HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-18-05
:OlUlcilmember.:
. David Grant
Brenda Holden
Greag Larson
Lois Rem
."-'
....,~~.i....
~.~... ...1 ,~./.
......~
Arden Hills City Council
. WORK SESSION
1245 W. HIghway 96
~ Hills, MiBaesota
55112
651.634.5120
www.ci.ardeu-hllls.mo.us
Mayor:
Beverly Aplikowski
5:60 p.m.
Monday, April 18, 2005
Agenda
1. Call to Order
2.
Al!enda Items
A. Cable Commission Update
B. Mounds View School Board Update
C. Highway 96 Landscaping Proposal
D. Front Porch Ordinance
E. TCAAP Interim Agreement #2
F. Tree Removal Proposals
ShlfflPresenters
Craig Wilson/Michelle Wolfe
Mounds View School Board
URS Staff
Peter Hellegers
Scott Clark
Tom MoorelSchawn JohllSon
~
5:00
5:15
6:00
6:30
1:00
3:00
3. Council Reports
A. Councilmember Holden
B. Councilmember Larson
C. Councilmember Rem
D. CODncilmember Grant
E. Mayor ApUkowski
.
.
.
.
t
,
...
~
~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
AGENDA ITEM: Work Session #1
April 13, 2005
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator ~~
SUBJECT: Cable Commission Update
It has been over a year since Arden Hills' representative, Craig Wilson, has been at a work
session to provide an update about eable commission activities, (Although, he did attend the
committee summit held late last year and provided some updates at that time,) The commission
has undertaken a strategic planning process, which both Mr. Wilson and attended. He will be
able to provide an update about the strategic planning, as well as other commission activities,
This is also an opportunity for you to ask questions of him.
At last month's work session, I mentioned the coneept of WEB streaming. Mr. Wilson had
spoken with me about this at the retreat. I have since learned that the cost for this service will be
$163.69 per month, billed quarterly, Ifwe desire to archive the meeting on DVD rams for future
referenee, we would pay the cost for the DVD rams (eurrent pricing $25-30 for about 4 hours of
recording.) We can send in the authorization to begin this serviee at any time.
I would also like to note that Finance Director Siddiqui and I are working with producer Ken
Gammel on some technology improvements for the Council Chambers. These items include: a
newer computer for presentations, new monitors, a screen that ean show what is being broadcast
live, and additional play back decks (to increase the quality of the broadeasts and handle to
growing nwuber of shows we are doing, sueh as adding Planning Commission and TCAAP
meetings,) We are in the process of obtaining quotes and looking at options.
Attachment
Ii,Earlh'vfdmin\City Administrator\Memo\2005\03-08-05 Memo to Council RE Cable Commission doc
'"
L
o
'"
>
~
U
;i
~
~
-
<:0
0'"
._ l"-
+- '
ON
....~
0,
0.-
....:2
O~
<JX
o
i
<(0:,
'"
VII"-
.D '
....<;;
::I'"
.D~
::I'"
V)>
f-
"<:"
+--
....0
00
Z:::
N
. '"
<:';'
_~ ;0
VI'"
VI~
.- "
E"
E~
0-
U"c.i
c
VI 0
<:..c
00.
+-M
O~
.~tr;
<:'"
::IZ
E::<
E oi
0:=
<J~
I
..00
.::J=
V)~
,,<:g
t:3>
00
Z~
(!"\'J 15
RECEIV~;;
MAR 2 3 2005
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
March 21, 2005
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
City of Arden Hills
1245 W. Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Dear Michelle:
CTV /North Suburban Access Corp. offers web streaming and channel
programming services to our cities and school districts. The monthly fee for
this service is $163,69, for which we invoice the district on a quarterly
basis.
The service includes the following:
1. CTV will encode (i.e., record) your televised meetings live from the
council chambers and cablecast them live on your channel and recast them
per your schedule.
2. CTV will cablecast on your channel any other programming provided
by the city, per your schedule.
3. The council meetings will be linked with agenda items, per timing
provided by city staff, and posted to your web site,
4. If the city desires, CTV will archive the meetings on DVD for future
reference. The city must pay the cost of the DVD's. (Current prices for
DVD's runs between $25 and $30, and they can be used to record
approximately 8 hours of programming.)
5. CTV will have a master control operator on duty Monday through
Thursday from 3 p,m, until 11 p.m. or until the end of the last live event that
evening. On Fridays, the master control operator will work from noon until 9
p.m.
Arden Hilk Fnlrfl/'l HPinht~ I", .,jp"",", I iff.. rnl'>'Vin MNnrk iii"", ~"Rn"ht"", I>-1nrtI,n-,k Dn=vil.. <;+ "n+J,~, """""'.~"
Web Streaming/Programming
March 21, 2005
Page 2.
.
If you wish to use this service, please complete the form at the bottom of
the page and send it to me. Feel free to call me or Pat Cook at 651-481-
9554 if you have any questions about the service.
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - -
YES, the City of wants CTV /North Suburban Access
Corporation to provide web streaming/programming services for our channel.
City Administrator
Date
Contact for programming schedule
Telephone #
Mail to Coralie Wilson, CTV /NSAC, 950 Wood hill Drive, Roseville, MN
55113 or fax to 651-792-7501.
.
Page 10fl
,.
. Wolfe, Michell,:
From: CWilson [cwilson@ctv15.org]
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 12:00 PM
To: Michelle Wolfe
Subject: Webstreaming/Programming
Michelle --
Just a quick correction to my letter on our webstreaming and programming service. In #4, you would archive on
DVD rams, and they can be used to record approximately 4, not 8, hours of programming.
.cor.
.
.
3/25/2005
.'
.
REPORT
NORTH SUBURBAN
COMMUNICA TIONS COMMISSION
.
PLANNING RETREAT
FEBRUARY 26, 2005
.
Prepared by
HOLLY HANSEN
Holly Hansell Consulting
,~
Introduction
The eommissioners and lead staff from the North Suburban Communieations
Commission (NSCC)/North Suburban Access Corporation (NSAC), and representatives
from the NSCC member cities attended a planning retreat on February 26, 2005. This
retreat was organized by NSCC Exeeutive Director Coralie Wilson and the NSCC
Strategie Planning Committee. The retreat's purpose and goals were to 1) educate NSCC
commissioners, eity staff, and NSCC/NSAC lead staff about various models for PEG
access and institutional/eommunity networks; 2) determine the need for further planning
by identifying issues and priorities; and 3) determine ifNSCC commissioners, cities, and
staff had similar interests and priorities,
.
During the morning, three presentations were made by guest speakers. The first two
speakers covered networks and different types of teclmologies and associated key issues;
the third speaker presented various possibilities for PEG aceess operations, Holly
Hansen facilitated the afternoon session, whieh eonsisted of a visioning exercise and a
SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) exercise, and discussions to
help the attendees identify issues, priorities and common themes that might require
further review and planning, This report addresses the afternoon exercises and outcomes,
provides summary information as well as the full results of each of the exercises, and
presents planning themes and next steps discussed at the retreat.
Visioning Exercise
The first exercise of the afternoon was a visioning exercise. The attendees were asked to
imagine that they were writing a letter in February 20 I 0 to a eolleague who had been
very involved with the NSCC but who had moved away and lost toueh, They were to
write a letter deseribing the current aetivities of the organization in as much detail as they
could, including things like staffing, programs and aetivities, board status, relationships
with the cities and the cable company, etc. Small groups then discussed these "letters"
and recorded their combined results. A large group discussion was then held and a
master list was developed. The master list was created by asking each group to report an
item from their list; if another group had a similar item, they checked it off their list so it
was not duplicated on the master list. The final master list eontained items that had been
on at least two groups' lists, The master list and the individual group lists were posted
and participants voted for six items they believed were most important; they could vote
for items on the master list and the individual lists.
.
Votes were made with color eoded dots: blue for commissioners, green for city
reprcsentatives, and red for NSCC staff. Different colors were used to determine inhere
were any significant differenees in priorities among those present that might warrant
further study. These results were not discussed at the retreat and are not examined in this
report. The three items or themes that received the most votes were: a wider scope of
programming and services that also included more staff; NSCC eontrolling its own
communications corporation, and that NSCC would become a regional entity. The
detailed results of the Visioning Exercise appear in Attachment A of this report. The
"raw data" in this section refers to "brown group" and groups of other eolors; the colors
refer to the color of the marker each group used to make its list and have no other
significance,
.
, .
.
.
.
Holly Han,sell Consulting
SWOT Exercise
Thc second exercise of the afternoon was to identifY "Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT)" that face the NSCC. The facilitator explained that
Strengths and Weaknesses are internal to the organization, and Opportunities and Threats
are external forces. The proeess used in this exercise was to break into four groups and
each group was assigned one of the four charaeteristics. The groups were then asked to
brainstorm ideas and to list them on Post-it@ notes, After fifteen minutes, thc groups
moved to a new eharacteristic (i.e, if they had been working on Strength, they moved to
Weakness), In this phase of the exercise, the seeond group added to the first group's
ideas and also grouped similar ideas on the Post-it@ notes together. This process
eontinued until each group addressed all four elements, Individuals then received twelve
dots they could use to vote for their top three priorities in each area (S,W,O and T); the
dots were color coded as they had been in the visioning exercise, A large group
discussion was held following the SWOT voting regarding items and eategories that had
received the most votes. Due to time constraints, the discussion focused on the most
important Strengths and Opportunities.
In preparing this report, the author classified the various Post-it@ note groups and gave
each group of ideas a theme name, These themes are simply meant to organize the
information; the NSCC may change the name of a given theme as it deems appropriate.
The top three Strength themes were staff, intergovernmental eooperation, and volunteers.
The three Weakness themes that emerged were Comcast, franchise, and commission. It
should be noted here that classifying Comcast as a "Threat" rather than a "Weakness"
may be more appropriate sinee Comcast is external to the NSCC. If, however, the intent
was to address the NSCC's attitude towards Comeast, then the issue is internal to the
NSCC and it is classified appropriately. In the Opportunity area the themes reeeiving the
most votes were outreach, legislative, and I-Net. And finally, the top three Threat themes
were legislative/legal, cable eompany, and competition, Note that the legislative theme
was viewed as both an Opportunity and a Threat and that an issue can be viewed from
both sides such as in this instance, The eomplete results of the SWOT Exercise appear in
Attachment B of this report.
Planning Themes and Next Steps
A large group discussion was held at the end of the day to compare the results from the
SWOT and Visioning exercises and to discuss themes and issues that had been identified
as priorities, The results of these discussions are listed below; they were not prioritized at
the retreat and appear in the order they were brought forward by the group members at
the retreat.
Identified Planning Themes:
1, How do we get out from under Comcast? (Cable, Internet, etc., - get control)
2. Shift resources to Governmental and Educational programming (from public)
3. Identify what we can control and maximize control
4. How do we proactively plan for 2013? (franchise expires)
5. Bids for new attorney
6, Continue collaboration, expand partnerships
7, Explore public/private partnerships
2
Hally Hansell Consulting
.~
What We Can Control:
I. Educate commissioners on FCC, legislation, and what we can regulate.
2. Lobby at state and federal level.
3, Perception - public outreach
4. How government can provide better serviee, more cost effective, through
technology. (Maximize what we have now.)
5. Outreaeh - audience, council members, legislators, other PEG groups.
6. Support access and technieal serviees,
7, Community needs assessment: e.g. survey, public and government
.
Identified Next Steps:
I. Start schedule of training - commissioners - learn about regulation, FCC, ete.
2, Put on NSCC agenda - bids for attorney
3, More study on how eities could offer competitive communications services.
4. Establish roles and responsibilities: staff, commissioners
5, Prioritize ideas and develop work plan
6, Meet with strategic planning eommittee to further discuss/clarify
Summary
Excellent progress was made at the retreat as the group generated a wealth of ideas and
came up with a preliminary list of priorities and next steps. These will need to be further
examined and refined to determine more precisely what the NSCC will ineorporate into .
an action plan to guide its future.
.
3
, .
.
.
.
Holly Hansen Consulting
Attachment A
VISIONING EXERCISE RESULTS - MASTER LIST
(Code: B ~ Commissioners, G ~ City Representatives, R ~ Staff)
I
ksh
h
d
h
terns t at appeare on more t an one e:roup s wor eet
# Votes Total Description
3B, 12G, 3R 18 More staff-based/quality programming (PE&G), more staff,
more servlees.
The access corp. has taken over production of edueation and
government programming in addition to public programming.
9B, 5G, 2R 16 Control own communications corp. (cable, Internet, Wi-Fi)
2B, 8G, 3R 13 NSCC is a regional entity (beyond 10 cities)
4B, 3G, IR 8 Control/own infrastrueture
3B,2R 5 State-of-the-art aecess studio and equipment
2B,2R 4 Diversify revenue stream
IB,2G 3 Common R.O.W. ordinance
IB, IG, IR 3 Increased publie support and awareness of public access
(through education)
lB, IG, lR 3 Video on Demand for access programs
IB,IR 2 Five year C.I.P, for network - expand I-Net applications
IB I Stronger legislative presence and effort
Items on individual worksheets that received votes
# Votes Total Description
lB,4G 5 We now control our communications eorp, i.e: cable, Wi-Fi-,
Internet
3B,IG 4 Improved relationship with cable eompany - new attorney,
further deregulation
2B, IG, IR 4 Stepped UP edueational efforts for the public
3B,IG 4 Consolidation of other eommissions to appoint regional
commISSIOners
IG,IR 2 Public/private partnerships
IB I Funding decreased, sealed back, lease government building,
more programs in city buildings, closer to people in communities
IB I Use ISP for Internet, I-Net for intemal communications needs
lB I We now have our own building, housing a communications/fine
arts eomplex
IB I Cutting costs to consumers was achieved through self ownership,
resulting in increased public access and equipment
IG 1 Board will eonsist of a member from each goveming body
IB 1 Ownership of a separate I-Net
4
Holly H unsen Consulting
Attachment A continued
VISIONING GROUPS - RAW DATA
Brown Group Comments
NSAC
. Broadcast in high definition
. Video on demand
. State-of-the-art facilities
. Enhanced distribution network
. Public/private partnerships (2 votes - also on Master list)
NSCC
. Diversified funding sourees
. Expanding I-Net applications
. Ownership of a separate I-Net ((I vote - also on Master list)
. Consolidating of other commissions to appointed regional commissioners (4 votes
- also on Master list)
. Stronger legislative authority/presence
Green Group Comments
. Improved relationship with able company (4 votes - also on Master list)
. New attorney
. Further deregulation
. The access Corporation has taken over production of~ducation & Govermnent &
programming in addition to rublic programming (9 votes - also on Master list)
. Funding deereased, scaled back, lease govt. building, more programs in city
buildings. (I vote - also on Master list)
. Closer to people in communities
. Use ISP for Internet, I-Net for internal eommunications needs (I vote - also on
Master list)
Orange Group Comments
Commission
. Stays the same
. Franchise still in effect
. Franchise fees still go to eities
. Cost reduction through an integrated technology and fiber overbuild
Legislative
. Join the fight to preserve public aeeess
. Stepped up educational efforts for the publie (4 votes - also on Master list)
. Network
. Open access to eable network - high tech areas use "hot spots" - econ
development
. R.O.W. - take control via NSCC-wide ordinance
5
. ,
.
