Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-08-05 " , f . .(IL . ~HThLS Arden Hills City Council Mayor: Beverly Aplikowski Council members: David Grant Brenda Holden Gregg Larson Lois Rem 1245 W. Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesola 55112 651.634.5120 www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us REGULAR MEETING Monday August 8, 2005 City Vision A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness, and our tradition as a desirable ci in which to live, work, and la . Agenda City Council Meeting Convenes 7:00 PM Call to Order PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2. APPROV At. OF MINUTES A. July 26, 2005 Special City Council Meeting Minutes B. July 18, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes C. July 18, 2005 City Council Work Session Minutes D. July II, 2005 City Council Minutes 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Payroll B. Lift Station #4 and #9 Reconstruction- Partial Payment #1 to Gridor Construclion, Inc C. Payment #6 to Arnt Construction for the Edgewater Neighborhood PMP Project D. Final Payment to MC! Builders, Inc. for construction of the Peny Park Pavilion E. Resolution #05-51: Minnesota Department of Transportation Administrative Variance for the 2005 Red Fox-Grey Fox PMP Project F. Authorize City Staff to Prepare Plans and Specifications for lhe 2006 Lift Slation Reconstruction Project in the Amounl of $26,600. Those ilems listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacled by one motion under a Consent Calendar format. There will be no separate discussion of these items, unless a Council Member so requests, in which event, the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered separately in its normal sequence on the agenda. , Arden Hills City Council Agenda August 8, 2005 Page 2 G. Resolution #05-48: Approve the Appointments of Nancy Kneeland and Rob Davidson to the Economic Development Commission H. Resolution #05-49: Designating the National Incident Management System as the Basis for All Incident Management in the City of Arden Hills. I. Resolulion #OS-50: Promoting the Use of Intrastate Mutual-Aid Agreements in the City of Arden Hills. J. Final Payment to Amt Construclion for the Ingerson-2003 PMP Project K. City Council Acceptance of the 2006 PMP Ridgewood Neighborhood Feasibility Study and Public Hearing Schedule Date L. Approval ofthe bid submitted by Valuation Group, Inc. for $17,000 10 perform a property appraisal of the TCAAP property. 4. PUBLIC INQillRIESIINFORMA TIONAL Public InquirieslInformational is an opportunity for citizens to bring 10 the Council's attenlion any ilems nol currenlly on the agenda. In addressing the Council, please state your name and address for the record. and a brief sununary of the specific item being addressed to the Council. To allow adequate time for each person wishing 10 address the Council. we ask that individuals limil their conunenlS 10 three (3) minutes. Written documenls may be distributed 10 the Council prior 10 the meeting, or as bench copies, to allow a more timely presenlalion. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Awarding of the 2005 PMP Red Fox/Grey Fox Project Bids B. Extension of Royal Oaks Purchase Agreement C. PC 05-18 Mitchell Minor Sub-division Greg Brown/Tom Moore Scott Clark Peter Hellegers 7. Unfinished Business A. TCAAP Update Scott Clark Arden Hills City Council Agenda August 8, 2005 Page 3 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Councilmember Holden B. Councilmember Grant C. Councilmember Rem D. Councilmember Larson E. Mayor Aplikowski ADJOURN Work Session FoUowing the Regular City Conncil Meeting: Agenda Items- 1. Refuse Haulers Task Force-Final Report . . .- Message Page I of I Jackie Gritz From: Jackie Gritz Thursday, August 04, 20053:23 PM sschroeder@smithmicrotech.com; bob. fletcher@co.ramsey.mn.us; bulletin@lillienews.com; cwilson@ctv15.org; dprobst@mspmac.org; etopinka@pioneerpress.com: info@mnsunpub.com; Ken Gammell; kmaltman@msn.com; mlsmith@startribune.com; smccann@startribune.com Subject: City Council Agenda 8-8-05 Sent: To: Jackie Gritz, Office Support Specialist City of Arden Hills Phone 651.634.5120 Fax 651.634,5137 www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us 8/5/2005 . . . ~ ~HILLS Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2005, 5:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Beverly Aplikowski called to order the regular City Council meeting at 5:10 p.m. Present: Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Councilmembers David Grant, Lois Rem (Arrived 5:20 PM), and Brenda Holden. Absent: Councilmember Gregg Larson Also present were City Administrator, Michelle Wolfe; City Attorney, Jerry Filla; Finance Director/Treasurer, Murtuza Siddiqui; Assistant to City Manager, Schawn Johnson 1. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda. The motion carried unanimously (Approved 3-0 by Aplikowski, Grant, and Holden) 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES No minutes were approved at this meeting 3. CONSENT CALENDAR No items on the consent agenda 4. PUBLIC INOUlRIES/INFORMATIONAL None. \\Metro-inet.uslardenhillslAdminICouncil\MinuteslRegular\2005107-26-05 Special City Council Meeting Draft.doc ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 26, 2005 2 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 6. NEW BUSINESS None. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Mayor Aplikowski adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting meeting at 5:15 p.m. The City Council then moved to a closed session meeting to discuss a personnel matter. City Attorney Jerry Filla announced that the personnel matter in which we are discussing on July 25, 2005, is the subject of an active investigation. Therefore, pursuant to Minnesota State Statuc 13D.05, Subd . 2, a City Council meeting at which this issue is being discussed must be a closed session meeting. Beverly Aplikowski Mayor Michelle Wolfe City Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS The next Council Meeting will be held Monday, August 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council Chambers. e . . . . . ~ ~~HILLS Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 18, 2005, 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL 1. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Beverly Aplikowski called to order the Special City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m. Present: Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Councilmembers David Grant, Gregg Larson, Lois Rem, and Brenda Holden. Absent: None. Also present were City Administrator, Michelle Wolfe; City Attorney, Jerry Filla; Director of Operations & Maintenance, Thomas Moore; Finance Director/Treasurer, Murtuza Siddiqui; Community Development Director, Scott Clark; City Engineer, Greg Brown; City Planner, Pete Hellegers; and Recording Secretary, Kathleen Altman. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None 3. CONSENT CALENDAR None 4. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL None. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18,2005 2 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS . None. 6. NEW BUSINESS None. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Resolution No. 05-45: Approval of Roval Oaks Special Use Permit (old City Hall site) Mr. Clark reviewed staffs report and requested Council consider the Resolution which would approve the requested Master and Final PUD, PUD Permit, and Preliminary Plat for the redevelopment of the old City Hall/Public Works property as a 7-building, 30-unit, office condominium complex by Royal Oaks Realty. He indicated staff had met with the developer subsequcnt to the July II, 2005 City Council . meeting and discussed issues raised by the City Council and residents. Mr. Clark reviewed the approval Resolutions and the Environmental Assessment Worksheet requirements. Marcell Eibensteiner, President of Royal Oaks Realty, stated the building would be maintcnance free with both the building and sidewalk being built on a sand cushion. He indicated he would add downspouts on all of the buildings, which would go directly into the storm sewer, and this would lead to dry sidewalks in the winter season. He stated he wanted to build a quality project in the City and he would remain on the Board for a year after the project was built. He noted his brother would be on the Association Board and he was selling the building to him. He stated he would irrigate the complete area and if any landscaping died, the association would replace it. Councilmember Holden asked if they are using the same materials as they used in a previous development. Mr. Eibensteiner replied they had a similar development in Eden Prairie with the exception they would be using Hardy Board instead of stucco. He noted he might also upgrade to Timberline shingles_ Councilmember Grant askcd how was the City was proposing that the developer would make good on his promises. Mr. Hellegers replied there would be a legal document recorded with the County that would ensure everything was done properly, as well as the City Engineer, himself, . and the building official would be responsible for reviewing the plans for compliance. 2 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 3 Councilmember Grant requested the improvements the developer referred to be put into the PUD as a part of the plan and requested those improvements be documented. Mayor Aplikowski noted this was voluntary on the part of the developer, but she agreed it should be made part ofthe PUD. Councilmember Holden asked if the building materials being used were standard huilding materials for the City. Mr. HelIegers reviewed the standard materials and believed these buildings would blend in well architecturally with the commercial and residential areas. He noted the brick and Hardy Board were maintenance free materials, which would add to the quality of the development. He indicated architectural appeal was one thing the developer could take to a buyer to get businesses into the units. Mayor Aplikowski noted Council had a request to have some residents speak to the Council, and if there was anyone that had anything new to add they were invited to speak to the Council. She noted there would be a three-minute time limit for comments. Bobbi Huot, 1468 Arden View Drive, noted change was not easy and they eould not stop progress. She stated there was an extreme level of discomfort as to how the Council and Mayor had heard their concerns with this development. She expressed concern about the traffic study and asked who had followed up on the study. She indicated the study did not include two issues - the TCAAP and Guidant developments, which would impact the traffic in this area and that traffic study should have included those developments. She noted there was not a feasibility study done or a hydrology study done. She indicated the Rice Creek Watershed District study was not completed. She stated there were serious water issues in the area. She indicated the citizens needed a level of satisfaction that everything had been done that could be done. She stated there was an environmental issue also including the loss of green space and she requested the City do an environmental study of this area. She noted there was a lot of wildlife in the area. She stated nobody heard at the last meeting from the traffic engineer. She stated the citizens wanted to address these issues with him but he was not availahlc at the meetings. Dick Klick, Arden Hills resident, stated in the studies it referred to this as a residential intersection. He noted Hamline Avenue was not a residential street, nor had it ever been a residential street. He indicated Hamlinc Avenue was an arterial route between Highway 96 and Interstate 694. He asked if it was not a residential street, but an arterial route, what arc the other considerations. Hc acknowledged there was not an easy answer. He noted the decision was that this area was no longer going to be residential at this end of the City. City Engineer Greg Brown stated the questions predominantly pertains to the radius and from thcir review, the typc of traffic that would traverse between the access and Hamline Avenue would need a 30- foot radius, which was the type of radius that would serve his area well and would serve the traffic increase while a 50-foot radius was not necessary. He noted they were very comfortable with that recommendation. Mayor Aplikowski acknowledged therc was a problem with traffic on Hamline Avenue, but this development did not create the traffic problems and they needed to address the solution to the problem, but stopping the development would not fix the problem of traffic on Hamline Avenue 3 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 4 and they were looking for other answers for that. She stated there had to be further discussions regarding traffic on Hamline Avenue. . Kathy Sukke, 1286 Karth Lake Circle, stated they already had a sign to not turn right on red, which did not work. She asked why the Council was willing to exacerbate the problem. She believed another sign would not help. She expressed concern for the safety of the school buses. She indicated Kartb Lake Circle residents would never be able to get out of their street. She expressed concern that the feasibility study had not been done. She expressed concern about the impervious surface with this development and she believed the parking lot was too large. Dave Ehresman, 1481 Arden View Drive, suggested a west turn lane westbound on Highway 96, which would not allow an access onto Hamline Avenue. He stated he had emailed the Council with his suggestion in detail. Councilmember Holden asked if staff had seen the report from the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mr. Hellegers replied the City had received a Conditioual Approval Pending Receipt Of Changes (CAPROC) and prior to the development going forward and obtaining a permit, the developer had to make changes to their plans, which would be reviewed by the District and theu a permit would be issued. He stated Rice Creek Watershed District was waiting on soil borings and the shifting of one building so it would not impact the wetland. Couucilmember Grant asked if the two inches of runoff assumed there would be some drainagc . into the soil or would it go into the pond. He asked if the poud was sufficient. Mr. Brown stated the pond would hold a 2.5-inch rainfall event, uot including the drainage into the soil. He stated there would also be capacity for a ] OO-year flooding event, which was a 6-inch rainfall in a 24- hour period and the sewer system did mcct that requirement. He stated the two wetlands on site did not have natural outlets today, but the development would add outlets to the storm sewer system, which would address any flooding concerns. He noted the water would run through two ponding systems prior to getting to Sunfish Lake. He stated the pond elevation near the daycare center was lower than the daycare center so they were comfortable with this pond. CouuciImember Holden asked if Wetland A would also flow into the storm sewer direction. Mr. Brown responded that was correct. He indicated the plumbing would be in place so none of the wetlands would flow off of the site. Peter Upsall, Childrcn's World, indicated they were concerned about safety and adding to the traffic would make this a lot worse. He noted the road would run along side their infants and toddlers playground and asked how would the children be protected from the dust, sand, etc. He also expressed concern about the drainage pond. Bobbie Huot asked how the parcel was marketed. Mr. Clark responded the City had received a Letter of Intent from Royal Oaks Realty and they had an appraisal of the property done. He noted in January, the Council directed staff to detennine if there were any other projects that were . interested in the site. He noted they had receivcd some interest, but those inquires did not match the intent of the zoning. 4 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 5 Ms. Huot asked if the Purchase Agreement was contingent upon the POD approval. Mr. Clark stated if the PUD was not approved, the developer had the right to cancel the Purchase Agreement. Ms. Huot asked if any Councilmember had any personal dealings or business interests with Royal Oaks Realty. The Councilmembers responded they did not. Councilmember Rem asked for an explanation and summary of the traffic study. Dan Soler, Traffic Engineer Ramsey County Public Works, stated the County tried to determine what kind of trips were likely to be generated from a development and once they determined how much traffic a development would generate, they needed to then look at where the traffic would be coming from. He indicated after that they reviewed the development plan for proper turn lanes, signals, signage, etc. He stated he had worked with staff on this and had contributed to the recommendations. Councilmember Grant asked what was the possibility ofputting in a left turn lane on westbound Highway 96. Mr. Soler responded the County did not support this and would not approve of any additional left turn movements on Highway 96. He noted this was a safety issue and not a cost Issue. Mike Spack, Traffic Study Engineer from Traffic Data Inc., explained the process he went through when preparing a traffic study. He noted with the additional driveway, this would give people choices and allow them alternatives to get out. He indicated he was a licensed engineer by the State and he had gone through extensive training in traffic engineering. He stated he had prepared the study, but both the City Engineer and the County Engineer had reviewed his study. Mr. Clark stated what Mr. Spick said was accurate and this was one of the tools they used to analyze this project. Jim Orutt, 1387 Arden View Drive, stated he had purchased his unit a little over three years ago and what he found in Arden Hills was unique. He stated this was a community and the community was very concerned about their quality of life. He noted something would be lost and changed forever if this development was approved. He requested they look at the communities' feelings, in addition to the studies. Ms. Huot stated she saw many contradictions in the Traffic Study and believed that this project would double the traffic in the future. Mr. Spack responded Ms. Huot was misinterpreting the report. Mike Black, Royal Oaks Realty, thanked the City for their time and review process. He noted there was a neighborhood meeting held in late March and they had tried to address the residents' issues. He indicated the number one issue at the neighborhood meeting was traffic, which they addressed with a traffic study. With respect to the EA W, he understood there was a petition for 5 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 6 one that went to the State and he had requested a copy of that report, but he had not received the report until he came to the meeting tonight. He stated they did have to consider the EA Wand noted there were certain State guidelines that needed to be followed for an EAW. He noted the Council needed to make a determination as to whether there was a potential for a significant environmental review. He indicated the threshold for an EA W was 200,000 square feet, while their project was under the threshold significantly. He noted if there were valid concerns of an environmental impact, then that needed to be addressed, but he did not believe this development would have a significant environmental impact. He stated they had worked closely with staff and did a lot of compromising. He believed the issues had been addressed. He stated he had 25 years of experience in planning with 16 years of those years as a consultant for Cities. He stated he had experience in land use planning and he believed they were bringing a quality project to the City. He indicated the development was appropriate for this land use. He stated they had come forward with a very good project and this was a perfect development for this area. He stated it was designed to blend into the residential neighborhood to the south. He indicated change was hard, but this project would be the best they could get for this parcel in this area. Council member Larson requested they close the public comment period. Mayor Aplikowski agreed and did so at 9:00 p.m. Councilmember Larson stated he had done a lot of homework on tbis and answered many phone calls and emails. He noted there was no such thing as a perfect decision, but at some point they needed to make a decision. He stated he was speaking only for himself, but he tried to make sure he understood the proposal and the residents' concerns. He noted he understood there was a concern with the access on Hamline Avenue, which he spoke about at the last meeting, in addition to signage and parking. He stated one thing he saw with the emails, was that the citizens did not want to develop this property. He noted the City had always intended to replenish the funds that they used for the new Maintenance facility by selling this land. He stated personally, he did not believe the City could afford to make this a public park because the cost would be 1.3 million dollars. He stated this area was never targeted for park or open space. He indicated 1,500 acres would be left as open space and parkland in the TCAAP development He stated there was no basis for a need for additional park and open space. He stated he had a hard time coming up with justification for not doing anything on this site. He noted the developer had a good plan in terms of appearance. He stated this was not a good location for residential development, but believed this development would look similar to a townhome development with attractive buildings. He noted the buildings would provide a buffer to Highway 96 noise. He acknowledged this was not a perfect solution, but what the developer had proposed was a good solution for the City. He stated he did not support and he would not vote for an access onto Hamline Avenue. He stated Hamline Avenue would only get busier and there was not a good solution, but by returning an easement, if in the future an access was needed, it could be added. He stated by not adding it now, they eliminated a lengthy road and would not create an unsafe access. He indicated he was not comfortable with the signage as proposed. He noted he had looked at other developments and generally these lypes of dcvelopments did not havc as much signage as they were proposing. He stated he would not vote for this is if the development was "cluttered" up with signs. He indicated he could compromise and let a larger monument sign on Highway 96 be put in place. He statcd he 6 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 7 . was comfortable with respect to parking spaces. With respect to the EA W, he believed they had enough information now and did not believe anything would be gained by an EA W. He stated he would not support an EA W. He thanked the citizens for their comments, calls, and emails. . Councilmember Grant thanked the residents for the phone calls, letters, emails, pictures, and comments. He stated he had also done a lot of research on this, including visiting other office parks and his comments were very similar to Councilmember Larson. He believed this was a nice high quality office building, but they werc proposing too much signage. He noted he did not want this to look like a strip mall development. He stated he liked the townhouse development look, but that feeling would be removed with too much signage. He stated he would not support this with the signage as proposed. He indicated he would be in support of a larger monument sign along Highway 96. He stated he would like to see more green space and trees and he would not support a development of more than 70,000 square feet and this was the number that everyone went in with. He noted this would be a reduction of 4,000 square feet and a reduction of 16 parking stalls and those parking stalls could add to the green space and trees. With respect to the EAW, he believed they had enough information and was not necessary and would not change the final outcome of the development. With respect to the access onto Hamlinc Avenue, he was concerned that if they had only one access off of Highway 96, it would create additional "u" turns by 50 percent. He stated he was not sure if he liked the access on Hamline Avenue, and he believed they needed to solve the problem on Hamline A venue. He noted Hamline Avenue traffic would only get worse, with or without this development and he was in support of the access on Hamline Avenue. He stated the City and County had to work together to solve the traffic problems on Hamline A venue. He stated he needed to see changes on the signage and the overall square footage of the project in order to support it. Councilmember Rem stated she was not in favor of an access on Hamline Avenue, but she also did not like one access onto Highway 96 either. She stated whatever happened on Hamline Avenue, she hoped the developer worked with the City. She believed the EA W was not necessary in this case and the environmental issues had been covered previously. She stated she was in agreement with the signage being reduced also. Council member Holden asked if 306 parking spaces were necessary. Mr. Hellegcrs replied staff had a standard set that they workcd from for office space. He indicated the developer felt this was the amount of parking they needed on this development. He noted they wanted to make sure the parking lot was built large enough to accOlmnodate all of the cars parking on site. He indicated there was no other place for people to park, except in the parking lot. Couucilmemher Holden stated when this proposal first came to them in October it was quoted as 40,000 square feet and as things moved along, it was now 74,000 square feet plus with less green space. She stated she was not sure if this was in the spirit of the neighborhood business zoning, even though it met all of the requirements. She stated this was way too dense for this area and she could live with it if there was more grccn space. She stated she was not sure she could support this as proposed. . Mayor Aplikowski stated they first needed to deal with the EA W. 7 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 8 . Councilmembel' Larson noted a residential development would still have the minimum distance between the building and lot line of30 feet. MOTION: Mayor Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded to approve Resolution 05-47, Finding the Negative Declaration for the Preparation for an Environmental Assessment Workshop for the Planned Unit Development, PUD Permit, and Prelimiuary Plat for Royal Oaks Realty. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mr. Filla stated the Council needed to respond to the development as proposed, unless the developer agreed with the revised conditions, otherwise it was the Councilmembers' development and not the developer's development. He noted that making substantial changes, without the developer's approval, would change the development. Mr. Eibcnstcinel' stated he has decided to go along with a 2 x 2 sign outside the door, but he would like to do some advertising on thc doorway also. MI'. Filla stated all they could do tonight was agree to look at the signage and have it come back to staff for approval. Councilmembel' Larson stated he would likc to see the 2 x 2 signs outside ofthc doors only. MOTION: Councilmcmbcr Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to amend the amended condition 9 on signage that the signage does not exceed 2 x 2 and this come back to the Council for final approval. The motion carricd lmanimously (5-0). . Mayor Aplikowski stated she was not in opposition with a logo on a door, since they had drastically reduced the signage. Councilmembcr Grant stated he was pleased to see the signage was moving more toward an office park setting rather than a strip mall look. Councilmcmbcr Grant stated believed the Purchase Agreement addressed square footage up to 70,000 square feet and he was proposing to havc this development not exceed 70,000 square feet. He indicated a small reduction in square footagc would add to the grecn space. Mr. Filla asked if what he was asking was to add an additional condition that the square footage would not exceed 70,000 square feet. Mr. Eibcnsteiner responded thcy were willing to give up unit 20, which consists of 3,260 square feet as well as an equivalent amount of parking. Mayor Aplikowski asked if they could leave thc number of parking spots to match the equivalent amount of the reduction without specifically putting a number on it at this meeting. Mr. Filla suggested condition number 20 read: That thc project to be scaled back by eliminating unit 20 and the parking space that would be allocated for that square footage. . 8 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 9 MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to add Condition number 20 to read: That the project be scaled back by eliminating unit 20 and the parking space that would be allocated for that square footage. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Larson requested Condition 17 Hamline Avenue exit be stricken. He believed this would be the right decision for the access to the property. He noted there were advantages, such as eliminating the need for a lengthy access road and eliminating the need to clear the land, which would leave a buffer to the residential areas. He stated by doing this, they always had the option in the future to add the access if necessary. He stated they were not closing down any options, but he wanted to see if this development would work without tbe access_ Mr. Filla asked how strongly did they feel about preserving the future possibility and if they felt very strongly about it, they should preserve an easement now so that they did not need to acquire the easement in the future. Councilmember Larson stated he would like to maintain an easement on the property. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to strike Condition 17 and to replace it with a reservation of a potential future access over the proposed road shown on the plat from the westerly border of the daycare property westerly to the point tbat is approximately north of Block 9 of the Townhouse Villages North, First Addition. Mayor Aplikowski requested staff specifically define the wording of the motion to ensure it was accurate. Councilmember Grant stated he would not vote in favor of the motion because he was concerned about the required "u" turns. lie understood the concerns about Hamline Avenue, but this would not solve any problems along Hamline Avenue. Mayor Aplikowski stated she had asked staff to start the dialogue with Ramsey County about putting in a stoplight somewhere on Hamline Avenue and to also look at the budget for a stoplight. She acknowledged they needed to fix the problem. Sbe agreed this was not a solution to the problem, but it would give them some time to look at the problem and still move forward. The motion carried (4-1 Councilmember Grant opposed). Councilmember Grant inquired about the quality specifications of the parking lot. Mr. Rellegers replied the City had a standard for commercial parking lots and the City Engineer would review the plans to make sure they met the standards for development. Councilmember Grant inquired about the sub-grade and the depth of the bituminous of the parking lot. Mr. Brown replied he would review the plans and ensure they met the standards. 9 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 10 . Mr. Filla asked if Condition 1 would show the details for the final project. Mr. Brown responded the details would be shown for approval on the final project. Councilmember Larson stated the developer had volunteered two items that he would like added to the Conditions. One of the items being that the landscaped areas would be irrigated by the applicant and the second that gutters would carry stormwater directly to the stornl water system without drainage over land. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to add the following Condition 21: The landscaped areas be irrigated by the applicant and the addition of gutters to carry the stormwater directly to the storm water system without drainage over land. Councilmcmber Grant requested one more item be added to the motion: The one- foot of sand cushion base is added for the sidewalk. Councilmembcr Larson accepted the amendment. Mr. Filla suggested Condition 21 read: The final plans be revised to illustrate the landscaped area will be irrigated, that there be downspouts and gutters added to the structures to convey the water directly to the storm water drainage system, and that they illustrate a one-foot of sand base to the sidewalk. . Mayor Aplikowski requested the one-foot of sand cushion to the sidewalk be added as Condition 22 and be addressed as a separate motion. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). MOTION: Mayor Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to add Condition 22 to read as follows: One-foot sand cushion to the sidewalk be provided. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mr. Clark asked for clarification with respect to signage. He asked if the motion implied the removal of the 60-square foot sign by unit 26-30. Mayor Aplikowski noted they had not addressed that issue. Councilmember Holden stated seeing as they were not allowing an access onto Hamline A venue, she did not see the need for a 60-square foot sign by unit 26-30 at this time. Councilmembcr Grant stated he believed the intent of that sign was to have it visible from Highway 96. Councilmcmbcr Larson stated his intent was to limit the signs by the doorways to 2 x 2 foot and the only other signage then would be the monument sign sitting on Highway 96. Mayor . Aplikowski noted that was really restrictive. 