" on the weekends and
after hours for them and their equipment. The other space required would bc office space for
Dave Hammemick who would have a public presence during normal business hours at City Hall.
.
The Guard inquired about space on the second level, and I indicated that I would like to reserve
that space for future City Hall expansion, and we would like to only maintain the conference
room at this time.
We then discussed the main level office space, given the fact that we have one (1) extra office at
this time, originally planned for a map and drafting room. The Guard indicated that this would
be acceptable to them.
In conversations with staff, the question has come up that, given the fact that the Guard is a
short-term user of the facility and not paying us any rent or lease monies, to what extent should
the City go to provide large or multiple office spaces for the Guard? The reason given by the
Guard for desiring office space (not in the lower level) is due to the fact that it will function as a
business office for Dave Hammemick, and he will be meeting with contacts during the day, and
would like a more typical officc setup. They feel that, by being on the lower level, they're
relegated to the "back room" space, which doesn't have windows, and isn't typical of the City
offices.
.
Staff s perspective is that they are not like City offices and they're not going to occupy space at
City Hall on a long-term basis, and we don't want to make so many changes to the facility that it
renders the space unusable by the City in the future, or that will cost us more to retrofit at that
time, for City purposes. There would also be staff services that would, by default, be used by the
Guard if they were on the main level (i.e., Receptionist).
.
.
.
Memorandum, City Hall - Costs
Page Four
March 22, 2001
Staff recommends that the City Council maintain all Army National Guard space on the lower
level, and outfit an office of up to 300 square feet on that level. This would be the equivalent of
two City offices on the main level at 150 square feet each. We would propose to finish the walls,
paint, carpet and suspended ceiling in this 300 square foot area. In this fashion, we can further
subdivide the 300 square feet into two (2), 150 square foot offices, should future needs indicate.
We therefore maintain all Guard functions in one location, and they have access to only a portion
of the building, instead of two areas. We also continue to maintain a separation of City space
and fWlction from National Guard space and fllilction, and we have the flexibility on the main
level to utilize the open office area for map and plan review, as well as seasonal or part-time
employees and/or interns. This would also provide space for any consultants needing temporary
on-site office space during a specific project (i.e., attorney, engineer, planning consultant, etc.).
Generator
Previously, the City COllilcil was approached about the need for a generator, since the City Hall
is identified in the City's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) as the operations center in case of
emergency. A generator had not been originally planned. At one point, we considered a
permanently affixed generator, and its necessary hookups and scrcening that would be required.
This quickly became prohibitive at an cstimated cost of $70 - 80,000.00.
At this time, staff recommends that the City COllilcil make the appropriate changes to the wiring
to accommodate installation of a manual transfer switch, to allow for a mobile generator to be
hooked up on-site in the event of disaster, to allow the City Hall to function as the Emergency
Opcrations Center. The necessary wiring and installation change costs are estimated to be
$14,000.00. Staff would further recommend that it establish a goal for 2002 that a budgetary
priority would be the acquisition of a third mobile generator for the City. This would allow
flexibility in use by the maintenance department, and for emergency disastcr preparedness. The
cost estimate for a mobile generator are estimated at $30 - 40,000.00, and this cost could be
covered with part of the 2000 budget surplus, or could be budgeted for 2002 and obtained
then.
cc: Terry Post, City Accountant
Dave Scherbel, Building Official
~
........
E~ ~ILLS
.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 20, 2001
TO: Joe Lynch, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Scherbel, Building Official
SUBJECT: Emergency Generator Backup for New City Hall
The Cities EOP (Emergency Operations Plan) requires that City Hall must act as the main
control center in the event the City experiences an emergency or natural disaster. Staff
has consulted with three separate contractors for the price of a generator and has
detemlined the following options.
.
1.) Provide a permmlent generator that would handle minimal operating capabilities. It
has been determined that a I OOkw gcnerator would operate all lights, computers, and
cooling system on the 1 sl and 2nd floor only. (No basement, Council Chmnbers, or
elevator). The cost for a 100kw generator is approximately $27,500.00 plus
installation of approximately $36,500.00.
2.) Provide a permanent generator that would handle the entire building. A 200kw
generator costs approximately $36,000.00, with installation costs of$33,500.00.
3.) Provide manual transfer switch and necessary wiring for a portable generator. The
cost for this is approximately $13,500.00. A portable generator can cither be rented
for approximately $2,100.00 per week or purchased for approximately $32,300.00.
The problem with renting is there will be no guarantee one will be available when
needed.
Other items to note - the generator installation price is for a permanent generator
installed at the far NW comer of the parking lot enclosed by a cedar fcnce, with the
wiring to the building underground, Also, part ofthe cost for the generator could be
recovered by participating in Excel Energy's offline peak cnergy plan. The savings
would be a minimum of 1 0% per summer months, with a potential of up to 40%, This
depends on what type of program you enroll in.