.
.
Holly Hansen ConslIlting
. Attachment A continued
Blue Group Comments
. We now control our eommunications corp. I.e.: cable, Wi-Fi, Internet (5 votes)-
also on Master list)
. Corp. may consist of original NSCC or other regional bodies
. We are now having our own building housing a communications/fine arts
eomplex (I vote - also on Mastcr list)
. All jurisdietions have their own monthly new program
. Video on demand
. Cutting eosts to consumers was achieved through self ownership, resulting in
inereased public access and equipment (I vote - also on Master list)
. Decline in volunteerism - staff taking on more duties
. Board will consist of a member from each governing body (I vote - also on
Master list)
.
Red Group Comments
. 10 communities centrally administered to offer expanded services to our
communities and rely less on previous sources of support, e.g, Comeast, cable
companies
. Via I-Net ownership/maintenanee, be able to support operations less as profit
based entity but provider of services to customers/clients e.g. Internet services,
phone systems, seeurity systems, essentially what similar entities are offering now
. Lobby for legislative support to get started on path to self sufficiency
. Stepping up production of community programming resulting in more timely and
frequent programs about city issues (e.g. more staff production)
.
6
Holly Hansen Omsulting
Attachment B
.
SWOT EXERCISE RESULTS
STREN G THS (Code: B ~ Commissioners, G ~ City Representatives, R ~ Staff)
# Votes Total Themes and Comments
STAFF
9B, IG, 3R 13 Great teehnieal staff, committed staff, operations manager,
eooperation among staff members, expertise in local TV
programming, administration
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION
2B, 6G, 2R 10 Collaboration of the member eities, good relationship among cities,
good organization, good governance model, inter-govemmental
cooneration
VOLUNTEERS
2B. 5G, IR 8 Good volunteer base, dedicated volunteer base
EQUIPMENT
58,IR 6 Verv 1100d equipment, great mobile eauinment
I-NET
6G 6 I-Net, I-Net availability
MISCELLANEOUS
2G.1R' 3 No one else does this, only l1ame in town
IB,lG 2 Customer satisfaction with current services
18,lG 2 Involvement of publie officials
IG I Streaming video, web streaming
0 0 Partnership with TIES
0 0 Well funded (substantial resources NSAC)
0 0 Good franchise agreement
0 0 Outstanding legal eounsel
0 0 Diversity of commission, diverse commission
.
.
7
Holly Hansen Consulting
. Attachment B continued
.
.
WEAKNESSES (Code: B ~ Commissioners, G ~ City Representatives, R ~ Staff)
# Votes Total Themes and Comments
COMCAST
8B,2G, 1R 11 Comeast is powerful, Comeast, relationship with Comcast cable co.
FRANCHISE
2B,7G, IR 10 Franchise agreements do not take into consideration changing
technology, franchise agreement,
COMMISSION
2B. 3G, IR 6 Lack of coherent and cohesive vision,
3G, 3 Us - umealistic expeetations
1B, lG 2 Too much "group think." Anger against cable company leads to poor
decisions.
0 0 Consumer aeceptance of eurrent serviees
0 0 Commissioner age
0 0 Personal agendas
0 0 Laek of knowledge of regulatory authority
0 0 No real (lack) of authority of commission
ATTORNEY
4B 4 Too much reliance on attorney, attorney seems to want to make a name for
himself, spend too much on legal advice with little or no imoact
PROGRAMMING
2R 2 Poor web streaming quality
IG,lR 2 Not enough shared programming
0 0 Inability to broadcast live HS sports
0 0 Lack of clear polieies on slanderous programs
0 0 Quality of access broadcasts
0 0 Clash between eities and public production
0 0 More staff for a daily 15 minute news urogram
0 0 Faeilities - CTV, building
MISCELLANEOUS
lIG II Not working hard enough on our partnership with TIES
2B,2G, IR 5 Revenue, limited source of revenue streams, limited resources/funding
resources
IG,lR 2 Marketing
IG,lR 2 Lack of control over infrastructure
IB I Knowledge of technology regarding I-Net
IG I Lack of understanding of technology
0 0 Not enough technical expertise or time to maintain I-Net.
0 0 Train staff in new equipment use
0 0 TV Land line up could be better
0 0 Better cmty. awareness, public understanding of commission's role.
8
Holly Hansen CousaJting
Attachment B continued
.
OPPORTUNITIES (Code: B = Commissioners, G = City Representatives, R ~ Staff)
# Votes Total Themes and Comments
OUTREACH
3B, 3G, 2R 8 Community support for what we do, education outreach e.g.
(intergenerational, seniors), educating communities on issues affecting
commission and corooration, education, increase "TIES" with partners
LEGISLATIVE
2B,4G 6 Positive legislation, influence legislation to protect public aceess, more
le~islative oresence
I-NET
lB,4G,IR 6 Expanded use ofI-Net, expansion ofI-Net eapabilities (i,e, Wi-Fi, cell,
seeuritv, etc.
COLLABORATION
2B, IG, lR 4 Cities work together for more economies of scale, collaborate with other
organizations, stremrth in numbers (other commissions)
IB,IG,2R 4 Public/private partnershins
PROGRAMMING
3G 3 More shared orogrammin~ between communities
IG I More orogramminl!: done in communities
IG I Imorove l!:overnment Drol!:ramminl!:
0 0 More orol!:rammirWTinfonnation on local events
TECHNOLOGY
lB,lG 2 New technology, acquiring the technology to uplink public aecess to
satellite for satellite transmission" technology
MISCELLANEOUS
5B,IG 6 Newattornev
4B,IR 5 Have our own communication comoration, be our own company
IB, IG, IR 3 Multiple providers (more comnetition)
IG I Diversifv funding, revenue diversification
IG," I Improve TV Land
0 0 1m Drove services at lower cost
0 0 Desoerate Housewives on HDTV
.
.
9
Ho"yHansefl Consulting
. Attachment B continued
.
.
THREATS (Code: B ~ Commissioners, G ~ City Representatives, R ~ Staff)
# Votes Total Themes and Comments
LEGISLA TIVE/LEGAL
5B, 30, 3R II Deregulation, government restrictions and regulations
2B,8G 10 Legislators (influenced by lobbyists), adverse legislation, potential
state and local regulation, potential federal regulation, changing
legislation
IB,2G 3 FCC, FCC judgments
0 0 Court decisions, pending decisions
CABLE COMPANY
6B,2G 8 Cable company, Comcast, Comcast (arrogant), ignore the franchise
agreement by cable company, misrepresentation of commission by
cable company
COMPETITION
2B,3R 5 People going to (dish) and losing public aeeess channels; the dish;
increased eompetition; faster, more efficient, more aeeessible
competition
TECHNOLOGY
38. 2G, 2R 7 New technology, teehnology (x2)
SCHWERM FACTOR
14G,6R 20 The Schwerm factor, the Sehwerm faetor "may" be overstated by 12
green and 6 red votes
FUNDING
2B,10 3 Finances, loss of funding, loss of franchise fees,
IB,IG 2 Loss of PEG fees
COMMUNITY
IG I Local po I i ti cs
IG I Roseville
0 0 TIES
RIGHT OF WAY
0 0 Utility eompanies (ROW)
0 0 Differing ROW policies
MISCELLANEOUS
0 0 Nay sayers
10
.
.
.
~'
, ,^^,~'. . ,-'-... ,.."
w.
........._,S(~...'...;-_:
~~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
April 13, 2005
AGENDA ITEM: Work Session #2
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator?
SUBJECT: Mounds View School District Presentation
I was contacted by a representative of Mounds View School District, asking to be placed on an
agenda for a future Arden Hills meeting, School Superintendent Witthuhn and one or two school
board members would like to talk with you about the pending school closings and the transition
into the changes that this proeess will entail. They would also like to use this opportunity to
answer any questions you may have.
\\EarthlAdminlCity AdministratorIMemo\2005\03-08-05 Memo to Council RE School District Presentation.doc
.
.
.
"
URS
Worksession
MEMORANDUM
Thresher Square
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Phone: (612) 370-0700
Fax: (612) 370-1378
To:
Ms. Michelle Wolfe!
City of Arden Hills
Copy:
Tom Moore!AH
File:
Pending
From:
Greg Brown
Arden Hills City Engineer
Date:
April 18, 2005
Subject:
Highway 96 Landscaping Improvements
Background
Kathy Ryan presented options for landseaping improvements to be installed along Highway 96
between Lexington Avenue and Snelling Avenue at the November 15, 2004 worksession, The
concept landseape plan and cost estimate have been revised based on Council comments
received at the November worksession. The plan includes boulevard trees and median planting
beds. Green Ash, White Ash, Red Oak and Swamp White Oak trees are proposed in alternating
groupings of three and four. These groupings will alternate from north to south and provide a
continuous rhythm along the highway without imposing a rigid order that would aeeentuate
missing trees. All of the tree planting costs would be part of Ramsey County's contribution to
the project.
The attached color graphies portray the proposed planting plan. The first graphic is a plan view
of the entire project divided into three segments, The boulevard tree locations and varieties are
shown as well as the locations of the planting beds. There are two different planting bed
configurations depending on the width of the median. These have been labeled 'Planting Group
A' and 'Planting Group B'. The seeond and third graphics show enlarged views of the planting
bed layouts. The graphics also include numbers, photographs and written descriptions of the
proposed plant materials.
The median design consists of linear planting beds of perennials that have been shown to be salt
and drought tolerant. Plants were also chosen to provide color throughout the growing season in
colors that will eomplement each other. The planting beds have been located back from the
intersections to minimize the obstruction of views. The wider planting beds (group A) will have
Honeylocust trees at intervals with daylilies planted in squares around them.
Memorandum
April 18, 2005
Page 2
Maintenance eosts are estimated in the $30,000 range annually. This cost is based on a fairly
high level of maintenance including mowing of the boulevards and median, and deadheading
plants to promote better flowering.
Watering may need to be done by the City after the two year plant material warranty period is
over during dry weather conditions. The total project cost is estimated to be approximately
$290,000 with Ramsey County contributing $155,000 and Arden Hills contributing $135,000.
The intent of the discussion Monday is to review the concept plan prepared by URS. If the
Council is comfortable with the eoncept plan, a resolution authorizing the preparation of final
plans and speeifications will be presented at a future Council meeting, We recommend the final
design be completed during the summer of2005 with bids solicited in the fall of2005 to allow
for planting material to be procured and readied for spring 2006 planting, Based upon discussions
with Ramsey County Public Works staff, the project could be lead by Arden Hills with Ramsey
County financially participating through the use of County state aid funds.
..
.
.
.
.
~~:i5~;;;~~
<( ~
0.. 5
:J t m
fi1 5 g
C) ~ I- ~
~ 5 a a: ~
~ ffi 9>- ~<I)~frl
Z ~ (jj5w~~oc-~
<( 5 z).,lfJ~<~:J
~ ~ !fi3@~:::;>,1'r
~
o
u
g
~
2.
O.
H
,~
::;-:g.<:
B~~
~gg
0::"",...0-
W-.
:r:.~.,",
'h
"<;.
0"'0
"..
, ^.'.'1' ,~
~ ~ 1> ,[,
h;" -b, ';, .
,~ ~~~~ "" I
..1'"" "" '.;'~7 t ~
$' ~t! ,,"':
.
w. ,
000 8
~~fj~
mfil:,jE
~W""'2
i:!lD::~-_g.
offi~,:<"lI,l
LL:I:E.~~
g~!!l;='"
,.,..1
.
_,,"E ]
n.
H~
~!!! to
~~t~
~E~b
ti~~.;;
.~
w
.
.~';1
.; ~
~~ ~
.J5'CE
.:-"'H
~lg~
<:g-~'l1
~~~!
~~~h
;:)=><\1::>
D::a::~..,
.
~
""..,ON
l,DNl,Dt-
In
0..
::l
o
'"
<!J
<!J
Z
f=
z
<(
-'
0..
~
~
~
~
.
o
o
"
o
z >
...:: dW:::;:n::
o ;;:,,,,;?W
~ ~~~~
~
,
~
. "j
~~[~
~~,:~
~-:i~
::lEGit>
D ,,-<0 "
w.,,' '"
",:l':~.i'
.
-~~ ~
~l ~
~,~ ~
g~_l
OI~~
.
.
.
.
I,
I
I
I
I
I
~
/-1
I
I
I
i
,
[
,
I
I.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
~
"''..O~
.
.
---I
I
I
J
.
~'-~I
I'
I
I
.
c ~f!
ra '[I
- <l:,
0.. i
, I
ell t1~ I'
g. < I
~ I
'0 /
c r
C\l !
...J i
(Q "I
(1) i,
I ,
:I: I . I
t-= I.
1 I
j
/
/
/
/
~
,
i\r
\t1
~.-
-
(-
I
\
~
'3A'IIlINI1W'9'H
.
.
"
(~
j
[]
, '1
I
! l_.__L_
.
n
,
o
'f
"
.
n
i5
.