10 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 II . Councilmember Larson noted this was a destination development and he did not believe whether anyone would be going to this development because they saw a sign on Highway 96 and that was his intent on voting yes on the amendment and he believed the monument sign on Highway 96 was sufficient. Mr. Filla stated he believed the Motion was to have a not to exceed a 2 x 2 foot sign_ He stated another way to say this was that each unit should have four square feet in signage including a one-foot address and nameplate plaque adjacent to the entry for the unit. Councilmember Larson indicated that was his intent and he would make another motion to make this clear. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to limit the signage to four square foot signs adjacent to the entrances of each unit, including a one-foot square foot address nameplate, and there be no other signs applied to the exterior of the buildings. Council member Rem asked if he was stiJl approving the illumination of the signage with lighting, or was he also striking that. Mayor Aplikowski stated she believed there should be a light above the sign. Councilmember Larson replied he was comfortable leaving the lighting above the signage. . Mayor Aplikowski requested this come back to Council for final review. The motion carried unanimously (4-1 Mayor Aplikowski opposcd). Councilmember Grant stated item C on Page 2 of the PUD permit was in need of adjustment. He asked if they needed to change the number of units to 29 now that they were dropping a unit. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councijmember Larson seconded a motion to amend item 2.0.c read: 29 Office condominiums versus 30. Note: Jl1otion not voted on. Mr. Clark pointed out there were many other changes that would need to be made also in the PUD permit. Mr. Filla suggested Council say the conditions attached to the pem1it should be amended to reflect the conditions of approval. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Mayor Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Resolution #05-45, approving a Planned Unit Development, PUD Permit, and Preliminary Plat for Royal Oaks Realty with the conditions as amended. . Councilmember Grant stated based on the motion there would be only one exit and entrance, which meant there would be "U" turns necessary_ He asked Mr. Soler if this was acceptable. Mr. 11 ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 12 Soler replied the "U" turns at Highway 96 and Hamline Avenue would not be a concern. He indicated the left turns on Keithson and Highway 96 were problematic, but there was a left turn lane and width there so they would not initially propose to post a no "U" turn unless they received a lot of complaints or accidents. He noted a "u" turn was not a good move if they could not make it, but in this case, the biggest thing would be ifthere were big enough gaps in traffic on Highway 96. He noted this would not be as safe of a move as at a protected sigual, but rigbt now they were not experiencing problems with "u" turns. . The motion failed (3-2 Councilmembers Grant and Holden opposed)_ Mr. Filla noted this needed four votes to be approved. Mayor Aplikowski asked if Councilmember Grant was opposing this due to access concerns. Councilmember Grant replied that was his objection. Councilmember Larson stated he believed the Council made a terrible mistake tonight. He stated the City was foregoing 1.3 million dollars in City revenue with no plans as to how they were going to use this land and he believed if the reason for voting against this was because of the access point not being present, they provided in the conditions that if there was a need demonstrated in the future, that they reserved the easement. Councilmember Holden noted Councilmember Grant had stated if the access were approved he . would vote against this so she did not understand why he would be surprised by Councilmember Grant's vote against not having an access. Councilmember Larson replied he understood Councilmember Grant's vote in opposition to this, but he did not understand her vote in opposition as she had not stated her opinion. He believed the Council had made a big mistake tonight and they had now turned down revenue that would offer the City 1.3 million dollars. Conncilmember Grant asked what would show that an access is needed on Highway 96. He stated he had looked at this development and he believed the developer had come up with a good plan and that the access on Hamline Avenue should have been there and they should work on the access on HamJine Avenue. He agreed this was not a bad project and maybe it would come back to them with a slightly different fOlID_ Councilmember Larson stated he believed the same risk existed with right and left hand turns out of Hamline Avenue, but they left their options open if they proved they were incorrect. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Ms. Wolfe - None Councilmember Holden - None . 12 . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 18, 2005 13 CounciJmember Grant - None Councilmember Rem - None Councilmember Larson - None Mayor Aplikowski - None Mayor Aplikowski adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 10:15 p.m. Beverly Aplikowski Mayor Michelle Wolfe City Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS The next Council Meeting will be held Monday, August 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council Chambers. 13 " . . . ~ ~~ILLS Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, JULY 18, 2005, 5;00 P.M. CITY HA-LL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHW A\' 96 Call To Order Mayor Aplikowski called the meeting to order at 5:00 PM. Present: Mayor Aplikowski, Councilmembers: Gregg Larson, David Grant, Brenda Holden Absent: Council Member Lois Rem Staff present: City Administrator, Michelle Wolfe; Finance Director, Murtuza Siddiqui; Assistant to the City Administrator, Schawn Johnson; Operations and Maintenance Director, Torn Moore; Recreation Program Supervisor, Michelle Olson; City Engineer, Greg Brown 2006 Lift Station and Lift Station #7 Rehabilitation (In coniunction with Presbvterian Homes) City Administrator Michelle Wolfe provided the City Council with an overview of the proposed 2006 lift station rehabilitation project. At the July II th City COllncil meeting, staff requested authorization to prepare plans and specifications for this project. Members of the City Council tabled this item and requested that City staff place this item on the July 18th work session agenda. City staff was requesting authorization to spend $26,600 to perform design and lield survey work for the lift station rehabilitation project. Based upon the discussion at the April II th work session, City staff recommended that the City proceed with Option D. Option D included the preparation of plans and specification for the remaining four stations which are scheduled for replacement in the near future. If the proposed 2006 project moves forward, it would be based upon further financial analysis during the budgeting process and receipt of satisfactory bids. If the project is delayed due to financial concerns or a poor bid environment, the design and field survey data would still be of use to City staff in the future. The field survey work would offer thc following benefits to the City: 1. Determine a good estimate for 2006 budget preparation purposes; 2. Provide the opportunity for City staff to bid the project early and potentially take advantage of a more competitive field of contractors. Councilmember Holden asked how long the performance design information would be valuable to the City. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES July 18, 2005 , 2 City Engineer Greg Brown said that the performance design information has no shelf life. The only thing that would change over time is the cost of the project. The design would continue to remain the same. . Councilmember Grant asked staff when did the bid schedule change. City Engineer Brown said that the plan was to obtain bids this fall. Councilmember Grant said that he remembered the lift station bidding process was going to be pushed back. He is concerned about a balance of under $500,000 in the sewer fund, if the City proceeds with rehabilitating four lift stations next year. Finance Director Murtuza Siddiqui said that the sewer fund balance would go below $500,000 if the City rehabilitates the four lift stations in 2006 and does not make any changes to scheduling of other future projects that involve the sewer fund. City Administrator Wolfe noted that the proposed rehabilitation of the four lift stations coincides with future discussion regarding the 2006 budget and CIP. Councilmember Grant asked about the proposed utility rate increases for 2005 to 2009. City Administrator Wolfe said that staffs intention was to complete the pre-design portion of . this project and utilize that information to create a better financial forecast for the future. Councilmember Grant asked what is the failure rate for the lift stations. Operations and Maintenance Director Tom Moore said that the failure rate is one or two times per year. A problem for City staff is that some of the lift stations are very old and it has become increasingly difJicult to order replacement parts. City Engineer Brown stated that lift station failure can cause the most legal and I11surance exposure to the City, due to sewer back-ups and basements flooding in the City. Mayor Aplikowski said that it makes sense for the City to complete design and field survey work on the lift stations. Councilmember Holden asked ifthere is an advantage to advertising for bids in late fall or early winter. City Engineer Brown said that pricing is typically better during those times_ This allows the contractor more time to order parts and complete preparations for future projects. Councilmember Grant asked if the proposed Civil Engineer position with the City of Rosevil1e would be able to handle this type ofproject. . 2 . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES July IS, 2005 3 City Administrator Wolfe said that she was not sure at this time. It would depend on the background and qualifications ofthe engineer. Councilmember Larson stated that the City is not committed to this project He would like to receive more information in order to make an educated decision on the lift stations. Maybe after reviewing the five year CIP, the City could find some cost savings that would result in not raising the utility rates for the residents in the future. Also, the designs would be ready-to-go for the lift stations. Councilmember Holden noted that the City could proceed with four lift stations or just replace two lift stations at this time. City Engineer Brown stated that City staff will evaluate the different options (2 or 4 lift stations). Hopefully, it will be less expensive for the City to reconstruct four lift stations at once. This item will be placed on the consent agenda at the August Sth City Council meeting. Lift Station #7- City Engineer Greg Brown stated that Presbyterian Homes has been discharging illegal materials into the City's sanitary sewer system. In the past, the illegal discharges have created sewer blockages. Presbyterian Homes currently has five separate services that connect the facility to the City's sewer system. City staff has met with Presbyterian Homes and has suggested that chopper pumps be installed at lift station #7 to minimize the number of blockages. Presbyterian Homes has ordered two of the chopper pumps for the lift station. The City and Presbyterian Homes are currently in negotiation and working on a fonnal agreement for the installation of the two chopper pumps. The estimated cost for the chopper pumps is six to seven thousand dollars each. Presbyterian Homes is seeking some financial reimbursement from the City equal to the value of the pumps. City Engineer Brown recommended that Presbyterian Homes and Arden Hills share the maintenance costs for the lift stations. Parts and materials for the chopper pumps would be the responsibility of Presbyterian Homes. A memorandum of understanding will be created regarding this financial arrangement with Presbyterian Homes. Couneilmember Holden asked why a chopper pumps was not installed earlier. City Engineer Brown said that it was a change in philosophy. Therefore, these type of pumps would not be necessary but for the materials from Presbyterian Homes. However the installation of the chopper pump is a win-win for both parties. Presbyterian Homes will continue to educate their staff and residents what items cannot be disposed of in the sewer system. Mayor Aplikowski agreed with City staff that a memorandum of understanding should be pursued with Presbytelian Homes. City Engineer Brown said that he will pursue an agreement in which both sides share the costs. 3 ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES July 18,2005 4 Mayor Aplikowski recommended that Presbyterian Homes be charged with a flat rate for maintenance costs. Presbyterian Homes should be responsible for the costs associated with the chopper pump. . City Council requested that a draft agreement between the City and Presbyterian Homes be brought forth to the City Council for further review and discussion. Celebrate Arden Hills Reeap Recreation Program Supervisor Michelle Olson provided the City Council with an overview of the 2005 Celebrate Arden Hills operating budget The City obtained $19,100.00 in sponsorships for this year's event This was an increase of $4,000.00 in sponsorships from 2004. The projected cost to the City's general fund is $25,000. The City budgeted $30,000 (net ofrevenue) for this year's event. Recreation Program Supervisor Michelle Olson asked the City Council if they were comfortable with the current event set-up. The Barbeque Dinner is the only event that participants must purchase tickets. Councilmember Holden asked if attendance for this year's event was larger than last year. Michelle Olson said that this year's crowd appeared to be larger. Most of the participants stayed for all of the events. Approximately 400 tiekets were sold for the barbeque dinner. . Mayor Aplikowski asked if the City should sell buttons for this event Recreation Program Supervisor Michelle Olson asked if the participants would be required to wear a button. Councilmember Grant estimated that 800 people attended this year's event. Mayor Aplikowski said that the extended hours and additional children play structures were very popular. Councilmember Holden said that she would like to see more local companies financially support this event. Mayor Aplikowski stated that the City may want to recruit more volunteers to assist with the fundraising efforts. Councilmember Larson suggested that the City change caterers or vendors every two years. Councilmembcr Holden is concern cd that the City subsidized $11,000 for the BBQ dinner. Councilmember Grant commented that the City is large enough to host such an event, but may not be large enough to expand this event in the future. . 4 . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES July 18, 2005 5 Councilmember Holden said that the crowd may have been smaller due Roseville's annual eclebration going on at the same time. Mayor Aplikowski said that this event typically draws younger families and older adults. Michelle Olson requested City Council input regarding the changing of caterers and different aspects of the day long evcnt. We seem to have problems selling tickets and it is very hard to givcr the caterer an exact number for the BBQ dinner. Councilmember Larson suggested that the Recreation Program Supervisor meet with the event organizers from other communities to see what they do to raise money. It is important that the City focuses on different ways to increase revenues for this event. City Administrator Michelle Wolfe suggested that the City alter the catered dinner approach for one year. Councilmember Larson stated that he is less concerned about the financial risk to the City, ifthe local event can obtain more participation from the business community. He believes that the City should focus its attention on bringing in more revenue. Possibly recruit and focus on more sponsorship related activitics. It is important to explore what other communities do to fund thesc types of events. Mayor Aplikowski said that she enjoyed the extended hours for the children events. She recommended that the BBQ tickets have the actual day of price on top of the ticket and the advance purchase reduced rate on the bottom of the ticket. The City should work on obtaining more sponsorship from the business community. The food issue should be brainstormed by the City Council and City staff. Possibly consider incrcasing the ticket prices for next year's event. The City should explore the possibility of changing caterers but continue to keep the event as is. City Administrator Michelle Wolfe provided an overview of the conversation by stating that City staff should explore different ways to increase revenues and explore other ideas lor the BBQ dinner. Mayor Aplikowski stated she does not believe it is staffs role to seek sponsorships for this event. Councilmembcr Holden suggested that we ask businesses for donations earlier so that they can budget for the event. City Administrator Wolfe said that a meeting could be arranged with the local businesses to get them involvcd earlier in the planning process. Councilmember Holden suggcsted that the City contact Land 0' Lakes to budgct their donation for ncxt year's event. 5 ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES July 18,2005 6 . Mayor Aplikowski asked City staff to contact the event organizer for New Brighton, Mounds View, and Shoreview. Members of the City Council will contact community members to brain storm different revenue raising ideas for the Celebrate Arden Hills event. Shared Ene.ineerine. Services with the City of RosevilIe City Administrator Michelle Wolfe provided the City Council with an overview of the proposed shared engineering services with the City of Roseville. The City of Roseville is also discussing this item at their work session meeting tonight. The last time City staff met with Roseville's rcpresentatives, the decision was made to inform the respective City Councils of this idea and to seek authorization to procecd with thc development of an agreement. Councilmember Holden asked why a civil engineer would want to work for two different communities. City Administrator Wolfe said that technically the engineer would be a Roseville employee. It would be very difficult for Arden Hills to recruit an engineer being that we do not current have a registered professional engineer on staff A civil engineer must be supervised by a registered professional engineer in order to obtain his/her license. Councilmember Larson rcqucstcd that staff move forward with this proposal, but he is concerned about sharing services with a second community. It could result in some project delays. . City Administrator Wolfe estimated that this employee would be dedicated to the City of Arden Hills a large pcreentage of the time. The City would also have access to the other engineering services being offered by the City of Roseville for the remaining pcrcentage of the time. In the future, additional staffing may be needed if thc TCAAP project moves forward. Members of the City Council were comfortable with the idea of continuing to explore the sharing of engineering services with the City of Rose vi lie. Proposed Shade Tree Ordinanee Opcrations and Maintenance Director Tom Moore provided the City Council with an overview of the draft shade tree ordinance. City staff has reviewed the shade tree ordinance for the Cities of New Brighton, Columbia Heights, Andover, and Shoreview. After reviewing the existing ordinance, City staff determined that it would be more advantageous to revise the existing ordinance. The intention of the proposed ordinance is to more clearly define the tree removal proccss and thc City's regulations regarding the role of the City Forester and proper proeedures for rcmoving shade trees that are eonsidered diseased and unsalvageable. City Administrator Wolfe stated that the proposed ordinance contains underlining and language strikes of new and old language in thc draft ordinance. The new ordinance ties together the City's shade tree and public nuisance ordinances. . 6 . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES July 18, 2005 7 Councilmember Holden requested a year by year statistics be provided to the City Council of public and private trees that are removed on a yearly basis, with updates on a more regular basis. Operations and Maintenance Director Moore said that he will provide an on-going tally of the public and private trees that are being removed. Councilmember Holden asked when is a tree considered dead? What if a resident wants to try to save the tree through chemical or mechanical means? Operations and Maintenancc Director Moore said that typically a tree consultant is brought in to review the situation to determine if the tree could be saved using ehemical or mechanical means. Mayor Aplikowski asked what is the difference between chemical and mechanical intrusion. Operations and Maintenance Director Moore said that mechanical means is when a trench is dug around the tree. The chemical treatment involves injecting a chemical into the ground around the tree forming a chemical banier. City Council requested that the City insert clarifying language regarding root treatment of trees and also how to deal with new tree diseases. The City of Minneapolis tree ordinance was suggested as an example. The proposed ordinance will be brought to a future City Council meeting for further review. Conneil Reports David Grant Councilmember Grant reported that there is a sink hole on the Chatham trail that is need of repaIr. Couneilmember Grant asked if the City is having any problems with water pressure or levels at the City's water towers. Operations and Maintenance Director Moore reported that there have been no problems with water pressure or watcr levels. Councilmembcr Grant asked ifthe perennial plants are being watered. Operations and Maintenance Director Moore reported that O&M staff members have been watering the newly planted trees and flowers. Councilmember Grant reported that the Refuse Hauler Task Forcc has eompleted its assignment and will be submitting a report to the City Council at a future mccting. The meeting adjonrned at 7:30 PM 7 ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES July 18,2005 Respectfully submitted by Schawn P. Johnson Beverly Aplikowski, MAYOR Michelle A. Wolfe, CITY ADMINISTRATOR 8 8 . . . . ~ ~~HILLS Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 11, 2005, 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due eall and notice thereof, Mayor Beverly Aplikowski called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:05 p.m. Present: Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Councilmembers David Grant, Gregg Larson, and Brenda Holden. Absent: Councilmember Lois Rem. . Also prcsent were City Administrator, Michelle Wolfe; City Attorney, Jerry Filla; Director of Operations & Maintenance, Thomas Moore; Finance Director/Treasurer, Murtuza Siddiqui; Community Development Director, Scott Clark; City Engineer, Greg Brown; Assistant to City Manager, Schawn Johnson; City Planner, Pete Hellegers; and Recording Secretary, Kathleen Altman. 1. APPROY AL OF MEETING AGENDA Councilmember Grant requested item Item 6.C be pulled from the agenda and placed on the Council Work Session for July IS, 2005. Ms. 'Volfe stated item 5.A. should be moved to item 4.A. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as revised. The motion canied unanimously (4-0). 2. APPROY AL OF MINUTES A. J LIne 27, 2005 City Council Minutes B. June 20,2005 Work Session Minutes Council member Holden requested the following changes: None. . Couneilmember Grant requested the following changes: June 20, 2005 Council Work Session, change under absent: Councilmember Grant should say excused absence. \\EarthlAdmin\CounciJII\1inutes\Regular\200S\07 -tl-OS Draft.doc ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 2 . Couneilmember I"arson requested the following changes: June 27, 2005 City Council Meeting, correct the spelling of efface to EFIS. June 20, 2005 City Council Work session, Page 5, 5th paragraph from the bottom delete the sentence: Each year improvements to the park system are dependent upon charitable gambling revenues. Mayor Aplikowski requested the following changes: June 20, 2005 Work Session, insert on Page 4, third up from the update, add: "Mayor Aplikowski stated her opposition to a ban in open air because of the inability to enforce and she also stated she was really opposed to the posting of signs in the parks and on the trails. She considers that sign pollution." Ms. Wolfe requested the following changes on behalf of Couneilmember Rem: June 27, 2005 stated Councilmember Rem was present, but she did leave thc meeting at 8:00 p.m. Under item I, the unanimous motion should be changed to 5-0. Item 2, Councilmember Rem had no changes. Page 2, under motion should be 5-0 with thc same change under the Consent Calendar. Page 5, between the yd paragraph from the bottom, should note that Councilmember Rem left the meeting at 8:00 p.m. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the June 27, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes as amended, the June 20, 2005 Council Work Session Minutes as amended. . The motion carried unanimously (4-0). 3. CONSENT CALENDAR a. Claims and Payroll b. Approve Resolution #05-44: Approving the Application for the New Use of Tax Forfeited Land at the Intersection of Amble Road and Dellwood Street MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and COlmcilmember Larson seconded a motion to approve thc Consent Calendar and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion eanied unanimously (4-0). 4. PUBLIC INQUlRIES/INf'ORMATIONAL A. City Council Recol,(nition of Fred Bell's and Fred Reed's Retirement from the Operations and Maintenanee Department Mayor Aplikowski stated Fred Bell has been with the City for 29 years and Fred Reed has been with the City for 27 years and both were retiring. She publically thanked them for their service to the City. . . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETlNG MINUTES JULY 11, 2005 3 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Resolution #05-45: Approval of Roval Oaks Special Use Permit (Old City Hall Site) Mr. HeUegers requested Council consider the approval of Resolution No. 05-45 which would approve a Master and Final Platmed Unit Development and Preliminary Plat for Royal Oaks Realty to redevelop the fonller City Hall and Public Works site on Highway 96 and also to eonsider for approval the Planned Unit Development Permit No. 05-12. He noted the Planning Commission at their July 6, 2005 meeting recommended approval (6-1) subject to eighteen conditions as noted in stafrs July 1],2005 report. Councilmember Larson stated he was very concerned about access onto Hamline Avenue. He indieated he had a hard time undcrstanding why this was a necessary part of this project and he would be much more supportive having a second exit and entrance onto Highway 96. Mike B1aek, Royal Oaks Realty, replied one of the issues on Highway 96 was the left turn movement, which restricted the movement in and out of the development. He stated the access to Hamline afforded multiple movements and allowed for disbursement of traffic in and out of the site from all different directions, which was a key point that they needed for this dcvelopment. He noted his traffic engineer was unable to be in attendance at tonight's meeting, but he believed the engineer would say it was better to have multiple access points in and out as opposed to directing traffic to onc spot. He stated it was critical to this development to have this full movement in terms of access. Conncilmember Larson stated he was not so concerned about the traffie from the development entering and existing on Highway 96 because if they needed to make a "u" turn at Hamline, that was a controlled intersection and he believed that was better than having people turning on Hamline Avenue to access the site. He stated if people were exiting the development and the intention was to head southbound on Hamline Avenue, it was a simple matter to turn at the light. He indicated the amount of additional traffic that would be using that intersection did not warrant having an additional access on Hamline Avenue. Mr. Clark indieated one of the statements that the County made was that the westbound traffic on Highway 96 could use a "u" turn to get back onto the site, but the County would reserve judgment as far as the traffic safety with respect to "u" turn and if the City funneled the traffic to make a "u" turn, there was a possibility the County would eliminate "U" turns, which would be detrimental to the development. Councilmember Larson replied "u" turns were not the best of all worlds, but he would like to see them being made on Highway 96 whcre there was room to make them. He also noted this would rcduce impervious surface as well as allow for additional green space between the buildings and the residences on the development. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 4 . Couneilmember Holden asked how the entrance would be designed since it was cut into a hill. Mr. Black replied their engineer would draw the entrance up, but they did not anticipate retaining walls along the edge. Mayor Aplikowski asked if a frontage road could be designed instead of a back road. Mr. Blaek stated this would put an access point close to the intersection of Hamline Avenue and Highway 96. He stated he did not believe the lraflic engineer's would advise them doing that. Mayor Aplikowski noted when the City Hall was located on this site; they had a frontage road for access. Mr. Blaek stated if they had an access on Hamline Avenue it should be where it was previously located, but they were willing to look at even having a different access on Hamline. However, he believcd thcre should be an access there, but he understood the public safety issue. Councilmember Grant noted most of the access to this development if there was not an access on Hamline Avenue, would be "U" turns and he believed there was too much traffic on Highway 96 to make "U" turns. Couneilmember Larson stated people could also make a turn on Highway] 0 and turn around on Highway 96 to access the development. He agreed "U" turns were not the best, but he believed . people would find other ways to the development if they did not want to make "U" turns. Mr. Blaek expressed concern about the marketability of the site if the access was limited to Highway 96. Couneilmember Grant asked about uses in the new business district. Mr. HeIlegers summarized the uses that could and could not be in this development. Couneilmember Holden asked who would regulate what businesses went into the development. Mr. Hellegcrs replied the City had ordinances set up to regulate these types of activities. He noted the City also had the option of having Deed restrictions for the development. He indicated there could be some costs to the City in the future due to code enforcement. Couneilmember Holden asked if there had been any neighborhood meetings held. Mr. HeIlegers replied they had a neighborhood meeting in April with approximately 20 people showing up. Couneilmember Holden askcd if there had been an appraisal done on this property. Mr. Clark replied there was an appraisal done on November 23,2004 by Nagell Appraisal & Consulting. Couneilmember Holden asked if this property had been advertised for sale. Mr. Clark . responded in May 2004 Council directed him to procccd with selling this property and at that time there was a Letter of Intent from Royal Oaks for a townhome development, which development ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 5 . was not allowed due to the zoning. He indicated after a couple of Work Sessions, Council directed staff to see if there was other interest in the property. In January, staff had contacted three different companies to see if there was any interest in the property. In addition, over the last 12 months, the City also had a number of requests from individuals who were interested in purehasing this property for a small strip mall as well as an interest from a Charter School, which did not meet the zoning. Councilmember Holden asked how this development changed from a 40,000 square foot project to a 70,000 office condominium development. Mr. Clark replied Council had agreed to a development that was approximately 70,000 square feet not 40,000 square feet which was written into the Purchase Agreement under 11.3 of the Development Permits. He indicated one of the reasons they put this in there was that they wanted to separate out the Purchase Agreement from the Planned Unit Development process and by the City acting on the Purchase Agreement they did not want to give approval for the Planned Unit Development. Mr. Filla stated hc was given the terms to be put into the agreement and the agreement indicated the general nature to be an office complex of that number of feet, but it did not obligate the City to approve this and if it was not approved by the City, the developer had the option to get out of the agreement and get his money back. . Council member Holden asked if this would be considered maximum density or medium density. Mr. Clark replied he believed this would be a medium density. Couneilmember Larson stated he believcs what the developer proposed in tern1S of building, were attraetive and nice looking. He stated the development was an attractive development for a business condominium development and while he generally did not like parking in front of the buildings, but in this case they did the right thing because otherwise the parking and the parking lots would be closest to the south lot line where the residences were located. He noted by eliminating the Hamline access it would incur less impervious surface and runoff. He asked why they needed even five extra parking places over the City Code if the City Code required 297 parking spots. He stated if the developer was not opposed, he would like to see the parking match the City Code. He expressed concern that the signs on the buildings were relatively large, which he believcd would detract from the attractiveness of the development. He personally would like to see the signs smallcr and a restrietion that there was one sign per owner, even if an owner owned more than one unit. He asked about the park dedication fee and if this was the standard amount for the park dedication fee. Mr. Clark responded the park dedication fee was the amount they had agreed to in the development agreement. Council member Holden stated this was a nice development, but she expressed concern about the lack of green space in this development and this was not what she had envisioned when she thought there was going to be three-unit buildings. . Mayor Aplikowski stated she believed there was going to be more green space added in again. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JlJL Y 11, 2005 6 . Couneilmember Holden asked if Couneil was comfortable with the trail being 15 feet from the residences. Couneilmember Grant noted it was 15 feet from the lot line, not from the residences. Mr. Hellegers clarified the Planning Commission wanted more space between the trail and the office building. He noted the trail would stay where it was, but the distance from the trail to the office buildings would bc 15 feet, so the buildings within units I, 2, and 3 would be shifted five feet to the east. Couueilmember Grant stated one other change the Planning Commission made was that there would be low lighting on the trail behind buildings 1,2, and 3. Couneilmember Holden asked what percentage of caliper trees were in the parking lot areas. Mr. Hellegers responded the majority of landscaping was against the residential areas and he did not know the exact amount of landscaping in the parking lot areas. Couneilmember Holden asked if there would be landscaping next to the daycare center. Mr. Hellegers replied therc was no requirement to buffer space between existing commercial properties, only existing residential. He noted there was not much room to put in landscaping in this area and there was a concern that the landscaping would not stay healthy if it was put in. Couneilmember Holden asked how large the proposed wall was between the daycare and this development. Mr. Hellegers replied there was a berm being proposed, not a wall. There is a wall east of the parking lot. . Couneilmember Larsou statcd they had received some commentary from people and they also had received a copy of a newspaper article from 1991 when there was apparently a significant dispute over Royal Oaks and the City. He asked for a response to this and asked for assurance that this would not happen again. Mareell Evensteiner(?sp), Royal Oaks Development, stated in 1988 he developed Keithson Addition. He stated the City's engineer had indicated they did not need an overflow for the sewer system on the west side, which he had originally proposed in this development. He stated the City redesigned the property and when everything was completed, there was an inspection and everything was fine until two years later when the pond kept rising due to a wet season and there wcre homes that got flooded out. He indicated at that time when the City contacted him, he told the City that they had designed the system and it was up to the City to repair the problem. He stated the City took over and fixed the problem. Mayor Aplikowski stated when she came onto the Council, this topic had come up again and it was at that time the City changed engineers. Councilmember Holden asked what the pereentage oflandseaping was. She asked if they could get it up to 35 percent. Mr. Hellegers rcplied right now it was at 34 percent, but they could reduce the parking some to get to the 35 percent landscaping. . . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 7 Councilmember Grant asked if the City had agreed to approximately 70,000 square feet. Mr. Filla replied the agreement was approximately 70,000 square feet of office condominium. Couneilmember Grant asked if the Council could reduce the number of buildings. Mr. Filla replied this would not violate the terms of the agreement, but the developer had the option of backing out ofthe agreement if this happened. Mr. Eibensteiner stated they were at 74,000 square feet, so he did not know where 76,000 square feet came from. Mr. Hellegers noted the original proposal came out to 76,000 square feet, but once all of the numbers had been crunched, it came to approximately 74,000 square feet. Mr. Eibennsteiner stated the Purchase Agreement was written at minimum of 70,000 square feet and they were at 74,000 square feet. He stated when the appraisal came in and they could go to 74,000 square feet he decided to take the property as is for 1.4 million. Mayor Aplikowski stated the Council would take public comment for 30 minutes. Elwood F. Caldwell, 1451 Arden View Drive, stated he was representing the Arden Hills North Homes Association development with 140 units. He stated he would not repeat the testimony at the Planning Commission. He noted they were aware that the Planning Commission was a recommending body only and others might voice objections to the project as a whole. He stated it was their position not to do that, but rather in the first instance if Council did approve this that they did not weaken the 18 conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. He called their attention to condition 4, retail uses and that retail uses shall not be allowed to oecupy thc development, except for accessory sales. He indicated the parking could be reduced and he recommended COlillcil reduce the parking. He stated the Planning Commission did not see fit to adopt their recommendation for wall signage. He stated 30 square feet in the sign ordinance for the NB zone was not intended for 30 tillits so close together and he recommended the signage be limited to a maximum of 18 square feet for the outer units, with the middle units being allowed six square feet. He noted signage was addressed under condition number 9. Jeanine Yates, 1394 Arden View Drive, stated she was concerned about the enviromnental impact, property depreciation, and stress for the elderly people in the area, and the lack of this developer to communicate with the residents and City. She noted the Guidant developers worked very well with the City, Council, and the residents to accommodate all of the concems everyone had. She asked why with this development, some things were not considered that would benefit the community more also. Gail Van Buskirk, 1390 Arden View Drive, stated she opposed this development. She noted they had a coalition of residents who would be speaking on various issues. She stated this coalition had gathered 154 signatures from the resident opposing the development. She noted there was an additional 17 signatures which she presented to Council tonight. She indicated there was a broad range of locations of the residences who opposed this development. She stated the residents did not want the trees and green space with a parking lot. She acknowledged the City ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 8 . owned the land, but the City was the people and the people wanted a more environmentally friendly development, such as a residential development. She asked what would happen when the vegetation was gone when this development was put in with respect to the wetland. She noted this area was a wetland area and was subject to flooding. She stated if the wetlands were classified as type 3 that these were protected wetlands which required a water management plan and she encouraged them that this was taken care of. She understood that Rice Creek Watershed would be taking care of this. She asked them to deny the Resolution. Erik Hautb-Sebmid, 1313 Kartb Lake Circle, stated he was here because this was very important to him to discuss this. He stated Karth Lake Circle had one way in and out of their development and even in the best of times, it was difficult to turn left. He stated they were vcry concerned about them being able to use Hamline ifthere was an access from this development on Hamline Avenue. He believcd this would be a serious impact on their quality of life. He asked Council to consider not approving the plan as presented. He stated they were concerned that the marketing of this development should not impact their quality of life. Cindy Owen, 4490 Hamline Avenue Nortb, stated she was opposed to this development because of traffic concerns. She noted with the Guidant development, this had put a tremendous amount oftraffie on Hamline Avenue. She asked Council to consider the expansion of Guidant in the next few years. She stated the people of the City lived on Hamline Avenue and asked them to consider this when voting on this property. She stated she had spoken with the Ramsey County . Sheriff about this development and he had stated if he had been asked, he would have recommended the County also do a traffic study. Tony Tredal, 4521 Keitbson Drive, stated tonight's meeting was very informative and thanked Council for their time. She stated if they looked at the objectives for everyone involved, the City had an objective to create tax revenue, and the developer wanted to market that particular piece of property to the best of their ability and to make a profit, and the residents wanted to not improve the property, or to delay the development of the property. She noted the Council had the power to make the decision and the residcnts had empowered the Council to protect the best interest of the residents. She suggested the Council delay this development to answer all of the concerns and questions brought forward at the various meetings. She asked Council to make sure this development mct all of the City's long-term goals. She asked Council to exercise their power. Katby Sukke, 1286 Karth Lake Circle, stated when she moved into Karth Lake Circle, they could not go more than 35 mph on Hamline Avenue, so she appreciated the change to Hamline Avenue. She pointed out that the daycare center entrancc did not mach up with Karth Lake Circle and this ereated a problem when both vehicles wanted to take a left. She stated she opposed the project as planned, but she did not oppose the development of the property. She stated she believed there wcrc a lot of unanswered questions and recommended thcy delay a decision on this. She asked who would pay when the daycare center would flood if this development went in. She expressed concern about the safety of the ncighborhood with the additional traffic, as well as the . inerease in police traffic on Hamline Avenue. She stated this access would not work and without the developer's traffic engineer in attendance tonight, she did not believe Council would approve . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 9 this development and therefore this decision should be delayed. She stated she was not against development, but she wanted to see another model. She indicated they needed to consider the good ofthe community as a whole. Hallie Finucane, 1347 Arden View Drive, stated Highway 96 was a Gateway entrance to the City and thus if this development was approved, the development should meet the City's vision. She stated the proposed development must not only abide by the City Ordinances for lighting and signage, it needed to reflect a positive landscaping image for Arden Hills. She stated they were proposing the following changes to Section 2: Landseaping Plans: Change: "The mixture of landscaping shall adequately screen the development from the residential properties to the west." to "The mixture of landscaping shall adequately screen the development from the residential properties to the west and south." Add: "Residential properties to the west and south will be screened with an 8 foot high berm, as measurcd from the residential property side of the berm, with evergreen trees on top." Change: "The ratio of the total number of calipcr inches of the deciduous trees to coniferous trees described in PUD should be changed from an approximate 3 to 1 ratio to an approximate] to I ratio." Add: "Developer will provide a five-year replacement guarantee for all trees and other vegetation, including bushes and other plants, planted in the proposed development, on the benns, and in the buffer yards. Trees and other vegetation should be replaced within 6 months of dying, initiation of disease, or damage. The five years will commence upon completion of the proposed development project." Tree Preservation: Add: "Developer will replaee all trees and other vegetation, including bushes and other plants, destroyed or damaged on all adjoining properties of the development due to this proposed development project with either 6 foot minimum coniferous trees or 3 inch caliper minimum deciduous trees, depending on the type of tree destroyed, or replaee with other vegetation with like vegetation, within six months of completion of the proposed development project." Building Setback from City Trail: Change: "Units I, 2, and 3 of the proposed development shall be set back at least 12 feet from the existing trail on the west side of the Property." To "Units 1,2, and 3 of the proposed development shall be set back at least 20 feet from the existing trail on the west side of the Property." Dave Earsman, 1481 Arden View Drive, stated he would prefer the exit not come out on Hamline and they ask the Sheriffs Department to enforce the no right on turn onto Hamline A venue off of Highway 96 because they are unable to get out of their driveways. He stated this ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 10 . had to be enforced. He stated the traffic on Hamline was a "disaster waiting to happen" and traffic and access needed to be controlled. Mayor Aplikowski asked if it was anticipated once the 35W interchange was completed, would this change the nature of Hamline Avenue. Mr. Brown replied it should reduce traffie on Hamline Avenue. He indicated Guidant at some point would put in a signal at County Road F. He stated the long term would be better, but until that point this would be a problem. Mayor Aplikowski asked if adding a stop sign along Hamline Avenue, would assist with the traffic issues. Mr. Brown replied the further someone got from a traffic control, the less benefit there would be. He noted it might help some tl1ings, but it would probably hurt some things also. Couneilmember Holden noted every time the Ramsey COlmty Sheriff came down Hamline, this would also strip the signal from the residents. Mr. Brown replied that was correct. Mayor Aplikowski stated the development as proposed would not additional traffic to Hamline A venue, but she agreed they needed to look at the traffic issue on Hamline. Bonnie Lovell, 4340 Garden View Court, stated with Medtronic now being developed on Highway 10 that would be approximately 3,000 additional employees trying to get to their work, . whieh would add to traffic on County 10. Mayor Aplikowski asked if Council wanted to table this and have a special meeting or proceed tonight. Couneilmember Larson stated he believed this was a nice development, but he could not support the development with an aecess on Hamline. He suggested the developer look at the signage to determine ifthey could live with the suggested signage proposal suggestions. He asked staff and the developer to also look at the number of parking spaces to detennine if it made sense to have this much parking, or whether they could get by with fewer parking spaces on the site. He stated he would support tabling this until they got the answer to those items. Couneilmember Grant stated he would also like to table this and he saw problems with the access on Hamline Avenue. He stated he liked some of the ideas in the landscaping plans, but he asked they look at the berm again. He stated there were a number of issues they could not make at the bench tonight. He asked what the deadline for action was. Mr. Hellegers replied it was July 15, and they would need from the developer a written extension of the 60-day review period. Mayor Aplikowski stated she was suggesting they do this next week because at the next meeting not all of the Councilmembers would be present because of vacation schedule. She stated she wanted a portion of the Work Session to be declared as a special meeting if they could get all of thcir questions answered. . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11,2005 11 . Couneilmember Holden stated she would like to see an extra five feet for the City trail. She also would like to see building 20 be removed to ease up on the parking and add additional landscaping. Couneilmember Grant stated a development of this nature (Neighborhood Business) generated less traffie than an equivalent residential neighborhood. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to table Resolution #05-45 Royal Oaks to the next regularly scheduled Work Session as a special City Council Meeting on July 18, 2005. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to amend the motion to have the special City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m. seconded by Holden asked if Couneilmember Grant would make a time certain of 7:30 p.m. The amended motion earned unanimously (4- 0). The original motion carried unanimously (4-0). . Mayor Aplikowski recessed the meeting at 9:10 p.m. and reeonvened the meeting at 9:20 p.m. B. Resolution #05-46: Approval of Amended Speeial Use Permit for Presbyterian Homes Mr. Hellegers requested Council consider approval of Resolution No. 05-46 which would approve the Special Use Permit Amendment for an addition to the south end of MeKnight Care Center on the Presbyterian Homes property in Arden Hills subject to seven conditions and also to consider approval of Special Use Permit No. 05-17. He noted the Planning Commission at their July 6, 2004 meeting recommended approval subject to seven conditions as noted in staff s July 11, 2005 report. Councilmember Holden stated her main concern was the garden terrace on top and the see through fence starting at 4 fect. She asked how many residents would use the garden terrace. John Mehrkeus, Presbyterian Homes, replied thcre was a total of 52 residents in that area with staff supervision or family members taking residents up there. He stated maximum the space would accommodate was somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 to 30 people. . Council member Holden asked what kind of visual sensitivity the see through fence would have. She stated they would be intruding on the neighborhood at a higher level. Mr. Mehrkens replied the nearest resident was 210 feet away, so they had a significant distance which would address the privacy issues. In addition, inside the fenced garden area, there would be plants which would be used to add additional screening between the residents and Lake Johanna. He noted they did not ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2005 12 . want this to look "fence like" or "cage like". He stated he had spoken with the landscapers and there would be wheelchair height plantings also, which would also create a buffer between them and the residents. He stated they were looking at a lot of options both for the safety of their residences as well as the concerns oflhe neighborhood. Councilmember Holden stated she was concerned about the neighborhood. Mr. Mehrkens replied this had been brought up at the neighborhood meeting and they were also aware of the site lines. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to approve Special Use Permit No. 05-17. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). MOTION: Mayor Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve Resolution #05-46: Approval of Amended Special Use Permit for Presbyterian Homes. The motion canied unanimously (4-0). Go 2CJCJ6 Lift Station Rehabilitation Proiect Soeeifieations f.Hthorize Preparation of Plans anll Removed from the Agenda. . D. Approve the appointment of Anthonv Knowlan as Operations and Maintenanee Worker for the City of Arden Hills Ms. Wolfe stated with the pending retirements of Fred Bell and Fred Reed from the Operations and Maintenance Department, City staff began recruitment efforts for their replacements in early May. Based upon the interview and exam process, staff is recommending Anthony Knowlan as an Operations and Maintenance Worker. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to Anthony Knowlan as Operations and Maintenance Worker for the City of Arden Hills, subject to the successful completion of a physical, a drug test, and job evaluation assessment. The motion earried unanimously (4-0). 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. TCAAP Update Mr. Clark updated the Council on recent TCAAP developments. Council member Holden asked for a list ofthe strike out on the term sheets. Mr. Clark replied . that would be forthcoming. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2005 13 . Couneilmembef Holden stated they should discuss how much of staffs time TCAAP is taking up now that they are not getting reimbursed by the developer. Councilmember Grant asked what was the value ofthe cost of clean up as known. Mr. Clark noted this was a starting point and they would get the perspective of the Army's cost of clean up. Councilmember Holden asked for more information on the insurance issue. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Ms. Wolfe - None. Couneilmember Holden - Asked for an update on the diseased trees in the City. Mr. Moore replied from the residential standpoint, tree inspectors have been very busy and the residents have been working with the City to remove trees at a mueh greater pace than last year. From the City property, they were still doing inspections, but they were concentrating on residential properties first, but he anticipated they would be working more on City property in the next two or three weeks. . Councilmember Grant - None. Councilmember Larson - None. Mayor Aplikowski - Stated she has visited with the Council of Long Prairie and it was interesting to note they had their own fire and police department. She noted the Mayor of Long Prairie was scheduled to meet with them on July 25. She stated at some point they needed to sit down and talk to the County about the Highway 96 and Highway 10 intersection. She stated the 35W coalition also needed to be discussed. Mayor Aplikowski adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting meeting at 9:57 p.m. Beverly Aplikowski Mayor Michelle Wolfe City Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS The next Council Meeting will be held Monday, July 25, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council Chambers. . . Prepared by: Murtuza Siddiqui Dept.: Finance Council Mtg. Date: August 8, 2005 Final Action Needed By: August 8, 2005 ~ --7\.~HILLS City ot Arden Hills Request for Council Action ~ Agenda Item~:[llli Claims & Pavroll Budgeted Amount: Actual Amount Funding Source: j Council Action Request: Review and Approve Consent Agenda Item 3.A. - Claims and Payroll Staff Recommendation: Approve Consent Agenda lIem 3.A. - Claims and Payroll Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action Planning PTRC Not Applicable . Not applicable Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): . 0 Memo/Letter: o Resolution (No. ) o Ordinance (No. ) o Engineering Recommendation: o Attorney Recommendation: o Other: Payroll and Claims Reports Financial Implications: Payroll #14 Total Cost $70,661.77 Payroll #15 Total Cost $56,991.92 Claims Total $196,930.35 Administrator/Staff Comments: . Page 1 of 1 !I~-I "'I 0::1 -; 0..1 -I I ,- '" o j::; ~ .... o w .... ol: o ~I 0' wi :I: o ~ I ..I:g ..1M O~ 0::.... ~.s a.'" ie )-0> ...JiO :>'r:;: -~~ -, >; Ox !~ ~ 'I " 1-iB. --.: I 1-1 i i II i I~ n-t- .~ I. I z; z 1 t:l W : l>< ~ 'I i i()<(~ I~.. r~ I~! I ,I . -::~ $j~ . I l > r ...1 i;;;'~ ~:::8 ~.~ :~ g g :ta 06 ill .", e .~ t--o-.:\i:;i ....1:'-..... ,....;('1".;,,0: ....M ^D- ----:r-.~ ..... ~ 0000'0 oooO'~ 66009 OOOOC 0000-0 c:i6ociC: 'D ~ .ri " ..ci ~ ':0 E S .~ e :.a ~ ::J p::: "" :." E'E e ~ ~ e I,) (OJ' s:: -.W i::l-. Q: U~ :'~ -S ~:E ~:x ~ ~ ~ dl ':~ ::r:Q:t:Cl <: <: <: <: .....S VlU'lVlVl "0 "-1.L.1.L.t.I.. ! I I " u c ~ ~ <: " '8 " ~~ ,:j ~ -.U '" u :t:I:~f ~N::E"':t" o f-o '"0 ~f-o "'" 7 ~ 0 it)::C E E <;! r= t= ~ 0- ~ ~ ~ "~U "'::c vi :l:~:I: ..".,...)'<t vi vi g~,..;,::g ~2:2:ci OONMoo ggggggggggggg 6cici6cicicicioocic:i6 '-----;-- ~~~~~_c:: .., M N""'; N :~~~:::::~.~ -:~ "':t"~ d M .~: ~ Z .0 I:: '" :Wi .Cl !l :~ I :e> t: .. e rJ:r "- ~ .... ~~ :~- o::Lti -< <-:~ f-<UUO If.i t:i:: t:;::"jo.or 00 f-of-o '"'" ~~Jj ~~~ <-NN aaa ooaa 0~ci ~'" '" N '", <-aa "'''''-0 viM"v) "''''''' ~<-'" ON" ^ ~~ ~ ~ '" ~ "'. N _oi o ~ ~~ S'O~l:: ]~~~~i~o~~~~! g c.o... ;,:; ~ U'l 1! ~ ~" ~~" ...: ~ ,...., o..c::" 5 ~ ~^ ~~" ~ g .DI.~ ~ .tf ~ tl I\) a 1::1--::, a;::: ~ i :g -a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~105 0 i: :E ~ 00 ~ . . . " " i" x " '" ~ x '" g~ggxjo 62:0056 OONOOOON R "1 Z aaa "''-0'" '<iO'.o ~ 00 ~ ""'00,"""" QQQOOClODOClClClCl ClClClClClClClOOClDOCl '-0 a N '" N N ......O-'ON t- Moo'go. ~~g~ 0'<1' '<1' O' N"" ~ c o 'c ;J -g~ ow ';;'Q' ~ ~ g :~ A. 'r:;.:: ;:i:n~ l:e 80:re o f-o '" ~ X a '" '" U ~ " '" 0; '" :i: <- a a '" a", N<- ~~ N _ g.;g ON "" .... -t; OO'-COOOO\C oo",,:o-OOIlr; 66 6"<io6lfi 00 ~ ~8ggggg!;O ooOOOO"<iON 00 0, '-0 ~ N '" F: 'i; " U c ~ ~ d) 8 ~ d) ;.....' g ~ ;g t:: Q:i ~",~~...4 I?~ '" ~ .~ .s 01...1 ~ ;:l ..2 0 - aIm IZl ..l A.O\Cl~:;5::2~ Ir; "f" f- ,.....l"'O '- 11:~~'!2-<<-go ~ t2 0 Cl ~ :0.-::: ... II:;: 2 ~ ~ :J :S ~ 0 b~ ~ A. " ,; NX b ~ x t~d: ,; u x <- N ~~ "':c aa a~ rio..: gggj 060:3: ooOOOON ~gg~ -00 '-0 00 ~ "'. ~'1 00 0-, ~ 00 ""';cr-.--.:i M\CI\CI\CI ~ N <- "("".f MM" o.a '" a ~ E 2 o 0 c a;,~~ JJ g ~ c ~ 8 g g ~;;E:::t~ '" a r-oooo ....,ClCl~ ~f-o '"u ~ <Ii xx ~'" 0000 0000 0606 00000000 OO\O"'1'""f" O-:O'......t- 1"'-0V"lOO 00 MNO on...... V"J\O 000-,0 ~'-Coo ~~gg '-0'-0 00 ^ "N- JL'S! 1::: - > 0 :;;:.~ ~I:> o"~ 0..1;6 ]1 .:~f ~ .= .5 ~ ~~:3:;:r; a a '" 0000 0000 V"Joo6ci t-I"'-OOOO ~s~~:!gog Vl~;;;;;;;;;ci~~ \D"'~V"J~ .......N 000000 000000 vioOcioo"<i ~~~~~3 oi 0\ vvooo t-\Ot--.......o o'ri""';oO...-ici vr-t-cr-.o-- r-- 1"'-"_ \0 N r-:-...:o~ --NVl ~ .g t> 'f';. .g "5~:8 ~ ~!~~ d) 'Vi ~:g~ ~::::;I? 2 0':: ~ 81 ~ Q ci':1.;:; &; ~g:o U< .5..... ~ e '" ~ ~ d)IF a:~ " " U; ,; X '-0 a a 00 gjg 0:3:\0 OON'" ~aa N ~ a -.:trio.; "'~'" N Ij~'" ~ - '';;: 00 g; '" .'$. I ~ I I F L I~i I II I ~~ N <- N . ~~ g:7:~:7;;q;q ci~~~~~ N-~ <-"'N <ri'!i"f"' '" '-0 N N ~ " .g t: Jl~~ti~~~'2~~.~~ ~~~~ u'-o~!i8~-u-gE~6eg<j~ Z 2: ;, cG VI;;E l..." U .."..... UJ U ~"~ {i 12.- ~ ....^ r=." ~ 1iJ ..r:." g r:f ~ 50 0 ~ ~" o. 0 ...rl~ ~ .... '3 0- e r=. g C s: E..= ~::::!.=.i5 E ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~I~,.....l~o~~aQQ8dC~2~~ ~a N ~ ..:f..--i '-O~ ~ ~ 0'-0 ~a 0''''''; <-'-0 ~~ .....0.....\0 ~ -~ oO-DNN cr-. -t-_ ....,<:tv..... ~'" ~'" 0..--i "'<- ~N a~<- a~- aN'" :;;j:~ ......N<"')~t-vOO"'t- ~O N.....'<1'....,~\CIOOo--o ~~~~~~~~~8~~~~~~~~~~~~ g s:; ~,..., ~ 0-- ar-"........--ici..--i NVl-OOr-- ~....... N......N ao aa 00 '-0 :!:::;~ oO..--iN ~ ~~ d;:;t- ~ <: :;;: ~-< ~ .c: U t?-.;t, #"G:o- . 0 N ~:::;0 -< " 01", ~ f2 ~BI~ 3 o =' -0 .- S c.. tI) ~"2 ~ ~ ~ O;;E VI C1. <-< ~] ti ~ ~ ...JQ. Z '""" '""" _.- 1 I L I II I, I ~~ a N<- a ado..: '-O~ '" '-0'" ~'-O 00""'; ~ N "'~ '-OOO~ ~ 00 <- 00 . ~ ~~:;;j: o ~ 9 c '" -~ ~ '3,9 u~~ ~ ~ ti ~~ 'iJ 0 u f-of-o~ N aa "'''' \ . . V"J .- 6:~: ~ ."",. ~ -~ :1': ...... -~ -0. If! '" .iti: - ..~- ::-j-: :;;;J: -:wi o "" -.,.: <. "- .:;;;;Z: 8:~ ::.15 - ;:;. . . . . ,. ;;; " ~ ~ " ~ ;:: o " Ul J- '" " '" '" " Ul :J: U E:5 8 r::: tee:? ~oor--~.:~ .IJl. :~ f " ~ r:: ;e :-;i ~ ~. ~ ~ ~!":~ ~ '" E II ;! ~ g 8 ~ t: r- () lI. v.; i: ~~...~. . . . ...1- ..J~ 0" ",:g >-;:: <(9 l>.~ o >-- ..J~ ::>;0 ..,0 0'; z:>< O. (J ~ w- "'!!'. '" ...I ...I s: Z W o '" < u. o i'= (3 .-~ gd S I;:r.j "'.W '.~ m~ ~ ~ :~ J- ~ .~ IS ~ ~ [2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :i:: ::c . t ~ :i:: ::r: :r: ~ ~ :E :E :E -00-.00 "" o<J "k...j. ~ l:~~ ~ :::~ G :'~ _..0 1.'-<'''' 0 0 0 :"g 0 0 0 " 0 '';;: ~ ~ 8 ~ -:~ " ~f~ " N N "':<'l E . E ~ ..~ g g ~ " "'.c; c .~ ~ 8 ::~ " ~ ~ u "] g ~ ~ " " " ..~ ~ ~ ~ A ;\ ~ ~ ;\ .:~ ~ J- ~ 0 ..~: a ~ ~ 0 it .~. '" .N ~ 0 .::< " - '" " :~~ " ~ N . 0 . ~ ..g ..w J- ! 0 .~ -:~ ~ ..~ ffi < ~ :::* ~ ~ ~ 0 J- ~ o J- g ~ ~ Iri <:> [2 ::c ~ & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :::: " 'C ~ U :r: ~ :r: 01 Jj:E:E:E ;; g g ~ g 2- o 6 a-. 0 'to ~ o ~ o o 0 g ..... 0 a a 0 'CJ a a 0 ... <:> a-. :;: ~ ,.; ~ ~ '" :::; ~ ~ ~ '5 51 g II ~ i ~ <1 ..s .2 8 ~ ~ ~ ;f.' ~ ~ ~ o J- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " :: ...l jj g . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ {; ~ U-l ."::: c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ J- o t o " N [2 g g g =-. "'" "'"' =- :€ f :E f ~ 2: ..,. N " :r: :r: ~ :r: :r: :r: :r: :r: :r: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ g g <:> g or: 00 :::: N -&: ~ o a 0 a 0 0 o 0 a g ~ g 0 g g ~ ~ ~ g ~ $ g g g g o N g g NO..... M N ~ N N g ~ g ~ $ $ N N g g g g <:> g g g g g ~ ~ <:> ~ N rl ~ g g ~ N N g ~ g ..... ~ 0 0 g ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ..... ~ ~ ..,. N 0 ~ 0 ..... ~ ~ o j :r: ~ ~ 5 :E Ii: u: ;;;0 ~ :E :E ~ .- ..,. ..,. 'D " " "'::E :r: :l:! <><> ~ g g g 0 g g g g g g g g g o 0 0 060 0 0 000 ~ 0 c ~ ~ .. o. ~ ~ ~ ~ , " < e z , " C > " g e o o "' " N 0 ~ 0 ...~ " 0 " > ~ " c 0 .~ c . . 0 - 0 ~ .e - co .~ 0 0 .::t:: , q ~ 0 :I ..~ " ~ .,:.; t " 0 :.:~ ] ~ ~ " j ~ ., 1 .< ~ m ;{Ioo u < - " . e ~ .'~ 0 f .0 .0 ~ C CO " ~ e :2 ~ g J- ~ o " ~ o a " a a ~ ~ c c ~ ~ gee g c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;;; ~ i':' ;!; .,. "" ~ !3 ~ o .0 o < ~ S2 ~ ~ ~ -W 0 ~ ;; : :5 - .;: ~ '" - N ~ 00 N N ~~=;~~~r;:~~:j} .,. ;; ,- ~;!'; ,., "';; S ~ 8 8 o " ~~~-uo~] i ., E ~ is o Ul U ~ j~"~.,~ ] _ 0 c:l III i5 ~ G o .,. '" '-0 0 ~ 0 ~ '-0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ '-0 .,. '-0 ~ o " d ~ ~ ~ c ~ .i :;:; 1 ~ Ii ~ ~ of ] ~ :E " ~ 2 ~ .~ ~ ~ ] ]. ~ . U g 1 ] .! f ~ ::E r>o: ~ I-< !--o ~ " $~$Ogg~~:2N~~~~~~~O ~S::i8:~g g"'~",~'-O~""gg~;;;;;:t:~8",8.::~ ~~9~."'C!~;:t:g_ ~~~~ ~':b:~~~",g~"':"'N"'O:;:g; O","'~~ O"O;:;:Jt - - - - M - _ _ N N N S N N N N N _ _ N N ~ .~ w :< .< " '" " o ~ <> i ~ - ~ M cil J:. ~ ~ ~ ; ! j 1 ] ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ "": i ~ D ~ ~ -e :~ " " ~ ] ~ ~ 1 J ]g~o'l-<j] ~ ~ ~ ~ E <> Jl ~ ::;: :E i:l- ~ . 8888888 8 8 8 8 888 o 0 00_ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ .~ ~ a ;>1 ~ i ~ ~ ~ a z. ~ ~ g" ~ 1<: <> ~ ~ ~ ~ sf.::'''' _ F' o o I.'-l'" ....... .LJ:Sf 3 ...~ f-:: N :-~ _ _ =:1 .i"' . . . PAGE] OF 5 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT TO BE APPROVED AT 08/08/05 COUNCIL MEETING CLAIMS PAID SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING 107f25/0Sl :,::'Ci):.;i( : ::tKibATj;j:; :::V.!~I)!:>>l.:. .. . .. :.:':::::,>J,:AMOIjNi<r :~OM~f~ts,::-. 26995 07/07/05 Bunker Beach 913.00 Admin & Lunch Field Trip X3 participants 7/8/05 26996 07/08/05 Acclaim Benefits/Stanton Groun 100.00 FSA Admin 6/1-6/30/05 26997 07/08105 Animal Control Services, Jnc 706.02 Doo-fCat Enforcement - June 26998 07/08/05 Annie Busine~s Fonns, Inc 660.94 UB Envcloncs 26999 07/08/05 AscI Sunn1v & PaDer, Inc 221.47 CH Paner Towelsrroilet Tissue 27000 07/08/05 Deen Rock Water Comnanv 89.92 CH-SnnnpWater 27001 07/0X/05 E-ZRecyclinl!,1nc 5,248.00 Curbside Recvclinl!. 27002 07/08/05 FirSl Student,lnc 796.13 CAB - Bus Trans""rtation 7/25/05 27003 07/08/05 Fortis Benefits 468.20 Lone: Term Disability - Julv 27004 07/08/05 Government Training Service 191.00 2005 MCMA Conf. 5111-5113 s. Jolmson 27005 07/08/05 Grainl!Cr,llC 6053 SpraYer, ComnresseJAir 27006 07/08/05 HarMarLock & ServiceCenlcr 204,00 Servicecall,rekev,kcv-CH 27007 07/08/05 Peter Hdlep-ers 21.38 Milcal1eReimb-2/26_4119105 27008 a7/0R/05 HomcDcnot 125.00 Gift Ccrt. - Retirement - 1'. Reed 27009 07/08/05 Ideal Advcrti~inp- Promo Items 2644.00 0& M - Sweatshirts - Uniform Allow. 270]0 07/08/05 lnt'J Union Oncratin" Engineer 240.00 Union Dues 27011 07/08/05 Lillie Suhurban NeWSDaoers ]]6.67 Le al Nntic~s Subtotal - Paid Claims 12806.26 Paid Claims - 144,342.29 Add Unpaid Claims, &~~C& TfJtal Accounts Payable Claims ror Council Approval, 07/25/05- 196,930.35 Note. Checks for unpaid claims totaling $0 to be mailed August 9, 2005 after approval al IheAugusl 8,2005 Council Meeting. * Exp. Related to TCAAP Project _"'_".,-.Llo"'~'" PAGE20F5 CITY OF ARDEN lIlLLS ACCOUNTS PA V ABLE CLAIMS REPORT TO BE APPROVED AT 08/08/05 COUNCIL MEETING . PAID CLAIMS REGISTER: ;' :;:ti:~> k c~iJ)~.t( l;: ::::::':::':::<:'I'.i","";.;...