.
The portable generator would not have thc high cost of installation, nor the problem of
where to locate it as it would only be used in an emergency. If the City were to purchase
a mobile generator the City would also have the ability to use it elsewhere in the City as
needed.
.
.
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 22, 2001
TO:
Mayor and City Councilmembers .1
Joe Lynch, City Administrator(j
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City Hall- Technology, Maintenance and Security and Furnishing
Options for City Hall
Staff volunteered for service on three (3) different subcommittees to look at technology
upgrades, maintenance and security, and furnishings required for City Hall.
If the end results desired by the City COllilcil are a flexible, fllilctional, available City Hall, the
following will achieve those end results.
Furniture
Furniture was preprogrammed in the original overall cost estimate for City Hall construction
(Attachment A - Staff memorandum dated February 16, 2001), There was never any
breakdown on the cost itemization for direct purchase of furniture and what was to be applied to
the management of furnishing the building.
We've obtained a proposal from Architectural Alliance for managing tile bid, installation and
administration offllrnishing City Hall at $20,000,00. The remaining portion of the budgeted
$155,000.00 would be applied to the furniture purchase itself.
Maintenance and Security
Staff is recommending that the City go to a remote card reader system (Attachment B - Staff
Memorandum dated February 13,2001). This system allows for the most flexibility for City
Hall security. The new City Hall will be used in completely different ways that any of the public
facilities have been to-date in the City. You will have multiple groups and individuals requesting
use of space at various times (day, evening and weekends). The City needs a flexible, functional
system that allows for use of the available space, yet provides for protection expected upon
entering City Hall.
Previous discussions indicated that the fallback position is the current system, which is key sets
and programmable alarms. While this may seem to fit the qualification of basic and necessary, it
will not allow the use and full functionality of City Hall. With the key system, we would need to
designate an individual for distributing and collecting keys and reprogramming security codes;
collect security deposits; and to explain to disgrlliltled users why we had to keep all or a portion
of their security deposit because oflost, misplaced or non-returned keys. This person would also
need to be available to respond when a security code was not entered properly or the building
was not properly secured at the end of an event.
.
.
.
Memorandum, City Hall - Committee Findings Swnmary
Page Two
March 22, 2001
A remote reader system will allow the designated building manager a tool to provide a card to a
user that will gain access to a certain amount of space in City Hall, but denies them access to the
parts that are not appropriate, with a minimal financial and time investment on the City's - or
their - part. We will need to develop a policy on potential fees for such a card, return of card or
deactivation of cards, but it would not prove as labor intensive as the current key program.
The project's general contractor, Rochon Corporation, has provided a cost estimate of
$18,000.00 for remote readers for the main lobby entrance, the staff entrance, City COllilcil
Chambers entrance, and potential future for restrictions for access of the elevator to either the
second or lower level. Cost comparisons to private, outside vendors, indicate a very competitive
rate, and we will realize savings by having the same contractor install the remote reader system
who is a subcontractor for other project-related installations.
Technolol!V
The Technology Committee looked at the needs of the staff in terms of computer hardware and
software, network and the potential for website and email access. They are recommending that
the City COllilcil authorize an expenditure of up to $30,000.00 for the purchase of new
computers and software (of which $7,500.00 has been spent to-date through the City of Roseville
for the purchase of five (5) new computers). This would include the ability of all the staff
computers to be networked on a local area network; all computers would have access to the
Internet and personal email; and a comprehensive and coordinated software package.
Today, the City has a mix and match software system, with everything from Windows 95, 98 or
NT. As noted in the enclosed information (Attachment C - Staff memorandwn dated March 8,
2001) is the purchase of a digital scarmer. There is a high need for this, as was pointed out
during the Walgreens case, it is important that the City be able to scan old physical documents
into electronic format for easier access and coordinated use.
cc: Staff committees
A~~A-\
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
February 16, 2001
TO:
Joe Lynch, City Administrator
FROM:
Michelle Olson, Program Supervisor MP
SUBJECT:
City Hall Furniture Recommendation
Back!!round
Members of the new City Hall Furniture Committee have been meeting montllly since
November. Our group was charged with the following:
.
. Idcntify the needs for the fumiturc and all related decorations in the new City Hall.
. Working with Architectural Alliance on the sclection of the carpet, window and wall
treatments, and art (if any),
. Should the same type offumiture be in the same functional areas?
. Should all administrative offices and common areas have the same look, feel and
related fumiturc?
. How to coordinate the move to the new City Hall, and tile disposition of any and all
of the furniture at the leased facility, Should the City begin moving files with records
in it before the movement of the administrative offices, or should those be reversed?