"
Jr
-- L.."
1'..'111
L--JI
9
L--
,
i i r' co
, ,
.
'lJ^,,'NOlONlXi"1
~<
.L
,00
. <!~
.3 ., eJ ~
. " n
€ ijj. Q
:S....E~;
-g ECl1l.!.1:;
]!~~~~
! 04IM0
.
jL-
,
--'-'l
>,~ \
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
/
<""
.
I
o
,
..
"
5'
<0
\\
,
.
.
.
~
~HlLLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Work Session Agenda Item 2.D
April 18, 2005
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner q\\
~
SUBJECT: PC #05-07, The City of Arden Hills
Setback Exceptions for Front Porches
Discussion
At the April11, 2005 City Council meeting the Council was asked to consider Ordinance #357
and Resolution #05-29 which would establish standards for allowing front & side-yard comer
porehes of up to ten feet with a minimum setback of 30 feet. Council members expressed
coneern about potential materials for front porches (open-air or sereened versus allowing glass
enclosed three season porches) and resulting setbacks and how those items may affect the look
and feel of the neighborhood. Staff has attached the materials from the April 11, 2005 meeting
as Attachment 2D-1.
Ordinance #357 (Attachment 6D-2)
Staff has included a list of potential modifications to Ordinance #357 which filay address some
of the concerns expressed by Couneil members at the April 11 th meeting.
I, Exterior Materials. Council members expressed coneern with allowing three season
porches enclosed with windows or full lite doors. In particular the eoncem was that the
enclosed porch may detract more from the sightIines and feel of homes along a partieular
street. Also, a three season porch could be stretched to be more on an addition than a
porch, and may not be consistent with the purpose of Ordinance #357, The following
alternative language could be included (in Ordinance #357, under 6C2d):
o Allows Open-Air and Screen Porches. Subsection Id (6C2dld) strike the words
windows and transparent material and add text to read: "At least sixty five (65)
percent of the exposed porch far;:ade is open or occupied by screens and/or screen
doors; and the far;:ade constitutes the area from the floor level of the porch to the
porch ceiling,' up to thirty five (35) percent of the far;:ade may be solid and may
only be occupied by columns and spaced railings; solid walls (even partial) are
prohibited. "
llEarthlPlanllinglPlanning Cuses12005\05-07 Zoning Ordiance Amendments/or Front Porch Encroachments (PENDING)I04-18-05 CC
Work Se.~sion Report Front Porch Exceptions.doc
Page 1014
o Allows Only Open-Air Porches. Subsection ld (6C2dld) strike the words
windows, screens, and/or doors of transparent material and add text to read: "At .
least sixty five (65) percent of the exposed porch fa(:ade is open; and the fa(:ade
constitutes the area from the floor level of the porch to the porch ceiling; up to
thirty five (35) percent of the fa(:ade may be solid and may only be occupied by
columns and spaced railings; solid walls (even partial) are prohibited. "
2. Setbacks Distance to Property Lines: Council members expressed concern with the
impact that porches may have in relative distance to neighboring property owners. In
particular Council members raised questions of distance to side yard property lines. As
currently proposed the language would allow the porches to extend up to ten (10) feet
into the front yard or side yard comer yard (only applicable to comer lots) but limiting
the minimum setback to 30 feet. This means that existing side yard setback regulations
would still pertain to the porches and they would not be able to encroach into those side
yard interior setback areas. In order for a porch to wrap around the sides of the home
would require space beyond the existing side yard interior setbacks (5/15 in R-2 and
10/25 in R-l).
Ordinance #357 does allow for encroachment into side yard comer setbacks similar to
that of the front setback area. The side yard comer setbacks are for comer lots which
essentially have two fronts (one front, and one side yard comer). While the zoning
definitions may call one side the "front", the side yard comer side may functionally be
the "front" of the home and therefore would be a better porch location. Again this side
yard comer setback is adjacent to the roadway and not another adjoining lot.
.
Staff has included some alternative language that would give the Council the option to 1)
clearly state that porches cannot encroach on side yard interior or rear setbacks, 2) allow
side yard comer lots to have porches that wrap around from the side yard comer to front
side, and 3) would require that comer lot properties choose either the side yard comer
side for a porch or the front side but would preclude having a porch on both sides. The
following alternative language could be included (in Ordinance #357, under 6C2d):
o Clarify That Front Porches Cannot Encroach on Side Yard Interior Setbacks.
Under subsection 1 (6C2dl) on the third line before "...the design of the..." add
the following language: "; the porch complies with the side yard interior setback
requirements. "
o Clarify That Side Yard Comer Porches Cannot Encroach on Front or Rear
Setbacks. Under subsection 2 (6C2d2) on the end of the fourth line before "...that
the design..." add the following language: "; the porch complies with the front
and rear setback requirements. "
Page 2 of4
.
I\Eal1hlPlanninglPlanning Cases\2005\05-07 Zoning OrdianceAmendmentsfor Front Porch Encroachments (PENDING)\04-18-05 CC
Work Session Report Front Porch Exceptions.doc
.
.
.
o Allow Comer Lots to Have Wrap Around Porches. Under subsection 2 (6C2d2)
at about the middle of the third line after "...into the required side-yard corner..."
(setback) add the following language: "and/or front setbacks." Strike the
existing word "setback. ..
o Require Comer Lots to Choose Between Porches into the Side Yard Comer or
Front Yard and Not Both. Under subsection 2 (6C2d2) at the beginning of the
third line strike the word "front" and replace with "side-yard corner face." On
the fourth line near the end after "...side-yard comer lot line,..." add the following
language: "the porch shall be limited to either the side-yard corner
encroachment or the front porch encroachment and shall not be permitted to have
both a front side-yard corner and front porch encroachment,"
3. Steps to Access A Porch. Staff has also included the following suggestion for amending
Ordinance #357, relating to steps to access a porch:
1. Steps to porches. Include the following language to allow steps to porches to be allowed
outside of the front porch exceptions (in Ordinance #357, under 6C2a at the end of that
section):
o "Steps, decks and ramps, leading to covered porches as described in Section
6C2d may extend (3) feet beyond the covered porch into the front or side setback
area, but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six (6) feet from any
lot line. "
Desirm Guidelines - Zoninf! Ordinance Appendix A per Resolution #05-29 (Attachment 6D-3)
3. Exterior Materials - Allowing Only Open-Air and Screen Porches. Consistent with
the Ordinance #357 alternatives, changes could be made to the design guidelines to create
only open-air and screen porches as permitted. In particular changes could be made to
the sections on Exterior Walls, Floors, and Ceilings.
o Exterior Walls. On the third line delete "operable windows" and "full lite "and
add the word "screen" before doors. Clarify that solid surfaces should include
railings and not partial walls. The resulting text would read as follows: "Exterior
Walls. The exterior walls are considered to be those exterior surfaces from the
floor line to the ceiling of the porch. This surface is to be at least 65 percent open
and 35 percent solid. The open surfaces are to be open air or occupied by
screens and/or screen doors. The solid surfaces are to be exterior materials that
are consistent or complementary in color, texture, and quality to those of the front
of the existing home. Solid surfaces may only include columns and spaced
railings; solid walls (even partial) are prohibited. "
1. Alternate - remove the words "screen" and "screen doors" to allow only
open-air porches.
\\Eo.rth\PlanningIPlanning Cases\2005105-07 Zoning Ordiance Amendments/or Front Porch Encroachments (PENDING)104-18-05 CC
Work Session Report Front Porch Exceptions.doc
Page 3 of4
o Floors. On the second line delete the last sentence, related to enclosed porches.
o Ceilings. On the second line delete the last sentence, related to enclosed porches.
Requested Action
Consider the currently proposed Ordinance #357, currently proposed Resolution #05-29, and
potential modifications and inform staff of any desired changes for these documents.
Attachments
2D-l
2D-2
Staff Report to the City Council wi attachments - April 11, 2005
Graphics showing potential modifications for R-l and R-2lots
\\EarlhlPlanninglPlanning Co.sesll005\OS-07 Zoning Ordiance Amendments/or Front Porch Encroachments (PENDING)\04-18-05 CC
Work Se.<t.<tion Report Front Porch Exceptions.d()c
Page 4 of4
.
.
.
.
.
.
City Council Work Session
Attachment 2D - 1
April 18, 2005
.
~
~~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
April 11, 2005
Agenda Item
6.D
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner
SUBJECT: PC #05-07, The City of Arden Hills
Setback Exceptions for Front Porches
Requested Action
· Consider Ordinance #357 which would amend section 6.C.2.a of the Zoning Ordinance
and insert new section 6.C.2.d into the Zoning Ordinance, allowing for front porches of
up to ten feet and with a minimum setback of 30 feet from the front or side-yard comer
property lines, which meet design standards to be allowed subject to staff review and
approval.
· Consider Resolution #05-29 which would add the front porch language and Front Porch
. Design Guidelines to Appendix A of Zoning Ordinance #291.
Planninl! Commission Recommendation
Recommendation and Conditions of Approval
At their March 2, 2005 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #05-07 and
unanimously recommended approval (5-0) of the Zoning Ordinance Amendments as proposed.
Update
I have fielded questions from several residents interested in the front porches as permitted
encroachment language. Two residents have raised the question of exterior wall material; one
was advocating for only open-air porches, the other for open-air or full screen porches and not 3-
season porches. As currently proposed, the language from the proposed design guidelines reads
thaI:
"The exterior walls are considered to be those exterior surfaces from the floor line to the
ceiling of the porch. This surface is to be at least 65 percent open and 35 percent solid.
The open surfaces are to be open air or occupied by operable windows, screens, and/or
full lite doors. The solid surfaces are to be exterior materials that are consistent 'or
complementary in color, texture, and quality to those of the front of the existing home. "
.
\\Earth\Planning\Planning Cases\2005\05~07 Zoning Ordiancc Amendments for Front Porch Encroachments (PENDlNG)\04-ll-05 CC Report
Front Porch Exceptions.doc
Page 1 of2
This language would allow for open-air porches but also screen porches and porches that are
mostly glass (minimum of 65 percent glass surface). The 65 percent open to 35 percent solid .
ratio would prevent the porches from becoming full year-round room additions. The 35 percent
solid area would generally be an area for railings or a wall base around the edge of the porch.
A second question that has been raised a couple of times is in regard to the solid base
requirement for the porches. As current! y proposed the language would require that all porches
be built on a solid base (i.e. concrete block, etc.). The intent of the solid base was to have the
porch base appear consistent with the base of the house. This requirement may also create
porches that are structurally superior and therefore should make them last longer.
The Planning Commission reviewed both of these design questions and unanimously (5-0)
approved the language as proposed by staff.
In addition to the front porch language, Ordinance #357 would also amend Section 6.C.2.a to
allows steps, decks, and ramps to extend up to six (6) feet into the required front, side, and rear
setbacks but in no case could the resulting setback be less than 6 feet (i.e. in a side yard where
there is 15 feet between the side of the house and the property line a step, deck, or ramp could
extend a full six feet into the setback area because there would still be 11 feet remaining; if the
side yard was only 10 feet the step could only extend 4 feet from the house). The intention of
this amendment is to allow more space on top area of the steps, decks, and ramps, so that people
have a flat surface they can stand without having to back down the stairs when a door is opened
outward.
Attached are Ordinance #357 which would amend the Zoning Ordinance as described above and
Resolution #02-59 which would include the Porch Oesign Guidelines in the Zoning Ordinance
Appendix A. The language in these documents has changed slightly since the Planning
Commission staff report, so please refer to Ordinance #357 and Resolution #02-59 for the
correct language.
.
Options
1. Recommend approval as submitted.
2. Recommend approval with conditions.
3. Rccommend denial with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request,
H... it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time it denies the request. H
4. Table for additional information.
Attachments
60-1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission - March 2, 2005
60-2 Proposed Ordinance #357
60-3 Proposed Resolution #05-29
60-4 Planning Commission minute excerpts (01/05/2005 and 03/02/2005)
\\Earth\Planning\Planning Cases\2005\05-07 Zoning Ordiancc Amendments for Front POTch Encroachments (PENDING)\04-II-05 CC Report
Front Porch Exceptions.doc
Page 2 of2
.
.
.
.
City Council Meeting
April 11, 2005
Attachment 6D - 1
.
~
~~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 2, 2005
PC Agenda Item
4.D
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner
SUBJECT: PC #05-07, The City of Arden Hills
Setback Exceptions for Front Porches
Requested Action
Consider staff recommendations to amend section 6.C .La of the Zoning Ordinance and
insert new section 6.C2.d into the Zoning Ordinance.
. Overview
At their January the Planning Commission discussed allowing Front Porches as
"Permitted Encroachments" under section 6.C2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff included
example handouts from the City of Richfield and included potential amendment
language. Subsequent to that meeting staff has received the questions which need to be
addressed.
. Should the front porch design guidelines allow for an open base of the porch or
should the porch base be consistent with the base of the dwelling?
. Should the front porch be only an open or screen porch or should 3-season
porches be allowed?
· Would the Arden Hills Front Porch Design Guidelines be similar to the Richfield
Front Porch Design Guidelines?
The following is the language rclating to the first two questions which has been included
in staff's proposed amendment:
3. The base of the porch is not open and its appearance is consistent with the base
of the dwelling.
.
4. At least sixty five (65) percent of the exposed porch fa,ade is open or occupied by
windows, screens, andlor doors of transparent material; the fa,ade constitutes the
area from the floor levcl of the porch to the porch ceiling;
\\Earth\Planning\Planning Cases\2005\Oi-07 Zoning Ordiance ArnendlHt'nls tOJ FWIll P()rch Encroachmenl:S_ IPENDING)\OJ-02-05
PC Report 05--07.doc
Page 1 of 4
In regard to the third question, the City may want to adopt Front Porch Design
Guidelines. If the language from the City of Richfield is acceptable, staff would
recommend adding that language (or any other design guideline language) to the end of
Section 6.C.2.d so that the design guidelines are easily accessible.