~ 27012 07/08/05 Michael A MillerlISN 897.00 Umnire Services 6/1 4-6/30/05 27013 07/08/05 Midwav p~rru Rental 1,459.26 Canonv Rental ~ CAH 27014 07/08/05 Midwes.t AsnhaJt Com 877.52 Road ReDair Material 27015 07/08/05 Mills Fleet Farm 125.00 Gift Certificate - Retirement. F. Bell 27016 07/08/05 MTI DistributinQ Co 720.24 Blades, Caster Wheel Kit, 6' Broom, soaccr 27017 07/08/05 NQt1bem 119.05 CAB - Flashlicllts Econo Style Vests 27018 0-7/08/05 Office Denat 51.58 CAH - Clinboard, taoe, folder 27019 07/08/05 Pitnev Bowes 1,016.99 Posta eMeler 27020 07/08/05 Postmaster - 51. Paul 150.00 Permit Fee - BRM 2702] 07/08/05 Rosevilte,Citvof 1)16.67 Joint Powers AlITeement -IT - June 27022 07108/05 Timesaer Off Site Secretarial 17025 Rec.Sec-P&R6128 27023 07/08/05 Tokle Insoections Inc 812.00 Electrical InSDe<:tions-Jtme 27024 07/08/05 United Rental Technoloo1es 58.31 CAH - Traffic Control 27025 07/08/05 XceJEnerl!\' 9,728,87 ElectriciGasService 27026 07/11/05 Acclaim Benefits/Stanton Groun 726,13 Medical & Daycare Reimb 711/05 27027 07/13/05 IC1\1A Conference Remstration 565.00 Conf. ReI!. M. Wolfe 9/24-9/28105 27028 071l3/05 New Bric-hton, Citv of 1,591.14 Tax/fitlelPlate Fees 2006 Ford F350 27029 07/13/05 Robert & A!:!nes Wolff 111.45 Oyernvmt. On Final Utililv Bill 27030 07114/05 Affinitv Plus Fed Credit Union 3,038.87 2nd July 2005 Payroll 27031 07/14/05 City of St. Louis Park 622.00 Admin to Water Park & Lunch 7/15105 27032 07/14/05 ICMA Retirement Trust--457 9,396.04 2nd July 2005 Payroll 27033 071l4/05 Me Cbild SllOnort Pa .ment Ctr 370.64 2nd July 2005 Pa roll 27034 07/14/05 Acclaim Bcnefits/Stanton Groun 436.03 FSA Deo/ Daycare Reimb 27035 07/2l/05 Acclaim Benefits/Stanton Groun 399.30 Medical & Daycare Reimb 7/21/05 27036 07/2l/05 Aid Electric Com 89.98 RenairSecuritvGate 27037 07/2l105 Allied Waste Service 354.21 Waste Removal CHlPe1T\' Park 27038 07/2l/05 American Red Cross 503.75 Emcr cnc . Medical Service CAH 27039 07/2l105 Aramark Unifonn Service 126.45 CH Rug- Cleanuw 27040 07/21/05 ASlleford lnternational 47_05 Parts for Truck #403 27041 07/2l/05 Beisswenl!er's How- To-Store 1CU4 Gaskets, HanQs, Screws, Choke Knob 27042 07mf05 Biffs,Inc 772-86 Portable Tiolets 6/8-7/5/05 27043 07/21/05 Continental Research Com 197.38 Bacto Dose Shock Kit 27044 07/21/05 Comorate Exnress 29.91 Conv' a r/OfficeSuODlies 27045 07/21105 DeeD Rock Water Comnanv 96.65 Bottled Water O&M 27046 07i21/05 First Studellt Inc 100.00 Clean Bus for TCAAP Tour Paid Claims - Pac-e 2 37487.72 . . . . . PAGE] Of' 5 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT TO BE APPROVED AT 08108/05 COIJNCIL MEETING PAID CLAIMS REGISTER: ;::::cs:;if::. ::tir<;D~tE : :::VENDOR::. ..'."""""">"">'1 :AI\.10nm::. ::::tti!\1iiiE;N~:::... 27047 07121/05 Fortis Benefits 243.00 Short Ternl Disabilitv Ins - AUI! 27048- 07/21/05 Fra-Dor Black Dirt RecvcJe 20.77 Blaek Dirt Surface Work 27049 07121/05 Frattallone's Hardware IIlC 300.46 Perrv Park SUDonlies,Fertilizer, MOD, Shop SUlJolies 27050 07121105 Gonhcr State OIle~Call Inc 420_00 June Service i 2705] 07121/05 GrainQcr,lnc 144.47 Safety Eveware, Snraver, Dish Wash Show Boal, Fus 27052 07121/05 Ha....en, Christensen & Mellwain 417.07 PeTV Park Architect Fees 6/l-6/15 27053 0712J/05 Hannv Faces Entertainment 210.00 DenosiUPennv Carnival & Face Paintul2 27054 0712J/05 Har Mar Lock & Service Center 506.20 CH-ResetLocks 27055 07121105 HealtliPartneJ1; 883.86 Dental Jnsurance-AUullst 27056 07/21105 Hvdro Lolric 259.90 Pe TV Park Snrinkler Renair 27057 07/21/05 ICI Delux Paint Center 877.03 Paint for Field MarkinI'" 27058- 07/2l105 Kath Auto Parts 25.45 7 Wav Metal socket for Streets 27059 07121105 SheJbv Yahui Li 34.00 Reimb for Basketball BBS3000 27060 07121105 Linder's Greenhouses ],825.&5 Plants & Shmbs CH & Parks 27062 07/2]/05 Midwest Asnhalt Corn 342.03 Street RenairMaterial 27063 07/2]/05 Minnesota Dent. of Revenue 72.92 Hazardous Waste State PrOl!faffi Fee 27064 07/2]/05 Minnesota State Treasurer 1,574.53 June Ouarterlv Bld<-. Pennit Surchawc 27065 07/21105 Nextel Communications 35.00 Renair Phone - Ree I & 2, Phone Chips 27066 07/21/05 North Metro Insnections, Tne 555.60 Electrical InSTlections-June 27067 07/2I105 Northern 164.86 Hook wllalch, Binders. Clevis, 27068 07/2l/05 OfficeD""ot 14.91 Conv Paner 27069 07121/05 Olde Town Deli 72.&4 Worksession - Box Lunches 71l8/05 27070 07/21/05 MiehelleOlson 102.43 Milea<-e & SUl"lnlv Reimb 6/16-7Il ] 27071 07/2]/05 Orie:ntaJ Tradinp Co., lnc 195.]9 Penny Carnival Prizes 27072 07121/05 AmvPeters 34.00 Reimb Basketball B8S3000 27073 07/2l/05 Pitney Bowes 861.00 Meter Ouarterlv Chare:es 4/30-7/30 27074 07/21/05 PrescrinlionLandscave 553.13 R airs at Red Fox Road 27075 07121/05 Ramscv Countv 2,192.83 JuneFuelChare:es 27076 07/2!/05 S&S Tree & Hortic. Snec., lne 2,452.16 Tree Removal 27077 07121/05 Sam'sCJub !58.13 CII SuoDlies & TCAAP LWlehean SUDoties 27078- 07121105 Skvhawks Snort Academv 597.60 Vollevball, Sboreview Conununitv Center 27079 0712]/05 Snencer Fane Britt & Browne, LL 1,158.05 Le a] Fees - TCMP 27080 0712]/05 51. Poso"nh's E"uinment Ine [23_87 SunnJies - Tubes 27081 07/2]m5 SUDerior Ford, ]ne 24056.00 2006 Ford F350 27082 07/21105 The Bridoes Go]fCourse 300.00 Golf Lessons (Park & Rec, Classes) 27083 07/21/05 The Tane Comnanv 153.41 Battent, VHS Tan{~s, DVCAM 27084 07/21/05 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 415.05 CC Meetino, Planninll Commission Mcetine: 270&5 07/21105 Tiziani Enlernrises ofMN 239.63 CAR - Box Car Renta[ 27086 07/21105 Triarco Arts & Crafts, Inc 92,44 PJavO'Tound $u')nlies - Arts & Crafts 27087 07/2]/05 United Rental Tedlllofogies 1,404.69 Lime, Silffi Stand, Rollun Cross, Cones 27088 07/2]105 United Rentals 14531 Blue & Wllile Markin<- Paint Paid Claims - Page 3 44235.67 PAGE40F5 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPOHT TO BE APPROVED AT 08/08/05 COUNCIL MEETING . PAID CLAIMS REGISTER: ~~~.j)~#~~~~I:: <, ".j;",JJi<i~<<<~ 27089 07121105 Winnick Sunnlv, loc 535.32 Steel Channel5, Amdes, Flats 27090 07121105 XcelEner"" 2,558.11 Electrical Service 27091 07/21/05 Zie ler Ine 893.06 Enui ment Rental 6/24-6/27/05 27092 07/28/05 10,000 Lakes Ch~"ter of1CC 60.00 Cla.<;s J Mennenga 81lS/05 20793 0712S/05 Affinitv Plus Fed Credit Union 2,688.87 3rd Julv Pavrol12005 27094 07128/05 American Public Works Assn 152.50 I Year MembersbipAPWA 27095 07!28/O5 Bond Tru5t Service Com. 450.00 M'entServices8/I/05-81l/06 27096 07/28/05 Boyer Ford Truch Inc. 46.68 Shock Absorbers 27097 07128/05 COTT\()rateE)(nreS5 535.42 Cardstock 27098 07/28/05 Davies Water Eauioment Co 359.63 YellowPainl 27099 07/28105 Dent. of Administration 975.66 Phone Service CHlPWlParks 27100 07/28105 CluistoDher Diemer 150.30 Reimb. Mileal!e 6/] 5"6/30/05 27101 07/28/05 Fortis Benefits 399.85 AUl>. - Lonl! Teml Disabilitll 27102 07/28/05 Fra-Dor Black Dirt & Recvcle 218.06 2] "ards Black Dirt 27103 07/28/05 Har Mar Lock & Service Center 256.00 Drill & Rekev Lock Hazdnut Park 27104 07/28/05 leMA Retirement Trust-457 1,487.29 3rd Julv Pavroll 2005 27105 07/28/05 Kath Auto Parts 64.82 S lark Plugs, Powerated Belt 27]06 07/28/05 LTG Power Emlinmcnt 81.79 Wheel 27107 07/28/05 Mike'sProSbon 85.20 Suftball Championship Plaqlles 27108 07/28/05 Minncsota Mutual Life 343.90 Life Insurance - AUl!llst 27109 07/28/05 MN Cit-v/Countv M01nt. Assoc. 8I.S7 Membershio5/l/05-4/30/06 27110 07128/05 MN NCPERS Life Insurance 60.00 Grou Llfe-Aul!Ust 27111 07128/05 MTI Distributino Co. 415.70 Fmk Parts, Pullev, Shaft 27112 07/28/05 Newman Traffic Sii:'ns 340.96 Telesnar & Oesknad 27]13 07128/05 Nextel ConmlWlications 600.90 Cell Phone Scrvicc 6/19-7/lS/05 27114 07f28/05 N0I1hern 40.43 Pins & Clevis 27115 07128/05 Michelle Olson lOO.12 :tvlileal!.e& Rce. Suuplies 27116 07128/05 OuickSilver 16.43 Deliverv 10 LWld Printin!! 27117 07f28/05 Sand Creek Graun LTD 1,500.00 EPA Admin Fcc 7/0ll05-6i30/06 27118 07/2S/05 Scherer Bros. LWllber Co 11.43 Reoair Park Bcneh 27119 07/28/05 Snorts Unlimited 621.00 Golf Canm 9 participants 27120 07/28105 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial 260.15 CCMeetifil'17/11/05 27121 07/28/05 Toareo Arts & Crafts, Ine 51.45 Orioami Paper for Park & Rec 27122 08/04/05 Abdo Eick & Mevers 5038.42 Special Audit Reviewl Annua] Report to SAG Paid Claims - Pap-e 4 21481.32 . . . . . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT TO BE APPROVED AT 08108105 COUNCIL MEETING PAGE50F5 PAID CLAIMS RJo~GJSTER: ~~~~+~~~iiL LY12'H2J<'"" <I AM6oo::~I: S":<<".:.::"':.i::>.~ 27123 08/04105 Accountcmps 862.40 Finance Asst. - Pa week cnrlin!! 7/22/05 27124 08J04f05 ADDle- Business Forms, Inc 253.08 Statement Fonns - Finance OeD! 27125 08/04/05 B & H Photo Video 2,659.95 Sony DSR 25 DVCAM Re<:order 27126 08/04/05 Sandra Byl 34.79 Mlcal!e Reimb - 5/9-8/4/05 27127 08/04/05 COITlOJateExDress 83_75 Audio Tape, Roll Paper, Copy Paper 27128 08J04/05 CSD 345.00 Interureter-Mceting7!l]!05 27]29 08/04/05 FedEx Kinko's 90.47 Creation Scan 27130 08104/05 Frattallone's Hardware, IlIe 67.07 concrete mix 271]] 08/04/05 Scott Frevlx:rger 69.98 Uniform purchase 2005 27132 08104/05 Happy Faces Entertainment 100.00 Caricaturist & Face PainlllU! - Penny Carnival 27133 08/04/05 Ideal Advertisin)1;,JIIc 607.50 Tee Sbirts/Screen PrintinJ:;: 27134 08104/05 Zigurds Kauls 3,625.00 2005 Basketball Camo - Admin Costs 27135 08/04/05 Lake Johanna Vol Fire DeDt 807.01 Reimb. Computer/Monitor Replacement 27137 08/04105 David Leiser 539.00 2005 Basketball Camp - Admin Fees 27138 08/04/05 McDonald Rat~1}' Corn JaIlV 120.00 2-12 Volt Batteries 27139 08104/05 Midwest Aspbalt Corp 1,128.22 Road Repair 27140 08/04105 MarvNosek 150.00 Dcskto J Publishing Julvl AUI!, 2005 27]41 08/04/05 Peterson, Fram & Bcr~mall P.A. 6.903.]2 Proseculion 27142 OSf04/05 Kelllleth Porten 50.00 Reimb for ~ Kalil's Program 27143 08104/05 Ramsey COUllty 1,708,00 Special Assmt. Fees 2005 77]44 08/04/05 Sherer Bros. Lumber Co. 11,43 Treatedpjnelx4-IO' 27145 08104/05 SCORE 345.40 60 Jupiter Balls 27146 08/04/05 Sun Newspam:rs 243.75 Ad Celebrat~ Arden Hills 27147 08/04105 Tar~etStores 56_39 Pmty 27148 08/04/05 TomWcco 1,0]3,00 BasketballlVollevball Camp - Admin Fee 27149 08104/05 Petersoll, Fram & BerJ:;:man P_A. 6457.01 Admill. Paid Claims - Pa e 5 28,331.32 CITY OF ARnEN HILL5 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLAIMS REPORT TO BE APPROVED AT 08/8/05 COUNCIL MEETING UNPAID CLAIMS REGISTER: ~~(~~#~~ 27061 27136 07J2]/05 08/04/05 MCICouncilEnviJOnmenta]Serv Lakes Count Service Coo 43,888.06 8,700.00 Au st-WasteWater Au ust 2005 - Insurdnce Premiwns Un aid Claims Pa e 5 5258806 , . . . URS BRW, Inc. AGENDA ITEM 3.8 URS Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 554t5 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (6t2)370-1378 To: Murtuza Siddiqui! Arden Hills File: 31809733.00301 From: Gregory S. Brown Arden Hills City Engineer Date: August 3, 2005 Subject: 2005 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project Pay Estimate #1 Background The City of Arden Hills awarded Gridor Construction Inc., of Plymouth, MN the 2005 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project on April 25, 2005 for a total contract amount of $236,758.00. Project Status Lift Station #9 Gridor began the project at Lift Station #9 the first week of July and have been able to complete about 80% of the work to this point in time. Work completed includes, but is not limited to, the installation of the 72" wet well manhole and the 60" valve manhole as well as the plumbing for both. All accessories needed for each pump assembly were also installed, as well as the installation of the pumps themselves. The electrical control panel, and all required wiring are near completion. The connection to the existing forcemain and gravity lines, along with the removal ofthe existing station will be completed this week. Lift S tati on #4 Gridor has also begun work at Lift Station #4 although sparingly. They have completed the clearing of the site but will fully move over to Lift Station #4 after the completion of Lift Station #9. Recommendations The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate #1 for Gridor Construction Inc., of Plymouth, MN in the amount of $94,172.36. ~ ~HlLLS City ot Arden Hills Request for Council Action . Prepared by: GSB Dep\.: O&M Council Mtg. Dale: 8.8.05 Final Action Needed By: 8.8.05 Agenda Item. . 2005 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Proiect Budgeted Amount: $200.000.00 Actual Amount: $280.000.00 Funding Source: Sanitary Sewer Entel'Prise Fund Council Action Request: Approve Pay Estimate #1 for Gridor Construction Inc., of Plymouth, MN in the amount of $94,172.36 for the Lift Stations #4 and #9 Reconstruction Project. Staff Recommendation: The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate #1 for Gridor Construction Inc., of Plymouth, MN in the amount of $94,172.36. A retainage of 5.00% is being held for this project Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action u u ___~I,<1!1r1inL PTRC . _____ ~ot AppUcable_.... r-Jot_AppJica_b~.__.__~j _ ____Not.ll(JIJlic:able_~___._____.J Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): o Memo/Letter: . o Resolution (No. ) o Ordinance (No. ) ~ Engineering Recommendation: See attachment o Attorney Recommendation: ~Other: Application for Payment #1 Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: . Page 1 of 1 . . . APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT PAYMENT NO.1 Project: Lift Stations #4 and #9 Reconstruction Project Owner: Owner No.: Contractor: URS Job No.: Application Date: For Period Ending: City of Arden Hills Gridor Construction, Inc. 31809733.00201 8/3/2005 8/1/2005 Original Contract Amount: Contract Amendments: Contract Amount To Date: Total Amount of Work Complete To Date: Material Suitably Stored On-Site but not Incorporated Into Work: Gross Amount Due To Date: less 5.00% Retainage: Amount Due To Date: less Previous Payments: Total Due This Application: $236,758.00 $0.00 $236,758.00 $99,128.80 $0.00 $99,128.80 $4,956.44 $94,172.36 $0.00 $94,172.36 I hereby certify that all items and amounts shown are correct for the work completed to date. Contractor:#ridor Construction, Inc. By: ro.-ul <) ~ Date: &; - Lj- 0.':: The work shown on this project and the application for payment have been reviewed and the amount shown is recommended for payment. Date: 5- 3-Cl5 By: APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Owner: City of Arden Hills By: Date: Payment History Payment Number Payment Application Date 8/3/2005 1 Payment End Date 8/1/2005 Amount Total Payments: $0.00 Page 2 of 5 , . . . Application for Payment: Itemization f/SChedUle: A - LIFT STATIONS #4 & #9 RECONSTRUCTION Unh Contract Contract To Date To Date No. hem Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount MOBILIZATION LS $1,000.00 1.00 $1,000.00 1.00 $1,000.00 2021.501 2 CLEARING TREE $100.00 19.00 $1.900.00 10.00 $1,000.00 2101.502 3 GRUBBING TREE $20.00 10.00 $200.00 5.00 $100.00 2101.507 4 LIFT STATION NO.4 REMOVAL LS $2,530.00 1.00 $2,530.00 0.00 $0.00 2HXl601 5 LIFT STATION NO.9 REMOVAL LS $2,530.00 1.00 $2.530.00 0.00 $0.00 2103.601 6 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (6" CIP) LF $10.00 50.00 $500.00 0.00 $0.00 2104.501 7 REMOVE MANHOLE (SANITARY) EA $120.00 2.00 $240.00 0.00 $0.00 2104.509 8 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF $1.60 75.00 $120.00 40.00 $64.00 2104.513 9 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE C EA $60.00 2.00 $120.00 1.00 $60.00 2104.523 10 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $2.60 275.00 $715.00 140.00 $364.00 2104.601 11 GRANULAR BORROW (LV) CY $16.00 360.00 $5.760.00 0.00 $0.00 2105.521 -. TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY $20.00 100.00 $2.000.00 0.00 $0.00 52. 13 STABILIZING AGGREGATE TON $19.00 60.00 $1.140.00 67.00 $1,273.00 2105,543 14 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HR $82.00 24.00 $1.968.00 24.00 $1,968.00 2123.61 15 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (3B42) CY $380.00 3.00 $1.140.00 0.00 $0.00 2301.605 16 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT (3") SY $28.70 350.00 $10,045.00 0.00 $0.00 2350.521 17 DEWATERING LIFT STATION NO.4 LS $3,220.00 1.00 $3,220.00 0.00 $0.00 2451.601 18 DEWATERING LIFT STATION NO.9 LS $3,220.00 1.00 $3,220.00 1.00 $3,220.00 2451-6Ql 19 4" SWING FLEX CHECK VALVE EA $510.00 4.00 $2,040.00 2.00 $1,020.00 25113.503 20 4" DIP FORCEMAIN, C150 LF $57.00 52.00 $2,964.00 52.00 $2.964.00 2503503 21 6" DIP FORCEMAIN, C150 LF $57.00 25.00 $1,425.00 0.00 $0.00 2S[)3.503 22 8" PVC SDR 26 PIPE SEWER LF $79.00 10.00 $790.00 0.00 $0.00 2503.503 23 10" PVC SDR 26 PIPE SEWER LF $44.00 10.00 $440.00 0.00 $0.00 251)3.503 24 DIP PIPE FITTINGS LB $5.00 510.00 $2.550.00 260.00 $1,300.00 2503.503 _503CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLE EA $440.00 2.00 $880.00 1.00 $440.00 Page 3 of 5 Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 26 3" STEEL VENT PIPE EA $270.00 2.00 $540.00 1.00 $270.00 2500.500 27 4" FlANGE GATE VALVE EA $425.00 4.00 $1,700.00 2.00 $850.00 . 2503.503 28 6" FlANGE GATE VALVE EA $730.00 4.00 $2,920.00 2.00 $1,460.00 2503.500 29 SEWER BYPASS LIFT STATION 4 LS $3,790.00 1.00 $3,790.00 0.00 $0.00 2503.603 30 SEWER BYPASS LIFT STATION 9 LS $3,790.00 1.00 $3,790.00 1.00 $3,790.00 2503.603- 31 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY FORCEMAIN EA $980.00 2.00 $1,960.00 0.00 $0.00 2503.600- 32 F & I LIFT STATION NO.4 PUMP SYSTEM LS $45.100.00 1.00 $45,100.00 0.00 $0.00 2500.003 33 F & I LIFT STATION NO.4 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM LS $28.600.00 1.00 $28.600.00 0.00 $0.00 2500.603 34 F & I LIFT STATION NO.9 PUMP SYSTEM LS $30.800.00 1.00 $30,800.00 1.00 $30,800.00 2503.603 35 F & I LIFT STATION NO.9 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM LS $30.100.00 1.00 $30.100.00 1.00 $30,100.00 2503.603 36 72" LIFT STATION #4 WET WELL WITH LS $9.530.00 1.00 $9,530.00 0.00 $0.00 2~.602 ACCESS HATCH 37 72" LIFT STATION #9 WET WELL WITH LS $9,530.00 1.00 $9.530.00 1.00 $9,530.00 2506.602 ACCESS HATCH 38 60" VALVE MANHOLE,L1FT STATION #4 LS $5,930.00 1.00 $5.930.00 0.00 $0.00 2506.602 39 60" VALVE MANHOLE,L1FT STATION #9 LS $5.930.00 1.00 $5.930.00 1.00 $5,930.00 """.602 40 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $1.150.00 1.00 $1.150.00 0.50 $575.00 . "".005 41 INSTALL SIGN TYPE C EA $60.00 2.00 $120.00 0.00 $0.00 ""'.602 42 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FENCE LF $1.72 275.00 $473.00 140.00 $240.80 2573.502 43 SILT FENCE. TYPE HEAVY DUTY LF $3.60 450.00 $1,620.00 225.00 $810.00 2573.502 44 RESTORATION/SITE GRADING LS $3.240.00 1.00 $3,240.00 0.00 $0.00 2575.502 45 WOOD FIBER BLANKETS, TYPE REGULAR LS $1.20 415.00 $498.00 0.00 $0.00 2575.523 Subtotal: $236.758.00 $99,128.80 Grand Total: $236.758.00 $99,128.80 . Page 4 of 5 . . . Application for Payment: Itemization Summary Contract Schedule Amount To Date Amount of Work Completed A - LIFT STATIONS #4 & #9 RECONSTRUCTION $236,758.00 $99,128.80 Grand Total: $236,758.00 $99,128.80 Page 5 of 5 e Prepared by: GSB Dep!.: ENGINEERING Council Mtg. Date: 8.8.05 Final Action Needed By: 8.8.05 ~ ~HILLS City 01 Arden Hills Request for Council Action Agenda Item all ".",-",,",.~-;.~ 2004 Pavement Manal!ement Prol!l'am Budgeted Amount: $1.270,005.00 Actual Amount: $1.270,050.00 Funding Source: Multiple Funds , Council Action Request: Approve Pay Estimate #6 for Amt Construction Inc., of Hugo, MN in the amount of $37,914.48 for the 2004 Pavement Management Program. Staff Recommendation: The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate #6 for Amt Construction Inc., of Hugo, MN in the amount of $37,914.48. Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action Planning. PTRC _ n~ _ __ _ ___ _ _ Not Appiicable _ __ _______ ___ ___ Not ~ppiic.~I:>I~_._____._ _ _____ _.__ .._ ____tIlQtapplicabl~___ _____ ~ . Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): D MemolLetter: D Resolution (No. ) D Ordinance (No. ) IZI Engineering Recommendation: See attachment D Attorney Recommendation: IZI Other: Appiication for Payment #6 Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: e Page 1 of 1 URS , AGENDA ITEM 3.C Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: (612)370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 . To: Martuza Siddiqui! Arden Hills Finance Director ce: Michelle Wolfe Thomas Moore File: 37951-027-1001 From: Gregory S. Brown Arden Hills City Engineer Date: August 4, 2004 Subject: Pay Estimate #6 2004 Pavement Management Program Edgewater A venue Neighborhood Background The City of Arden Hills awarded Arnt Construction Company, Inc. of Hugo, MN the 2004 Pavement Management Program on June 9, 2004 for a total contract amount of $1,093,359.76. . Pay Estimates #1 through #5, for a total amount of $1,075,202.51, have been approved by the Council. Project Status The project is complete and all punch list items have been completed with the exception of the landscaping warranty items. Negotiations are underway with the Contractor for Change Order No.2, to address outstanding project items and quantities. Final Payment will be made after the warranty period on the landscaping has expired. A 1 % retainage is being held 10 cover the landscape warranty. Recommendation The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate #6 for Arnt Construction Company, Inc. of Hugo, MN in the amount of $37,914.48. A retainage of 1% is being held for this project. . . . . , APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT PAYMENT NO.6 Project: 2004 Pavement Management Program Edgewater Avenue Neighborhood ADDENDUM NO.1 City of Arden Hills Owner: Owner No.: Contractor: URS Job No.: Application Date: For Period Ending: ARNT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 31809367.00101 8/8/2005 7/30/2005 Original Contract Amount: Contract Amendments: Contract Amount To Date: Total Amount of Work Complete To Date: Material Suitably Stored On-Site but not Incorporated Into Work: Gross Amount Due To Date: Less 1.00% Retainage: Amount Due To Date: Less Previous Payments: Total Due This Application: I hereby certify that all item to date. $1,059,189.76 $34,170.00 $1,093,359.76 $1,091,778.71 $0.00 $1,091,778.71 $10,917.79 $1,080,860.92 $1,042,946.44 $37,914.48 unts shown are correct for the work completed By: Date: 9 - 3.-a ~ The work shown on this project and the application for payment have been reviewed and the amount shown is recommended for payment. APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Owner: City of Arden Hills By: Date: g'. 3 'OS Date: Payment History , Payment . Payment Payment Application Number End Date Date Amount 1 7/30/2004 8/3/2004 $227,906.99 2 9/4/2004 9f7/2004 $495,596.25 3 10/2/2004 10/6/2004 $191,911.40 4 10/30/2004 11/23/2004 $45,723.45 5 1f7/2005 1/18/2005 $81,808.35 6 7/30/2005 8/8/2005 Total Payments: $1,042,946.44 . . Page 2 of 9 t Application for Payment: Itemization .SchedUle: A-ROADWAY Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Hem Unit Price Quanlity Amount Quantity Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LS $36,000.00 1.00 $36.000.00 1.00 $36.000.00 2021.501 2 CLEARING TREE $300.00 8.00 $2,400.00 2.00 $600.00 2101.502 3 GRUBBING TREE $100.00 8.00 $800.00 2.00 $200.00 2101.507 4 CLEARING AC $2.100.00 0.20 $420.00 0.32 $672.00 2101.501 5 GRUBBING AC $2,100.00 0.20 $420.00 0.32 $672.00 2101.506 6 REMOVE CURB & GUTrER LF $3.00 150.00 $450.00 135.00 $405.00 2104.501 7 REMOVE STONEiBLOCK RETAINING WALL LF $8.00 75.00 $600.00 55.00 $440.00 2104.501 8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY $1.25 7,600.00 $9,500.00 7.500.00 $9,500.00 2104.505 9 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $3.00 2,450.00 $7,350.00 2,050.00 $6,150.00 2104.505 10 REMOVE CONC. DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $3.00 672.00 $2.016.00 456.00 $1,368.00 2104.505 11 REMOVE PEDESTRIAN RAMP EA $240.00 2.00 $480.00 2.00 $480.00 2104.509 _2 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LF $3.00 275.00 $825.00 239.00 $717.00 104.5H 13 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LF $2.00 975.00 $1,950.00 912.00 $1,824.00 210U13 14 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE C EA $25.00 9.00 $225.00 9.00 $225.00 2104.523 15 SALVAGE SIGN - STREET SIGN EA $26.00 2.00 $52.00 2.00 $52.00 2104.523 16 SALVAGE MAILBOX EA $54.00 43.00 $2,322.00 43.00 $2,322.00 2104.5.23 17 REINSTALL PRIVATE LANDSCAPING LS $1.500.00 1.00 $1,500.00 0.00 $0.00 18 SALVAGE PRIVATE LANDSCAPING LS $1,200.00 1.00 $1,200.00 0.00 $0.00 19 HAUL SALVAGE MATERIAL LS $500.00 1.00 $500.00 1.00 $500.00 2104.501 20 COMMON EXCAVATION (P) CY $11.46 7,763.00 $88.963.98 7,763.00 $88,963.98 2105.501 21 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) CY $11.46 150.00 $1,719.00 695.00 $7.964.70 2105.507 22 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) (P) CY $19.78 2.616.00 $51,744.48 2,616.00 $51,744.48 2105.522 23 COMMON BORROW (LV) CY $6.00 100.00 $600.00 150.00 $900.00 2105.523 24 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY $9.00 150.00 $1.350.00 552.00 $4,968.00 2105.525 .5 COMMON LABORER HR $55.00 40.00 $2,200.00 38.00 $2,090.00 123.501 Page 3 of 9 UnR Contract Contract To Date To Date \ No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 26 UNILOADER - SKIDSTEER HR $72.00 40.00 $2,880.00 38.00 $2,736.00 2123.505 27 DOZER HR $tt2.00 40.00 $4,480.00 32.00 $3.584.00 . 2123.509 28 TANDUM DUMP TRUCK HR $70.00 40.00 $2,800.00 24.00 $1,680.00 2123.510 29 FRONT END LOADER HR $118.00 40.00 $4,720.00 24.00 $2,832.00 2123.514 30 TRACTOR MOUNTED BACKHOE HR $90.00 40.00 $3,600.00 0.00 $0.00 2123.601 31 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HR $125.00 35.00 $4,375.00 32.00 $4,000.00 2123.610 32 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5 TON $10.30 500.00 $5.150.00 750.00 $7,725.00 2211.501 33 AGGREGATE BASE (CV), CLASS 5 (P) CY $25.62 1 ,975.00 $50,599.50 1,975.00 $50,599.50 2211.503 34 CONCRETE PAVEMENT SY $27.00 1,375.00 $37,125.00 1.286.00 $34,722.00 2301-501 35 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE CY $83.00 25.00 $2,075.00 0.00 $0.00 2301.511 36 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, HE CY $91.00 205.00 $18,655.00 214.00 $19,474.00 2301.513 37 REINFORCEMENT BARS (EPOXY COATED) LB $1.00 1,000.00 $1,000.00 108.00 $108.00 :2301.529 38 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY $14.00 2.075.00 $29.050.00 2,151.00 $30.114.00 2331.604 39 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY $41.00 500.00 $20,500.00 685.00 $28.085.00 2531.507 40 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL $1.80 307.00 $552.60 425.00 $765.00 . 2357.502 41 TYPE LVWE35030C WEARING COURSE MlxrURE TON $41.00 685.00 $28,085.00 695.00 $28,495.00 2350.501 42 TYPE LVNWE35030C BASE COURSE MlxrURE TON $41.00 685.00 $26,085.00 723.00 $29,643.00 2350.502 43 AGGREGATE BEDDING MATERIAL (CV) CY $30.00 50.00 $1,500.00 0.00 $0.00 2451.509 44 ADJUST CURB STOP BOX EA $200.00 5.00 $1 ,000.00 3.00 $600.00 2504.602 45 ADJUST GATE VALVE EA $300.00 5.00 $1,500.00 0.00 $0.00 2521.511 46 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LF $7.80 6,185.00 $48,243.00 5,195.00 $40,521.00 2531.501 47 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY $41.00 482.00 $19,762.00 463.00 $18,983.00 2531.507 48 CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN RAMP EA $600.00 4.00 $2,400.00 4.00 $2,400.00 2531.602 49 7" CONCRETE V ALLEY GUTTER LF $15.00 80.00 $1,200.00 45.00 $675.00 2531.603 50 MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL SY $180.00 85.00 $15,300.00 70.00 $12.600.00 2563.601 51 FURNISH AND I NST ALL MAILBOX AND SUPPORT EA $64.00 43.00 $2,752.00 0.00 $0.00 2540.002 52 INSTALL MAILBOX EA $50.00 43.00 $2,150.00 43.00 $2,150.00 2540.602 53 REVISE SIGNAL SYSTEM SYS $8,300.00 1.00 $8.300.00 1.00 $8.300.00 . 2565.604 Page 4 019 Unft Contract Contract To Date To Date No. nem Unn Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 54 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $2,200.00 1.00 $2,200.00 1.00 $2,200.00 2563.601 .~NSTALL SIGN TYPE C EA $100.00 2.00 $200.00 2.00 $200.00 56 F & I SIGN PANEL TYPE C SF $31.00 28.00 $868.00 36.20 $1,122.20 2564.531 57 BALE CHECK EA $6.00 200.00 $1,200.00 0.00 $0.00 2573.501 58 SILT FENCE. TYPE HEAVY DUTY LF $2.80 1,090.00 $3,052.00 700.00 $1,960.00 2573.502 59 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA $100.00 2.00 $200.00 0.00 $0.00 2573.602 60 3'x6' CROSSWALK PAVEMENT - EPOXY MARKING SY $10.00 8.00 $80.00 0.00 $0.00 2564.604 61 12- STOP BAR - EPOXY MARKING LF $50.00 2.00 $100.00 0.00 $0.00 ".."" 62 SEEDING AC $1,600.00 0.30 $480.00 0.50 $800.00 2575.501 63 SODDING, TYPE LAWN SY $2.80 10.186.00 $28,520.80 10,096.00 $28,268.80 2575.505 64 MULCH MATERIAL TYPE 1 TON $130.00 3.00 $390.00 5.00 $650.00 2575,511 65 DISK ANCHORING AC $400.00 0.30 $120.00 0.50 $200.00 2575.519 66 COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER ANALYSIS 22-5-10 LB $0.50 450.00 $225.00 400.00 $200.00 2575.532 67 CONSTRUCTION FENCE LF $3.00 150.00 $450.00 150.00 $450.00 2575.603 . Subtotal: $601,512.36 $585,600.66 Schedule: B. STORM SEWER Unft Contract Contract To Date To Date No. nem Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount CLEARING AC $1,850.00 1.50 $2,775.00 0.90 $1,665.00 2101.501 2 GRUBBING AC $1,850.00 1.50 $2,775.00 0.90 $1,665.00 2101.506 3 REMOVE RCP PIPE SEWER (STORM) LF $15.00 245.00 $3,675.00 166.00 $2,490.00 2104.501 4 REMOVE CMP PIPE CULVERTS ANO APRONS LF $15.00 100.00 $1,500.00 102.00 $1,530.00 2104.501 5 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EA $525.00 5.00 $2,625.00 6.00 $3.150.00 2101.509 6 REMOVE RCP APRON EA $320.00 4.00 $1,280.00 2.00 $640.00 2104.509 7 COMMON CHANNEL EXCAVATION CY $12.64 1120.00 $14,156.80 1.500.00 $18,960.00 2105..511 8 12" RC PIPE APRON EA $320.00 3.00 $960.00 3.25 $1,040.00 2501.515 9 21" RC PIPE APRON EA $440.00 1.00 $440.00 1.00 $440.00 2501.515 _0 27" RC PIPE APRON EA $630.00 1.00 $630.00 1.00 $630.00 501.515 11 12' TRASH GUARD FOR 12" PIPE APRON EA $260.00 2.00 $520.00 6.28 $1,632.80 2501.602 Page 5 019 Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. nem Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 12 4' PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN LF $3.00 920.00 $2,760.00 600.00 $1,800.00 2502.541 13 12" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V LF $27.00 1359.00 $36,893.00 1,319.00 $35,613.00 . 2503.541 14 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V LF $30.00 290.00 $8.700.00 284.00 $8,520.00 2503.541 15 21" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL II LF $36.00 92.00 $3,312.00 89.00 $3,204.00 2503.541 16 27" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL '" LF $50.00 133.00 $6.650.00 107.00 $5,350.00 2503.541 17 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EA $840.00 2.00 $1,680.00 0.17 $142.80 2503.602 18 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 LF $240.00 65.00 $15,600.00 86.72 $20,812.80 2S06.501 19 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 54-4020 LF $340.00 15.00 $5,100.00 27.21 $9,251.40 2506.501 20 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 60-4020 LF $360.00 12.00 $4,320.00 12.31 $4,431.60 2506.501 21 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 2'X3' LF $175.00 30.00 $5,250.00 31.05 $5,433.75 2506.501 22 CASTING ASSEMBLY EA $580.00 19.00 $11.020.00 31.00 $17,980.00 2506.516 23 ADJUST RING FRAME AND CASTING EA $370.00 12.00 $4,440.00 0.00 $0.00 2506.522 24 RIVER RUN BOULDERS (RIP RAP) CY $160.00 32.00 $5,120.00 48.00 $7,680.00 2511.501 25 DECIDUOUS TREE 2.5" CAL B&B TREE $464.00 3.00 $1,392.00 9.00 $4,176.00 2571_502 (NORTHWooDS MAPLE) 26 DECIOUOUS TREE 2.5' CAL B&B TREE $440.00 3.00 $1,320.00 3.00 $1,320.00 . 2571_502 (HERITAGE RIVER BIRCH) 27 ORNAMENTAL TREE 6 Fr HT B&B TREE $310.00 9.00 $2.790.00 9.00 $2,790.00 2571_503 (AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY) 28 DECIDUOUS SHRUB #5 CONT SHR $52.00 71.00 $3,692.00 63.00 $3,276.00 2571_505 (WHITE SNOW BERRY) 29 DECIDUOUS SHRUB #5 CONT SHR $52.00 6.00 $312.00 3.00 $156.00 2571.505 (WITCHHAZEL) 30 DECIDUOUS SHRUB #5 CONT SHR $52.00 32.00 $1,664.00 31.00 $1,612.00 2511.505 (CARDINAL DOGWOOD) 31 PERENNIAL (BLUE FLAG IRIS) PLAN $15.00 70.00 $1,050.00 43.00 $645.00 2571.507 32 PERENNIAL (BEAKED SEDGE) PLAN $6.40 166.00 $1.062.40 60.00 $384.00 2571.507 33 PERENNIAL (BEBB'S SEDGE) PLAN $6.40 316.00 $2,022.40 120.00 $768.00 2571.507 34 PERENNIAL (VENUS ASTILBE) PLAN $10.50 77.00 $808.50 29.00 $304.50 2571.507 35 PERENNIAL (TURTLEHEAD) PLAN $10.50 107.00 $1,123.50 0.00 $0.00 2571.5lf1 36 SILT FENCE, HEAVY DUTY LF $2.80 236.00 $660.80 0.00 $0.00 2573.502 37 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SY $10.00 3.00 $30.00 0.00 $0.00 2575.523 38 SEEDING MIXTURE #30B LB $6.00 18.00 $108.00 30.00 $180.00 2575.608 39 SEEDING MIXTURE #25B LB $14.00 9.00 $126.00 10.00 $140.00 . 2575.502 Page 6 of 9 UnR Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Rem Unit Price Quantity Amount Quanttty Amount 40 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN H LF $400.00 2.00 $800.00 3.78 $1,512.00 2506."" 27" - 4006 . Subtotal: $160,943.40 $171,325.65 Schedule: C - WATER MAIN Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Rem UnR Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1 REMOVE WATER MAIN LF $21.00 510.00 $10,710.00 699.00 $14,679.00 2104.5Ot 2 REMOVE GATE V/>l.VE & BOX EA $420.00 10.00 $4,200.00 10.00 $4,200.00 2104.509 3 REMOVE HYDRANT & VALVES EA $2.600.00 10.00 $26.000.00 9.00 $23,400.00 2104.509 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN EA $1.260.00 8.00 $10,080.00 11.40 $14,364.00 2504.602- 5 F & I HYDRANT EA $2,600.00 11.00 $28,600.00 10.00 $26,000.00 2504.602 6 6" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA $740.00 10.00 $7,400.00 19.00 $14,060.00 2504.602 7 l' CORPORATION STOP EA $130.00 1.00 $130.00 1.00 $130.00 ""''''' B 1" TYPE K COPPER PIPE LF $12.60 100.00 $1,260.00 100.00 $1.260.00 .2504.602 9 6" x 6" WET TAP EA $4.200.00 1.00 $4,200.00 0.00 $0.00 ""'."" ~.6.,6" DIP WATER MAIN LF $32.00 800.00 $25.600.00 802.00 $25,664.00 11 INSULATION SY $26.00 120.00 $3,120.00 8.00 $206.00 ""'."" 