. Meet with Department heads and department areas to determine needs/desires in
offices, and common arcas.
The carpet, window and wall treatments had already been chosen as well as the wood for
the council chambers and front reception area.
Recommendation
The Furniture Committee, currently consisting of Receptionist Pam Sweeney; Michelle
Olson, Recreation Program Supervisor; and Joe Lynch, City Administrator recommcnd
the following:
The furniture budget for the new City Hall is set at $175,000. We recommend that the
city utilize $20,000 for Architectural Alliance's assistance with the furniture selcction,
bidding process, and follow up with the vendors during installation. The remaining
$155,000 would be utilized to purchase all fwuiture and art. This would outfit ten
offices, two conference rooms, council chambers, community room, and the lobby's
waiting area. We also feel that the appliances for the kitchen on the lower level should
be included within this budget. This would include a refrigerator and microwave.
.
In regards to moving out of our current facility, the committee recommends that we
utilize a moving compmlY to move any files, file cabinets, supplies, and furniture to the
.
.
.
. .
new facility. The city will also have equipment and supplies that need to be moved from
the maintenance facility. The committee would like to assign a moving company upon
Council approval.
The Committee further recommends that an auctioneer sell the remaining furniture,
supplies, and equipment at the leased facility. The Committee would like to assign an
auctioneer upon Council approvaL
A-~
- ()Vv~ 1 or~~
~r;Yt~+ . J " I
_ (;\.L{)AA.ty1AA.fr ~ "Wt>,?
\jv lA1- <1tlk+- b~ vS
pt~ J;-n- J,t{ ~.
.
1>,<<.1}L( ",1l?'} .b... I ~ C. T'1 .J.trl/ f f/.16'c1-
.
.
fr+kJ..m~.b
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
February 13, 2001
TO:
Joe Lynch, City Administrator
Arden Hills City Council
Dwayne Stafford, Public Works DirectorYS
J'
FROM:
SUBJECT:
New City Hall Security
Back!!round
The City Council was presented with a proposal recommended by the Security and
Maintenance Committee, to equip the new City Hall with a proximity card access system,
TV cameras and monitors, distress alarm switches, and glass breakage or motion sensors,
At their February 5,2001, special meeting, the Council authorized,staffto only provide
conduit to recommended locations for future electronic locking deVices and for distress
alarms at the Council Dais and receptionist area.
.
Security Svstem
To date, no provisions have been made for a security system for the new City Hall.
Due to the configuration of the building and realizing many functions may occur in
isolated areas, the building may need to be broken up into two (2) or three (3) zones with
separate annIdisarm pads for each zone. This would allow staff to alarm the City's
offices, yet still permit other functions to occur in different zones of the building.
Costs
Estimated costs for such a security system are very rough at this time. A ballpark figure
would be $15,000, plus an additional $30 per month for after hours monitoring ofa
system,
Recommendation
The City Hall Security and Maintenance Committee recommends the City COWlcil
authorize the installation of a security system at the new City Hall with costs not to
exceed $15,000.
.
() trh~vv~
, .
~tl~)~ ~LS bvt 1-
fJ () pVlPlh~ li'i;>t?
up-hcu T
100 Nu-rttl in- ~ tg( ~ c[~/o
c: ~. ~ ~- .;rf~/rV\ ~lS*,-n,- frS
0!.~,,utf}t.-vr- ,
f)p'~ ~ lL .
bpf1 C.~D (2- f?kD
:# D p.- \it'D VL '7 ~
D~~!IIv\JtVt-{ (G1AAuC&- CDS l- ;::... .
~
1ll
FuJI lw.rIOUtcm~~
o pfuvL
..
~~lM-1SV1A\). Dr.hM
-
~w~
.
.
.
.
A-It~k"",e..vd-- ~-1
,
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 8, 2001
TO:
Joe Lynch, City Administrator
Technolo2V Studv Group f'f)JJ ')
Sandy Berres, Jennifer Chapu;(;Terrance Post, Dave Scherbel
FROM:
SUBJECT:
New City Hall Technology Recommcndations
The employee technology study group has met several times in the last two (2) months to discuss
tecbnology options in the new City Hall facility. Following is a listing (in no particular
prioritized order), of our recommendations.
1. Establish Microsoft NT as the network access file manager. This constitutes a change
from the existing NOVELL network system we currently use.
2. Standardize productivity application software to the Microsoft Professional Suite of
Word, Excel, Access, Outlook and Power Point (Premium, including Frontpage).
3. Upgrade PC workstations not being replaced to Windows 2000 operating systems.
Also, ensure that these workstations are NT compatible.