In addition to language regarding front porches, staff has also proposed providing an
exception to Section 6.C.2.a for steps, decks, and ramps to extend 6 feet into setback
areas as opposed to the currently permitted 3 feet. This change will allow space at the top
of the stairs so that people standing at the door will not have to back down the stairs any
time a door is opened.
Proposed Zonin!! Ordinance Amendments for Front Porch Exceptions I Steps,
Decks, Ramps
Amendment #1 - (Section 6.C.2.a - Permitted Encroachments) add the following at the
end of the paragraph "Exception: Steps, decks, and ramps may extend six (6) feet into
the required front, side, and rear setbacks but in not case shall the setback to these
encroachments be less than six (6) feet."- see attachment 4d-l for the full amended text
of Section 6.C.2 as proposed.
Amendment #2 - (Section 6.C.2. - Permitted Encroachments) Insert new subsection "d"
and the following language:
"d. Covered Porches for Single-Family Detached Dwellings. In
required front yards, covered porches attached to the principal
structure may extend no more than 10 feet, provided that the porch
is no closer than 30 feet from the front lot line and that the design
of the porch is consistent with the City's Porch Design Guidelines
and approved by the Community Development Director. The
Community Development Director must make the following
findings to approve a porch encroachment of up to 10 feet:
1. The exterior materials of the proposed porch are
consistent or complementary in color, texture, and
quality with those visible at the front of the
dwelling;
2. The roof of the proposed porch is properly
proportioned to and integrated with the roof of the
dwelling and has no less than a 3/12 slope;
3. The base of the porch is not open and its appearance
is consistent with the base of the dwelling.
\\Earth\Planning\PlaTllling Cascs\2005\05-07 Zoning Ordiance Amendments for Front Porch Exceptions (PENl.)fNG)\OJ--02-05 PC
Report05-07.doc
Page 2 of4
.
.
.
.
.
.
4.
At least sixty five (65) percent of the exposed porch
fayade is open or occupied by windows, screens,
and/or doors of transparent material; the fayade
constitutes the area from the floor level of the porch
to the porch ceiling; and
5. Building Permits shall be required before
construction can begin.
The Community Development Director may attach conditions to
the approval of the porch encroachment as needed to make the
required findings; and
In required residential street-side yards, covered porches attached
to the front of a principal building may extend no more than ten
(10) feet, provided that the porch is no closer than thirty (30) feet
from the street-side lot line and that the design of the porch is
consistent with the City's Porch Design Guidelines and approved
by the Community Development Director. The Community
Development Director must make the findings required by (Section
- wi 1-5 listed above). The Community Development Director
may attach conditions to the approval of the porch encroachment
as needed to make the required findings." - see attachment 4d-l
for the full amended text of Section 6. C2 as proposed.
Recommendation
In Planning Case #05-07, staff recommends approval of:
. Zoning Amendments #1 and #2 (as listed above) to allow for steps, decks, and
ramps as Pennitted Encroachments of up to 6 feet in all Zoning Districts and to
allow Front Porches as Permitted Encroachments of up to 10 feet, provided that
the front porch is no closer than 30 feet from any front or side lot line, for Single-
Family Dwellings.
Options
1. Recommend approval as submitted.
2. Recommend approval with conditions.
3. Recommend denial with reasons for denial. Ifthe City denies the petitioners
request, .....it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time it denies
the request."
4. Table for additional information.
\\Earth\Planning\Plannjng Cases\2005\Q5-07 Zoning Ordiance Amendments fOT Front Porch Exceptions (PENOlNG)\03-02-05 PC
Report 05-07 _doc
Page 3 of 4
Attachments
4d-l
4d-2
Section 6.C.2 - Permitted Encroachments (as proposed per amendments 1 & 2)
Sample handout and design guidelines from the City of Richfield
.
.
\\Earth\Planning\Planning Cascs\2005\05-07 Zoning Ordiance Amendments for FfQnt Porch Exceptions (PENDING)\03-02--o5 PC
Re(Klrt 05-07 _doc
.
Page 4 of4
. Planning Commission Meeting
March 2, 2005
Planning Commission
. Attachment 4d - 1
.
.
Arden Hills Zonine: Ordinance Section 6C2 (with proposed
amendments)
2.
Permitted Encroachments.
~.p~
a. Parts of the Principal Structure. Features which are part of a
principal structure, including but not limited to eaves, cantilevered
areas, cornices, canopies, awnings, decks, balconies, steps, ramps,
fire escapes and chimneys, may extend three (3) feet into the
required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall the
setback to these encroachments be less than six (6) feet.
Exception: Steps, decks, and ramps may extend six (6) feet into
.
the required front, side, and rear setbacks but in not case shall the
setback to these encroachments be less than six (6) feet.
b.
Parts of the Principal Structure. Equipment Attached to the
Ground or Other Structure. Recreational equipment, gym sets,
picnic tables, patios, barbeque grills, and clotheslines which are
more or less permanently attached to the ground or are attached to
some other structure having a location on the ground may be
located in side or rear yards provided these are not less than two
(2) feet from any lot line.
.
J
c.
l)~4p
Tnofli< ",'b'lily. On, corn" 10<, "".hi"" ,"'11 be ,"'"oJ oc 7'.
allowed to grow in such a manner as to impede vision between a
height of two and one-half (2-112) and ten (10) feet above the
center line grades ofthe intersecting streets within fifteen (15) feet
of the intersecting street rights-of-way.
d. Covered Porches for Single-Family Detached Dwellings. In
required front yards, covered porches attached to the principal
structure may extend no more than 10 feet, provided that the porch
is no closer than 30 feet from the front lot line and that the design
of the porch is consistent with the City's Porch Design Guidelines
and approved by the Community Development Director. The
Community Development Director must make the following
.
findings to approve a porch encroachment of up to 10 feet:
1. The exterior materials of the proposed porch are
consistent or complementary in color, texture, and
quality with those visible at the front of the
dwelling;
2. The roof of the proposed porch is properly
proportioned to and integrated with the roof of the
dwelling and has no less than a 3/12 slope;
.
)
j
.
b~4,(-J'
The base of the porch is not open and its appearance
3.
is consistent with the base of the dwelling.
4. At least sixty five (65) percent of the exposed porch
fayade is open or occupied by windows, screens,
and/or doors of transparent material; the f~ade
constitutes the area from the floor level of the porch
to the porch ceiling; and
5. Building Permits shall be required before
.
construction can begin.
The Community Development Director may attach conditions to
the approval of the porch encroachment as needed to make the
required findings; and
In required residential street-side yards, covered porches attached
to the front of a principal building may extend no more than ten
(10) feet, provided that the porch is no closer than thirty (30) feet
from the street-side lot line and that the design of the porch is
consistent with the City's Porch Design Guidelines and approved
by the Community Development Director. The Community
.
j
b~
Development Director must make the findings required by Section ~~l
.
6.C.2.d, numbers 1-5 as listed above.
The Community
Development Director may attach conditions to the approval of the
porch encroachment as needed to make the required findings.
.
.
- 1
t I
,
.
Planning Commission Meeting
March 1, 1005
Planning Commission
. Attachment 4d - 2
.
.
.
.
Tip Sheet.
AddinQ A Front Porch
Why Should I add a porch onto my home?
A well-designed porch can do the following for your home:
. Increase its value and improve its .street appeal"
. Provide a transition space from the public street to the privacy of your home
. Provide a gathering place for neighbors
. Provide for a welcoming, sheltered enlry
. Provide an opportunity to add architectural detail to the front of your home.
A well-designed porch can also do the following for your neighborhood and community:
. Create a more interesting streetscape
. Increase activity to the street side of the neighborhoods
. Encourage social interaction between neighbors, which helps to strengthen the
neighborhood and the entire community
. Allow for the casual supervision of the street and adjacent homes. which creates
safer neighborhoods
My house is located 30 feet from the front property line; how can I add on a front
porch? I thought there were rules about adding to the front of my house?
The Richfield Zoning Ordinance requires houses be set back. 30 feet from the property
6ne. In the past. unless you had extra room in your front yard, you were fimited to a six-
foot, uncovered landing and steps. The City recently changed the rules so that you can
add a porch that extends up to 10 feet from the house as long as it is no closer than 20
feet from your front property line, and as long as it meets design requirements.
What are the requirements I need to fol/ow to build a porch within the 3O-foot front
setback?
. The porch can extend no more than 10 feel.
. The porch can be no closer than 20 feet to the .front property line (the street is not the
property line; the property line is usually located 12 - 13 feet behind the curb).
. The design of the porch needs to be consistent or complementary to that of the
house. This includes the types and colors of materials used.
. The roof of the porch must be integrated with or carefully imitate the roof of the
dwelfing.
. The roof must have at least a 3/12 slope (it can't be lIat).
. The base of a porch can't be open; it has to have an appearance that is consistent
with and blends in with the dwelling.
. 1/ is possible to add screens or combination windows on a porch addition, but 65
percent of the facade must be open to or consist of transparent materials such as
screens.
. The regulations are designed to allow front porches. not front additions that add
another room to the house or expand an existing room. Such additions do not meet
design requirements.
Richfield Rediscovered New Life Po. Old Home~__ m Queslions? Can !he Remodeling Advisor at 612-861-9772
>>'WW.ci.richfield. mfLUS
Tip Sheet tOJ Adding A Frol1l Porch 2
The Community Development Director will determine whether or not a porch meets .
these design requirements.
What do I need to do to get a permit for a front porch?
1. Determine how much buildable area exists in the front yard
. locate your property irons and develop a site plan that shows the location of your
house and property lines with all relevant dimensions clearly marked.
. You may want to have a certificate of survey done. It costs money, but it can
save you problems later. The City sometimes has old surveys on file in its
Inspection Division. If you are using an old survey, you should confirm ~s
accuracy by locating your property irons and measuring the conditions on your
property.
2. Contact an architect andlor builder to begin developing plans. If you don't use an
architect to design the porch plans, you may need to review your plans with the city's
Design Advisor. You can start this process by meeting with the c~y's Remodeling
Advisor (612-861-9772). He can provide assistance with developing ideas, finding a
contractor, financing the project and other parts of the remodeling process. He can
refer you to the Design Advisor, if necessary.
3. Optional Step: Submit preliminary plans to the Community Development
Department for review. This may save time later if you get slaff feedback before you
get too far in the process.
4. Submit a bu~ding permit application to the Inspections Division along with two (2)
sets of the following: construction plans, site plans. and building elevations.
. The plans wlll be sent to the Community Development Department for review
. The plans will be reviewed by an Inspector
. It is important that you or your builder/architect submit complete plans with
detailed information; the review process can go much quicker if the plans include
all the information that staff needs to conduct their review
. If you met with the city's Design Advisor, you should indicate how his or her
suggestions were incorporated into the porch design
. Be prepared for the fact that the additional review can add to the amount of time
needed to review plans
.
5. Respond to any comment, questions or changes requested by the Community
Development Department or Inspections Division.
6. Once you have received approval from the Community Development Director and a
building permit from the Inspections Division, you can start construction.
My house has "extra" room in #Tont, and I don't plan on building my porch any
closer than 30 feet to the front property line. 00 I have to follow the same rules
and process?
No. If your porch doesn't infringe on the front setback, you or your builder can just apply
for a building permit as usual. Remember that you'll need to show the Building Inspector
where your property lines are so your "extra room" can be verified.
...
Richfi~I~__~.~discovered New Life For Old Homes Questions? Call the Remodeling Advisor at 612--861-9772
www.ci.richjield.mn.us
.
.
.
.
Tip Shut #3/ Add'-flg A Fron, Porch 3
Porch Design Guidelines
The following are general guidelines and criteria that will help you in the planning, design
and construction of your porch addition.
General Form
The form of your porch addition is the outer shape created by the exterior walls and
roof. The form of the addition should be appropriate and compatible to the form of
your existing home. See specifIC recommendations for two story. one and one-half
story and rambler slyle homes in the following page.
Roofs
The roof of your porch addition should be properly proportioned in shape and pitch to
the rooflines of the existing house. Roofing materials should match as closely as
possible to the materials of the existing home.
Exterior Walls
The exterior walls are considered 10 be those exterior surfaces from the floor line to
the ceiling of the porch. This surface is to be at least 65 percent open and 35
percent solid. The open surfaces are to be open air or occupied by operable
windows, screens andlor full lite doors. The solid surfaces are to be exterior
materials that are consistent or complementary in color. texture and quality to those
of the front of the existing home.
Floors
Open-air porches must have floors of durable exterior grade materials such as
concrete, painted solid wood or brick. Enclosed porches may have flooring materials
such as liIe, wood, vinyl and exterior grade carpel.
Ceilings
Open-air porches must have ceilings of durable exterior grade materials such as
beadboard or painted or stained wood. Enclosed porches may have ceiling
materials of sheet rock, paneling material or wood.
Columns
Structural columns should be clad in finish grade, wood trim or be a decorative
shape that is compatible With the design of the existing house. The columns should
be expressed on the exterior of the porch to help articulate the porch facade.
Railings
The height and spacing of railing must meet the requirements of the City of Richfield.
Acceptable railing materials are painted or stained wood and painted metal. The
design of the railing assembly should be compatible with the details of the existing
house.
Landscaping
Integrating your porch adoruon into your yard is as important as its integration to your
house. Plant materials and landscape features should transition the porch into your
yard, providing a visual base. Landscaping could also be placed along the entry
path.
Richftel~ Rediscovered New Life.. For Old Homes Questions? Call the Remodeling Advisor at 612-861-9772
"WWW_ciIichfield.mn_us
Tip ShuJ #31 Adding A Franl Porch 4
.
Who can I call for help?
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Richfield Remodeling Advisor Dave Schaffer
Remodeling assistance at no cost to you.
(612) 861-9772
Community Development Department
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
(612) 861-9760
Inspections Division
(612) 861-9860
The following organizations may assist you in locating qualified professionals for the
design and construction of your porch addition.
Architects
American institute of Architects
275 Market Street
Minneapolis, MN 55405
(612) 338-6763
.
Landscape Architects
American Society of Landscape Architects
275 Market Street
Minneapolis, MN 55405
(612) 339-0797
General Contractors
Builders Association of the Twin Cities
2960 Centre Point Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 697-1954
.