12 WATER MAIN FITTINGS LB $3.20 700.00 $2.240.00 617.00 $1,974.40 ""'.620 Subtotal: $123,540.00 $125,939.40 Schedule: D - SANITARY SEWER Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. "em Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1 REMOVE VCP PIPE SEWER (SANITARY) LF $21.00 160.00 $3,360.00 319.00 $6,699.00 2104.501 2 TRENCHLESS SANITARY SEWER RELINING LF $31.00 4500.00 $139,500.00 4,500.00 $139,500.00 2503.603 (8"CIPP) 3 4" PVC SANITARY SERVICE LF $21.00 150.00 $3.150.00 96.00 $2,016.00 2500.603 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EA $1,600.00 1.00 $1,600.00 1.00 $1,600.00 2504.602 MANHOLE 5 EXTRA DEPTH MANHOLE LF $200.00 2.00 $400.00 2.00 $400.00 .2506.500 6 8" PVC SDR 26. 0' - 10' LF $42.00 13.00 $546.00 27.00 $1,134.00 2503.603 "'5068" PVC SDR 26, 10' - 12' LF $52.00 205.00 $10,660.00 112.50 $5,850.00 8 8" PVC SDR 26.12' -14' LF $63.00 56.00 $3.528.00 228.00 $14,364.00 Page 7 of 9 Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 2500.506 9 8" PVCSDR 26,16'-18' LF $80.00 5.00 $400.00 11.00 $880_00 . 2500.506 10 STANDARD MANHOLE 0' -10' EA $2,300.00 1.00 $2,300.00 1.00 $2,300.00 2506.508 11 MANHOLE SEALING GAL $31.00 250.00 $7.750.00 0.00 $0.00 Subtotal: $173.194.00 $174,743.00 Schedule: E - CHANGE ORDER #1 UnR Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1 6" DIP WATER MAIN LF $32.00 490.00 $15,680.00 490.00 $15,680.00 2504.603 2 1" TYPE K COPPER PIPE LF $12.60 250.00 $3,150.00 250.00 $3,150.00 2504.602 3 1" CORPORATION STOP EA $130.00 13.00 $1,690.00 13.00 $1,690.00 2504.602 4 REMOVE WATER MAIN LF $21.00 650.00 $13,650.00 650.00 $13,650.00 2104.501 Subtotal: $34,170.00 $34,170.00 Grand Total: $1,093,359.76 $1,091,778.71 . . Page8of9 I . . . Application for Payment: Itemization Summary Contract To Date Amount of Schedule Amount Work Completed A-ROADWAY $601,512.36 $585,600.66 B - STORM SEWER $160,943.40 $171,325.65 C - WATER MAIN $123,540.00 $125,939.40 D. SANITARY SEWER $173,194.00 $174,743.00 E - CHANGE ORDER #1 $34,170.00 $34,170.00 Grand Total: $1,093,359.76 $1,091,778.71 Page 9 of 9 ( i . . . -- ~LS City of Arden Hills Re uest for Council Action Prepared by: Thomas J. Moore Dept.: O&M Council Mtg. Date: 08/08/2005 Final Action Needed By: 08/08/2005 Agenda Item Motion to Approve Final Payment to MC Bnilders for the Perry Park Pavilion Budgeted Amount: $332,124.50 Actual Amount: $30,377.22 Funding Source: Park Fund Council Action Request: Motion to approve the final payment to MC Builders for the Perry Park Pavilion Staff Recommendation: Approve the final payment to MC Builders for the Perry Park Pavilion Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date F'lanning PTRC SupportingDocuments(whichareatt3ched to this Action Form): [g! Memo/Letter: Dated August 3, 2005 o Resolution o Ordinance (NA) o Engineering Recommendation: o Attorney Reeommendation: [g! Attachments . Final Pay Estimate Financial Implications: Not Applicable- Administrator/Staff Comments: r' Action . . Not Applicable Not Applicable. Not applicable.. > ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM . DATE: August 3, 2005 Agenda Item 3.D TO: Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator ~ Thom~ J. Moore, Di=m' of Op""""O' & M,io""mw L J ~ Final Payment - Perry Park Pavilion FROM: SUBJECT: Baekl!round At the April 20, 2004 Regular Council meeting, the City Council approved the plans and authorized the advertisement for, and the obtaining of bids for, a new pavilion at Perry Park. The City Couneil approved 2004 CIP budget for the pavilion was $350,000. At the June 28, 2004 Regular City Couneil meeting, the City Council authorized the bid award to MC Builders, Inc., of Becker, Minnesota, in the amount not to exceed $332,124.50. The funding source for this project is the Park Fund. Construction began in August 2004 and has proceeded in a timely .. marmer. Staff Reeommendation Staff recommends the City Council approve the final pay estimate for MC Builders, Inc., of Becker, Minnesota, in the amount of $30,377.22. Total dollar amount paid to date is $332,124.50. . 8&A . _10.. i~ , o ~ z ~ if .. ~'I ~- !iW il! ~ \\I . ~ ~ tV.&.i.Wc.ANiJa 8lillillil lil '" ~ '" ci~""':""': ... ...: ...: 0) (") N C\I '" ... " tON__ ~ " ., ~- r--.~N N~ '" ~- <:i '" .,., ., <:> ., ., .,., ., ., lfl.~'lJI')lfl. "'''' '" '" '" QJ ~ -e QJ -'" '" '" '" 13 g " " II " S ~ " !i.i ~ 1--0 u 0:: ~ .. " ...g "'ti ... " " .2 llll II u-'" o;:~q;: ~ su 8UJ5:~ ~~ ""~ll'" '" " .. ~ 0:: 0 0 1$ .~ :@Ot::t:U II .Q . ,,'" ~ITJJ ",0 0" ",Cl .,- ., " '" .. .. <:> ~E <:> " " ... s: .. u E 0 Si ,.,0 ... ll.- ~. ~~ .. .. '" 't> .. ...c: '" ~o E'" 0 0 ll'" .!! a ;:: >-- ~G c::::".W ~ a o .. "flU "" " ~ 0 .. " ll'" u ._ il: 0::0 'a'C ~ <(g: Q,O <( <(0 1--0 ~ ::;, o o a ~ 1- Z W :;;: >- <( n. lr o u. W !;( o u: ~ w o c z ;.; r:...: () II l:'! a ~ 0:: 0:: ll. <( "'''' '" ~ ,.,~ ~ ~ ~ ~"'''' ~ ~::;; il~ ~]?~ :,:~:r: o \0 i ~~~ '-'~<( i:J ~ o " " .. ~ .,,, " r::: ~ 0 .:R"'(""'t .f1...~ tj{J;:: I:E <! ~ 11) ~ ,...~ 0) <;:) 1i. ~~~ <> ~ .e C/)~ ti<<f~ -SelO l'! q; '" -8..::;; ~ ;; Qi~ III ~ '" ~~16 ~~Ill :i o if ~ '" 'ti -6 -810 -...::t :go ~~ >- "0 z :5 w ::;,f.!__<<, O-8wO :E ~ I- ~ .0.'" .... Qt 0 to (,) "'0 Q ~;....w L-.c""'....~ zo~~~ o ~Q) 0.. t; .. (J ....:: W ...l &0 0 & ~ . ". U _ 2ft11a:::-I(!)Z ~1i!Z~E~ 1r1l00~w 020~oD:: ~N"..t~rG 'l:' ~ ~ ~ C?' ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ w E l! Q :E 0.2 ~i' o ~ ~ ~- ~ W ..... c;)'.... !::: 7i t:L.g ,Il OoC;)O -> 6cr::::t::t ~ ...... &'0 1-010.:; *c>*ouWill')I.L~ ~(O' c:; t;:,$::C)~0)... ~. o "J_<(t:;wO r-r::: ~ 5~~::)~a ~::J Cl l1.1-~~3:E U)~ lC)r:::Ol::~W~~.gW3.!!!: E E..QCl::"t- :;Jt:L~ .::J ~1()(f.J.~t:OO \1) Q O+UJc:a::QII~xr::: o OJ.:w;:)W~zU)~ -- --- ..J~O-....o..w-~ ...; ^ ~c U) :E~ .... -":::J ::> >1L ~!!i! 0 .0 l>>D:: - D..... ~c( ~ f-w .sW It 20 ~..J f1. W:z :~ Q) ~:3 o ~ ::l<( :s.... -I om ~ui ..: cOc.) ~ 0 ;::: 0 ~ ... <0 <:> ., ~ '" co C\iC\i ... 6 .... <0 ., .... ... '" ;::: '" ,,' a a "'''' ... <( C/) ?l .... .... .~ ~ ~ >- ~ g g ~ 0:: ~ -E . 't)"i'1:J ~ " 4) ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ,. e e .. e "- e ft~&: '" C/) oS " Q, .. ffi g.~ ~ "'{Q)~ '" .a~Qj '-' a r! ~ o(5Ji ,., 0:: ~o J!! .., 0 oS .. IU 0'" " '" '-" .Q ~ ~ " .. ., " " '" 0>", i ~ 'll ~ ,,- " " - '" " .. '-' II E "'~ '" '" >- Z 10 :E >- :. Ir o IL Z o ;:: .., u ::; Q. Q. . '" ir o .... o il! .... z o o '-' - 0 0 ::>0.., C .... S '" <3 ~ S ., ~ 15 e "' .e .. " " .Q .!,; .e ;; ~ l Qj " ,g .!! .Q .!;! " ~ '-' ll. 0 c <3 .e .e .e :;'j! ~ C/) -g ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ E 5 ~ s: ~ 8 ~ 0 -: co a ~ ~;;~~ _ i _ = ~!I~ ; 28 l 'L C (b e ~ l s ~ E; .t'1I) a ~ ~ ~ (,) 1;; il il ~ ~ " 'i! - ,,~ " o ~ lj 'i l ~ ~ :::! .0 -2 ~ ~ ~~~e~ ~ i ~ h ;; q; :: ~ ~ ~~~~~ t:: S ~ a.. P2. 8ki~~ Jli):q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,g 8 8 8 ~ ~ (,) ~ ~ <'5 ~ i ?: ~ ~ ~ t;~!1 }l-g€:elii h: llJ:;:: !::;; Ii:' g o <( g: '" o II .J tl 19 \)Jl$ ~ ~ " .9 ~ il .. . ~ 0 lJ\ .9 i '" ~ '" .. ~ :q i: :1! :€ 1 ~ ~ l n ~ ~ [ij[ .. .. Ok .. S '- .. E ffi ~ ,g (,) ~ ~ '- " 01! ~l ~ i :l; 0 '<( .. .. '0 .. t: ~ 0 ,0 'l: fil ~ I~ " " ~ tt " - " ;:: ,g g ~ 0:: .. " ~ lU I ;.; Jil- 0 II .. ... l:'! ~j "f ~ ~ 0 0:: <(~ <( ~ .. Q '15 ~ " .. ~ i~.is ,dli ~ ~ ~" Co') .2 oS 5 5 - ~ - ~ ~ i ~ (b Ql 0) 0 C/) ~ P2. 0 ,~ 0 ~ ~ Jil .. a '0 1) :5 10\1 ~ ~ S! It! 1lI_ >-~I~~ zoo. w i: ~ ~ 5 ~!~~8 a.fi~.iu l5 H" f U.~~~0~"-' w is ""'~ t:; ~ ~t)g~;€~ ~g~g~~ E8&~g~ w~;~~g o ~ g j] 0 :l; ~C8:%g~ o g :S ~ S :S ~~~e~~ ~8'&~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ;.:, '" "'''' 88 ;tSi~ S;S; B ..... (!) I- lli ::1; :::> () o Cl ~ 'l: ~~2~ ""dOl-- o 0<.> ;::: "" ",- UJ o -., ~~~o :;]0 g: &::i !J> q::[t ti '< l':! t 0:: '< .. CJ ?i ~ l!! ~ 1)j (') ;;; J:: it g ~ u- ti< + ~ 81il o 0 0 88 82~~ 0 "'0 0 0 I:\i""': <'\it-.': ci tb.o ti.....-:~,...: ~ '" - o 0 '" 0>'" OOf'-,..(>) ....... 0> '" - '" "'*" <0 ....... 00 ~!t'i -^ -- .... ...... .. ...... .. .. b<).b<}.b<}.t;,o). .... .. ...... .. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~w~~~ *** 888 - -- CJ ggg Q ill i!! i!! citici --' It Li:'~~~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ Ie) ...: ":t'~ g !l< '" -0>- ~ g e. - 0 " '< .. .. .. '" >- i'iJ --.I ~ Q - 0 :$;c: tt.i Q u.. ~~e ;;;: h. ~[~ 0 ~ '" ." .~ .l!! " " " 5;- 2'i- UJ 2: ~ '" ib' ir: E ~ ~ lL. ~ < ..: II> o ~~ j::: 1:1 l... ~ woe e " !!; :~ ~ C:'~ UJ ~ - o :S ~ Q"ti.2.!!: ~~~-g q: 0 ~ os;;: <~.2!~ g.; e ~ 0~;~ it~3-e n.. ~ 0 m <:t: 0...; E b \l) \l) I:. <'i l) ,<:> <::l'lls() l--- <ll <:> t:: ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 'tij~ ~ II) 10 c:: ~ E~,g5 ~ti.5!'a ~e.5() "," % ~ t~'" ~ \\ ~ ... I- W w :t: l/l Z o ~ ~ i= ,~ ~ g 0 0 oi ~ 0 <> '" !a I: ...... !il 800 ':: o 0 t;j 0 is g~~ ~ s: ..."'''' .... >:: i'iJ I()~ O)~ .... ~ - "'- 0 It + - " :l; e. '" ll: 0:: 0 ~ ll: '< ...... 000 ill 000 '!l otio 5 .."" '" ... '" 0> !il --' to ~ ~~ ~ - "'- 1)j " .... .. " a ~ ~ 0) ii~ 2 ~ '2 E q, 0 ..... ~ fb CD 13"0 ~ _ C: 'E ~ ~~~ ~~ 0 ~ 8 ~~e i~~~ ~_ ~~~ 0 ~~- Oo~ ~~~~_i~~!~l ~ ~~~~U~% ~ ~ u v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "- U Q ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~~%~~!%s~~~~~~m~~~~l ",,,,o~::;;<'>I-Q"- .. Cl <> '" 0:: ~ u.. o '" is >:: ~ r:J Q << .. **''*-*-** 000000 000000 ----............ **-*****- '000'00000 00.0.000.0 ............ '<'- """.................. ggggg8 o <'J-:cicOoiti 1()0)1"-.(()'t-U) Olb<V"Tlf)"T uir--.~~"'<!ia;C'\i ... :il881il8~~ r-.:ciO<<ta)NN ~~:g~rel:::~ If) ~. .0 ~ ......~ U)~ ....... N (\f C\I o '" '" ~ '" ::l ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .. .. '" 8 0 - 0 <> 0 <0 ... '" - <> '" 0 - .; 0; .; .; ci .; .; oJ g: '" '" - 0 '" ... '" '" ... '" <> ., - ". ~- .: 'q-.<'i '" '" .... 1:i - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ g:ggggg ~~~~~:a O('o')C'\l"<tO:l~ m~I.l)~""".t'\l. 8~88g~ ~;t~g;~ ~f()lOt-........t-.. lfl 0:1. M.l.6"': 10. ............. t'.I ~ ~ ci '" '" ...' ;;; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .. gggggg ~~~~~g CI(()(\4"I()~ (0. to-: ICi ""t- oi <\i ... f58ggg~~ ,...:titio::ioici~ t--.C1QP)CO......!O C1Q<'?1O(")"'......"'I' I()- ~ I()~ ....... ......~ q) ..- N ('"j C\i :il '" '" - '" ~ .. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .. -' ~ o ... Q ~ " ~ '" ......0:00)** C_NC?'=t-~~...........-oo ~N('o')~~~~~~A~~666666600 \ \ ',l..\c,a.a.o.,-\uu Cl~CI\..l'-\ ~ ~LS . City of Arden Hills Re uest for Council Action Prepared by: GSB Dept.: Engineer Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/05 Final Action Needed By: 8/8/05 Agenda Item:' ~,'" 2005 PMP Budgeted AmountN/A Actual AmountN/A Funding Source: N/A Council Action Request: Motion to approve variance resolution 05-47 for the 2005 PMP Street Improvement Project. Staff Recommendation: MnDOT requires that a variance request for use of State Aid dollars be submitted by the City since the project bids were opened prior to the final plan approval by the State. This was done in the interest of maintaining the project schedule in light of the impending state shutdown. The variance request should be granted administratively by MnDOT staff. We are anticipating the use of approximately $175,000 in State Aid funds for this project. Staff recommends approval of resolution 05-47 for the 2005 PMP Street Improvement Project. Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action Not Applicable_ ___Not Applic",bl~ __ .Jliot applic<I.blEl _ . Planning PTRC -----,.,~"------ ---.--.-.-- Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): o Memo/Letter: ~ Resolution (No. 05-47) D Ordinance (No. D Engineering Recommendation: o Attorney Recommendation: o Other: Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: . Page 1 of 1 ~ ~HILLS . City of Arden Hills Ramsey County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 05-51 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE FROM STATE-AID RULE 88211.281111 SUBPART 2 FOR CITY PROJECT NO. 318119691 WITH STATE AID PROJECT DESIGNATIONS OF SAP 187-1115-O3 AND 187-112-111 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arden Hills has approved the 2005 Pavement Management Program Street Improvement Project; and WHEREAS, said improvement project was designated with the following project locations, termini and designated State Aid Project numbers: . Red Fox Road (83+00 to 93+50) & Grey Fox Road (7+50 to 53+00), S.A.P 187- 105-03 . Dunlap Street (10+50 to 23+50), SAP 187-112-01 . Red Fox Road (70+00 to 83+00) & Northwoods Drive, non-State Aid participating WHEREAS, 2005 Pavement Management Program would be financed partially with State Aid funds thus requiring the plans to be prepared in accordance with State Aid rules; and . WHEREAS, the City of Arden Hills let bids prior to receiving final State-Aid approval in order to minimize delay by the impending State shutdown and desire to minimize delay to project schedule; and WHEREAS, State Aid Rule 8820.2800 subpart 2 states "only those projects for which final plans are approved by the state-aid engineer before opening bids or approving a force account agreement area eligible for state-aid construction funds". NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ARDEN IDLLS, MINNESOTA, that the City of Arden Hills hereby requests an administrative variance from State Aid Rule 8820.2800, Subpart 2. ADOPTED by the Council this 8tb day of August, 2005. Beverly Aplikowski, MAYOR ATTEST: Michelle Wolfe, CITY ADMINISTRATOR . . . . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ~ ~HlLLS ) ) ss ) "CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION" The undersigned hereby certifies the following: I) The attached is a full, true and correct copy of the original Resolution No. 05- 51 adopted August 8, 2005, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk. 2) The City Council meeting was held upon due call and notice. WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arden Hills. AME Deputy . y Clerk ^_. <.(.,.leAS Date: 1-rQ,.... i..... ' ~\\\\,\'\'uHm-'!f!l.l~. >>~~ "'~ \-lILts "'c/_'" ~O"'(/".""...I "''':- ~<2"" ..- ". --~> ;::; ~.' ",pOR." '.c. .:::: '\ . oor-. '''l ~"" ".::. gt3/ (J -(, . :;>-: ;:~; ". ~ 0- { ~>.. I J ~ ~HILLS City ot Arden Hills Re uest for Council Action Prepared by: GSB Dept.: Engineer Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/05 Final Action Needed By: 8/8/05 Agenda Item II 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Budgeted Amount: 400,000 Actual Amount: 26,600 Funding Source: Sanitary Utility Council Action Request: Authorize City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for the 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Project for Lift Stations #1, #11, #12 and #13. Staff Recommendation: The City has been performing lift station rehabilitation converting our older stations to submersible pumps. Earlier this year as a part of the review of bids for lift stations 4&9, staff recommended that the final four lift stations to be rehabilitated be done as a single project In 2006. We are requesting authorization to complete engineering at this time to allow for bidding in the late fall which should provide for a competitive bid environment. Initiating engineering at this time will also allow us to refine the estimated project costs for lift stations during our review of the Capital Improvements Program this summer. Final plans and specifications will be prepared with this authorization. Council will be requested to authorize the advertisement of the project in October following preparation of plans and specifieations. Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action . - - ---------.- f"lanrli!llL PTRC - _._--_.__._--_._-~-_._,._-'"-" "-,---_._---------_._---_._..._-_.~ NotApgli<<:.able___~______ . . . Not Applicable_ ____ n _Not app!i<<:.able __n Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): D Memo/Letter: D Resolution (No. D Ordinance (No. ) ~ Engineering Recommendation: Work authorization letter from City Engineer to Michelle Wolfe dated 8/3/05 D Attorney Recommendation: DOther: Financial Implications: Engineering scope per the city ongoing contract terms with URS. T olal project cost anticipated to include approximately $75,600 in engineering and $425,000 in construction. Engineering fees to prepare plans and specifications total $26,600. . Administrator/Staff Comments: Page 1 of 1 \ URS . August 3, 2005 Ms. Michelle Wolfe City Administrator City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Work Order OS-03 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Dear Ms. Wolfe, The following proposal is offered as a confirmation of our scope of work, estimated fees and schedule for the above-referenced project. GENERAL PROJECT SCOPE The proposed scope of work includes services for preliminary engineering, preparation of final plans and construction services for the proposed rehabilitation of Lift Stations # I, # II, # 12 and #13 located Ihroughout the City. These four lift stations are the last remaining stations with dry well operating systems to be replaced with submersible pump systems. . BASIC SERVICES Design Phase URS will provide preliminary engineering services for the proposed project including the evaluation of alternatives which may be appropriate. URS will conduct field reviews ofIhe project site as necessary and prepare presentation graphics and exhibits for public information and council review. URS will make modifications to the proposed improvement scope as directed by City staff and Council. The preparation of a feasibility report is not included in the scope of professional services. URS will prepare final plans and specifications for the project in accordance with the Professional Services Agreement. City staff will provide as-built infonnation as needed for the project. Final plans and specifications will be prepared to City standards and will include removal plans, utility reconstruction plans, grading plans, details, and site restoration plans as necessary. Final plans and specificalions will be submitted to City staff for review and comment. Bidding Phase URS will provide bidding phase services in accordance with the Professional Services Agreement. URS will submit advertisements for bidding, produce bidding documents, answer contractor questions, issue addendums and conduct the bid opening. URS will check bids and provide a detailed bid tabulation and recommendation of award to City Council. . Thresher Squw~ . 700 Third Stlref Soufh . SIIife 600' Mi/l/leapolis, MN 55415. Pho/le: (612) .FO.0700 . Fax: (612) 370-1378 . Ms. Michelle Wolfe August 3, 2005 Page 2 Construction Phase URS will provide construclion services in accordance with the Professional Services Agreement. The services will include contract administration, shop drawing review, field inspections and conslruction staking. Construction tesling will be coordinated by URS but will be provided by others and will be billed directly to the City by the firm performing the work. ADDITIONAL SERVICES In addition to Ihe Basic Services detailed above, URS will provide additional services for field survey necessary for the project. Field Survey Field surveying will be completed for the project during both the Preliminary and Final Design Phases of the project. II is anticipated that the survey will be a topographical survey to include right of way, easements, existing utilities and all topographic points which, will be impacted by this projeet. All survey information will be based upon the Ramsey County Coordinate System in order to allow easy correlation with City GIS mapping information. ESTIMATED COSTS We propose that the basic services identified above be completed on a percentage of construclion COSl basis consistenl with the terms of our Professional Services Agreement. The preliminary estimate for the project cost . iucluding 18% for Engineering and construction administration is $500,000 all of which would be funded from the sanilary sewer enterprise fund. The total budgeted project cost in the CIP for lift stations are $200,000 (2006) and $200,000 (2007) for a tOlal of $400,000. The CIP budget should be adjusted during the annual review this summer to reflect the current estimated cost as well as the fact that the projecl will be completed in one year instead of two years. An outline of our eSlimaled fees and direct expenses for the project are detailed below: Estimated Fees for Basic Services Percentage Multiplier to be used for Basic Services based upon estimaled construction cost of $425,000.00 and curve included on Exhibit D of the Professional Services Agreement: 4.70% Breakdown of Basic Services Design Phase (90% of 4.7%) Bidding Phase (10% of 4.7%) Construction Services (10% of Ave. 3 bids) Subtotal Basic Services (14.7% of construction) $17,980.00 $ 2,000.00 $42.500.00 $62,480.00 Estimated Fees for Additional Services (hourly, not-to-exceed) Field Survey: CAD Technician: 16 Hours @ $65.00 Survey Coordinator 4 Hours @ $85.00 Surveyor 120 Hours @ $60.00 Subtotal Additional Services (hourly) $ 1,040.00 $ 340.00 $ 7,200.00 $ 8,580.00 . Ms. Michelle Wolfe Augusl 3, 2005 Page 3 . Direct Expenses Direct expenses for the project include items such as mileage, parking, photography, printing and delivery services. URS will bill all expenses incurred on the project directly to the Cily wilh no URS markup. . Expenses are anticipaled to include printing and distribution of plans and specifications ($2,500), conslruction materials testing ($1,500) and mileage ($500). The total estimated amount for direct expenses is $4,500.00 ESTIMATED FEE SUMMARY Basic Services (percent of construction cost) Additional Services (hourly, not-to--exceed) Expenses (estimated, no markup) Total Estimated Cost $ 62,480.00 $ 8,580.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 75,560.00 All work, therefor is estimated to be complele for a total amount of $75,560.00. Final amounls for Basic Services and Construction Services will be based upon the actual conslruction cost of the project in accordance with the Professional Services Agreement. Additional Services will be performed on an hourly basis based upon the parameters ouilined in the Professional Services Agreement. Expenses will be billed directly to the City with no URS markup. SCHEDULE The following is the proposed schedule for the project: Field Survey of four SiIes Complete Final Design & Construclion Documents Bid Opening Begin Construclion Complete Construction August, 2005 October. 2005 November, 2005 December, 2005 June, 2006 . Thank you for the opportunily to provide these services. We look forward to working with you and CiIy staff on this project. Please call if you have any questions or we can provide any additional information. A completed Work Order Form is attached for your execution. Sincerely, Copy: Tom Moore/Arden Hills Tom Geear/URS Frank TicknorlURS File: Pending . . . . WORK ORDER NO. 05-03 This is an authorization to proceed and site-specific scope of services under the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Arden Hills and URS dated November 1, 1997. Project: 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Project We hereby authorize you to proceed with the following phases of services: Preliminary Design Services, Final Design Services, Bidding Services and Construction Services as outlined in URS proposal letter dated August 3, 2005. Payment shall be on the basis of: · Percent of Construction Cost: In accordance with Exhibit D of the Professional Services Agreement. The Estimated Total Fee for URS under the Work Order is: $75,560.00 The Pinal Completion Date for the services included under the Work Order is: July, 2006 URS, INC. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Signed: Signed: Title: Title: Date: Date: . ~ ~HILLS City of Arden Hills Reqnest for Council Action Agenda Item i3~ Appointment of EDC Members Budgeted Amount: $0.00 Actual Amount: Funding Source: Prepared by: SC Dept.: CD Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/2005 Final Action Needed By: 8/8/2005 Council Action Request: Motion to approve Resolution No. 05-48 "A Resolution Appointing Nancy Kneeland and Rob Davidson as Economic Development Commission Members" Staff Recommendation: Advisory Commission Action: Action Not ApRlicable Not Applicable Not applicable Commission Date Planning PTRC Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): . D Memo/Leller: l2J Resolution (No. 05-48) D Ordinance (No. D Engineering Recommendation: D Allorney Recommendation: DOther: Financial Implications: None Administrator/Staff Comments: The Council recently changed the Economic Development Commission's bylaws to expand from 7 to 9 membes, including the provision that one representative would be from the real estate profession. Staff published the need for applicants and the attached two individuals were the only respondents. Rob Davidson is with Davidson and Associates and meets the EDC test for a real estate member. . Page 1 of2 ~ ~HILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 05-48 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING NANCY KNEELAND AND ROB DA VInSON AS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBERS WHEREAS, the City Council annually appoints residents to serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council regarding economic development issues; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The City Council appoints Nancy Kneeland and Rob Davidson to serve on the Economic Development Commission. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2005. Beverly Aplikowski, MAYOR ATTEST: Michelle A. Wolfe, City Administrator \\Ear-th\Admin\Ccmndl\Resollllions\200S\OS-32, Appointing David McClung to the Planning Commission.doc . . . . . . ~ ~~HILLS June 14,2005 Ms. Nancy Kneeland 1716 Chatham Avenue Arden Hills, MN 55112 Dear Ms. Kneeland: Thank you for expressing an interest in becoming a mcmber of the Arden Hills Economic Development Commission (EDe). City staff has reccived your application form and will be in contact with you in the near future regarding the open positions on the EDC. The City of Arden Hills is currently in the process of recruiting other potential candidates for this commission and will be accepting applications until July 29th Onee again thank you for expressing an interest in the Economic Development Commission. If you have any questions or eoncerns, please feel free to contact me at 651-634-5125. 2Jl~. Schawn P. nson City of en Hills Assistant to the City Administrator City of Arden Hills . 1245 'Vest Highway 96 . Arden Hills, MN . 55112-5743 Phone 651.634.5120 . Fax 651.634.5137 . www.ci.arden-hilfs.mn.us ~ ~LS ~ECEj) f'-:;:"--~! . JUN 1 0 2005 I I' rlTY n- '-O'-.N HI' LS I.. ' v' ur At-< Cl ,'-- _2 City Committee Application Form Date ~) -?S -05 General Information Name J~ '\\PI' \r\ v-.c\ \:'B. w: L~ Last First \ _['1 II,., ~V\a~ \\dV\-\ t:\ue A(~ U; \\5 \-\0 551 \'2- Home It,S\-Id:o,qIoO! Work: Fax Fax Ch~03(i9 W\:::,~, CDM ~ M.l Address City, Slate, ZIP Phone Numbers ~ Email Address Committees If you wish to be considered for more than one cGfllll1i.ttee. please order in number of preference. Communications Parks, TraiL~, & Recreation (PTRC) City Events Task Force City Council -+- Economic Development Commission Operations & Finance Plaiuring Commission Wcbsite Task Force Election Judge . Special Interests As the C...ou.ncil prioritizes lIS goals~ il may create additional/new committees or task forces trom time to time. If you have other specific areas or lOpics ofinteres\ please indicate those interests and we will retain your application for future openings in those areas as new committees .are created.. Othec Interests Personalluformaoou I,ist your work experience. -l5 S \6. "1,,,\ ~ ''\\ -1-'0\1\ IcnS-._lq~ 'Ie.\'-) dDI>)j~\.lH\ Si, \>;. IX) lh:~~l\'\" \ Cl.1't '7:>':::> -~---\tL5-J~'("\\~ 1 dolCv.I'liLOY\ C:n ~Wl; l (' \O'?-P \' lfil>'3?-S?1S - ~ V\d..'1' \,\- \e I I'\(da-v- ~ \~~) Mart<N-1 ~ \"e. r' \C\'!5'6-qq, '\\-\\eU'lo'{"L'jAfdo.'h ~\~ \",es.ol.O\'\e\ C8) c. c . A ,. . F I J ) Pa lly onumUee pp Icatlon orm gc I of2 IQQ'D-C,\)'\"(8AM- '(e~'e6. . ~. \q~ q - 'lCD \) ~d ,.\ ~ 1f'II.e.,.) ~~ {'b\--:P(\ti'\0(\LClM..'\~Jl.. I ~\l \s I S\eC--\o\ ~'<o,\ec.--\-6 List any Civic, Professional, and Commnnity Activity involvement. . WIly do yoll wut to be 011 a committee? ~n~;\~~~~ ~ ~~~t;:;t~y; l~;~ ~ --VV\.e lje--"xs) e.SQCU'~l""\\A 11'~.....\-V\Ic\'AF\-P (~a--i---Knj\+~V.tii'.<:" ae;..~ w \s..e) , I What skills, strengths, or abilities do you believe you will add to the committee? ~~~~0~\I\'1 (-fuM"\ ~W eVY\~\1)I,\lV\Pfl\.-\-) s:r-('Od \ ES---k~ Ust any additional comments. References. . I. Name Address Pbone No. 2. Name Address Phone No. 3. Name Address Phone No. . Please return this form along with your current resume to: -::r \'\8 ,,<If' \I\..,"\:) C D 'C~ €1,~ eOV' CJ (d \ \eSL),~e,.. -:::c ~~ ~ \~6 c..~. \:J?- AItn: City Administrator C'B\~\\)\l,{\ l\:, \l-\1\.. ~ \eyew \ 11'::1) City of Arden Hills 'it' tpd..S cKLe-y\e '. , !24SWestHighway96 -j:" \C\~ql \C~ 'w:cU3,'^-':\ Q.t,~ol\~'-'\( Arden Hills. MN 55112 \ ~ES-\; ,,"^- \:lo<- *' ?:s1.C\.A \' ~ u tt l' ( 1= c'-4G\(ed W\-f' ~ 5\' --\D ~~.4 \G~L Phone: 651.634.5120 a1-\.,"\ ..Ge-f --W \ (' \ V\~,,,6-\S v,.... ".::>' '\-'ai:. Fax: 651.634.5137 5'" \'4.'bb. LJ\\C)\~ ~-Uext"cl. 'Me C ~)O\);~ C\D\'\.G,! 9 L.-aV'A h~ li';'"ed ,-\-0 WO'( \- ~L\~ \"^-to ~ 'tJ..b4. .t oS Lcc\ Y'N-' .--\-0 d:v \'\...\. os 'NI.i'y.. ~G+ V\.l City Conuninee Application F..m ..(;G", \rvl. W\. w \'\eA'- v\Q C) QJ:!v\. eel. h..., ~; ~ ~ON'-\.-\' Page 2,ot2 > < ---r. lOG J. \" '-"'" CA'\ ed \'^-''-t ","'L,-..'''V\, .Y' V\ 'v~v) ~ C \ -C::c ~ C~~ ~-.u..\ ;} <;; a v, dC';,Q--V\ --;-., \ Co'f-'\. ,,\ en--.. w<:.'''2--M, /..:<1.N1.J'\:,.u., ...--Y''\.S Ca ---::::f,t\ \qq C\-'z.uD \ I '-"\\>'6 ~ e..';j 1. ,,---v\.(1 \ 1Iv"-ar'Y\~ oi. 'f::,-, AV"N'.Y\CO-A 'dS k 6. V'-'\L' \"t-...J-: \..c~Y,\I' cPY'~ J'\.:'~_\' v,:.\'\-Q...V\ ~~ 6nuJ \w 200S/AUG/Ol!MON 01:48 PM P. 002 . .... . ...,.'...,"",..".....". .. , . . . . . - - ',' - . . ,"'-c. "d.',',." ".; ',:". ":y:; ,;..:-:~!", ",'j." '. :-,: " ...., ......,... ".'.' ,. ..... ~.../.".;::'..,\'Cili1l,..'!"/)i;. ,....'...'" ','..........iB....~.:.1 ".'" .'.'.!'..' 'fe', .. I., " '. .. ." 'Bl:)I-:-" "..,- " :LL0 ,. ".'. ., .","",.,,,.. .'..,.'.-,' " . . ""' ,. ,"'" - .'--, . City Committee Application Form Date ~ (,160" Name General Information ~"..J..N. ~~Z~ L~ m& ~~1Sb - M~uo.l.~......is. \)L A....l.,~ ~~ltJ I MI'l S"S"1 t "- Home Work F~ F~ C M.L S.."*,,"- l~~ Address City, State, ZIP . Phone Numbers i. '6"' -1- $', -(. ~~l.\ c.. S't .. 'tit ~ '-l.. i''t Email Address Committees If you wish to be considored for more than one committee~ please order- in number ofpreferellce_ Communications (Newsletter) Parks, Trails, & Recreation (PTRC) City Events Task Force Election Judge Economic Development Commission Planning Commission . Special Interests As the Council prioritizes its goals, it may create additional/new connnittees or task forces from time to time. If you h1;iVC other specific areas or topics of interest please indicate those interests and we will retain YOltI application. for future openiJ;J,gs in those area!! as new conm:rlttees are created. Other Interests Personal Information List your work experience. a~ ~~c City Committee Application Form Page t of2 . 2005/AUG/Ol/1~ON 01:48 PM P. 003 List any Civic, Professional, and Community Activity involvement. . Why do you want to be 0.11 a committee? What skills, strengths, or abilities do you believe you will add to the committee? List any additional eomments. . References. 1. Name Address Phone No_ 2. Name Address Phone No. 3. Name Address Phone No. Please retum tlris form along with a letter of interest and your current reSUllle to; City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 Attu; Schawn Johnson, Assistant to the City Administrator Phone: 651.634.5120 Fax: 651.634.5137 . City Committee Application Form Page 2 of2 I / . e e Prepared by: SJ Dept.: Admin Council Mtg. Date: 08/08/2005 Final Action Needed By: 08/08/2005 ~ ---1\.~HILLS City of Arden Hills Request for Council Action Agenda Item l[lI Motion to Approve Resolution #05-49 Desil!natinl! the National Ineident Manal!ement System as the Basis for all Incident Manal!ement Responses in the City of Arden Hills Budgeted Amount: NA Actual Amount: NA Funding Source: NA Council Action Request: Motion to Approve Resolution #05-49-Designating the National Incident Management System as the basis for all incident management responses in the City of Arden Hills. Staff Recommendation: City Council approval of the National Incident Management System for the City of Arden Hills- Advisory Commission Action: Commission Supporting Documents (which are attached to Not Applicable Not Action [2J Memo/Letter: [2J Resolution (05-49) o Ordinance (No. ) o Engineering Recommendation: o Attorney Recommendation: [2J Attachments . Information pertaining to the National Incident Management System Financial Implications: Not Applicable- Administrator/Staff Comments: , \ ~ /],\~HILLS MEMORANDUM . DATE: August 3, 2005 Agenda Item 3.H. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator FROM: Schawn Johnson, Assistant to the City Administrator SUBJECT: Approve Resolution #05-49 Designating the National Incident Management System as the Basis for all Incidcnt Management Responses in the City of Arden Hills Baekl!round In coordination with the Ramsey County Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division, the federal government is requiring all states, tenitories, tribes, and local governments to approve a resolution adopting the National Incident Management System (NIMS) as the standard federal government system for handling all incident and emergency management situations which may occur within the City of Arden Hills. The National Incident Management System (NIMS) is part of the United States Homeland Security Department. The goal of this federal program is to assist government agencies in managing future domestic incidents by creating a single and comprehensive unit of government that can handle any future catastrophic events. The goal of NIMS is to develop and administer a program that is eompatible with federal, state, and local government entities and provide the highest level of emergency management services. . Beginning January I, 2006, jurisdictions that are currently receiving or will be receiving federal emergency management assistance in the future will be required to adopt a resolution that rceognizes and adopts the National Incident Management System. If a government agency does not pass a resolution recognizing the National Ineident Management System, financial assistance will not be granted to that government agency in the future. At this time, the following Ramsey County government agencies have passed this mandated resolution: . Ramsey County . City of Maplewood . City of Roseville . City of Falcon Heights . City ofShorevicw . \\Metro-inet.us\ArdenIlills\Admin\Assistant City Administrator\Memo's and Letters\2005\Nalionallncidcnt Management System-8-1-05 .DOC I . . . Recommendation City staff is requesting City Council approval of resolution #05-49 designating thc National Incident Management System as the basis for all incident management responses in the City of Arden Hills. Attachments; . Resolution #05-49 \ . State and Local Guide: Resolution Adopting the National Incident . Management System & Resolution Promoting Intrastate Mutual Aid Agreements . t . Resolution Adoptin2 the National Incident Mana2ement System (NIMS) Compliance requirement: To recognize formally the NIMS principles and policies. States, territories, tribes and local entities will meet this requirement by approving a resolution that adopts NIMS as the standard for incident management. Please note that jurisdictions currently receiving homeland security grant funding and any county, city, township, or tribal government that intends to apply directly for federal preparedness, prevention or planning grants must adopt and implement NIMS at the local government level. State and Local Jurisdiction Compliance NIMS principles and policies State and Local jurisdictions shall approve a resolution that recognizes and adopts the NIMS. Implementation Steps - Take appropriate measures to ensure that the governing authority for your jurisdiction (i.e., city council, county board, etc.) approves a resolution that recognizes and adopts the NIMS. Jurisdictions may use the sample resolution below in preparing a NIMS resolution. Such resolution must be adopted by the state or local jurisdiction no later than December 31, 2005. - Notify Ben Kosel, HSEM state agency coordinator, when the resoiution has been adopted. Fax a copy of the approved resolution to his attention as soon as possible. - If your jurisdiction has already complied with the step of adopting a NIMS resolution, fax the resolution to Ben Kosel at: 651-296-0459 Contact Information: Ben Kosel State Agency Coordinator Division o[Homeland Security and Emergency Management 444 Cedar Street Suite 223 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Phone: 651.215.6937 Mmail: Benjamin.kosel@state.mn.us .ax: 651.296.0459 'I ~ ~HILLS . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY ST ATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 05-49 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AS THE BASIS FOR ALL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT RESPONSES IN THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS WHEREAS, the President of the United Statcs of America issued Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 to cnhance the ability of the United States to manage domestic incidents by establishing a single, comprehensivc national incident management system; and WHEREAS, the President, in Homcland Security Presidential Directive 5, tasked the secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Sccurity to develop and administer a National Incident Management System; and WHEREAS, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security developed and . administered the National Incident Management System (NIMS) to provide for interoperability and compatibility among federal, state, and local eapabilities, the NIMS will include: a core set of concepts, principles, tenninology, and technologies covering the incident command system; multi-agcncy coordination systems; wlified command; training; identification and management ofresourees (including systems for classifying types of resources); qualifications and certification; and the collection, tracking, and reporting of incident information and incident resources; and WHEREAS, Minncsota Governor Tim Pawlenty issued Executive Ordcr 05-02: Designation of the National Incident Managcment System (NIMS) As the basis for all incident management in the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the collective input and guidance from all federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security partners has been, and will continue to be, vital to the development, effective implementation, and utilization ofa comprehensive NIMS; and WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable that all City of Arden Hills agencies and personnel coordinatc their efforts to effectively and eOiciently provide the highest levels of incident management; and . . . WHEREAS, the NIMS standardized procedures for managing personnel, communieations, facilities, and rcsourccs will improve the ability of City of Arden Hills to utilize federal funding to enhance local and state agency readiness, maintain first responder safety, and streamline incident management processes; and WHEREAS, the Incident Command System components of the NIMS are already an integral part of various ineident management activities throughout City of Arden Hills)ncluding current emergency management training programs; and WHEREAS, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (9-11 Commission) recommended adoption of a standardized Incident Command System; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: we do hcreby establish the National Incident Managcment System (NIMS) as the City of Arden Hills standard for incident management. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2005. Beverly Aplikowski, MAYOR ATTEST: Michelle A. Wolfe, City Administrator . \\:vJetm-inct.us\ArdenHills\Admin\Council\RcsolutiollS\200S\05-49. National Incident Management Syskm.doc . . . . ~ ---A~HILLS City of Arden Hills Request for Council Action Agenda ltem~1.W Motion to Approve Resolution #05-50-Promotinl! the Use of Intrastate Mutual Aid Al!reements in the City of Arden HiIls Budgeted Amount: NA Actual Amount: NA Funding Source: NA Prepared by: SJ Dept.: Admin Council Mtg. Date: 08/08/2005 Final Action Needed By: 08/08/2005 Council Action Request: Motion to Approve Resolution #05-50-Promoting the use oflntrastate Mutual Aid Agreements in the City of Arden Hills. Staff Recommendation: City Council approval ofthe National Incident Management System for the City of Arden Hills- .... A,cIvi1;ory..(;.olTl.rni,!;.s_i()I1_~c;!i<>.n: Commission Date Planning PTRC . Supporting [)ocumenis(whichare attached to this Action [gJ Memo/Letter: [gJ Resolution (05-50) D Ordinance (No. ) D Engineering Recommendation: D Attorney Recommendation: [gJ Attaehments . Information pertaining to mutual aid agreements. Financial Implications: Not Applicable- Administrator/Staff Comments: Action Not Applicable Not "flPlicAble Not applieable . ~ --A~ HILLS MEMORANDUM . DATE: August 3, 2005 Agenda Item 3.1. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator FROM: Schawn Johnson, Assistant to the City Administrator SUBJECT: Approve Resolution #05-50 Promoting the Use ofIntrastate Mutual Aid Agreements in the City of Arden Hills Backe-round In coordination with the Ramsey County Emergency Management and the State of Minnesota, the federal government is strongly urging all states, tenitories, tribes, and local governments to approve a resolution recognizing and promoting the need to establish and utilize intrastate mutual-aid agreements to deal with emergency management situations in the future. The purpose of the mutual aid agreement is to ensure that the neeessary emergency response functions of the state, county, and municipalities are being carried out in a coordinated and effective manner. This mutual aid agrcement would guarantee timely assistance amongst the different government agencies when a natural or man-made disaster occurs. . At this time, the following Ramsey County government agencies have passed this state mandated resolution: . Ramsey County . City of Maplewood . City ofRoseville . City of Falcon Heights . City ofShorevicw Reeommendation City staff is requesting City Council approval of resolution #05-50 promoting the use of Intrastate Mutual-Aid Agreements in the City of Arden Hills. Attachments: . Resolulion #05-50 . \\Metro-inet.us\Ar-denHiIls\Admin\Assistant City Administrator\Mcmo1s and Letters\2005\Resolution Promoting Intrastate Mutual Aid Agreements 8-1-05.DOC . State and Local Guide: . Resolution Adopting the National Incident Management System & Resolution Promoting Intrastate . Mutual Aid Agreements . Resolution Promotin2 Intrastate Mutual-Aid A2reements . Compliance requirement: To promote intrastate mutual-aid agreements. , State and Local Jurisdiction Compliance I Mutual-aid agreements State and Local Implementation Steps jurisdictions should approve a resolution - Take appropriate measures to ensure that the governing authority for your that recognizes and promotes the jurisdiction (i.e., city council, county board, etc.) approves a resolution that establishment and recognizes and promotes the utilization and establishment of intrastate mutual-aid utilization of intrastate agreements. Jurisdictions may use the sample resolution below to prepare this mutual-aid agreements. document. Such resolution - Notify Ben Kosel, HSEM state agency coordinator, when the resolution has been should be approved adopted. Fax a copy of the approved resolution to his attention as soon as possible. by the state or local jurisdiction no later - If your jurisdiction has already complied with the step of adopting a mutual-aid than December 31, resolution, fax the resolution to Ben Kosel at: 651-296-0459. 2006. . Contact information: Ben Kosel State Agency Coordinator Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 444 Cedar Street Suite 223 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Phone: 651.215.6937 Email: Bcnjamin.kosel@state.mn.us Fax: 651.296.0459 . . . . ~ ~HILLS CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 05-50 A RESOLUTION PROMOTING THE USE OF INTRASTATE MUTUAL-AID AGREEMENTS IN THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS WHEREAS, Chapter] 2, Section 12.331 allows for Intrastate Mutual Aid, and direct, timely assistance between jurisdictions is critical; and WHEREAS, the possibility of the occurrence of natural and other disasters of major size and destructiveness cxists and is increasing; and WHEREAS, there is a need to ensure that preparations of the City of Arden Hills will bc adequate to deal with disasters; generally protect the public peace, health, and safety; and preserve the lives and property ofthe people of the state; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide for the rendering of mutual aid among the political subdivisions of the state and to cooperate with the federal government with respect to carrying out emergency management functions; and WHEREAS, it is the poliey of Minnesota that all emergency response fimctions of this state be coordinated to thc maximum extent with the comparable functions of the state government, including its various departments and agencies, of other states and localities, and of private agencies of every type, to the end that the most effective preparations and uses may be made of the state's labor supply, resources, and facilities for dealing with any disaster that may occur; and WHEREAS, the director of eaeh loeal organization for emergency management may, in collaboration with other publie and private agencies within this state, develop or cause to be developed mutual-.aid arrangements for reciprocal emergency management aid and assistance in an emergency or disaster too great to be dealt with unassisted. These arrangements must be consistent with the local emergency operations plan and, in time of emergency, each local organization for emergency management and its members shall render assistance in accordance with the provisions of the mutual-aid arrangements; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: that the City of Arden Hills promotes the efficiency and effectiveness of intrastate mutual aid by designating the City Council, City Administrator, Finance Director, Assistant to the City Administrator, Ramsey County Sheriffs Department, Lake Johanna Fire Department, Operations and Maintenance Director, or other officers who, exercising discretion and considering the needs of the political subdivision and its . inhabitants, to dispatch equipment and personnel as considered necessary if the danger of fire, hazard, casualty, or another similar occurrence exists outside the political subdivision and by its suddenness it would be impractical for the governing body of City of Arden Hills itself to authorize thc dispatch of equipment and personnel to combat that emergency or disaster. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2005. Beverly Aplikowski, MAYOR ATTEST: Michelle A. Wolfe, City Administrator . \\Mctro-inet.us\ArdenHills\Admin\Council\Resolutions\2005\05-50, Mutual Aid Agreements.doc . .' . Prepared by: GSB Dep!.: ENGINEERING Council Mtg. Date: 8.8.05 Final Action Needed By: 8.8.05 ~ ~HILLS City of Arden Hills Request for Council Action Agenda Item II 2003 Pavement Manaeement PrOl!l'am Budgeted Amount: $2,450.000.00 Actual Amount $2,410.000.00 Funding Source: Multiple Funds Council Action Request: Approve Pay Estimate #8 (FINAL) for Amt Construction Inc., of Hugo, MN in the amount of $10, 145.22for the 2003 Pavement Management Program. Staff Recommendation: The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate #8 (FINAL) for Amt Construction lnc., of Hugo, MN in the amount of $10,/45.22. Advisory Commission Action: Commission Dale Action ______ .,___ _ Not Applic.a.bl~.___ __ _ ______!'l()t~RplicabLe.........__ n_ _ _ ____f\J.()!~[>Iic<l.ble _ . Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): o Memo/Letter: . o Resolution (No. ) o Ordinance (No. ) !:8J Engineering Recommendation: See attachment o Attorney Recommendation: !:8JOther: Application for Payment #8 (FINAL) Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: Page 1 of 1 URS ., AGENDA ITEM 3.J Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 . To: Murtuza Siddiqui I Arden Hills Finance Director File: 37951-023-1001 Cc: Michelle Wolfe I Arden Hills Tom Moore I Arden Hills From: Gregory S. Brown Arden Hills City Engineer Date: August 3, 2005 Subject: Pay Estimate #8 2003 Pavement Management Program Ingerson Neighborhood Karth Lake Neighborhood Background The City of Arden Hills awarded Amt Construction Company, Inc. of Hugo, MN the 2003 Pavement Management Program on June 9, 2003 for a total contract amount of $1,903,526.10. Change Order #1 in the amount of $126,487.94 was approved by the City Council on December 13,2004, for a new total contract amount of $2,030,024.03. Pay Estimates #1 through #7, for a total amount of $2,018,899.77 have previously been approved by the City Council. . Project Status This project is complete including punch-list items. The landscaping items were under warranty through the spring of 2005. A final landscaping walk-through was recently conducted by Kathy Ryan ofURS. The inspection confirmed all landscaping items are healthy and growing. Recommendation The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate #8 (FINAL) for Amt Construction Company, Inc. of Hugo, MN in the amount of $10,145.22. . . . . APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT PAYMENT NO.8 (FINAL) Project: 2003 Pavement Management Program $1,903,526.10 $126,487.94 $2,030,014.04 $2,029,044.99 $0.00 $2,029,044.99 $0.00 $2,029,044.99 $2,018,899.77 $10,145.22 I hereby certify that all items a amounts shown are correct for the work completed to date. Owner: Owner No.: Contractor: URS Job No.: Application Date: For Period Ending: City of Arden Hills ARNT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 37951-023-0101 8/8/2005 7/30/2005 Date: B- 3-0 <;~ The work shown on this project and the application for payment have been reviewed and the amount shown is recommended for payment. Original Contract Amount: Contract Amendments: Contract Amount To Date: Total Amount of Work Complete To Date: Material Suitably Stored On-Site but not Incorporated Into Work: Gross Amount Due To Date: Less 0.00% Retainage: Amount Due To Date: Less Previous Payments: Total Due This Application: By: By: APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Owner: City of Arden Hills By: Date: Date: fJ3.o~ ) Payment History Payment . Payment Payment Application Number End Date Date Amount 1 7/512003 7/9/2003 $365,498.58 2 8/18/2003 8/20/2003 $592,874.75 3 9/15/2003 9/12/2003 $323,323.60 4 1 0/15/2003 10/21/2003 $385,262.83 5 11/15/2003 11/19/2003 $105,733.47 6 7/30/2004 8/9/2004 $83,968.68 7 7/30/2004 8/4/2005 162237.86 Total Payments: $2,018,899.77 . . Page 2 of 9 , Application for Payment: Itemization , .SChedUle: A-ROADWAY Contract Contract To Date To Date Unit No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LS $96.000.00 0.70 $67,200.00 0.70 $67,200.00 202t.501 2 CLEARING TREE $200.00 64.00 $12.800.00 224.00 $44,800.00 2101.502 3 GRUBBING TREE $75.00 64.00 $4.800.00 154.00 $11,550.00 2101.507 4 REMOVE RCP SEWER PIPE (STORM) LF $12.00 1,134.00 $13,608.00 1,063.00 $12,756.00 2101.501 5 REMOVE WATER MAIN LF $16.00 113.00 $1,808.00 82.00 $1,312.00 210'1.506 6 REMOVE CMP PIPE CULVERTS AND APRONS LF $12.00 341.00 $4,092.00 487.00 $5,844.00 2104.501 7 REMOVE CURB & GlITTER LF $1.50 1.671.00 $2,506.50 1,961.00 $2,941.50 2104.501 8 REMOVE GUARD RAIL - PLATE BEAM LF $6.00 201.00 $1,206.00 200.00 $1.200.00 2104.505 9 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY $1.25 30,400.00 $38,000.00 28.134.00 $35,167.50 2104.505 10 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $2.00 1,888.00 $3,776.00 2,289.00 $4,578.00 2104.505 11 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY $3.00 828.00 $2,484.00 756.00 $2,268.00 2104.509 .2 REMOVE RIP RAP CY $25.00 5.00 $125.00 5.00 $125.00 104_5t1 13 REMOVE CATCH BASIN EA $350.00 14.00 $4,900.00 14.00 $4,900.00 2.104.513 14 REMOVE STORM MANHOLE EA $400.00 4.00 $1,600.00 4.00 $1,600.00 2.104.523 15 REMOVE RCP APRON EA $300.00 12.00 $3,600.00 12.00 $3,600.00 2104.523 16 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LF $3.00 429.00 $1,287.00 394.00 $1.182.00 2104.523 17 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL OEPTH) LF $2.00 1,391.00 $2,782.00 1,326.00 $2,652.00 18 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE C EA $50.00 28.00 $1.400.00 26.00 $1,300.00 19 SALVAGE MAIL BOX EA $50.00 74.00 $3,700.00 75.00 $3,750.00 2104.601 20 COMMON EXCAVATION (P) CY $7.60 26,584.70 $202.043.72 27,274.70 $207,287.72 2105.501 21 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) CY $7.40 600.00 $4,440.00 2.212.00 $16,368.80 2105.507 22 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) CY $12.40 10,170.00 $126,108.00 10,170.00 $126,108.00 2105.522 23 COMMON BORROW (LV) CY $7.40 500.00 $3,700.00 2,291.00 $16.953.40 2.11)5.523 24 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HR $125.00 150.00 $18.750.00 34.00 $4,250.00 2105_525 .25 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5 TON $9.70 550.00 $5,335.00 459.38 $4,455.99 2123.501 Page 3 of 9 Unit Contract Con1ract To Date To Date No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 26 AGGREGATE BASE (CV), CLASS 5 (P) CY $22.70 6,780.40 $153,915.08 6,780.40 $153,915.08 2123.505 27 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MATERIAL TON $300.00 1.50 $450.00 20.00 $6.000.00 . 2123.509 28 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2') SY $1.30 7.959.40 $10,347.22 6,532.00 $8,491.60 2123.510 29 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY $22.00 1.355.00 $29,810.00 , 1,315.00 $28,930.00 2123.514 30 SAWED/SEALEO JOINT LF $1.48 4,581.00 $6,779.88 0.00 $0.00 2123.601 31 TYPE LVWE35030B WEARING COURSE MIXruRE TON $30.70 4,223.00 $129.646.10 4.047.20 $124.249.04 2123.610 32 'TYPE LVNWE35030C BASE COURSE MIXTURE TON $34.70 3,171.00 $110,033.70 3.171.00 $110,033.70 2211.501 33 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL $1.70 1,145.00 $1,946.50 2.790.00 $4,743.00 2211.503 34 ADJUST CURB STOP BOX EA. $152.00 94.00 $14,288.00 0.00 $0.00 2301.501 35 ADJUST WATER MAIN VALVE BOX EA $250.00 16.00 $4,000.00 12.00 $3.000.00 2301.511 36 RELOCATE HYDRANT EA $3,000.00 6.00 $18,000.00 1.00 $3,000.00 2301.513 37 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN EA $1.000.00 2.00 $2.000.00 2.00 $2,000.00 2301.529 38 6" PVC WATER MAIN LF $50.00 20.00 $1.000.00 85.00 $4.250.00 2331.604 39 8" PVC WATER MAIN LF $48.00 110.00 $5.280.00 0.00 $0.00 2531.507 40 WATER MAIN FITTINGS LB $3.00 50.00 $150.00 535.00 $1,6OS.00 . 2357.502 41 ADJUST MANHOLE RING AND CASTING EA $400.00 28.00 $11,200.00 27.00 $10,800.00 2350.501 42 3' BITUMINOUS WALK SF $1.60 20,922.00 $33,475.20 21,659.00 $34,654.40 2350.502 43 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN S418 LF $7.50 9,172.00 $68,790.00 9,012.00 $67.590.00 2451.509 44 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LF $7.40 7,025.00 $51.985.00 6,934.00 $51,311.60 ""'."" 45 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $38.00 640.00 $24,320.00 1,892.50 $71,915.00 2521.511 46 6' CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY $38.50 757.00 $29,144.50 556.30 $21,417.55 2531.501 47 REMOVE AND REPLACE B61 8 CURB LF $16.00 2,063.00 $33,008.00 2,066.00 $33,056.00 2531.507 48 CONCRETE PEOESTRIAN RAMP TYPE A EA $340.00 2.00 $680.00 4.00 $1,360.00 2531.602 49 FURNISH AND INSTALL MAILBOX AND SUPPORT EA $150.00 105.00 $15,750.00 2.00 $300.00 2531.60:3 50 6 FT WIRE FENCE DESIGN SPECIAL LF $48.00 110.00 $5,280.00 0.00 $0.00 2563.601 VINYL COATED 51 F & I SIGN PANEL TYPE C SF $20.00 211.30 $4.226.00 211.30 $4,226.00 2540.602 52 INSTALL SIGN TYPE C EA $50.00 2.00 $100.00 3.00 $150.00 2540.602 53 24' STOP LINE WHITE.EPOXY LF $12.00 62.50 $750.00 0.00 $0.00 . 256S_604 Page 4 of 9 , > UnR Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Rem UnR Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 54 BALE CHECK EA $6.00 12.00 $72.00 0.00 $0.00 :2563.601 . ~"'" FLOATING SILT CURTAIN LF $18.00 390.00 $7,020.00 90.00 $1.620.00 56 SILT FENCE, TYPE HEAVY DUTY LF $2.60 5.253.00 $13,657.80 3,899.00 $10,137.40 2564.531 57 ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA $1,200.00 4.00 $4,800.00 4.00 $4,800.00 2573.501 58 SODDING, TYPE LAWN SY $2.80 18,720.86 $52,418.41 22,903.00 $64,128.40 2573.502 Subtotal: $1,376,374.61 $1,411,833.68 Schedule: B - STORM DRAINAGE Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Rem Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LS $76,000.00 0.30 $22,600.00 0.30 $22.800.00 2101.501 2 SALVAGE AND REPLACE WALKING BRIDGE EA $5.000.00 1.00 $5.000.00 1.00 $5,000.00 2101.506 3 COMMON CHANNEL EXCAVATION CY $9.14 3083.00 $28,178.62 3.083.00 $28,178.62 2104.501 4 FERNWOOD CHANNEL GRADING LS $9,420.00 1.00 $9,420.00 1.00 $9,420.00 2104.5Ot 5 HAMLlNE CHANNEL GRADING LS $7.880.00 1.00 $7,880.00 1.00 $7,880.00 2101.509 .6 RAINGARDEN GRAOING EA $2,200.00 5.00 $11,000.00 1.00 $2,200.00 2104.509 7 CONSTRUCT EARTH WEIR LS $4,710.00 1.00 $4,710.00 2.00 $9.420.00 2105.511 8 12' RC PIPE APRON EA $300.00 6.00 $1,800.00 1.00 $300.00 2501.515 9 15' RC PIPE APRON EA $330.00 3.00 $990.00 2.00 $660.00 2501.515 10 18' RC PIPE APRON EA $375.00 3.00 $1,125.00 2.00 $750.00 2501.515 11 24' RC PIPE APRON EA $525.00 1.00 $525.00 2.00 $1,050.00 2501.602 . Page 5 of 9 , UnR Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 12 36' RC PIPE APRON EA $975.00 3.00 $2.925.00 2.00 $1,950.00 2502.541 13 44" RC PIPE APRON EA $1,000.00 4.00 $4.000.00 4.00 $4,000.00 . 25Q3.541 14 IS' TRASH GUARD FOR IS" PIPE APRON EA $280.00 1.00 $280.00 2.00 $560.00 ""'-", 15 18' TRASH GUARD FOR 18' PIPE APRON EA $325.00 1.00 $325.00 2.00 $650.00 2503541 16 36" TRASH GUARD FOR 36" PIPE APRON EA $950.00 1.00 $950.00 2.00 $1,900.00 2503,541 17 44" TRASH GUARD FOR 44' PIPE APRON EA $850.00 4.00 $3,400.00 4.00 $3,400.00 2503.602 18 44' RC ARCH PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL 111 LF $100.00 128.00 $12,800.00 130.00 $13,000.00 2506.501 19 4" PERFORATED PVC PIPE DRAIN LF $10.00 2200.00 $22,000.00 2,000.00 $20,000.00 2506.501 20 8' PERFORATED PVC PIPE DRAIN LF $25.00 25.20 $630.00 0.00 $0.00 2506.501 21 18" PERFORATED PVC PIPE DRAIN LF $40.00 252.70 $10,108.00 259.60 $10,384.00 2506.501 22 12" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V LF $25.00 440.40 $11,010.00 443.00 $11,075.00 2506.516 23 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL III LF $27.00 84.00 $2,268.00 83.90 $2,265.30 2500.522 24 18' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL III LF $30.00 903.60 $27.108.00 911.00 $27.330.00 2511.501 25 24" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL 111 LF $37.00 433.20 $16,028.40 365.00 $13,505.00 2571.502 26 27" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL III LF $46.50 65.30 $3,036.45 63.20 $2,938.80 . 2571502 27 33" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL III LF $72.00 396.70 $28.562.40 392.30 $28.245.60 2571..503 28 36" RC PIPE SEW ER DESIGN 3006 CL III LF $87.00 276.20 $24,029.40 276.90 $24,090.30 2571.505 29 8" HOPE PIPE LF $20.00 60.00 $1.200.00 43.00 $860.00 2$71.505 30 12" HOPE PIPE LF $25.00 60.00 $1.500.00 0.00 $0.00 2571.505 31 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN LF $295.00 59.31 $17,496.45 61.61 $18,174.95 2571.507 48.4020 32 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN LF $318.20 5.50 $1,750.10 5.46 $1,737.37 2571.507 54.4020 33 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN LF $340.00 17.30 $5,882.00 17.51 $5,953.40 2571.507 60-4020 34 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN LF $497.00 13.70 $6,808.90 10.33 $5,134.01 2571.507 66-4020 35 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN LF $497.00 22.00 $10.934.00 14.21 $7.062.37 2571.507 72-4020 36 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN LF $156.00 53.18 $8.296.08 60.41 $9,423.96 2573.502 2x3 37 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE 4006 H EA $900.00 1.00 $900.00 1.00 $900.00 2575_523 38 CASTING ASSEMBLY EA $400.00 33.00 $13.200.00 36.00 $14,400.00 2575.606 39 FURNISH AND INSTALL V2Bl (STS-2) EA $36.000.00 1.00 $36,000.00 1.00 $36.000.00 . 2575.502 Page 6 of 9 " Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No, hem Unn Price Quantity Amount Quanthy Amount 40 FURNISH AND INSTALL V2Bl (STS-3) EA $48,000.00 1.00 $48,000.00 1.00 $48,000.00 2506.502 .41 FURNISH AND INSTALL UNISTORM (ST5-1) EA $24,000.00 1.00 $24,000,00 1.00 $24,000.00 2104.501 42 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EA $750.00 2.00 $1,500.00 3.00 $2,250.00 2104.509 43 INSTALL INFILTRATION SHIELD (CATCH EA $350.00 36.00 $12,600.00 0.00 $0.00 21D4-.509 BASIN/MANHOLE) 44 RANDOM RIP RAP CLASS III CY $100.00 60.00 $6.000.00 30.00 $3,000.00 2504."" 45 RANDOM RIP RAP CLASS III (RIVER RUN CY $140.00 200.00 $28,000.00 200.00 $28,000.00 2504"" BOULDERS) 46 GEOTEXIILE FABRIC. SY $6.00 600.00 $3,600.00 205.00 $1,230.00 2504.602 Subtotal: $490,556.80 $459,078.68 Schedule: C" LANDSCAPING Unn Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount 1 CONIFEROUS TREE 6 FT HT B&B TREE $250.00 28.00 $6,500.00 26.00 $6,500.00 2104.501 (BLACK HILLS SPRUCE) 2 CONIFEROUS TREE 6 FT HT B&B TREE $250.00 32.00 $8.000.00 32.00 $8,000.00 2.503.603 (EASTERN RED CEDAR) 3 DECIDUOUS TREE 2.5 CAL B&B TREE $440.00 12.00 $5,280.00 12.00 $5,280.00 2503.600 (CELEBRATION MAPLE) .4 DECIDUOUS TREE 2.5 CAL B&B TREE $430.00 11.00 $4,730.00 11.00 $4.730.00 2504."" (NORTHWOODS MAPLE) 5 DECIDUOUS TREE 2.5 CAL B&B TREE $420.00 20.00 $8,400.00 20.00 $8,400.00 2506.506 (HERITAGE RIVER BIRCH) 6 ORNAMENTAL TREE 6 FT HT B&B (AUTUMN TREE $286.00 25.00 $7,150.00 25.00 $7,150.00 2503.603- BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY) 7 DECIDUOUS SHRUB #5 CONT SHR $48.00 88.00 $4,224.00 88.00 $4,224.00 2506.506 (WHITE SNOW BERRY) 8 DECIDUOUS SHRUB #5 CONT SHR $48.00 51.00 $2,448.00 51.00 $2,448.00 . Page 7 of 9 . . Unit Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Rem Un" Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount '''''''''' (GLOSSY BLACK CHOKEBERRY) 9 DECIDUOUS SHRUB ~5 CONT SHR $48.00 8.00 $384.00 8.00 $384.00 . 2506506 (WITCHHAZEL) 10 DECIDUOUS SHRUB ~5 CONT SHR $48.00 8.00 $384.00 8.00 $384.00 2506.508 (NANNYBERRY VIBURUM) 11 DECIDUOUS SHRUB ~5 CONT SHR $48.00 22.00 $1,056.00 22.00 $1.056.00 (CARDINAL DOGWOOD) 12 PERENNIAL (BIG BLUESTEM) PLANT $4.50 120.00 $540.00 120.00 $540.00 ""'.603 13 PERENNIAL (LmLE BLUESTEM) PLANT $4.50 310.00 $1,395.00 310.00 $1,395.00 2504_602 14 PERENNIAL 1 GAL CONT (JOE PYE WEED) PLANT $14.00 195.00 $2,730.00 195.00 $2,730.00 2504-.602 15 PERENNIAL (BLUE FLAG IRIS) PLANT $11.00 690.00 $7,590.00 690.00 $7,590.00 2104.501 16 PERENNIAL 1 GAL CONT (BLACK EYEO SUSANS) PLANT $14.00 100.00 $1,400.00 100.00 $1,400.00 17 PERENNIAL (BEAKED SEDGE) PLANT $4.00 425.00 $1,700.00 425.00 $1,700.00 18 PERENNIAL (BEBB'S SEDGE) PLANT $4.00 575.00 $2.300.00 575.00 $2,300.00 19 PERENNIAL (VENUS ASTILBE) PLANT $7.00 170.00 $1.190.00 170.00 $1,190.00 20 PERENNIAL (TURTLEHEAD) PLANT $7.00 375.00 $2.625.00 375.00 $2.625.00 21 CONSTRUCTION FENCE LF $3.00 1000.00 $3,000.00 0.00 $0.00 22 MULCH MATERIAL SY $40.00 250.00 $10,000.00 250.00 $10.000.00 23 GEOJUTE SY $3.00 650.00 $1.950.00 0.00 $0.00 . 24 SEED MIXTURE #30B LB $8.20 650.00 $5.330.00 650.00 $5,330.00 Subtotal: $90.306.00 $85,356.00 Schedule: D - CHANGE ORDER #1 (ADDITIONAL ITEMS) UnR Contract Contract To Date To Date No. Rem Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND UTILITY WORK LS $70.624.63 1.00 $70,624.63 1.00 $70.624.63 2 ADDITIONAL FERNWOOD CHANNEL GRADING LS $2,152.00 1.00 $2.152.00 1.00 $2,152.00 Subtotal: $72,776.63 $72.776.63 Grand Total: $2,030,014.04 $2.029.044.99 Page 8 of 9 . . . . . . . . Application for Payment: Itemization Summary Schedule Contract Amount To Date Amount of Work Completed A-ROADWAY B - STORM DRAINAGE C - LANDSCAPING D - CHANGE ORDER #1 $1,376,374.61 $490,556.80 $90,306.00 $72,776.63 $1,411,833.68 $459,078.68 $85,356.00 $72,776.63 Grand Total: $2,030,014.04 $2,029,044.99 Page 9 of 9 . . . ~ ~HILLS City of Arden HIlls Request for Council Action Prepared by: Greg Brown Dept.: Engineering Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/05 Final Action Needed By: N1A Agenda Item.--a..~1.I,! ;~~ 2006 PMP Budgeted Amount:$1,670,000 Actual Amount:$TBD Funding Source: Multiple Council Action Request: Receive Feasibility Report for the 2006 PMP Ridgewood Neighborhood and authorize staff to schedule a public hearing on the project for August 29, 2005. Staff Recommendation: Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action , , . ----.---.------.-...---------.-----.---..--------.- . Planning PTRC .... ..u~==~~ ~..l~~~~~:~~~:l~:g::____ . .____. Not applicable Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): o Memo/Letter' o Resolution (No.) o Ordinance (No.) ~ Engineering Recommendation: See attached feasibility report o Attorney Recommendation: o Other: Financial Implications: See attached feasibility report Administrator/Staff Comments: The proposed scope of improvements are outlined in the attached report including a number of options for council consideration. The Engineer will prepare a presentation for the August 29t" Public Hearing. Council will be able to discuss comments regarding the project at the August worksession. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REPORT FOR i 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM RIDGEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD - RIDGEWOOD ROAD - SIEMS COURT - ARDEN PLACE - SKILES LANE - RIDGEWOOD COURT AUGUST 2005 Thresher Square 700 Third 51'eet South Minl1eapoi:s, MN 55415 612.370,0700 Til 612.370.1378 =ax 31809837 i\ '(. '.\ . ,--=.(Y/ .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT FOR 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM RIDGEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD CITY OF ARDEN HILLS RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA AUGUST 2005 URS Corporation 700 Third St. South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of Minnesota Sechon 326.0210 325.t5 File: 31809837 ;I /, t ~//J ,-' ... ./ //) f /;~"- .'0; /'. ::f:;tr.