4, See enclosure for inventory/matrix of PC workstations/printers. This schedule
identifies an estimated $30,050 in 200 I capital itcms versus a budgeted $25,000. The
primary reason for the budget deviation is an estimated $4,000 for a digital scanner.
The digital scanner would be useful in maintaining the City's website, and converting
paper files to electronic files.
5. Consideration should be given to converting from the City's current NOVELL
network to NT prior to the relocation to the new facility. This would give us an
opportunity to work out technical problems prior to the move so that after the move,
we should be able to "plug and play."
6. We havc asswned that the replacement copier (current lease expires December 31,
2001) will be networked and to become another network printer for large production
jobs (i.e., utility billing).
7, Employee policies need to be developed regarding business vs. personal use of E-
mail and Internet. This policy may also be broadened to include software training
(i,e., during work hours or outside of work hours).
Enclosure
. .
.
.
.
>.
o.~
".9
E! c
~ ~
>.c
t/l"C:::T'"
_::::I' CD 0
=Ci5'Eo
J: ._ '"
c ~a: ~
,,~. IX)
".Q-'(\J
... 0 ... >-
<c,s...
_J:::J(tI
o U Q.::J
>otLlE.c
t:'l-OCD
U"UlJ..
"
>.-
o '"
_ C
0.0
E I!!
UJ "
0.
.
"~"~~l . ~_~I " ~ ~ g~ !~8 ~ g-I~,I ~I
'0""" T'"T'" ~~ , 0~ ,~~~,~ 6
"r~H H ~ H H. H~~Ht I... . ~
iT..... ~ " -Ht J+W "" ~ H
Q)"' " . ~ Ii! I II ~I i ~ c & ~.
QJ.'t: .-
ceo: 0 <v <t: ill 3: <( <(10 <( 0 <( <( 0 0 <( <( ~ 0...<( <( <( <( <( <( <( bS ~ Q) '0 '0..
~~~~.~ =~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
<ic3 8 gj fu fu fufu OJ!} '~o:giJi 0
~ g! I 0, Z (f) 0 D- <( C (5
1>:1,81~ M ! j j~ :~ I~~~~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~.~ 8 ~ .~. ~ ~
c~~,~~:o_tLl~~ ~~ Q)~Q)<( 2 ~<r:Q)8Q)~5 ~ oB~
O:lO'~~~ ~~ _UQ 0.......... C o..,--..~ (,)'.-0....... _ Q:
1:~:."Z z~~ zz ~ ~ ~l<( if z~ f~ ~ z ~ ~f~J ! ~!I
.... [J)'[J) O:1'c E ~ (f) (f) (f) OJ O'~ Ie OJ ~I Ie > ~ Ie ~ ~ OJ '<t.
~ ~,(j) UJ ~ l- W W Z (j) (/) 0 a: "'")'z' l..1.. rJ) (I)'u.. <( Z LL Z (f) if) .,....
,:;:':
-
:)'
~.."~'~ ~ ~ ~;'~-~ ~
<.0 <0 T""" ,N '(0 (0 " r-...
0)_,0)_ '>t co 0). 0)_ ~ LO_
.....T'"T'" ,... ...---r-T'"
CIl.<I>
ili
<(<(
~~
zz
Z 0.:0.: 0.: 0 0 00.:0.:0 0.: 00.:0
~OO)Q)~ '~o OO),O)ro~m<oroO)rn
r-...O)(OO),~ ~m m<o(Om..-<oo.O)~CO
LO~m~,q ~~ ornrnroLOmNQ)~~
~ci~,~...- ...-(IJ ~'~~~~:~ ...-
<(
~
COil ~
<( <(<( ~j
'---001
zzz '~.;
.~.
,1;S
~,
E
z
~
OJ
I
1<(
~
z
(5
'lJ
OJ
-
~,
o
]1
o
~
E
~
.0
E
"
Z
OJ OJ
1818
-'0
-,-,
- -
"j:
~
'"
,'~
i7!
a;
'0
c
'"
C
-=
E
OJ
j
c'
~I
OJ
o
:0
~-~
o~s
,
LoSt
~q.
{os>T
~ _ ~~!/Qs \~
'\~ vS C. t~'2- /'?1.# f'I1l+ ctLc[h1..G
1IL ~tuS :tl-D
-Jo~r ~((J\/~1lA~(\I6-S
....--
\
-
.
)!s.
~
~o'l>t
~~
~
~ .
,~~.t} 2':?,offD
.
_ w.wf -h' 'lob Z ~ "6't~ ,kL hwYlim
_ 'bkf.../ CII-C'fYI/1 ~ ""''1 gp~ ff1/~f.
_ DIlle/$. ju- IJ-'~ ?><<l>fds 'Sew~/ ~
D . 1/11 !DtC/UHl.~
. fl././Z.
.