RIchfield Rediscovered New Life For Old H"",es___ Questions? CaD the Remodeting Advisor at 612-<161-9772
www.cLrichfield.mn.us
;
.
.
.
Tip Shed #J/ Adding A FrOn! Porch 5
Front Porch Adcfition
Suggestions
Two Story House
Story and a HaM House
Richfi&1d Rediscovered New Life /--OT Old Homes Questions? CaR the Remodeling Advisor at 612-861-9772
www_ci.n'chfieJd_mn.us
. City Council Meeting
Attachment 6D - 2
.
.
April 11, 2005
.
.
.
~
---A~HILLS
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO, 357
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO FRONT PORCHES AS PERMITTED
ENCROACHMENTS
THE ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL ORDAINS THAT SECTION 6(C)2(a) OF ARDEN
HILLS ORDINANCE 291 IS AMENDED; AND SECTION 6(C)2(d) IS ADDED TO
ARDEN HILLS ORDINANCE 291 TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
Section 6(C)2(a). Parts of the Principal Structure. Features which are part of a principal
structure, including but not limited to eaves, cantilevered areas, cornices, canopies, awnings,
decks, balconies, steps, ramps, fire escapes and chimneys, may extend three (3) feet into the
required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six
(6) feet from any lot line, except that steps, decks, and ramps may extend six (6) feet into the
required front, side, and rear setbacks but in no case shall these encroachments be less than six
(6) feet from any lot line.
Section 6(C)2(d). Covered Porches for Siul!le-Familv Detached Dwellinl!s.
1. In required single-family residential front yard setbacks, covered porches attached to the
principal structure may extend no more than 10 feet into the required front setback;
provided that; the porch is no closer than 30 feet from the front lot line, the design of the
porch is consistent with the City's Porch Design Guidelines, and the porch has been
approved by the Community Development Director or Development Director's designee.
The Community Development Director or Development Director's designee must make
the following findings to approve a porch encroachment of up to 10 feet:
(a) The exterior materials of the proposed porch are consistent or complementary in
color, texture, and quality with those visible at the front ofthe dwelling;
(b) The roof of the proposed porch is properly proportioned to and integrated with the
roof ofthe dwelling and has no less than a 3/12 slope;
(c)
The base of the porch is not open, the base must be a concrete block perimeter
foundation with frost footings, and its appearance is consistent with the base of
the dwelling.
(d)
At least sixty five (65) percent of the exposed porch fayade is open or occupied by
windows, screens, and/or doors of transparent material; and the fayade constitutes
the area from the floor level of the porch to the porch ceiling; and
( e) Building Permits shall be required before construction can begin.
2. In required single-family residential side-yard comer setbacks, covered porches attached
to the front of a principal building facing the side yard comer setback may extend no
more than ten (10) feet into the required side-yard comer setback, provided that; the
porch is no closer than thirty (30) feet from the side-yard comer lot line, that the design
of the porch is consistent with the City's Porch Design Guidelines, and the porch has
approved by the Conununity Development Director or Development Director's designee.
The Community Development Director or Development Director's designee must make
the findings required by Section 6.C.2.d.l, letters (a)-(e) as listed above in order to
approve a porch encroachment of up to ten (10) feet.
Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall become effective the 21 sl day of April, 2005.
Adoption Date,
Passed by the City Council of the City of Arden Hills the _day of
,2005.
BEVERLY APLIKOWSKI, MAYOR
ATTEST:
MICHELLE WOLFE
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Publication Date. Published on the
of
,2005.
F:\userrIJaniceIJerry\Arden Hills\Ordinance 357. 3.doc
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
City Council Meeting
April 11, 2005
Attachment 6D - 3
.
.
.
~
~HILLS
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO, 05-29
,
RESOLUTION AMENDING APPENDIX A OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 291 TO
INCLUDE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR FRONT PORCHES AS
ENCROACHMENTS INTO FRONT AND SIDE YARD CORNER SETBACKS
WHEREAS: Arden Hills has adopted new regulations allowing front porches in front
and side-yard corner setback areas subject to certain conditions.
WHEREAS: These regulations include a specific procedure and design guidelines for
porches proposed to encroach in the front yard or side-yard corner setback
areas up ten feet but in no case leaving a setback of less than thirty feet from the
porch to the property lines.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Council of the City of Arden Hills
directs staff to include in Zoning Ordinance No. 291, Appendix A, the design guidelines
and application procedure for porches which encroach into the front and side-yard
corner setback areas.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 11th
DAY OF APRIL, 2005.
Beverly Aplikowski, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michelle A, Wolfe, City Administrator
\\Ear1h\admin\Council\Resolutions\2005\05~29, Amending Appendix A of the Zoning Ordinance to include Front Porch Design Guidelines and
procedures_doc
FRONT PORCHES AND PORCH DESIGN GUIDELINES
.
A. CITY REVIEW PROCEDURE
1. Applicant reviews proposal with City Planner before plans are finalized.
2. Applicant submits application and submission documents to City.
3. Community Development Director or their designee reviews application and
review the findings to determine compliance with City regulations
4. The Community Development Director or their designee provides a written
review of application to the City Building Official and the applicant.
5. If the Community Development Director or their designee has approved the
porch addition the applicant may submit an application for a building permit.
B, SUBMISSION REOUIREMENTS
LOCATION MAP
Applicant provides a general map (8 y:," x II" is acceptable) illustrating the
general location of the property for which the application is being made.
OWNERSHIP REPORT
1. Record Owners of the property;
2. Applicant if different than Owner; .
3. Addresses and phone numbers of Owner and Applicant;
4. Owners and addresses of all property abutting or across the street from the
property for which a Variance is proposed.
WRITTEN STATEMENT
1. The applicant shall provide a written description of the proposed porch
addition including; the general style and form of the porch, roof materials,
exterior wall materials, floors and interior materials, ceiling materials,
column materials, railings and base materials, to provide an accurate
description of the porch addition and demonstrate compliance with the City's
porch design guidelines.
SURVEY
The applicant shall provide the City with a survey showing the property lines, existing setbacks and
proposed setbacks so that staff may determine if the porch addition is compliant with City Design
Guidelines and Zoning Ordinance Regulations. Surveys shall include the following:
1. The date, north point, map scale, name and address ofthe applicant, owner,
operator, surveyor, engineer and designer, including their license numbers and seals;
2. A correct boundary survey and legal description of the subject property made and
certified to by a registered Land Surveyor indicating total acreage of site;
.
.
.
.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
SITE PLAN
Depiction of all watercourses, lakes, marshes, wooded areas, rock outcrops, power
transportation poles and lines, gas lines, single trees with a diameter of eight (8)
inches or more as measured three (3) feet above the base of the tmnk, and any other
significant existing features;
Delineation of topography of subject property with contour intervals of not more
than two (2) feet and supplemental of one (1) foot in extremely flat areas, the data
for which shall be derived from the fifth general adjustment of 1929;
The location, right-of-way width, dimensions and names of existing or dedicated
streets or other public lands, permanent buildings and structures, easements, section
and corporate lines within the subject property and within a distance of one hundred
(100) feet from the property boundaries;
Descriptions, reference ties and elevations of all benchmarks;
Location of all monuments existing at the time of the survey, and those which the
surveyor shall have located at the comers of the subj ect property;
Reference to and relations of municipal, township, county or section lines to lines of
the subject property by distances, angles, radii, internal angles, points and
curvatures, tangent bearings and lengths of all arcs; and
Boundary lines of adjoining property within one hundred (100) feet, identifying
owners.
Sufficient detail to clearly show the conditions of the property, the location of the
proposed porch, and the area surrounding the proposed porch. This may be shown
on the surveyor included as a separate document. Plans should be drawn to scale
(engineer's or architect' s scale).
DRAINAGE PLAN
1. Existing and generalized proposed drainage facilities
2. Potential ponding areas
STRUCTURAL PLANS
1. Sketches or illustrations indicating the architectural treatment of the proposed
porch addition.
C. FRONT PORCH DESIGN GUIDELINES
The following are general design guidelines and criteria that will help you in the planning, design, and
construction of your porch addition. Porches that encroach into the front or side-yard comer setback areas shall
be required to meet the following design guidelines and shall require approval of the Conununity Development
Director or their designee prior to any building permits being issued (per Section 6.C.2.d of the Zoning
Ordinance) .
.
General Form
The form of your porch addition is the outer shape created by the exterior walls and roof. The form
of the addition should be appropriate and compatible to the form of your existing home.
recOillljJ:ei(~tfo~W;~i)~tQry'1Q!\~i\litt~~l!i~(;s_.4il:l!mTj\~~te~~Ji)'I"~'.
pages:
Roofs
The roof or your porch addition should be properly proportioned in shape and pitch to the rooflines of
the existing house. Roofing materials should match as closely as possible to the materials of the
existing home.
Exterior Walls
The exterior walls are considered to be those exterior surfaces from the floor line to the ceiling of the
porch. This surface is to be at least 65 percent open and 35 percent solid. The open surfaces are to be
open air or occupied by operable windows, screens, and/or full lite doors. The solid surfaces are to be
exterior materials that are consistent or complementary in color, texture, and quality to those of the
front of the existing home.
Base of the Porch
The base of the porch is not open, the base must be a concrete block perimeter foundation with frost
footings, and its appearance is consistent with the base of the dwelling.
Floors
Open-air porches must have floors of durable exterior grade materials such as concrete, painted solid
wood or brick. Enclosed porches may have flooring materials such as tile, wood, vinyl, and exterior
grade carpet.
.
Ceilings
Open-air porches must have ceilings of durable grade materials such as headboard or painted or
stained wood. Enclosed porches may have ceiling materials of sheet rock, paneling material or wood.
Columns
Structural columns should be clad in finish grade, wood trim or be a decorative shape that is
compatible with the design of the existing house. The columns should be expressed on the exterior of
the porch to help articulate the porch fal'ade.
Railings
The height and spa~ing of railing must meet the requirements of the International Building Code.
Acceptable railing materials are painted or stained wood and painted metal. The design of the railing
assembly should be compatible with the details of the existing house.
Landscaping
Integrating your porch addition into your yard is as important as its integration to your house. Plant
materials and landscape features should transition the porch into your yard, providing a visual base.
Landscaping could also be placed along the entry path.
.
.
.
.
APPENDIX A
PROCEDURAL MANUAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW ,..,...,..."",..,......,......,."...,.,...,....,...."..............,..",.....",..,....".,...........,.......3
REZONING,..,......,.......,..".."..,.,...,......,....,..."...,.",......,.,......".........,...,..,...,.'..,.....",.,..,..,..........., 7
SPECIAL USE PERMIT .,......",..........,..".............,..""..".,..,...........,....,.........."..",....".........""..,8
V ARIANCE ..........................,........."."....,..............,...,.....,..........."....,....",..,...."............,........",,11
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ..",.,..,....".."....,..........,.........."...."...,.,...",...,.,....,............12
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ..,.,.......,.."..,.,.........,...........,.."..,.,..........,..,.."..,....,...18
SIGN PERMITS,...,..,...,.....",...."......,..."..,.....,....."..".,..",....,..,.....,...".................,.,.........,........,19
PRELIMINARY PLAT (PLAN)...,.......,....."...,..,..,.............."..,..,...............",...,....,...........",..,..22
FINAL PLAT ..,.",...........,..",.,............,..,......."..,..,.......,...",..,"."...,....".....,...",....,........,.............25
MINOR SUBDIVISION/LOT SPLIT OR CONSOLIDA nON ,.....................,....,..................27
LANDSCAPE PLAN ................,.........,.."..............,....,.,..",.........",....,.....,......,..."......"......,..,...,29
FRONT PORCHES AND PORCH DESIGN GUIDELlNES..,.............................................,..31
This Procedural Manual is not adopted as part of the Zoning Ordinance but has been adopted by
resolution. Amendments to this Procedural Manual will therefore be made by subsequent
resolutions.
.
.
.
City Council Meeting
Attachment 6D - 4
April 11, 2005
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 2, 2005
8
the land should include an "if visible" clause to regulate the signage. The signs that are
not visible would not be subject to the regulation; those that are would have to comply
with the new size standards and would be required to file sign permit applications as
described in the ordinance. In addition, members of the Planning Commission
recommended that the "if visible" clause should establish who was determining if the
signage was visible. Staff has included language that would ultimately give that authority
to the City Councilor City Administrator.
He recommended approval of the seven Sign Ordinance Amendments as proposed.
Commissioner Larson recommended they designate a cenain staff member or designee to
look into the signage. He noted as it was worded that City Councilor City Administrator
shall determine if the signage is visible was poor wording for an Ordinance.
Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 8:30 p.m.
Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the variance to come forward and make
comment.
Bruce Kunkel, 3452 Glen Arden Road and Administrator at Bethel College, thanked staff
and the Commission for their work on this. He believed this would work well for both
Bethel College and the residents.
Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 8:31 p.m.
Commissioner Larson moved, seconded by Commissioner Bezdicek to approve Planning
Case No. 05-08: City of Arden Hills, ]245 W. Highway 96; Sign Ordinance
Amendments for Athletic Field Signage at Bethel University, Northwestern College, and
Mounds View High School.
The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
D. PLANNING CASE 05-07: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS. 1245 W, HIGHWAY 96.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS FOR IO-FOOT FRONT PORCH
EXCEPTION TO FRONT SETBACK IN R-I AND R-2 ZONING DISTRICTS
Mr. Hellegers requested the Commission consider staffs recommendation to amend
Section 6.C.2.a. of the Zoning Ordinance and insen new section 6.C.2.d into the Zoning
Ordinance.
He recommended approval of Zoning Amendments #1 and #2 to allow for steps, decks,
and ramps as Permitted Encroachments up to 6 feet in all Zoning Districts and to allow
Front Porches as Permitted Encroachments of up to 10 feet, provided that the front porch
is no closer than 30 feet from any front or side lot line, for Single-Family Dwellings.
Chair Sand asked what for the definition of residential street side yard. Mr. Hellegers
replied that would be a corner property.