~- Gregor '.Sr l3'ro\yn, PE Date:,' ii-S'C.';, MNLic. No. 22814 t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . URS August 4, 2005 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 ATTN: Michelle Wolfe City Administrator RE: Feasibility Study and Report 2006 Pavement Management Program Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: The enclosed feasibility report has been prepared examining the proposed rehabilitation of Siems Court, Ridgewood Road, Arden Place, Skiles Lane and Ridgewood Court as authorized at the April 25,2005 Council Meeting. This report evaluates the feasibility of the proposed improvements and explores potential optional improvements as directed by the City Council. Information utilized in the preparation of this report includes the 1999 and 2002 Pavement Condition Index field surveys, aerial mapping, as-built plans, GIS property information, plat information, and input from City staff, neighborhood residents and the Rice Creek Watershed. We are of the opinion that the improvements outlined in this report are feasible and would address an area that is high on the list for utility and pavement and utility rehabilitation and reconstruction. The proposed improvements would bring the neighborhood streets up to City standards while improving the drainage system and water quality for Lake Johanna. Underground utilities that may be near the end of their useful life could also be replaced or repaired as a part of the project thus significantly extending the life of those systems and reducing annual maintenance costs. A number of improvement options are presented in the report for Council and resident consideration that could be incorporated into the project if desired. Sincerely, URS Co~poration //., / f / ,i i/' ! /i ,)~--:, / /// " /, / )/.,,, " -,- /.' " .-y/.<.----<....---' "---:::/t t 1 ~.?j /,'.) / d ! Gregory!lffr~wn, PE Arden Hi)f~ City Engineer 1hreshcr Sq!l(/((!. 700 Thiill SrU!i!i 5'tiil!h . Sf/ire N)() 0 :\!uuieUj;'.l/is. JrV 55-J/5 ~ rho!ic: (6/2,1 .17()-()700 ~ Fill. l(jill 370-/378 . :i , . . . . PROJECT LOCATION Q ~ . I . (-:0 "'-'~.""",- ~ i ~ ., . I . ~ [\, ,'" "" "" I~\\ "" I" '.tA-KE /1"'; '0 v~~:'.'^ n ,~ " '" )\ I_oke uohonno I . I : . . I , : ;URS . ~~ ~ ~ EN HILLS 2006 PMP RIDGEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD Tl1ruhorSqu.ro 700 Third Stroo: Suuth Mlono4poliu,MN5S415 512.370.07QO-:-ol 512,370,IJ7BFox PROJECT LOCATION MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I' t TABLE OF CONTENTS LOCA nON MAP A. Introduction............................................................................. I B. Background............................................................................. 3 C. Proposed Roadway Improvements................................................... 6 D. Proposed Drainage/Water Quality Improvements................................. 11 E. Proposed Utility Improvements...................................................... 14 F. Project Costs........................................................................... 15 G. Project Funding.......................................................................... 16 H. Project Schedule... ......... ........................... .. .. .............. ................ 18 L Summary................................................................................. 19 APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: Exhibits <c Preliminary Project Cost Estimates Preliminary Assessment Rolls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM A. INTRODUCTION On April 25, 2005, the Arden Hills City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility study for the 2006 Pavement Management Program. The 2006 Pavement Management Program project area is located immediately south of Johanna Boulevard and west of Old Snelling Avenue. The project area is a residential neighborhood near Lake Johanna and will be referred to as Ridgewood Neighborhood in this report. The project area includes Siems Court, Ridgewood Road, Arden Place, Skiles Lane and Ridgewood COlllt. See Exhibit Ai for an overview of the project area. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PHILOSOPHY The current Pavement Management Program policy was adopted by the Council during the Fall of 2001. The adopted City approach to pavement management is based npon considering neighborhoods as a whole. The City has implemented a pavement management program, which includes field surveying each roadway every three years to monitor its condition, identify trends and extrapolate pavement life expectancies. This survey measures all of the pavement distresses within a road segment and results in a numerical Pavement Condition Index (PCI) unique to each particular road segment. To implement a maintenance program, specific rehabilitation / reconstruction trcatments are recommended based on the PCI values of the street. A specific PCI value is assigned to streets and used to rank all the City Streets in order from highest to lowest PCI (or best to worst). The PCI ranking can then be used to determine which streets and neighborhoods that available funding should bc dirccted to for overlay or reconstruction improvements. The PCI value doesn't determine the rehabilitation or reconstruction cost of a project, but provides a tool to compare relati ve condition of the city streets and allows engineers to forecast the rate of pavcmcnt deterioration and therefore the life expectancies of pavements. The current policy intent is to accomplish the relatively low cost overlay rehabilitation work on existing streets which otherwise meet City standards prior to those strcets becoming unserviceable and requiring more costly reconstruction Cun'cnt policy intcnt regarding existing streets that do not meet standards for width, curbs and/or drainage etc. is to prioritize them by their relative condition and program reconstruction work as funds permit. Although annual maintenance timc and effort are expended on these streets, the policy does not recommend that overlay work be funded on streets not meeting standards. The following table illustrates the generally recommended pavement treatment for a given PCI. PCI 100-81 80-61 60-0 TREATMENT Spot Repair, Crack Seal and Seal Coat Mill and Overlay Complete Reconstruct In addition to surface PCI ratings, issues such as drainage/flooding, water quality improvements, conformance with City design standards and utility condition are considered when developing URS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM the recommended priority for reconstruction and rehabilitation of City pavements. This approach allows for the City to address storm drainage and water quality issues, which typically cannot be effectively solved on a street by street basis. Additionally, the neighborhood approach provides some economy of constrnction costs and limits impacts to neighborhoods for one season of construction instead of multiple seasons over a period of several years. This feasibility report is organized into 10 sections which begin with an outline of the existing conditions and deficiencies of the project area followed by descriptions of the proposed improvements, additional options where appropriate and concludes with a summary of the project costs, funding and proposed schedule. The report includes three appendices providing additional detail and clarification with graphic exhibits, detailed constmction cost estimates and preliminary assessment roles. URS 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM I B. BACKGROUND II The project area is a residential neighborhood with roadway that was constructed in the early 1960s. The current roadway condition is generally poor with areas of broken pavement, potholes and standing water at times. The following table provides information on the street pavements, which are included as a part of this feasibility report: Exist PCI PCI Original Most Recent Street Name Width 2000 2002 Const. Pavement Work Siems COUlt 25 52 34 1961 1995 Seal Coat Ridgewood Road 24 66 43 1961 1995 Seal Coat Arden Place 24 5 2 1961 1995 Seal Coat Skiles Lane 24 78 62 1961 1995 Seal Coat Ridgewood Court 12 94 91 1961 1996 Overlay ROADWA Y The pavement conditions on Siems Court, Ridgewood Road, Arden Place and Skiles Lane are fair to very poor, generally within the typical PCl range for reconstruction. City crews spend time each year on pavement patching and pothole repair on these streets. None of these streets currently have concrete curb and gutter. The existing street widths are consistent with the City functional classification for Special case streets that recommends a 24- foot minimum width. The pavement condition of Ridgewood Court is good and has a PCI of 91 that reflects the relatively recent bituminous overly Ardell Place constructed in 1996. Bituminous curb was constructed along Ridgewood COlJrt at the time of the overlay. The existing width of Ridgewood Court is consistent with the functional classification of 12 feet for alleys. We have surveyed the entire neighborhood and reviewed existing plat maps to verify property ownership. As a part of our property review wc have discovercd that a portion of Ridgewood Road is partially located outside thc City ROWand on private property. This condition could be corrected by the dcdication of an easement or by the relocation of thc street however the street relocation would require removal of some mature trees. STORM DRAl~AGE Siems Court, Ridgewood Road, Ardcn Place and Skiles Lane do not include concretc curb and gutter and lack sufficient storm sewer which creates drainage and ponding issues on some pri vate URS 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM properties throughout the neighborhood. Bituminous curb along both sides of Ridgewood Court generally directs water along this street however some residents have indicated that runoff enters their property at driveway openings. The south end of Ridgewood Court is a cul-de-sac, which drains overland onto private property. This overland drainage has created erosion problems over the years and complaints from residents. There is no storm sewer on Ridgewood Court. A few catch basins exist within the neighborhood that collect storm sewer at low points along the roadway. The catch basins off of Siems Court discharge directly into Lake Johanna without water quality treatment and catch basins along Ridgewood Road and Arden Place discharge directly into the wetland. Along other sections of roadway, runoff tlows directly onto private property and to Lake Johanna. A privately constructed area drain exists nOlih of Arden Place that collects backyard IUnoff and recei vcs the runoff from the south end of Ridgewood Comi as mentioned above. This area drain runs under Arden Place and discharges directly into Lake Johanna. A private area drain has also been constructed in the backyard of3581 Ridgewood Road and discharges onto Ridgewood Road. From the public meetings held to date, some residents have voiced concern over street rnnoff flowing onto their property in various locations throughout the neighborhood. Presumably, runoff from small rainfall events naturally infiltratcs into the yards. However, larger events cxceed the ability of area soils to infiltratc may cause undesirable water ponding in yards. SANtTARY SEWER The sanitary sewer system is vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and was constructed in 1960. In the spring of 2005, the Operation and Maintenance crew televised the sanitary sewer system in the neighborhood. The televised sewer indicated no major damage to the sanitary sewer system but did reveal some cracked pipe, minor offset joints and root intrusion. These are relatively minor issues that can be addressed with regular pipe cleaning and ultimately pipe lining The pipe lining can be accomplished without disruption to the ground surface and therefore does not need to occur in conjunction with the project. The pipe relining will be considered with other pending sanitary sewer work in the City's Capital Improvements Plan and accomplished when funds are available. Minimal groundwater infiltration was observed into the sewer system at the time of televising. There are two sanitary pressure forcemains within the Ridgewood Neighborhood that consist of 6" cast iron pipe. One forcemain discharges from Lift Station #3 to gravity sewer along Ridgewood Road. The other forcemain discharges from Lift Station #4 to gravity sewer at the top of the hill on Arden Place. Lift Station #3 was reconstructed in 1999 and Lift Station #4 is in the process of being reconstructed in 2005. Due to the soils in this neighborhood and the age and material of the sanitary forcemain, there is concern that the forcemain may be near the useful end of their Ii fe and in need of replacement. WATERMAI'i The watermain along the north segment of Siems Court, Arden Place and Skiles Lane is 8" cast iron pipe (CIP). The south segment of Siems Court and Ridgewood Road watermain is 6" CIP. CRS 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM No watermain exists under Ridgewood Court. Homes on Ridgewood Court are served by watermain on Siems Court and Ridgewood Road. The watermain was constructed in 1968 and 1970. There have been a series of watermain breaks in the neighborhood over the past few years predominantly located along Arden Place. As has been the case in other Neighborhoods with similar aged watermain systems, the valves and hydrants become more difficult to operate and pose potential problems with the City's ability to isolate the system for repair and fight fires. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PROJECT COORDINATION We have conducted the following meetings for the project: . January 26, 2005 (Informatioual meeting concerning PMP philosophy and issues with Ridgewood Neighborhood) . March 23, 2005 (Follow up to January 26th meeting) . Lake Johanna Island Beach Club - April2Slh (General annual meeting, included Ridgewood Improvement Project and issues conceming it) . Rice Creek Watershed - May 91h (Met with Rice Creek Watershed District on sight to discus wetland use) . Lake Johanna Island Beach Club - July 14'h (Leadership of Beach Club met to discuss use of wetland and storm treatment alternatives such as infiltration techniques) The outcome of the meetings has been very positi ve and residents seem to be receptive to the overall project need and goals expressed by City staff and URS. Several residents have voiced issues that they want to be included in the design, which include maintaining a rustic appeal to the neighborhood, improving water quality prior to discharge to Lake Johanna, drainage issues on private propelty, desire to maintain street widths(no widening), save trees, to include infiltration techniqlles for storm water management, and general acceptance for the utilization of the wetland to improve water quality for Lake Johanna. PROJECT COORDINATION We have sent out letters notifying private utility companies (Qwest, Xcel Gas, Xcel Electric, and Comcast) of the project and to collect information on their utilities within the neighborhood. We met with Operation & Maintenance Staff to discuss the existing issues and problems with the streets and drainage, sanitary sewer system and watermain that they have. EristiHg R{)od'vva:r Con.dirimv; URS 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM II C, PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS I' OVERVIEW The following is a summary of the proposed scope of improvements for the Ridgewood Neighborhood. We have also identified a number of options for Council to consider and provide further direction to staff. Based upon the existing roadway pavement conditions and lack of curb and gutter and drainage the proposed improvements include reconstruction of Siems Court, Ridgewood Road, Arden Place and Skiles Lane. Ridgewood Court could be reconstructed with the remainder of the neighborhood, however the condition and characteristics of this street arc significantly different from the other neighborhood streets and should be cousidered separately for inclusion or exclusion from the project. RIDGE WOOD COURT DISCI!SSIOI'i Ridgewood Court is approximately 700 feet long and 12 feet wide. The existing ROW is approximately 20 feet. It was overlayed in 1996 and has a PCI rating of 91 (2002) and appears to be in good condition. There is bituminous curb along both sides of the road to limit runoff from flowing into private propeliy. The majority of runoff flows along the bituminous curb to Ridgewood Road, although dUling large storm events, mnoff enters several pri vate properties via driveways. At the southem end of the road, the runoff flows over the edge of the cul-de-sac, down a riprap swale and through pri vate property to an area drain. The area drain is connected to a PVC pipe that runs under Arden Place and outlets directly into Lake Johanna. The existing runoff from the cul-de-sac flows overland down a steep slope and into private propeliy. Residents have expressed concern over this and the City is required to maintain the slope from erosion problems. If Ridgewood Court is not reconstructed at this time and requires reconstruction prior to the remainder of the neighborhood (within the next 20 years), the work could be accomplished with minimal disturbance to neighborhood streets. Ridgewood Court Option 1: Leave Ridgewood Court As Is. The roadway section doesn't meet City standard, however it has a high PCI ranking and the existing bituminous curb appears to be functioning reasonable well. This option is the recommendation of staff. Ridgewood Court Option 2: Reconstruct Ridgewood Court, The full removal and reconstruction of Ridgewood COUli would cost approximately $120,000. This includes the construction of concrete curb and gutter with driveway aprons to keep runoff in roadway and all flow would be collected in the storm sewer system along Ridgewood Road. Storm sewer would be constructed at the southem end of the cul-de-sac and constructed through backyards to Arden Place, as exists today. The drainage work could be completed without the reconstruction of the roadway. Refer to Ridgewood Couli drainage improvement options later on in report. I!RS 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PAVEMENT SECTION DISCUSSI01>i The proposed roadway improvements for Siems Court, Ridgewood Road, Arden Place and Skiles Lane will include full reconstruction due to their deteriorated conditions, lack of curb and gutter and lack of drainage infrastructure. The proposed bituminous street pavement sections will be designed in accordance with flexible pavement design utilizing the soil R-values measured from the geotechnical analysis accomplished as a part of the soil borings. City standards also include a 12-inch sand subbase below the aggregate base. The sand subbase will provide enhanced pavement suppOli, pavement subdrainage and frost protection. Additional excavation, or subgradc excavation, may be required to conect poor soils in isolated locations as field conditions dictate. Compaction inspection of select granular subbase and aggregate base will include Penetration Index Method (PI Method), which will ensure proper compaction of roadway materials. The anticipated pavement cross section includes 4 inches of bituminous surfacing, 8 inches of Class 5 aggregate base and 12 inches of sand subbase. The sand subbase will be drained with perforated pipes connected to catchbasins. final pavement sections will be determined as a pati of the final design process based upon the soil borings and analysis of in place soils and traffic loads. See Exhibit A2 Typical Section. STREET WIDTH DISCUSSION All streets within the neighborhood, except Ridgewood Court, have been classified as "Special Case" in the Functional Street Classifications Map. Ridgewood Court is classified as an "Alley", which means its functional width is 12 feet. The functional classification recommends a 24-foot street width for "Special Case" streets; however the policy allows that streets may be narrower than 24 feet, depending on the sUlTounding neighborhood and topographical constraints. Below is a chart of street widths as measured, as recommended by functional classification and as proposed for the 2006 PMP project: Street Name Siems Court Ridgewood Road Arden Place Skiles Lane Ridgewood Court (Option) Ex. Width 25 24 24 24 12 Function 24 24 24 24 12 2006 PMP Recommend 22 22 22 22 12 The existing roadway widths measured from edge of bituminous range from 24 feet to 25 feet. The proposed roadway cross section will be 22 feet wide, measured face to face, for all streets. This equates to 23 feet 4 inches back of curb to back of curb and will allow the proposed to fit within the tight topographical constraints of the existing roadway. Throughout the neighborhood, trees and steep slopes close to the roadway force the proposed to match the existing alignment closely. The nanowest existing condition is near Arden Place and Skiles Lane where a large oak tree is located on the south edge of the road and a "bridge" driveway to the north. The distance between the two is approximately 25 feet. Although the proposed 22-foot width is slightly less than the recommended 24-foot width, the streets should function adequately for the low amount of traffic and parking pressure that they recei ve. Operations and Maintenance staff have been ORS 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM consulted on the street width and are also of the opinion that 22 feet will be adequate for their purposes. The Council may consider declaring "no parking" for one side of the neighborhood streets to ensure that emergency access and overall vehicular movement are not impaired when cars are parked directly opposite of each other. CURB AND GUTTER DISCCSSION The proposed improvements include concrete curb and gutter on Siems COUlt, Ridgewood Road, Arden Place and Skiles Lane per City standards for reconstruction. The City guidelines allow for the use of three types of curb: 4 inch batTier, 6 inch barrier or 4 inch surmountable. City staff generally prefers 6 inch barrier curb for maintenance purposes. Most of the neighborhood C1ltTently has no curb with the exception of broken bituminous curb in various locations. All roadway will have a crowned cross section with 2% slope on either side with the exception of the follow roadway segments: (1) Siems Court, from Lake Johanna Blvd to Arden Place; (2) Arden Place, from Siems Court to Ridgewood Road; and (3) Ridgewood Road, from 400 feet south of Lake Johanna Blvd to Arden Place. On these segments, the road will have a 2% grade straight across the road making one side of the street approximately 6" higher than the other. The straight cross slope will help "fit" into the existing topography of the neighborhood along these roadway sections and minimize changes to existing driveway grades. The upslope side of the road is intended to keep minor boulevard and yard runoff in the gutter from trickling across the roadway, especially during winter months. Construction of valley gutters and driveway aprons will improve runoff along street edges and prevent flow into private driveways and yards. Residents have expressed an interest to retain the neighborhood's natural appearance and have expressed concern over white curb. We have identified two options for Council consideration that would help address the concern expressed by some residents regarding the curb appearance. Curb Option 1 . Exposed Aggregate - Council could consider this altemati ve to standard curb which will soften the overall curb appearance in the neighborhood. Exposed aggregate would add approximately $65,000 to the overall project cost. The additional cost would be 100% assessed. Curb Option 2 . Colored Curb - Council could consider this alternati ve to standard curb which will soften the overall curb appearance in the neighborhood. Colored curb would add approximately $130,000 to the overall project cost. The additional cost would be 100% assessed. SIEMS COURT RETAINI1>iG WALL DISCUSSIOi\ Wall Option 1: Leave retaining wall as is. As a patt of this option the wooden retaining wall along Siems COUlt will remain as is but the bituminous road that connects the two driveways on the west side of the wall would be removed. This segment of roadway is partly within City ROWand removing it will free the City from any maintenance and operations responsibility for it. The two driveways to the south of the retaining wall and the one driveway to the north will be reconstructed to match the proposed Siems Court that will follow the existing road east of the retaining wall. Leaving the wall will reduce the overall construction cost and wouldn't jeopardize the existing trees within the wall perimeter. Option 1 would be less disruptive to the URS 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM neighborhood, including fewer tree impacts, than Option 2 but would likely require future repair and/or replacement of the wall. Wall Option 2: Remove retaining wall. As part of this option, the retaining wall along Siems COUlt would be removed as would the bituminous roadway to the west of the retaining wall. The area where the retaining wall is removed would be filled and graded at approximately a 3:1 slope from the edge of the proposed Siems Court to the western edge of the removed lower roadway section. Sod and seed would be planted on the slope. Two shorter retaining walls of approximately 75 feet in length and 3 to 10 feet high would be constructed along the north and south driveways. The City Siems COllrt at Retain WaU (Facing South) may desire the removal of all trees within the retaining wall due to damage that may occur during retaining wall removal. Removing the wall and grading the western slope will allow the proposed Siems COUlt to be 1 to 2 feet lower in this area, improving the driveway slopes in this section. This would add approximately $45,000 to the overall project cost. This option would minimize future maintenance costs and improve the slopes on either side of Siems C01ut. This option would require tree removal and could damage root systems on trees that remain. Exhibit A3 illustrates the proposed options for the Siems Court retaining wall. RIGHT-OF-WAY DISCUSSI01>i Based on our review of GIS information and survey of existing propelty corner monuments, there is one area where the existing roadway is outside of the City Right of Way and on private property. This case is along Ridgewood Road approximately 300 feet south of Lake Johanna Boulevard, where it curves and runs north and south. The western edge of the road traverses pri vate property and the eastern edge is adjacent to mature trees and steep boulevard slopes. ROW Option 1: Shift roadway centerline to the northeast. This would require the removal of one mature tree (18" caliper), several smaller trees (2"S' caliper) and require the constlUction of approximately 150 linear feet of 3' -5' high of retaining wall along the boulevard. This would add approximately $15,000 to the project cost. ROW Option 2: Acquire roadway easement from property owner on which the existing Ridgewood Road is located The City would need to acquire approximately 2,030 SF of property for permanent roadway easement purposes. The cost of the property acquisition may be nominal as the roadway has existed in its cunent location for over forty years. The City Attorney will need to review the situation prior to approaching the property owner. TEMPORARY ROW I:VIPACTS DURI!\G CO:\STRUCTI01>i We anticipate minor grading and sod placement in yards as well as driveway restoration beyond the City's Right of Way limits throughout the project area. Based on successful past experience, URS 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM we anticipate that this work will be accomplished with informal right of entry consent from propelty owners during construction. URS staff will contact homeowners prior to constmction, explain the anticipated grading and dri veway reconstruction limits and obtain a temporary right of entry from them at that time. Limits of construction will be determined during final design. ROUNDABOUT DISCUSSI01>i Roundabout Option: Roundabout at Ridgewood Road & Arden Place and Siems Court & Arden Place. After a public meeting there was expressed interest for an island in the Siems Court cul-de-sac for aesthetics. Upon review, the small size of the cul-de-sac makes this option too restrictive to traffic movements. There are two intersections in the project area that could be aesthetically enhanced without disruption to vehicle traffic. Small roundabouts could be constructed at the intersections of Ridgewood Road and Arden Place and at the intersection of Siems Court and Arden Place. The resulting islands could be aesthetically landscaped and/or used for runoff infiltration. Depending on the diameter selected for the roundabout, some removal of existing landscaping, rock retaining walls and trees may be required. The roundabouts would add approximately $32,000 to the project. Exhibit A4 illustrates the potential Roundabout concept. SIDEW ALK DISCUSSION As part of the overall neighborhood improvement philosophy, we have considered including sidewalk along the streets. There have been no residents requesting sidewalk to date. The most viable location for a sidewalk is along the eastern side of Ridgewood Road from Lake Johanna BI vd to the Island Beach Club access dri ve. Impacts resulting from constructing the sidewalk along the eastern edge of Ridgewood Road include retaining wall constmction along Ridgewood Road and the loss of at least 5 trees. The Ridgewood Road sidewalk would add approximately $65,000 to the project cost which would be 50% assessed. Constructing a sidewalk in this location will have an impact on the infiltration basin that are proposed along Ridgewood Road as part of the drainage plan. Due to the narrow confines of the neighborhood and existing landscaping and trees near the roadway, a sidewalk would incur significant cost as well as disruption to the neighborhood. Constructing a sidewalk anywhere within the neighborhood is therefore not recommended. URS to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM D. PROPOSED DRAINAGE/WAIER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS DRAINAGE OVERVIEW The proposed improvements include a storm sewer system that will collect runoff from the southern portion of Siems COUlt, Arden Place, Ridgewood Road and the northern part of Skiles Lane. The storm system will consist of a combination of infiltration basins, storm sewer pipes and small treatment ponds. The proposed neighborhood drainage system is organized in the following manner: · Northem Ridgewood Road area and majority of Ridgewood Court runoff will enter storm sewer along Ridgewood Road and discharge into a 0.25-acre pond (N-Cell). The proposed system would also collect a portion of the flow along Lake Johanna Boulevard between Old Snelling Avenue and Ridgewood Road. · Ridgewood Road area adjacent to the wetland will flow into infiltration basins constlUcted along the existing wetland. . N orthem portion of Siems Court will enter storm sewer along Siems Court and flow into the ditch along Lake Johanna Boulevard. · Southern portion of Siems Court area, Arden Place (from Siems to Ridgewood Rd), the backyards adjacent to Arden Place will flow into a 0.15-acre pond (S I-Cell) constructed in the wetland near existing Lift Station 4. . Arden Place runoff and the northern portion of Skiles Lane will flow down Arden Place in storm sewer pipe and discharge into a 0.1 O-acre pond (52-Cell) constructed in the wetland. · The southern portion of Skiles Lane will flow into an infiltration basin at Skiles Lane and Old Snelling. Infiltration basins are included in a few select areas throughout the neighborhood for water quality purposes. The basins will facilitate infiltration and nutrient removal throughOllt the neighborhood. In addition they will decrease the peak flows in down stream water bodies and will facilitate groundwater recharge and overall water quality within the neighborhood. Infiltration basins are proposed in strategic areas that have a relatively flat topography and within efficient distance along the drainage route towards the wetland. The infiltration basins proposed along Old Snelling are included in this report to describe the overall drainage plan but will be constructed as part of the proposed reconstlUction of Snelling Avenue (planned for 2008 in CIP). The estimated construction costs include landscape plantings for these areas and ponding areas. City staff, the Beach Club Association, or resident gardening clubs may accomplish maintenance of plantings within the pond areas and infiltration basins. The existing runoff area to the wetland is approximately 23 acres. The proposed runoff area to the wetland will increase by 3 acres to 26 acres due to the storm sewer system that will be collecting additional runoff. The additional runoff will include ditch flow along Lake Johanna Boulevard and the southem portion of Siems COUlt. l'RS 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The overall drainage area and flow pattems for the Neighborhood are illustrated in Exhibit AS. Exhibit A6 illustrates the proposed Storm Sewer Improvements. The Ridgewood Road storm sewer system will include a flared end section constlUcted at Ridgewood Road and Lake Johanna Boulevard to collect approximately 0.8 acres of runoff that is flowing in the ditch from the north. This runoff will be included in the overall neighborhood water quality treatment in the proposed wetland pond. The proposed improvements include collection and treatment of the roadway and adjacent propelty runoff in the neighborhood with the exception of the southern pOltion of Skiles Lane and the nOlthern pOltion of Siems Court that will be treated through future projects. The pOltion of Ridgewood Road that is adjacent to the wetland will collect runoff from the neighborhood to the west and discharge into an infiltration basin along the wetland. The infiltration basin will overflow into the wetland. The nOlth end of Siems COUlt will have a storm sewer constructed that will discharge into the existing ditch and low at'ea along the south side of Lake Johanna Blvd. Directing storm sewer from the nOlthern pOltion of Siems Court to Arden Place would require excavation depth of over 20 feet that is not possible gi ven the confines of this palt of the neighborhood. The low area at Johanna Boulevard and Siems COUlt and has been identified as a potential future ponding area. Based upon a meeting with a representative of the property owner and Rice Creek Watershed officials as well as previous conversations with the property owner (1600 Lake Johanna Boulevard), there is a strong interest in developing the site to include regional storm water treatment facility along with one or two housing units. Storm sewer will be constructed along the southem pOltion of Siems COUlt and connect with the proposed Arden Place storIll sewer system. Additionally, a catch basin at the southern end of the cul-de-sac will be connected to the existing private area drain in the backyard of 1553 Arden Place. The existing PVC storm pipe to Lake Johanna will be abandoned south of Arden Place. The City is inquiring into the existcnce of a drainage easement for this segment of storm sewer. [I' one doesn't exist, a drainage easement should be obtained as a part of this project. This option will improve water quality and significantly reduce ongoing maintenance costs due to erosion along the slope south of Ridgewood Court cul-de-sac. Residents on adjacent property have expressed interest in eliminating the overland flow and constructing a catch basin and pipe instead. 