Chair Sand asked if they wanted to allow some flexibility in the footing and foundation
materials so it was complimentary to the home. He expressed concern that it might be
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - MARCH 2, 2005
9
too rigid. Mr. Hellegers replied this language was taken from the City of Richfield's .
language and he believed that City wanted to have a consistent appearance in the front of
the homes. He indicated he had spoken with the building official about this and he was
okay with either following the Richfield ordinance or not following the Richfield
ordinance.
Commissioner Larson noted a perimeter foundation was a sturdier structure.
Chair Sand stated if they were referring to an enclosed structure, then he could see
needing better footing and foundation materials.
Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 8:46 p.m.
Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the variance to come forward and make
comment
There were no comments.
Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m.
Commissioner Bezdicek asked if they were only talking about front yard porches. Mr.
Hellegers replied this would include front yard and side yard porches.
Chair Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to approve Planning Case No. .
05-07: City of Arden Hills, 1245 W. Highway 96; Zoning Ordinance Amendments for
lO-foot Front Porch Exception to Front Setback in R-l and R-2 Zoning District. Zoning
Amendments #1 and #2 to allow for steps, decks, and ramps as Permitted Encroachments
of up to 6 feet in all Zoning Districts and to allow Front Porches as Permitted
Encroachments of up to 10 feet, provided that the front porch is no closer than 30 feet
from any front or side lot line, for Singe-Family Dwellings.
The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
None.
REPORTS
A. Planning Commissioners
Commissioner Larson noted he would not be next month's meeting.
B. Staff
Mr. Hellegcrs updated the Commission on upcoming application requests.
.
C. Council Member
Council Member Grant updated the Commission on recent City Council actions.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 5, 2005
7
Commissioner Bezdicek stated he agreed with the language as presented. Commissioner
Larson agreed with Commissioner Bezdicek.
Chair Sand stated they should also add holiday hours to be the same as weekend hours.
Chair Sand noted they should also add a percentage of space that could be used for this
home occupation. Mr. Clark replied they could add that.
Commissioner Larson stated this might be discriminating against smaller homes, but with
the portable tables, this would not be a permanent space anyway. Mr. Clark noted what
they were really talking about was the size of the table and he believed it would be more
important to limit the number of employees.
Chair Sand asked if they should limit the number of customers at a time. Mr. Clark
replied staff could eliminate the need for a waiting room, which would basically limit it
to only one customer.
Chair Sand noted the resident at the previous meeting had indicated her intent was to
eventually teach couple massage and asked if they wanted to limit it to only one customer
at a time.
Commissioner Holmes stated she did not want to have more than one customer vehicle at
a time on the premises. However, she understood there might be some overlap of
customers once in awhile.
Commissioner Bezdicek noted that this language gave the City the ability to inspect the
property and asked if the City would know what to inspect. Mr. Clark replied this was a
precaution in the event the City needed to inspect the premises, the business owner could
not keep them out.
Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the resident who was at the previous meeting was
given a copy of this report. Mr. Clark replied he was not sure, but it was his intent to
come up with firmer language and then send it to her.
D. DISCUSSION ON FRONT PORCHES/SETBACK EXCEPTIONS
Mr. Clark stated staff had received several telephone calls from residents inquiring about
adding porches onto their homes. Currently, porches would be permitted if they either
met the front setback or did not extent beyond 3 feet into the front, side or rear setback.
This setback exception currently applied to structural items like: Eaves, cantilevered
areas, cornices, canopies, awnings, decks, balconies, steps, ramps, fire escapes and
chimneys. Not only did this exception not allow much space for porches, on homes that
currently meet the front setback, it barcly provided enough space for people approaching
a front door without having to back down the steps.
He stated recognizing that front porches can offer a welcoming presence for homes and
better curb appeal, the City of Richfield created a mechanism within their codes to allow
porches to be counted as setback exceptions, but requircd staff review and established
specific design criteria. He asked if thc City should pursue amending the Zoning
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 5, 2005
8
Ordinance to include setback exceptions for front porches and should the eXlstmg .
language be maintained and porches allowed only if they meet the current regulations.
Chair Sand asked if they were going to go ten feet into the setback from the most
extended portion of the house, they could go ten feet beyond the garage point. Mr. Clark
stated this would be measured from the principal structure and not the garage.
Chair Sand asked if it made sense to have a shorter encroachment for an open deck than
an enclosed porch. Commissioner Larson noted steps, decks and ramps were considered
a part of the principal structure.
Chair Sand stated it did not make sense to have a 6 foot setback for an open deck and a
10 foot setback for an enclosed porch.
Commissioner Larson stated a deck was not integrated into the primary structure, where
an enclosed porch needed to be compatible with the existing roofline.
Commissioner Holmes believed New Brighton also had this type of a program and
suggested staff check with that City as to what their ordinance said.
E, PLANNING COMMISSION 2005 TENT A TIVE MEETING DATES
Mr. Clark presented the tentative meeting dates for the 2005 Planning Commission .
meetings.
Commissioner Zimmerman asked if they wanted to hold a Planning Commission meeting
on July 6 or should they hold it the following week to avoid vacation conflicts. ML Clark
asked if they also wanted to move the September meeting to the following week because
ofthe Labor Day holiday and that start of school.
Chair Sand also noted they might need to change the June meeting due to Memorial Day_
F. PLANNING COMMISSION 2005 PC WORK PLAN
ML Clark noted the Planning Commissioner 2005 Work Plan would be presented at the
February meeting.
REPORTS
A. Planning Commissioners
None.
B. Staff
ML Clark updated the Commission on recent TCAAP developments and the old City .
Hall site.
.
.
.
City Council Work Session
April 18, 2005
Attachment 2D - 2
. c >- III
-'0-,= a.
W - Q) (.) Q)
3: c: 3: l.. -
- ~ 0 0 UJ
0 0 l..-a.. '0
III - :J-
'<t ~ (J<C Q)
...J a. ......... ...... 3:
...J Q) >; .:.: CO)
- (.) 0
CIl ro ---
<( tJ) ~ .c <(
't:l ~ ....
>- Q) j
~ "i: CJ) >-
...J c .... -
~ C
.... 0 0 c:
Z <( ..... ~
LL
W l..
:>. :J
0::: - (J
-
0::: c: I 1/-
Q) -
::) l::r
U :J.
(JI N
. :'\ .....
::-1 -
<0. +--+
rII -I
....
c
Q) I
e~
I
Q)
E I
<( -
Co I in
..-
Q) .........
.... ::--1 .:.:
U) (.)
"C 0 ro
c :='1 .c
I'I:l -.~ ....
Q)
.c: .:.: . .-. CJ)
all -.-
u -.
,_. Q)
... .c -. -'- "0
0 .... U5
c.. Q) -
f CJ) 0
Q) M
I'- "0 .........
1.0 U5 .:.:
~ (.)
ro
Q) .c
u a5
c CJ)
I'I:l .....
C ro
,- CD
"C 0:::
...
0
-
I'-
0
.
ei
u
c..
(I)
Cl
f!
CIl
Cl
"CI
(I)
..c
u
CIl
:::
CIl
I:
CIl
..c
-
.~
(;
:0::
I:
(I)
"CI
'jjj
(I)
0::
>-
'e
CIl
.11.
(I)
m
I:
en
..
....
.
0::
"CI
(I)
I:
o
N
>-
1::
(I)
a.
~
a.
CIl
Cl
I:
'jjj
:::J
,!a
(I)
Ii
E
CIl
)(
(I)
III
:E
l-
.
en
w
C)
z
oCt
:c
u
c
w
en
o
0.
o
~
0.
III
-
c
CI)
E
"t:l
C
CI)
E
<(
Q.
CI)
-
en
"t:l
c
IV
.l:
U
L-
a
Q.
I
I"-
U')
M
'I:t:
CI)
u
C
IV
C
"t:l
L-
o
--
l"-
e
I
U')
e
'I:t:
U
Q.
I/)
0..
Q)
-
en
'0
Q)
I/)
o
0..
o
~
D..
-::--1
(0 .
-I
-I
1
1
I
-I
<=>
SI
~
g 1
.0
+-'
Q)
(f)
Q)
-c
(f)
-
L{)
..-
~
~
t)
ro
~ .0
+-'
OJ
(f)
OJ
-c
(f)
-
'0
Q).c
I/) 0
o ~
0..0
OD..
~
D..
>;
III
~
CD
>
'i:
C
-
o
'<t
~
-
~
o
M
-
~
t)
+-' ro
c.o
0--
... OJ
!L(f}
"-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
-
o
(;i)
~
~
t)
ro
.0
--
OJ
(f)
...
ro
OJ
a:
.
I/)
0..
Q)
-
en
'0
Q)
I/)
o
c..
o
~
D..
CD
Cl
E
co
Cl
'tl
CD
~
U
III
-
-
III
c::
co
~
-
'!i
J_
III
;;
c::
CD
'tl
'iij
81
~
E
co
u.
.!!!
Cl
c::
en
.
..
......
.
0::
'tl
CD
c::
o
N
>-
1::
CD
c.
e
c.
III
Cl
c::
'iij
::l
,!!!
CD
C.
E
III
><
CD
l/)
:E
l-
.
.
. ,.-.. l/J
C 0 >. c..
W "'" ;::"t:l.c: (I)
~ e: (I) CJ -
~ ..>::: tn
(.) (I) ~ L..
C'il L.. 0 0 "t:l
0 ..0 - L.._
~ ~-11. (I)
..... ......
..J Q) u<( ~
(/) M
..J ..... - 0
<( c -
0 <
L...
>- LL >-
..J -
-
l- e:
Z ~
L..
W ~
c::: u
c:::
:)
()
l/)
-
l:
C1)
.~
C1)
E
<(
c..
C1)
-
en
"C
l:
III
.c
(.)
...
o
c..
I
""
I.t)
M
~
C1)
(.)
l:
III
l:
"C
...
o
-
""
o
.i
()
c..
~I
..>::: .
~I
..0 .
Q51
(/).
wL._._._._._._,_._
:!2
(/)
,.-..
o
<:')
........
..>:::
(.)
C'il
..0
.....
Q)
en
L...
C'il
Q)
0::
~
>-
CIl
~
Q)
>
.;;:
o
~
-
~
.....
-
Ql
Cl
E
III
Cl
"C
Ql
..c:
U
III
-
Ql
"C
III
..c:
-
'i
iU
;:
c:
Ql
:E
III
Ql
0::
>.
E
III
U.
o
~
I-
ell
Ql
Cl
c:
en
,.-..
b
..-
........
..>:::
(.)
C'il
..0
.....
Q)
(/)
Q)
"'0
(/)
N
.
0::
"C
Ql
c:
o
N
>.
t::
Ql
Q.
e
Q.
III
Cl
c:
'iii
~
.!!!
Ql
Q.
E
III
><
Ql
.!!!
..c:
l-
.
en
w
C)
z
<(
:I:
(.)
C
W
en
o
a..
o
0:::
a..
tIl
-
t:
0)
E
'0
t:
0)
E
<C
C-
O)
-
en
'0
t:
co
J:
o
...
o
0-
I
""-
it)
M
'It:
Q)
o
t:
CO
t:
:a
...
o
-
""-
o
I
it)
o
'It:
U
0-
-
o
::!.-
~
t)
Cll
D
+-
0)
Cf)
.
-
~
'C
(I).c
(/) 0
o ~
0..0
eo..
0..
<II
01
E
III
01
"
<II
.J:.
U
III
...
<II
"
III
.J:.
...
'i
;u
:::
c
<II
"
'iij
<II
0::
,~
E
III
u..
~ .
ell
.9:!
01
C
iij
o
('I')
.........
~.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~I
~.
all
D'
051
Cf).
<D L._.
"0 -
en
(/)
0..
(I)
-
CI'J
"C
(I)
(/)
o
0..
o
~
0..
-
~
(Q
-
-
0
..-
-
~
t)
Cll
D
+-
<D
I Cf)
<D
I :2
Cf)
1
~
0::
"
<II
C
o
N
~
<II
a.
e
a.
III
01
C
"iij
;,
.!!!
<II
c..
E
III
><
"~ .
.s::
l-
.
~
>-
CIl
~
Q)
>
-c
o
~
~
o
M
-
~
t)
Cll
D
.....
<D
Cf)
I-
Cll
<D
0:::
.
.
.
~
/]'\~ HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Work Session Item #2,E
April 18, 2005
TO:
City Council
Scott Clark, Director of Community Development Q;
FROM:
SUBJECT: TCAAP Interim Agreement
As the Council may be aware of, the next step in the TCAAP process needs to be the adoption of
a new Interim Agreement, since the existing Agreement terminates on May 9, 2005. The
purpose of a new Agreement will be to: 1) Serve as a bridge from now until the time a final
Master Development Agreement is negotiated and finalized; and, 2) Define the functions and
tasks that need to be completed to effectuate the early transfer process.
The following is a summary of the various sections that a new Agreement would contain. At the
Council's Work Session staff would like to discuss issues associated with the Agreement and to
develop a time line as to when consideration of this action could be placed on a future agenda.
Recital of Goal
This section would detail the goal of arriving at a Master Development Agreement and
attempting to have a transfer in the first quarter of 2006. The timeline would be written in a
fashion so that if a transfer did not happen by March of 2006 some level of extension could be
accomplished without having to redo a new Agreement.
Recital of Work Completed to Date
This would be a declarative statement listing work accomplished to date as part of the past
Agreements, e.g., TCAAP Framework Vision, Financial Participation Plan, Phase III Planning,
and the negotiations to date with the GSA.
Chan!!e in Status Desi!!nation of Development Team
Full description of CRR, LLC, as Master Developer and the circumstances that would trigger
that event.
Updated Bud!!et
This section would: 1) Establish a new budget (costs that the developer would reimburse the
City); and, 2) Establish the conditions whereby the City would have to reimburse the developer.
Memo to City Council
TCAAP Interim Agreement
April 18, 2005
2
.
The developer has requested that the following items, and estimated dollar amounts, be added to
the cost reimbursement formula which would be adopted by the parties. This second point is
similar to the language in Agreement #2, Item F (attached). The difference is that the amount of
reimbursement would now be significantly higher since a large amount of expenditures will be
needed within the next six to eight months to accomplish the transfer, these costs include the
following:
. AUAR (environmental review) - $250,000
. Local Resource Analysis - $50,000
. Master Development Agreement - $150,000
. Environmental Attorney (Consent Agreement; FOSET) - $100,000
. Planning Phase IV and V- $150,000
. Miscellaneous (Peterson, Fram, Bergman; URS) - $50,000
It should be emphasized that these are the potential City reimbursable costs to CRR, LLC.
(Note: Staff has not discussed with the developers what portion of these costs should actually be
reimbursed.) During this same period of time, CRR, LLC would also have additional
expenditures of $650,000 of direct internal cost to them.
Outline of Tasks and Al!reements to be Drafted and/or Executed
The following are the major tasks that will need to be accomplished. As part of the new .
Agreement dates and responsible parties will be stipulated.
. Offer to Purchase
. Local Resource Plan
. Determination of Public Financing Base Line
. Financial Strategies
. Master Development Agreement
. AUAR
. Planning Phase IV and V
. Insurance Agreements
. Bonding/Insurance
. Response Action Agreement
In conclusion, staff will make a presentation at the Work Session, using the above as the outline.
From the ensuing discussion staff is seeking the following direction:
1. Concerns or contract points that the Council wants inserted into a new Agreement.
2. An Agreement on the timeline as to future discussions on the Agreement and a goal date
for final consideration.
\\Ea'lh\l'lanning\Misc FilesITCAAP\]nterim Agreemem\A.priI182D0:5JmerimAgreernemMemo.do.c
.
.
.
.
INTERIM AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT NO.1
EXTENSION OF TERM
1.0 PARTIES. THIS EXTENSION OF TERM is dated the 251:k;y of ()dvbf{
2004 and is entered into by and between the City of Arden Hills, a
Minnesota statutory city (herein "City") and CRR, LLC a Delaware limited
liability company ("Developer")
2.0 RECITALS.
A. The City and Developer are parties to that certain Interim
Agreement dated August 26, 2002 attached and incorporated as
Exhibit A (the "Interim Agreement").
B. The Interim Agreement was executed by the City on the 8th day of
November, 2002 and by the Developer on the 14th day of October,
2002.
c.
Pursuant to its terms, the Interim Agreement will expire on the 8th day
of November, 2004.
D. The parties wish to extend the term of the Interim Agreement.
3.0 EXTENSION OF TERM. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual
undertakings herein expressed, the parties agree to extend the term of the
Interim Agreement from the 8th day of November, 2004 to the 9th day of
May, 2005 (the "Extended Term"). During the Extended Term:
A. The City shall direct its Economic Development Commission to
determine if the development of the AH Re-Use Area requires
economic development assistance and, if so, how the City's
participation in various public assistance projects would impact the
City as a whole. It is anticipated that the work of the Economic
Development Commission would be completed within the first four
(4) months of the Extended Term.
B.
Developer shall continue to fund, in an amount not to exceed
$30,000.00, the City advisors on matters relating to federal transfer
and economic development of the AH Re-Use Area; and will fund,
in an amount not to exceed $18,000.00, the completion of the
Phase Three development tramework.
c.
Developer will continue to attend meetings at the request of the
City and will continue to provide the Developer's consultants, as
needed.
.
D. Developer will provide advice, as requested, on estimated
infrastructure construction costs and on the build-out of the Phase
Three development framework concept plan.
E. Developer will meet with the development team on an as needed
basis.
F.
Prior to the end of the Extended Term, the City and Developer will
enter into a mutually acceptable Second Interim Agreement or will
allow the Interim Agreement to expire. If the Interim Agreement
expires and is not replaced by a Second Interim Agreement
between the parties, the City agrees that it will reimburse the
Developer for all of the Developer's contributions to the restricted
account relating to planning, engineering and legal services, but
not relating to the AH staff time if, the City, within three (3) years of
the expiration of the Interim Agreement enters into a disposition and
development agreement with a new developer. To the extent that
this section is inconsistent with the provisions of Section 6.0.C. of the
Interim Agreement, the provisions of this section shall control and
shall survive the expiration of the Interim Agreement.
.
All other terms and conditions of the Interim Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands the day
and year first above written.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF f'{).lY\~
DEVELOPER:
CRR, LLC,
A DELAWARE L1M
B .
Name:
Its: Manager
l
)ss
)
11/201oW
.
2
I
.
.
.
~
~HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Agenda Item 2.F.
April 13, 2005
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
FROM:
Tom Moore, Operations and Maintenance Director 6
Schawn Johnson, Assistant to the City Administrator ~ .
SUBJECT:
Tree Removal Proposals
Backl!:round
In March, City staff advertised a request for proposal (RFP) for the removal of trees and stumps
in Arden Hills. City staff mailed out eighteen bid packets to area tree removal contractors. Five
of the bid packets were returned to City Hall with no forwarding address. The City also
advertised the tree removal RFP on the League of Minnesota Cities website, Shoreview-Arden
Hills Bulletin, and on the City's website. The City received four phone inquiries regarding the
RFP and the bidding process. On March 31 sl, the completed bid forms were due at City Hall by
4:30 PM. The City received two potential bids for the tree removal contract. One of the bids
that was submitted was incomplete. The bid did not have the required employee compensation
insurance, bond information, or bid signature that was required in the RFP. Also, the bidder was
only interested in the stump removal portion of the contract. The City received one bid that met
all of the requirements set forth in the RFP. That bid was submitted by S&S Tree Service. For
City Council review, staff has attached an Excel spreadsheet with a breakdown of the bid
proposals. Also for your review, I have attached a copy of S&S Tree Services 2004 pricing for
companson purposes.
City staff was very surprised by the lack of interest in this contract. As a follow-up, I contacted a
representative from Rainbow Tree Care. At the beginning of the bidding process, Rainbow Tree
Care had expressed some interest in the City's tree removal contract. Rainbow Tree Care
mentioned that they were very busy at this time with tree pruning and private tree removals. In
the past, Rainbow Tree Care has submitted proposals on government contracts, but they have not
had much success.
I also contacted the City of Columbia Heights Forester (Lauren McClanahan) to inquire about
how many bids Columbia Heights recently received for their tree removal contract. I was
informed that they only received one bid for their tree removal contract this year. Also, the City
of St. Paul recently advertised their tree removal contract and only received one interested
IIEarthlAdminlAssistant City AdministratorlMemo's and Letters\20051Tree Removal Bids-April Work Session. DOC
Page 2
bidder. It appears that the increased number of diseased trees in the metropolitan area has made
local government contracts less appealing to private tree removal companies. Also, a tree
removal contractor has less restrictions and legal requirements (bid bonds and insurance
requirements) if they are working with a private home owner. Another factor is that most cities
cannot guarantee the contractor a set number of trees or stumps that will be removed in a given
year.
Due to the current marketplace, it may be very difficult for the City to obtain more than two bids
in a given year. With the increasing number of tree illnesses negatively impacting public and
private trees there may not be enough financial incentive for a tree contractor to bid on a local
government contract at this time.
Options for the City Council to Consider:
I. Accept the bid proposal from S&S Tree Service for 2005.
2. City considers re-advertising the Tree Removal Request for Proposals a
second time.
Recommendation
Staff is requesting that City Council review the two options that were listed above. Staff is
concerned that the number of contractors interested in this contract may be limited due to the
increased number of Dutch Elm, Oak wilt, and other tree illnesses that are currently impacting
the Twin Cities area. It may be difficult for City staff to find other experienced tree removal
companies that meet the City's insurance and bonding requirements at this time.
Attachments:
. 2005 Tree Removal Proposal-Bid Overview
. 2005 Potential Tree Removal Contractors
. Copy of S&S Tree Services Bid Proposal
\
.
.
.
.
~
Q)
-2:
Q)
>
o
'0
ro
--'-
m
-
tti
6
E
Q)
0::
Q)
Q)
~
t-
LO
o
o
N
.
~ c;N I1J
Ql CUM U
2! ....c:... 't:
I-~I-~n..
Ql ftl liiO.t::
~ :3..... C
of: lIJ e:O ~
n.. (!)N (;)
M..
::!
:g :;~ Cb
Ql ....eM (,)
... 0 I- C ...
';;iii 4i~ ~
~:s ~'; ~
';: w ~ Ul :J
D.. C)~ ~
..
~C;
. c
o ~
Ql....c:= (I)
~ ~ -::~ u
.!~s;;t
III O"CU.J::
~ W fl- ~
0.... C>l:!o
00
--f It)
io~
lIJ eN
g: ...~~ B
... 0 I- 41 'C
~ iii 4;~ D-
._ :1_...
:g ~~_o "2
a... Cl'r.t:J
Mg
..;
~
~
~ ;~
~o~~.g
1"l"ii:;1ll D..
=::J;;:(5. 'c
.g11J2!Ul=>
n.. (!)~o
-T :;;
<OM
~
. c_
a: ...~m B
.. 0 1-..... 't:
1-_...1: a...
.!::! ~ S~ 'c
:g S" f '; ;:)
a... (!)g:~
-T ..;
~~
5 ~
,E ~
I~ 'E
IE~
"
o
~~
~
"
iii
,
II
18
I
I
~..
ot:ij
~~gJ5
~C~:i
.2g2~
~tle8
"0"
""u>
M
~t
5 ..~
~."
_o~
~CI
0.2...
~~~
"u>
"'"
,
N
~t
o ~
~D:-:::I
-00
~c:I:
00"
E:Z~
" 0
"u>
"".
,
~i
~t::1
~~i:;
-00
i!cI
00"
Eti~
" 0
"u>,
"", I
,
u
.
.
o
"
o
W
u
.
.
o
"
o
W
CUi.c:
f:;lo <1>
E,E .!::!
~!~IQ:
10'-
Co E:~
E lIli=>
<<liS:
(I), ;
L_
!
I
,~
I~i
!~I
:U!
.
u
2'
.
'"
.
.
,=
'"
'"
'"
.- I :::; f/l 0' 25
~~!, f -G :;;,.~
"- -"In L ~ Q.':(f)
.i III! n l~
& OJ \;;;,.:;::: c U1
i
~
Q)
2:
Q)
>
o
'0
ro
,
tti
'"
o
c.
e
0-
m
>
o
E
Q)
0::
Q)
i'!
t-
LO
o
o
N
I
I
II
,- H---~ ,
'I! 1
, I
I ,
I '
:
I
I
5
o
I
0;
0.
o
o
~
m
;;;
,
I
,
!
,
'I
~I
61
00,
~."--_.
,
i
____1
I~
jO
,e
,0
IE
~~
! ~I'O
'I~O
i~l~
i.~~
. 13'1~
: ~:=
I . I ~
'~ol
! :l:!f:'u
i~I~'I.
'0, ftl
j~ioio
l~i~I.=
i~i~l!:
!~I~~
1'010'0
iCicolc
:~iE:S
,',,'+1 I,~'.,:~I€
i !~f~
'J ,.-- u
r5:o 2
I I...,~-
<1>;U c
II 'I ]:~I'~
. !~:~i~
I ,~!~:o
jgl--I :g!g!g
!...'....'...
~I,' I' :,.E14;nE
~ . .....i...i...
.~_i, , :515;5
':=,-=='7
'"0: ' :4iIQjIQj
:5: I! D.jc.!
4lICl,Gl
!E'! I ;.gi.g!.g
~-g~:a.:l:L;1l.
;~' , - - ;M
::3. ! -..-:o:">.Iit::
Q1 ! :t::;'t::I~
E I -~i~ Or
.~ :6'0 C
ll) :~, c: C'I"
.!2 iO-,:2'.:2 ~
a:: i~-lJiu ~
'c 1:E!ci!)iJ;l~
? :~::!:::
Q)
'"
'"
0-
:s:
0'
::!
0'
0.'
01
:;1
f;jl i. !
~_L-L,--+----t-+--
I
,
I
ii, :
I I I
tt~-----
I
o!
u,
~I
"
:0
o
0'
~
V)_~--,-------__
~
2'
m
'"
m
m
,=
~
'"
'"
c
o
+::
III
E
~
o
...
c
~
'"
.c
-
o
iii"
'" '"
0_
a.",
0';:::
ll: E
" 0
iiiu
~
o
U
rn
~
c
<5
u
'iij
>
o
E
OJ
a:
Q)
OJ
.=
'iij
E
OJ
<5
(L
U')
o
o
N
"
'"
'"
o
U
c
W
"
C
o
m
"
iii
"
'"
c
~
::J
-
'"
lr
.s
III
a
"
~
';0
::;:
(i:
"':
!I
,
I
I
!
~I
llI,
a.
E
o
U
1
Ie
'iij
fJ)
o
<( <{ <{ <(<( <{ <( <( <(I fJ) <( <( <{ <{ <{ I<{ <{ <{
z z z z,z z z z,z';e z z z z z z z z
': i
.----- --
,
<{ <{ <{ <{ <{ <{i<( <{ <{ lfl <( <( <(.<{I<{ <{ <{ <(
z z z z z ziz z z >-- z z z,z z z z z
,
- r ~" "" 1-- ,',-
.$! II- l- l- l..... l-
ID jQJ Q) Q) <l) QJ
a. !-g -g-o -g-g-g
EI lID QJ 2 Q) <U Q)
o "U ""'Cl "'0 "'C:U) -0 "'0 (f) ~ "'0 -0 "'0 "'0 (f) if) (f) "'0
0--.-.- '-!o'-'- 0 E'-'-'-'- 0 0 0--
~irn. OJ co co:__ m m ...... ..c co m III co ....... ....... ...... co
-610000;-000-0::1 0 0 0 0-0-0"'0 0
Q)!ZZZZ!~ZZ ~(f)ZZZZ ~ ~I~z
c! l- ,-"0, '- '-I l....
~i :J::I enl ::I :Ji'I,:J
......' Q) w I w 1UCii
ct!. a: a: I a: a: a:
,
-
~
;,0
L{) I.() L() L() lO lO L{) L{) LOlLO L() L{) L() L{) L{):l!) to 1.0
000000000100000 a a<=>o
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: I I I
'- '- '- '- l.... l- '- '- l.... l.... l- '- '- l.... l.....l.... l..... ?-
m ro ~ ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro roiro ro m
:;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;::;:;:::.::.::. ::'1::'::'::'
I I I I I I 1 I 'II I I 1 I,' 'I' I I
o:::t 'V 'V 'V o:::t o:::t 'V 'V o:::t o:::t o:::t ...,. 'V '<;f",o:::tl..:;;t o:::t .q-
~"................. ......"...."................."............-............'......:..-.........-
i
1
, ,
i
a>! 8 I tI)
"1'- 't::
, 'E C: "'I I'" '"
'" I'~ Q) Q)I~I~ IJgI ~ '=1 Q)I~ c.i.~
u E= ml.~IQ)IQ) '~I~ Q) g.1 m c: ell
.:;: c.il"'uc:,~~ 'llI",.l<" ul~I-_rn
~ rn '" '" f-If- '" " '" C: fJ). ~ '" '"
Q) ... .E Q) Q) (/) Q) all I L.. Q) "0 (.) (1) II- ... Q)
rn "'> ... Q) ... ... wi Co ~ Q.I-- UJ c: c: e "0 Q):E ~
.. -I ~ f- - -I ~ rn III - ~ f-
-roQ)L- Q)CU) .cQ)J_r-IO
C1) a> ... ,-- tI) I- 0 c: C1) u 0 =
.=.....1-- Q)-",II- fI'I:: 0 (1)"'0 ~ >J: ~I~I.~ a>
r- ..... - ns ,^ .-... I- "'-1_ 0 > en
.. ~,C2,.c -i: "C ...I"U (I) I- Z -cl C:..c >01- CD
- (1) -- (I:li I CD ..... lo. -- en "'C....
E "'I~I= 0,:!::1Q)1::J UU'J O"...:J ~_5 calQ).-
U ca cn G)€It;i= 0 f0(5 0 Cl) oi... (I:lioCif5
<l: w 0 lr <l:PI<l:!Ll.. (L rn f- > UICl 0:: rn'f-:>
III
+::
c
'"
"
l;:::
c
o
U
~
:i:
-
o
>-
-
u
,-, --
PROPOSAL FORM
Tree Removal and Related Services
_elude Therapeutic Pruning, Storm Damage, Trimming, Stump Grinding, Restoration and Expert Tree
Services
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Dear Contractor:
We the undersigned, doing business as ....'\ 15'-.S ~ a..J l-tJ/'hcvf"T0/al ~~J~1fnd hereinafter
known as the Contractor, hereby proposes and, if this proposal is accepted, gree to enter into an
agreement with the City of Arden Hills (this signed proposal form shall serve as documentation of such
agreement), to furnish all labor, machinery, equipment and tools of construction necessary for the complete
construction of the work, all in strict accordance with the plans and specifications entitled "TREE REMOVAL
AND RELATED SERVICES".
SECTION A
Public Trees -Trees on Public Boulevards, Parks, Trails, Open Spaces within the
City of Arden Hills- including Disposal, Stump Removal and Restoration with
Cutting for Merchantable and/or Salvageable Wood
1. 6" 18" $ ,J, '-/' 7~
2. 18" 32" $ 3S': OU
3. 32" Over 32" $ L(S',oO
SECTION 8
Private Trees - Removal and Disposal of Identified Trees (do NOT include Stump
Grinding or Restoration).
13
Bid Form
Tree and Stump Removal
SECTION C
Stump Removal (public stumps not covered in Section A) - includes stump.
Removal and Restoration
Unit Price Per
Diameter Inch
$ /,() 0
SECTION 0
Contract for Additional Work - The "Tree Service" shall quote an hourly rate to
include all costs to perform storm damage, tree removal on larger projects or areas
with several trees requiring removal such as a road widening or easement clearing (in
excess of 10 trees per block), and therapeutic pruning to Public Trees. Also, the City
is requesting a quote for professional and educational consulting services when
necessary. The Hourly rate should include the following:
One Aerial Bucket, Chipper Box and Crew (the aerial bucket
shall have a 50 foot minimum reach) - based on operating
hours
$~.A~OO
.
per hour
Dump or dumping flat bed Truck or Trailer of 8 cy or more
hauling capacity - based on operating hoursD
Clam Loading Truck with 5 ton lifting capacity and 16 cy or
more hauling capacity - based on operating hours
$ 8'0, 00
per hour
$ 19S:0[}
per hour
Professional and Educational Consulting Services to the City
$ 7 s: 00 per hour
r t' w-e ore. o<v~d T~
(4 W'tCIJcJ c t:<~ vAo T, '"'-L 'v; l (
pr<JVtc(p -rh', 1 S",v;q ~ ~
5"'")
.
14
Bid Form
Tree and Stump Removal
Ne of Contractor: :5 o.s ~ q.....d
A~dress: L{o~ !{:~m;)(
Signature: .,..,/k ~
Title: r::_ r-: _ 0
Av<
/-Io;r;c..fTv/j S()e'-l~ 1,s,'7j TI"lc..
I
<~~ ,it ,\-,: ?o.J ml?_ ~;)t:n I;-
Date: 3-~/-o)
Phone Number: tf: )(- ~\I- K'''107
Please return the completed proposal form to:
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
Attn: Tree Removal Proposal Form
.
.
J5
j
\
..
BIDDER'S QUALIFICATIONS
.
1. List of References/Similar Projects.
Company or City Contact Name
Date
Phone Number
Last Work
City of Robbinsda1e James Burks 763-537-4534 - 2003
City of Minnetonka Mark Simmenson 952-988-8421 - 2003
City of St. Louis Park Jim Vauqhan 952-924-2565 - 2003
City of H~Rt.ing~ l{pvin ~mirh fi'i1_417_'iR'iR - 70(\1
City of So. St. Paul Steve Newbauer 651-554-3217 - 2003
City of I\rden Hi lIs Tom Moore 651-634-5133 - 2003
City of White Bear Lake Mark Burch 651-429-8531 - 2003
2. Name ofperson(s) who will supervise this contract, the number of years
experience, and ISA Certified Arborist number, if possessed. Also note if person
maintains current EHAP training.
Dave Hennis 1SI\ #20031378
.
Tony Sylvester N.I\.A. Certified Tree Care Specialist and
HIllP Certified
3. List of motorized equipment available for this contract. List type, size, (i.e. 2 ton
truck)
1999 Ford F-800 with 1\1tech 55ft bucket
2002 Ford F-800 with High Ranger 55ft bucket
2003 Ford F-800 with Hiqh Ranqer 55ft bucket
2001 Sterling Dump Truck 38 c.o, yd
2003 Ster1inq Dump Truck 34 c,o. yd
4. List of other available equipment such as chippers, stumpers, tractors, loaders,
power saws, etc.
2 Vermeer BC 2000 chippers
2 Vermeer BC 1400 chippers
5 Vermeer stump grinders
.
24
I
Bond No.
.
BID BOND
The American Institute of Architects,
AlA Document No. A310 (February, 1970 Edition)
KNOW ALL MEN BY TIIESE PRESENTS, that we
South St. Paul, MN
S & S Tree & Horticultural Specialists Inc. 405 Hardman
as Principal hereinafter called the Principal, and Old Republic Surety Company
a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Wisconsin as Surety, hereinafter called the Surety,
are held and firmly bound unto City of Arden Hills
as Obligee, hereinafter called the Obligee, in the sum of Five Percent of Amount of Bid
Dollars ($ 5% of Amt Bid ), for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, the said Principal and the
said Surety, bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly
by these presents.
WHEREAS, the Principal has submitted a bid for Tree Removal and related service
.
NOW, THEREFORE, ifthe Obligee shall accept the bid of the Principal and the Principal shall enter into a Contract
with the Obligee in accordance with the terms of such bid, and give such bond or bonds as may be specified in the
bidding or Contract Documents with good and sufficient surety for the faithful performance of such Contract and for
the prompt payment of labor and material furnished in the prosecution thereof, or in the event of the failure of the
Principal to enter such Contract and give such bond or bonds, if the Principal shall pay to the Obligee the difference
not to exceed the penalty hereof between the amount specified in said bid and such larger amount for which the
Obligee may in good faith contract with another party to perform the Work covered by said bid, then this obligation
shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect.
Signed and sealed this
28tb
day of
March
2005
Ok, m. i~Q,~A A___
Witness
S & S Tree & Horticultural Specialist Inc. 405 Hardman
South St. Paul, MN 55075
c~)~~a
. W,tness
(Seal)
Name/Title
\: 0''',,""," "'"" C..,,,,,
\ Surety k
By: ~(~
Attorney-in-Fact
>"",-:;~~'j7'~:;'""
to%-,,"-
(~~~~):)
,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,.
ORSC 21328 (5/97)
111111'* 1< * *
1* *:
l~ OLD REPl.8L1C
1111'* * Surety Company
1110.***
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN B.Y THESE PRESENTS: That OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY, awisconsin stock insurance corporation, .
does make, constitute and appoint:
GENEVA M. LAATSCH, DOROTHY P. BORMET, DWONA.K. OVERTON, JENNIFER A. BARTL, OF
SOUTH ST PAUL, MN
its true andl:aWful, Attbrney(s)-in-Fact, with full power arid 'authority fbC, and on behalf of the Cbm~ny as surety, to execute~d qeliver an? affix the seal of the
company thereto (If a seal is required), bonds, undertakings, recognizanc:s or other written obligat?nS In the nature thereof, (otherthan ball tx;:nds, ban~,depositay
bmds, mortgage deficiency bmds. mortgage guaranty bonds. guarantees of installment paper imd note guaranty bmds. seIf.insurance worKers wmoensal:bn
bends guaranteeing payment of benefits, asbestos abatement contract l:::o1ds, waste management bonds, hazardous waste remediation t:iondSor btack Itsr;;I bonds),
as follows:
ALL WRITTEN INSTRUMENTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED AN AGGREGATE OF
TWO HUNDRED 1"1 l"TY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1' 5 0, 0(0) -- -- c - +-- - -~ - FOR ANY SINGLE
OBLIGATION, REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF INSTRUMENTS ISSUED FOR THE OBLIGATION.
andto bind OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY thereby. and all of the acts of said Attorney~,in-Fact, pursuant to these presents, are
ratified and confirmed. This document is not valid unless printed on colored background and is 'multi-colored. This appointment is made
under and by authority of the board of directors at a special meeting held on February 18, 1982. This power of Attorney is signed and sealed
by facsimile under and by the authority of the following resolutions adopted by the board of direct,,,s of the OLD REPUBLIC SURETY
COMPANY on February 18, t 982.
RESOLVED that, the president. any vice-president, or assistant vice president in conjunction with the secretary or any assistant
secretary, may appoint attorneys-in-fact or agents with authority as defined or limited in the instrument evidencing the appointment
in each case, for and on behalf of the company to execute and deliver and affix the seal of the company to bonds, undertakings, recog-
nizances, and suretyship obligations of all kinds; and said officers may remove any such attorney-in-fact or agent and revoke any
Power of Attorney previously granted to such person.
RESOLVED FURTHER. that any bdhd, undertaking, recognbmce, or suretyship obligation shall bevalid and binding upanthe Company
(i) when signed by the president, any vice president or assistant vice president, and attested and sealed (if a sea) be required) by any secretary or assistant
secretary; or
(ii) when signed by the president. any vice president or assistant vice president. secretary or assistant secretary. and coun"""'gnedand sealed (if a seal
be required) by a duly authorized attorneyc.jn-fact or agent; or
(iii) when duly executed and sealed (if a seal be required) by one or more attomeys-in,fact or agents pursuant to and within t.he lim. Its of.. the authe
evidenced by the Power of Attorney issued by the company to such person or persons. ..... ..... ..... . ... ..
RESOLVED FURTHER.1hatthe signature of any authorized officer ~nd the seal of the company may be affixed by facsimile to 'JIly Power of Attomey or
certification thereof authorizing the execution and delivery of any bond, undertaking, recognizance. or other suretyship obIgations of the~and s.rl1
signature and seal when so used shall have the same force and effect as though manually affixed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer. and its
corporate seal to be affixed this 1 7'I'~day of DECEMBER 2003
Assistant Secre ry
"""'"'''''.'''''''
~'''''''~.P_~lJ.~_?:r:'.';.1..
(~~~~~~~,,,J)
OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY
~7'.-7 ~
./' President
STATE OF WISCONSIN, COUNTY OF WAUKESHA - SS
On this 17TH day of Q]';rEMBER 2003 ,personally came before me. JAMES E. LEE
and DAVID G~ MENZEL to me known to be the individuals and officers of the OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY who executed the above
instrument. and they each acknowledged the execution of the same. and being by me duly sworn. did severally depose and say;
that they are said officers of thecorporation aforesaid, and that the seal affixed to the above instrument is the seal of the corporation,
and that said corporate seal andlheir signatures as such officers were duly affixed and subscribed t6the said instrument by the authority of
the board of directors of said corporation. . . /7 / . // /7'
(!;~!:B;'~...\. ~~K/ ..?L y~)
,. ~, .. ..... . .. . . Notary Public .
\~!:f~r;i;~~~~f My commission expires: "0 2/ 13 /2005
CERTIFICATE
I, the undersigned, assistant secretary of the OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY. a Wisconsin corporation, CERTIFY that the
foregoing and attached Power of Attorney remains in full force and has not been revoked; and furthermore. that the Resolutions of the board of
directors set forth in the Power of Attorney, are now in force... .
4 0 ~ 0 ;7 7 0 ",,,"l"'''''''',,,,,
.,,"',ti5:IJ_A::t:r"'.',
f~~f()"'~~~~o..~rr~\ Signed and sealed at the City of Btookfi~ld, WI this _
~~; SEAL1~
\"5... ,.., __ $j
SHERMAN IN~~' AGENCY, INC.
"'"''''''''''''
day of
~ ~. kdZa-
/' Assistant#retary
i"ll=l<::r ???h? Ii ;07\
THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT VALID UNLESS PRINTED ON COLORED BACKGROUND AND IS MULTI-COLORED