'I l Poor drainage along roadway (Siems Court) The drainage area along the northern portion of Skiles Lane will flow nOlth towards Arden Place where it will enter the storm sewer along Arden Place. During smaller storm events, the runoff will enter a curb cut prior to the catchbasin at Skiles Lane and Arden Place and flow into an infiltration basin. URS 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The infiltration basin will overflow into the Old Snelling ditch and flow south as it does today. An additional infiltration basin will be constructed north of the Arden Place and Old Snelling intersection. The drainage area along the southern portion of Skiles Lane will remain the same as it does today and flow towards Old Snelling Avenue. An infiltration basin will be constmcted nOlth of the Skiles Lane and Old Snelling intersection. The basin will collect runoff from this pOltion of Skiles and ditch flow to the north. A cui vert parallel to Old Snelling will be constmcted under Skiles Lane for the ditch flow. The altemative of constructing storm sewer from the southern portion of Skiles Lane and connecting it to Arden Place, so that it can discharge into the wetland, is not Existing catch basin (Siems Courts) economical. The depth of excavation would exceed 30 feet and the disruption to trees and private property would be extensive due to the natTow confines of the neighborhood. The proposed ponds in the wetland will be designed to allow sedimentation of particulates prior to discharging into the wetland and will be sized per NURP standards. The construction of the ponds will consist of simple depressions within the wetland. An outlet structure at the southern end of the wetland will be constructed to control the outflow and elevation of the wetland as well as provide a means to skim floating debris from water discharging to Lake Johanna. l"RS 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM I E. PROPOSED UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS II SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Proposed improvements include replacing the sanitary force main from Lift Station #3 and from Lift Station #4. Due to the cOlTosi ve nature of area soils, age and material of the force main we anticipate that the existing condition of the pipe is fair to poor. The forcemain will be replaced with a 6" PVC or HDPE pipe. Exhibit A7 illustrates the proposed Sanitary Sewer Improvements. Each sanitary manhole will be inspected during the final design phase of the project to determine its condition. Manholes that appear to be structurally deficient will be included for repairs and lor reconstruction. Manholes with infiltrating ground water will be identified to be sealed as a part of future sanitary sewer rehabilitation work. W A TERMAIN IJVIPROVE'VIENTS Proposed improvements include the replacement of all hydrants and gate valves within the neighborhood. Due to corrosive soils, the age of the valves and past expelience in similar soil conditions the valves have often become inoperable and need to be replaced. Due to recent water main breaks along Arden Place the entire segment of watermain and house services along Arden Place is proposed to be replaced with high strength 8" PVC watermain. Watennain Option 1: Replace All Existing Watermain The existing 6" and 8" cast iron pipe and would he replaced with high strength 6" and 8" PVc. Due to the cOlTosive nature of the soils and based on past experience in similar soil conditions, it is possible that the cxisting watermain is nearing its useful life in several areas of the neighborhood beyond the breaks recently expClienced along Arden Place. This option would provide new life expectancy for the watermain within the neighborhood and reduce or eliminate the likelihood of ongoing spot repairs throughout the neighborhood over the next 50 years. The additional cost to replace watermain and services along Siems Court, Ridgewood Road and Skiles Lane is approximately $184,000. Exhibit A8 illustrates the proposed waterrnain improvements. PRIVATE UTILITIES Private utility companies have been notified of the extent and proposed schedule of the project. They will be required to relocate any of their lltilities that conflict with City uti Iities or roadway improvements proposed in the project. A meeting will be held with the private utility companies to discuss the proposed project and this may result in private utility upgrades. Although ptivate utility upgrades and modifications may be done in conjunction with this proposed project they would not be installed as part of this proposed project. Based upon our review of the neighborhood to date we do not anticipate significant private utility impacts. However if large amounts of watermain are replaced, some gas lines will likely need relocation or replacement. URS 1+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM J F. PROJECT COSTS I' Preliminary project cost estimates have been prepared for the proposed improvements and the alternati ves discussed in this report for the consideration of the Council. Project costs shown below include a 10% contingency cost and 18% for engineering, administrative and construction inspection costs. The following is a summary of the estimated project costs for the recommended improvements and alternatives. Detailed estimates are included in Appendix B. Item Deseription Pro iect Cost Roadway Bascline Improvements Storm Drainage Baseline Improvements 'Vatermain Baseline Improvements Sanitary Sewer Baseline Improvements Easement Acquisition Allowance Total Estimated Project Cost (excluding Options): $1,100,000 $410,000 $160,000 $ 82,000 $ 12.000 $1,764,000 Optional Imprnvernents Ridgewood Ct Reconstruction Option Curb Option 1 (Exposed Aggregate) Curb Option 2 (Colored Curb) Ridgewood Road ROW Option 1 Siems Court Wall Option 2 Roundabout Option Ridgewood Road Sidewalk Option Watermain Option 1 $120,000 $ 65,000 $130,000 $ 15,000 $ 45,000 $ 32,000 $ 65,000 $184,000 URS 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM I G, PROJECT FUNDING I~ The project will be funded from several sources including Unit Assessments on the benefiting propelties, the City General Fund, the City Enterprise Funds for Watermain, Storm Water and Sanitary Sewer improvements. ASSESSMENT R" TE DISCUSSION The proposed assessment for the project is based on the 2004 Revised Assessment Policy that was approved by the Arden Hills City Council on September 13, 2004. The policy states that residential properties with frontage abutting a street that is reconstructed shall be assessed on a per unit basis at the residential equivalent assessment rate. The per unit basis is calculated based on the average neighborhood unit size, particularly in a mixed neighborhood. The proposed assessment rate is based on fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the roadway project costs for the proposed 22-foot residential street section. The preliminary assessment role includes a total of 62 assessable units within the Ridgewood Neighborhood. The assessment role does not include the following properties located in the general project area: · Three properties which abLlt Snelling A venue and are accessed from Snelling A venue . 3583 Snelling Avenue which abuts Ridgewood Road but is accessed via Snelling A venue · The Island Beach Club parcel adjacent to Ridgewood Road and Arden Place (1200 foot frontage) . 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd. that abuts 250 of Siems Court but is accessed via Lake Johanna Blvd. · Two city owned parcels (Lift Station #4 and open space abLltting Ridgewood Road) Staff requests that Council provide direction as to whether or not these parcels should be included in the final assessment role. The total number of assessable units (62) divided by the total assessable amount (50% of roadway costs) results in a proposed unit assessment rate of approximately $8,800. If all of the parcels identified above were included in the assessment role (and assigned equivalent units), the total number of assessable units would be 84 (assigning two units to 1600 Lake Johanna Blvd and 12 units to the Beach Club Parcel). The proposed unit assessment rate Lmder this scenario would be approximately $6,500. The Preliminary Assessment Address Map that identifies the properties in the project area is included in the assessment role is attached in Appendix C I and the Assessment Role is attached in Appendix C2 l'RS 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Tntal Estimated Project Cost (without options): $1,764,000 PROPOSED FUNDING SOII'RCES General Fund: Non Assessable Street Fund: PIR Fund (Assessments): Storm Water Utility Fund: Watermain Utility Fund: Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund: Total FEASIBILITY $200,000 $362,000 $550,000 $410,000 $160,000 $ 82,000 $1,764,000 CIP $200,000 $400,000 $650,000 $280,000 $100,000 $ 40,000 $1,670,000 FRS 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM II H. PROJECT SCHEDULE I' The following schedule has been prepared based upon City Council receiving this feasibility report on August 8, 2005: ~ Feasibility Report Issued to Council ~ Public Hearing ~ Obtain Easements, ROW ~ Final Design ~ Assessment Hearing ~ Approve Plans & Specifications I Authorize Advertisement for Bid ~ Bid Opening ~ Award Construction Contract ~ Begin Construction ~ End Constmction August 8, 2005 August29,2005 Sep - Dec 2005 Sep - Dec 2005 .r anuary 23, 2006 February 27,2006 March, 2006 April, 2006 May, 2006 September, 2006 It should be noted that although the entire projected construction period is over three months, the project specifications will require that the Contractor restore streets with curb and gutter and one Ii ft of bituminous within 28 days of the initial removal of the existing pavement on a given street. URS 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM I L SUMMARY I' The Ridgewood Neighborhood is in the City's 2006 Capital Improvement Program for several reasons including poor existing pavement conditions, poor drainage infrastructure, lack of water quality treatment and aging utility infrastructure. The improvements identified in this repOlt will significantly improve the function and lifespan of the street, storm drainage, sanitary sewer and watermain infrastructure tem and reduce maintenance costs for the foreseeable future. The improvements will reduce or eliminate nuisance flooding which occurs throughout the neighborhood while providing positive water quality treatment for the runoff generated in this neighborhood prior to entering Lake Johanna. The residents of the neighborhood have been engaged in the process to date and have generally confirmed the City's expressed need for the improvements and feel the improvements will improve the overall neighborhood. Concerns about minimizing disturbance to the character of the neighborhood have been registered and ret1ected in the proposed nalTOW streets and use of natural water infiltration systems where possib Ie. We have attempted to provide Council with general descriptions and estimated costs of the proposed improvements and alternatives/options for Council consideration in the repolt. More detailed information and analysis will be provided on specific issues at the Council's request Project costs, as illustrated herein, are reasonable and representative of the proposed scope of improvements. The estimated project costs for the improvements included with this report are slightly greater than the amounts estimated as a part of the five year Capital Improvement Program but reflect the current construction costs that the market has been experiencing. URS 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX - A EXHIBITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLOT DATE: Jul 27, 200!5 12:J2pm DISK FILE NAME; {16.1) R:\31809B37\EXHIBITS\o1.SCOPE.dwg I u!ll I,lll o ~ S <; z . . . . ~ " z . z o " 'll ;;0 2;;0 r'1- 00 ....[i;l ;;; ~ ~, i. ~ 0 ,...." "'t] 0 0 ~_ -.-~ ~oo' ;;;~O) ~Ci-o ~J:3:: ....m-o o!il ;;;5 ;;00 so r'1 ~ @eJOO@ @ ~ :;:: -0 ;;0 r;:;-:::;:;;o;;o;;o;;o ;;0 (f) 0 z:I>OOOO 0 fTI < -1-100COO:;:: fTI -fTlfTlfTlZfTIfTI (f) :;:: ~~:::;:::E~:::;::::;:n fTI Z 00 00 -1 z)>OoCIJOOO fTlZOOOOOC 0 - C ;;0 -0 ~:;::n;;o-1n;;o-1 -1 CIJ-oOO 00 ;;0 0 O;;oC)> C)> fTI Z ;;00;;00 ;;00 -1 Yl I<-1(f) -1;;0 )> orrl(f)- ;;00 Z 0:;::-1:;ii fTI:::;: Z 0~0::E n 0 '--';;0 0 -1:;::)> z(f) ::E r (fJ (f) :;:: ^ -1 C )> ;;ofTI r -0 C r ;;0 n 0 -1 < rrl 0 :;:: Z rrl Z -1 ",-,,- ;un CD;U ::E'" "'0 "'''' o~ Ul -<z -<;:: OUl i'ii <:Ul ~o O;:j ~;d "'z ;:: "';;; 20 Ul 2c 2 0 00 CD ;u ::E-< 0- '" 0 ;u-< -< C )> _C )> <;:: ;u r "'- Z -< r ::E2 , )>0 2 .' ..(C 0 UlUl ::!'. -)> ..1 r r ~/""., / " :r_",-<, f',,) -'- -.- : I -~! "',.,~-) l "''''"J' i f It r~t;;:L:rT--!. "l~=:L .,.~' / i ,~~~".._.: , ',>., ,Ii ~7---'-~ ,1 '__:::!' i L ! i' _, _~, -- '<E?lD~IiWO :' . , QQ'ROAQ r"'j:'~-'I'-"'_'_'~ ~'-_"d. '--"'" i '-, , '-'" ~>~" i/ '_J'/ \. ;u '" o o 2 ...............Ul "'" ;u c n -< cD~ F= :::! z Ul 0 ~ ~ -< r )> 2 o " ..-^' ~"\...~<- \ \ \ / / ".....-/i >- ';::0, ::0 _~__ \ I Zl"Tl" rTf 'l 'ro -U -0 \ \ ~_~_/)~/ ~ ~___) ~i~~ ~\ ~ ~-:~ ~ ~~8 ~(- ..~~, \ \ J~~:_- R> >- ------ ~ E~\0.~'." \ v " ~~~---~! \ ~o \ ,,'.. )>..(;u i ., rT'l~~::E-~- " _.c?\ 0 0 I , 2 ,6')> '~'_~'5'~ r;:I;u ;;, \-::~J~ /~~~'- ~~ ~ ~m ~~ g .~ /o~fTlC 2ft:> 0 zO r ;0 o )> o ~(" ~ / r/ Pl, /\U{~"'''_ " r,;, ", /\ )>\ z\ \. 'fT1\\ ! \ \ \ i! ", \\,=~::=~._"--'~;:~ '\ \./ \~,/""i;~.v~\ \ \\~:'.\.' ///',\'i' ," ..--\\.-." Ii ..- ,~~ / ^-"..-(~ /~ / .. \ \ \ \. '/.--; , \ ~-~..---~;, ~-~ ~. ;;; Ul ~. ....... m I ~' / / ---(.-........^. \ \ \ \ /r"~ </l.:"---': \ '. ~. PLOT DATE: Jul 27, 2005 2:12pm DISK fiLE NAME: (16.1) R:\J1809SJ7\EXHIBITS\a2.T'r'P.dwg n!l" 1.11 o ~ s " z ~ . ~ ~ M Z ~ o M ;;u a G'l ,.., ~~~ 080 ~zO) r.n!!! ""G'l"U 0:I:3:: ::ltll...... 00 v Z;;u :I: o o c ~ '" ~ I <ii. l!l IO! OJ l! ;0 '" ~ ~ ~ . ~ A '" q ;0 .. is q -! ~ ~ ;;; en ;0 ~ - .. ~ Ii! .. ~ ~ ~ z .------J "' ~ > lll\2~~ ! "'~2 "!. " ;0 ij OJi! Cllr-_r-.... h ';!;":~'" ~~ ~;~8i ~~ ~8888 ~:i ~ tIl u) ~: : ~ ~ m > () ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" ~ ~ IG IG R R '" '" 8 8 -.., .. ~s: = g~ P -IS! '" ~~ ~ g~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~ '" ~"\ ~~ ~Q j;!~ " 1::>< >>( !1~ ,>;j;! ~1:: ,,> >:!: 2- -", Z'" "'-< :r ~ o ~ 2:2 N ~ r-J= ""l: %> : o~ ~ P !!l 01 ~ 22 <gi 0 '" !; !; n~ ~ ~ 8 8 :::o:::o~tIll/) NO ~ I1l g~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~~~~ Iii gj ~ ~ ~ !(jIG {i ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ .., "' e H en- g~ ffi~ ii ~~ p~ ~!:1 > 01 !!l ",:ll ,,~2 2 ....0 ::u ~ J: ;;is; ~ "'z :z ~I:I c= >g g ~ ~:~ en ~ ~~ ~ ~ l! ~ ;0 ;0 l'l ~ 'il !(j ~ ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ............. ................- -os:: :;0)> 0-< -on O:I: (fl ",0 0:;0 !!l~ "':< s::)> ~ -< --- .... '., \),/l'--n O--i If co! :;0 j -< PLOT DATE: Jun 16, 2005 3:54pm DISK FILE NA~E: (16.1) R:\J18098J7\EXHIBITS\Cl7,woll,dW9 '-, '-~--'--'~"'A'- J I ILJ ----T--..--~-T-' I i j , j , [:3 I /Jj /LJ I ;r--. .... // '\ ~~) /t~~ I C:::J ~--~ --~~ "~-,--- !j----._-----~- 1 -" -~--!- ! I I J , , ! !!~il o -0 ! , , i / , , >:::ocn:::o (J')fT1fTlfT1 -<-<;:: Vi~ii\O ~fT1~ Zz 06!:O! :<Al-< )>_c r<;:: r(Tlz :< -<)>0 o-<c (/J(/J :;0 '" ;:: )> z ,/ / / -os:: :;0)> 0-< -on O::I: (fl "'0 0:;0 !!l~ "';:E s::)> , (/J -< \n -< '00 c :;0 Tl i / ,. .' ,~., . .-""'''' Ii! '--.il , , 1 i , , I~ ~r I~ LJ /~ : '-......, / ~ I ! I~ 1---'-' ~ 1 1 , L--, I r----., I ! I ' I i U I I , l I i II I ! L-.J I I ~.J._ I _.. ~.~" "'''- .^"----. j i ,J-,._ " " " ''-j j I ! (""" d , -0\.1 '...~_,., ,.___.,._._.,,=:=j.S ~:!'I / (") o z (fl -< Al C n -< UJCU;o;U OfT1fTlfT1 0:2;::;:: rnriOO 0"'<;;; cz'" MO~~ < ;:0--1-1 >_c)> Al <;::- o~z~ .~-~. ---i~~g~' .' tBJ (fl :< I )> C). r ;:01 r )>' t:I '" , ~ i{,.ol i" / / -os:: :;0)> 0-< -on O::I: (fl "'0 O;:Q !!l;;; "';:E ;::)> Al (fl-< '" "."_.~~,,~~__,~(.,,.,(,il__{~i" 5,,---,,--,---'-'--Tr~"-' ! O-i L; - i/ i co I :; I i ;c i Z ! i -...' G) : I I :E )> r r f'-----~_m~- I J .'...=J.... --.. I \ T-'--- o ~tt ~e ~~ ~ < > . ~ z > z ~ o IJ/O tIl ;;;:;0 ;r::- (flC (")~ g ~ N / :;000 -ICO :;oZOl 1TIl!! >!S!\J -tt1s:: ~o\J Z;Il "':t: ~8 F ;";""'''''-- "',,- "'\ , i j C:::J / /' I It:::;;:: ,t:] I t:--..,,---"-.-----r--~ I "~--~ .-'.----., ---- --...""---- :> VI , j ! J : i n o / ~ I -<I Al' e: /n . -< i \::0 . 01 \-t 'J>.. ;i: z C) :< )> r r A...._._'^-"~_ -os:: :;0)> 0-< -on O:I: (fl ",0 0:;0 " !!l~ 'ITI:< ,s:::> '(fl -< !.n ~ 00 c ;Il ~ i i , 1"---, ~J ~ lu I L I I , I ! c:::J -...~-- s l!tifVrs..\ / / /(1(J)UF{T i~ ill T /Lc---1--J i-.......r-, L I _I 1 I LJ !r--~ . I ' I L i J '------r---I r----!' l U [, ~ Ii LJI I , ---I -'~-- ~c~_ ../'" " ,..I "----._J -.._-~-" i J /_~~~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . PLOT DATE: Aug 01, 2005 9: 530m DISK FilE' NAME: (16.1) R: \J1809837\EXHIBITS\o.roundcbout.dwg c______~ ~k~ . /~ )(- -~'~ / 0 \ /... \ -'" / \ (, ~~ i -"'- / // \ """ / ,/.'/' " 1/ ,/ \ '...." y /' \ ""0 \ , /7 \ \ /' \ \ // \ \\ ~~-,- . 0;0 i i :0 '" s:: o ;$i i ~ i' 10 ,- -j )> 's:: '''' i-i /'" " i "( 10 j C , z / 0 , I )> 10.@. --!:)~ ~:j r )> Z o (f) " )> " Z Gl )(j ----I-J I I ~ ----r- i 'J':~~~ & \\\I\L~ ~ ,_ _ - _-L.P;))(- ;Q __---.-- /" ~ ):.. ,--- i...!:? ,~~~-~...-,---~ I {',.J .----- ;'--'-'- ;~;, I I;} i , fA ....... i V" ^' / ~ I'-..i ! ____r:~L-J---rn ---_.~:_. -::~~~ ~'1i':'- H, !i T2 Ii:! m -1/ ~ r---'~~~! I j 0 ' i n J , ~ I .~,,-. ~" '..--L~~ , :0 -; 0 " c '" z g '" 0 )> " )> CD s:: '" 0 '" s:: c ;:;j 0 < -; :0 )> (f) :0 r r 0 ~ )> C N Z Z ~ 0 ~ 0 0 )> ~ CD 0 c:: z ~ -; 9 m 0 // ,/ \ \ ~,;. \ /'/ \/ , , \ , , : ,.,,--' 1I!!l "II! "..."" o , ~ 0; z " . . > ~ " z > z o " ~-~._,-~~-- _.- ~ "" lQ ~ '" ~,,::u ",- "00 , ~ " C)', ~g~N/' ..rT1go rOo ;;; "'0 z Ol -~ rT1 ~C'i"U? offis:: >~"U "aJ~ oo~ ;~g ~ '- "" .. r ;' / I i ! )~ "/:} ~ :\$,C/ f\1r~ r"".;i(;1"l'" (,*J,lf;:... <.J" I' -""" " o )> o ::E )> ,i<' :, ,i ,'" .)> !(f) .'" .s:: .-.~ -; o '" g " )> :::I o z I iI /1 t..,;;, ,7 I i 10 ~ I q) 1/",'1.,. I..,.",f..., \iV~" \~,) '~ "1"'--' \/ II l/ . ...,..~~j .I ;"1)\, d_ ~t:=;f~~'- ,r:? "'V RIDGEWOOD ROAD f r i I I SIEMS COURT ,~:@> .... .......... Ii I ) I , Ii --1 -1' (~ J:~;;:J '''--; @ ..,',.~) , , i";"- ,,"_ II ,,~) fl~,1L;"i;~'""" '\1fi"" (4 ',: r'J] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . / ~ N ~ FLOW ARROWS 26 oc - PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA TO WETLAND 23 oc EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA TO WETLAND DRAINAGE AREA TO PROPOSED PDND CELLS LAKE JOf-lANNA CONCEPT PLAN - DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS URS ~ A5 2006 PAIIElAENT MANAGMENT PROGRAM ~ RIDGEWOOO NEIGHBORHOOD ~ HILLS PLOT OAT€: Jul 27. 2005 n'38pm I J !l\feOltBrSq-oor. 7{)Ql),;'d$ltU,SOUlh _"8"1>0110, MN S:5(1~ 11ll.JrQ,'UO<lT'" 6;2.310:131e.Pu DISi< fiLE NAME, (16.1) R:\3180Q8v\nHIOITS\o5,DRAIN"GE_d"9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLOT DATE: JIJI 27, 2005 12:44pm DISK FILE NAME: (16,1) R:\J18098J7\EXHIBITS\o,stm Impr,dwg I nlll 1,1If ~ S 5 z . . . > ~ ~ n M Ul -i ..!iJa! 153::0 ~O~ ,,;Q 1!l N ?:- ~go ~ ~ 0 Z '" Z Ol "fTl[!! !ii-",-o c3:::I: !i!'UC03:: r;QO-o a~~ "3:::0 ifTlO "'ZO vl I \J AI o \J o (f) fT1 o (f) --1 o AI :s:: (f) fT1 ~ fT1 AI S0"\EY'.. .~\",\,,\j~....... ".lD~?j\'<j:'.)/.,..,.,/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLOT DATE: Jul 27, 2005 12:4Jpm DISK fiLE NAME:: (16.1) R:\J1809BJ7\EXHIBITS\Q6.son Impr,dwg ;:O""'Z{J)O\Z [TlCO-<-jO O-j (J)-<-j OC{J)-j [Tl s: ;:0 -0 [Tl (J)" s:[TlOS:-j [Tlr-j{J))> ZOZ;:O-o~ -[Tl;:O [TlZ-o--j 00)>Z[Tl , _0r 0;:0 [Tl ..,.,{J)N< 0- [Tl;:OO{J) Z[TlU1[Tl -jO' 0 ;:oC (J) [Tl;:o )> (J)[Tl Z -<!=l -j (J) )> -j ;:0 [Tl -< s: (J)O )>- z;:O _[Tl -j0 )>-j ;:00 -<Z ..,.,)> Or ;:Om 00 [Tl;:o s:[Tl )>0 Z (J) [Tl ::'E [Tl ;:0 (I) >- Z;:O ~i5 ;:oc;'l -(1"1 (1)8'" 1"100 1liz~ ;:01"1 -5-0 ~:I:3:: ;:om...... 00 " ;i;~ 3:0 'Z!8 vl C "'1 --<" VJ --< )> --< o z '" i Ii!!l "nf ~ ~ <; z " . < . ~ ~ M /^~~- /.. 0.'5 . ~'0"';?/ "r")'~/ J.S\)",?b::'/ ./ 6",,0 / '-. ~ ~ ....... ............... ...... .... PI.OT DATE: Aug 01, 2005 10:36<lm DISK FILE; NAME: (16.1) R:\J18098J7\EXHI8ITS\a7,WAT impr.dwg n!ll 1,1If o , S is z ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ z . z o " :E;!! >0 ;;jCl ~~N ~og -zOl ;l:[!l ;:J~"U oal3:: ;i;o"U ;l:::tI ",:I: zo vlS ~ I I ::;;: :;lJG)}> -I co }> fTI}>, 0 , -I "lJ-I' aJO fTI j;:fTlI :;lJ fTI"lJ :;:: n<-< }> fTI}>O :;lJ::;;: O,:;lJ fTI}> Z <}> "lJ-I fTlZ 'fTI aJ 1Il-j }>:;lJ :;lJ -I1Il n fTI fTI:;:: }> o}> O}> ^ aJZ fTlO Z .' \,,\S ~\,\:,\.:'\3./ ''J\~'- ~\31<<j//'" /'3(\.\~" . -^ \\",-, .- .",,~ (r"\O/ 1 .1 I , I I~ gJ ~,-i , . mi I[ "-" --j' --'-. ./. '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX - B PRELIMINARY PROJECT COST ESTIMATES . . 2006 PMP Ridgewood Neighborhood Preliminary Cost Estimate - Roadway Improvements . . Item Unit Cost Est. Quantitv Total Cost MOBILIZATION LS $50,000.00 1 $ 50,000.00 . REMOVE BIT PAVEMENT SY $2.25 16850 $ 37,912.50 REMOVE BIT DRIVEWAY SY $3.00 1503 $ 4,509.00 . REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY $3.00 755 $ 2,265.00 . TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA $500.00 4 $ 2,000.00 RETAINING WALL SF $25.00 2000 $ 50,000.00 . COMMON EXCAVATION CY $8.00 10050 $ 80,400.00 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION CY $12.00 1000 $ 12,000.00 . SELECT GRANULAR BORROW CY $14.00 7480 $ 104,720.00 AGGREGATE BASE CY $25.00 5000 $ 125,000.00 . BITUMINOUS WEAR TON $44.00 1610 $ 70,840.00 BITUMINOUS BASE TON $42.00 1610 $ 67,620.00 . TACK COAT GAL $2.00 1405 $ 2,810.00 . SALVAGE MAILBOX EA $55.00 62 $ 3,410.00 BIT DRIVEWAY SY $25.00 1700 $ 42,500.00 . CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY $45.00 900 $ 40,500.00 SALVAGE SIGN EA $50.00 16 $ 800.00 . CURB AND GUTTER (B618) LF $9.00 11000 $ 99,000.00 SOD WITH 4' TOPSOIL SY $3.00 12000 $ 36,000.00 . SILT FENCE LF $3.00 3100 $ 9,300.00 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $2,000.00 1 $ 2,000.00 . LANDSCAPING ALLOWANCE LS $5,000.00 1 $ 5,000.00 . Subtotal $ 848,600.00 . Contingency 10% $ 84,900.00 Subtotal Roadway Construction Cost $ 933,500.00 . Administration & Engineering 18% $ 168,000.00 TOTAL Roadway ProjeelCost $ 1,101,500.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . --------- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2006 PMP Ridgewood Neighborhood Preliminary Cost Estimate - Roadway Optional Improvements I MOBILIZATION LS $2.500.00 1 $ 2,500.00 RETAINING WALL SF $25.00 800 $ 20,000.00 REMOVE RETAINING WALL SY $100.00 120 $ 12,000.00 Subtotal $ 34,500.00 Contingency 10% $ 3,500.00 Subtotal Retaining Wall Option 2 Construction Cost $ 38,000.00 Administration & Engineering 18% $ 6,800.00 TOTAL Retaining Wall Option 2 Project Cost $ 44,800.00 CURB OPTION EXPOSED AGGREGATE LF Administration & Engineering TOTAL Project Cost Exposed Aggregate Curb . COST IS ABOVE AND BEYOND REGULAR CURB & GUTTER $5.00 18% $ $ $ 11000 55,000.00 9,900.00 64,900.00 CURB OPTION COLORED CONCRETE Administration & Engineering TOTAL Project Cost Colored Concrete Curb . COST IS ABOVE AND BEYOND REGULAR CURB & GUTTER $ $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX - C PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'C 0 0 .c ....I . .. 0 ....I .D 0 . .c a: Cl I- '0; Z . Z W 'C :;: 0 (f) . 0 (f) ~ W (f) Cl (f) . 'C <( it > . a: 0.. <( :iE z . 0.. :;: CD ::::i 0 w . 0 a: C\l 0.. . . 000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000 ddoooocicicicicicidddddddadddddciddociciciddcid 000000000000000000000000000000000000 ~wrooooorooooorooooooorooooooorooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oorooororoooro 00 0000 0000 roooooro 00 00 00 ooro 00 00 00 00 00 00 ooooooooooooooro 00 ~IDWW~~WWW~~~~~WWWW$WIDWWWWW~WWWWWIDWWW ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . ~b~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ qq~qqoooo:qqqqqqqqqqqRqqqqqqqqqqqqqq ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ m ~z ~ ~ I~~ ~j ~ ~W-5 B~~~~ ~w ~ Zl~ r~ W mZ~~- < ~W:::E ~~ B~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~o~g~j~~w~ ~~~5~~ ~ , :::E~ ~ ~< w~ ~ ~W<< < ~'~~:::E~w"' ~>~lz~ ~~~~~~~ s~~~6~~~OO~~~~'=~I~~~s ~ ~~ -W~~<:::EI~~~W~O~~z ~ ~>w~~~~~>~'~~w ~~~~~~~6g~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ffi~~I ~z~~ ~<~j ffi~~~~ o~ < W~ ~ ~~~~~~~ffi~~~~~~~~~3~~!~~~~~~5~~~~~~~ IbblbbbtlblG&!&!&!~&!&!&!&! ~~~~~~~~~~o8@ ~ B@Ro8@8B8B~~~~~~~~~ ~~z~zzzz~ S~ B ssB s@sssssO~P~O~~~~~~~ p~~~~w~~~ ~~~~ ~~~w ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~oQQ@ QQ Q_Qe9 =~=~~~~~~ <<~<<<~<< ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ m~m~m~~~~ ~~8~~~~~~m~N~~~~~R~~g~gRoo~g~~~~g~mID ~~~~~~~~~~m~~m~mmmmm~mmmmt~~~~~~~~~V ~~~~~~~~~~~MMMMMMMMMMMMMM~')MMMMMMMMM ~~Dm~~om~,~~~mmvm~romvmmmvMm~woommO~~M VN~~~~~~V8-V~~N~NNN~VM~MM~VOOOOO~~ 0 ooooooo~o 0000000000000000000000 0 000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOo~oooooooolgoo NMMMMMN~NM NNNNNNNNNNNNI~NNMMMMMM~~MM NNNNNNN NN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN MMMMMM~ M~ MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMI~MMM NNNNNN NN~ NN~NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN~NNN 000000 oog 000000000000000000000000 MMMMMMMMMvJ MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ~~~~~~I~~I~~cr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MMMMMM~JM~'JMI~'JMM~'JMM~')MMMMMMMMMMMMMM~MMM . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . cooocoCX) co co co co 00 co co co co co co co coco COCO CO CO (!) aSaSa:ia:i as as as a:f co~ cO as cO 0::) a5 cO cO aS05c6ooro cO Lri .,. L{) . . . . . . . . . 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . . . . . . 't:I 0 0 ..c ..J . .... 0 ..J .c 0 . ..c a: Cl I- 'Gj Z . Z W 't:I :;; 0 III . 0 III ~ := w '" 41 III '" Cl III . :E <( a: > '" N 0 Ol ..... CO Ol N '" <D '" .,. a: ~ ~ . ~ 0 0 0 0 0 .,. 0 .,. N N N N '" Q. <( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :iE '" '" N N N N N N N N N '" '" '" . :;; N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q. '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ::i N N N N N N N N N N N N N 10 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" . 0 a: .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,. C'II c.. '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" . . - - - PLOT DATE' . JIJI 27. 2005 12:39pm DISK FILE NAME: (161 . ) R: \31B09837\EXHI8ITS\ a6 ADDRESS.dwg - -- Ii 1I.!1 I,!I! I i~ . . > ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~;!!! (J)O ",e;) (J)'" ~~N 'ZOO ....00 >~Ol 85"U ;:c:I:;s:: !;l~"U (J):I: ;r:0 :!OS ; i'-~,-. / \ '\ \ \~ \~\ \ if \\\ \ \ ' \\ ~\\ \ "\; '\ On u /'/ / --- -"'----- ~-~-- ! ~b t l-tJ~-~-tf7~T--~~'--"'" / ~ ' !'. I ~ I I' -~l-A- - ~~- , iI' U ' ~- r'.:;-~~ .. i ~ I I O! ~ T~'-F' '~r'~-li-- ~ , . " n"" , '.' " ! '/' 7,~--L"iq I :! !O/:lf~/ g / g / \/: 1/d O.,..--~~ -- "7_--1--L.-l..-.i-L l ! j"----, " I' I' I ' _, - , , ", ,0 " ~ / ~ i l!i /~ * ~/'7'.....\.. '. -'. ~i ~ . ~ ,!~ ~ 'l: ,,,-'-- J ~ I- I ._'_~ ~ V'\) I ')., '.\' ~ ~ ! /// . ~ ' C:/tJI,J !~" I~---- 'c. ..../"" .......----- /. ~ . j ........ ~ " .~. -_.././...... ~ ~ ~" ,"...;: . //._ "\ /'! ,'t:;:' ;-'" // / /~; - _ i I '~" . \ \/// t I i TI ~w f~ /0 / . ' /' ,- .., "~,, ! -, , ,,~'.-n' ,',-c- "" '1'--, I -- ~\ Lr--m D'2)4 iN i1~i-~'jt/ f:i/c;i/C;; " /1 \ /_ --'_......i.. ii J ! U D I ~! . ,(7"._......._i. ; ~ wi ~ 'Ie---.....,''' - \~. , ;__>)1'" ,. -!'r-" -, - _ ,'" >J " ' ~_ ../ / ~ ~__o,='i~! I . 1 ~ ~ i,li-!'//"I.~ ! ~ .; ~ ! LI I \ ._./ ./ iI' __! ~..L_ ! '-......j !e.. j,!I~~1 i"',.. -...1. :;t ~ --U ' \ /__' ' '."">-O'CFJ'--- .. .' ' ". /~ / '. L. I'! I .. I J'"" IC:J 0.-,-::,:1.. / ~ /\\J '\. ': / 17]11 /:',-.J ' ! ! !Q:;~ -,0L....- Ii;!. /'\'\~>______ '::/I( / /- ' -- I \ / (~.. \"1 I II ~I /'\ \ _', , (' ...__1 ' I " J II, . /{{\ \ '\ ! L]\ I"~ '/C\,=~lt>j i~/i ~I --'i II \1 L' I \ " " ,\._.._._....y-_....Co...'-.....~. /...\ \. ~\\...~................l... ....//. ..' /i.. I I ': \, \ ~ ,,-'-i-"\I t "-.::''''-., "'"'''' _ .,/ //\ /.\ \ ~ " g\' ~/~. \ ! //J I , \ ,\ . \ . " i /, I \ ",,,,! 0 \, / ,- -". . ni.., i i! \~\ c:>~~ Cl ! t'c'~",<r \ !i::\~ yt Q \/// .... .' ... 0 " O~/ ~i,\ d (t/\..;;~~~;,;-Cl ,e ~""" q ~~" /i ;;50\O/~/~-l;\;/1 /1\ " ~.c^~'" 'I'; ,cd,. ~\ t'!~ .'v//" () Z (J> , , " ".,/ ./{, m' \ 1 ~v' ~ 8\" ./ ~- ,,"I 0',', l; 0 ~ D I . / m,,' ,,,,f' v Ii W ' ,. ,,1// \ '~,~\ \ [J \ ! ib(5)ii., 'i \_/./..~t:J\ \\"~" Jf''''-!'/''... .' //~~. '. i \, Ci \;-';.,'/' 0e/"/ /~ W ,--' , j ./...../ ~....,. "'./ ~.. / ./ \:) ....,'. ./ /- ,', .'. .. . ), '. / . I / ,..,^...//T' ./ "'/ \...J D \ \ \ \ ~,-~."_/ e . . ~ ~HILLS City of Arden HIlls Request for Council Action K~d;" Agenda Itemi'l~:,,,~ Prepared by: Greg Brown Dept.: Engineering Council Mtg. Date:August 8, 2005 Final Action Needed By: August 8, 2005 Budgeted Amount: $1,600,000 Actual Amount: $1,635,000 Funding Source: Multiple Council Action Request: Motion to approve the bid award to Amt Construction for the 2005 Pavement Management Program in the amount of $1,375,247.66 Staff Recommendation: The proposed improvements are consistent with thc CIP and are part of the systematic pavement management program in the City. The project costs are within budget with the exception of the watermain improvements which are approximately $80,000 above the CIP budget. Based upon the importance of maintaining and upgrading the water system, we recommend that council authorize the budget amendment and approve the award of the project. Staff is recommending the award of the 2005 PMP project with budget amendment. Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action Plannjng PTRC Not AJlfJlicallle__ _ .. _!\Jot Applicable_ _ _ ._ .. . !'Jot applicatJlE:___ ___ . Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): o Memo/Letter: o Resolution (No.) o Ordinance (No.) [gJ Engineering Recommendation: See attached letter dated August 2, 2005 o Attorney Recommendation: o Other: Financial Implications: Awarding the bid will require a budget amendment to the watermain enterprise fund of $80,000. Administrator/Staff Comments: URS . August 2, 2005 AGENDA ITEM 6.A Michelle Wolfe City Administrator City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: 2005 Pavement Management Program Dear Ms Wolfe: Bids were received and opened for the above-referenced project on June 29, 2005. Bids were received from six (6) contractors. The tabulated bid outcome is as follows: Contractor Bid Amount I Amt Construction Company, Inc. $1,375,247.66 2. Park Construction Company $1,431,876.33 3. T.A. Schifsky and Sons, Inc. $1,456,090.49 4. C.S. McCrossan $1,558,499.22 5. Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. $1,583,119.40* 6. Midwest Asphalt $1,606.213.13* Engineer's Estimate $1,345,000.00 * These bid amounts reflect the COlTected bid amounts upon review and tabulation. . All bids included proper bid guarantees in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the total bid as required by the Project Manual. A bid tabulation was performed to verify the total bid amounts during which the bids for Forest Lake Contracting and Midwest Asphalt were corrected to the amounts listed above. The corrections did not affect the low bidder. A copy of the bid tabulation is attached for your information. Arnt Construction Company, Inc. submitted the low bid with a total bid amount of $1,375,247.66. The low bid is approximately $35,000 (2.6%) greater than the Engineer's Estimate. Upon further review of the bids, the overage relative to the engineer's estimate is predominantly contained within the watermain work items. Watermain work is approximately $65,000 greater than the engineer's estimate, storm sewer work is approximately $10,000 greater than estimate while roadway work is approximately $40,000 under estimate. Based upon discussions with the contractor the higher watermain costs reflect the contract requirement for after-hour work (to avoid business impacts) as well as generally higher steel prices. The higher storm sewer costs are associated with the installation of 42" - 48" sewer pipe which was underestimated by approximately 20%. The following is a synopsis of the financial implications of awarding the project as bid: Difference! Work Category CIP Budget - (Low Bid + Engineering) = Budget Amend. Roadway Funds $1,100,000 - (910,000 + 172,900) = $17,100 Watermain $ 100,000 - (150,000 + 28,500) = $(78,500) Storm Sewer $ 375,000 - (314,000 + 59,600) = $ 1,400 . Sanitary Sewer $ 25,000 - ( 0 +0) = $ 25.000 Net Difference $1,600,000 $1,635,000 $(35,000) Thresher Square. 700 Ihird Slreel South' Suile 600, Mi/J/Jenpolis, MN 554/5' Phone: (612) 370.0700. Fax: (612) 370./378 URS . Michelle Wolfe August 2, 2005 Page 2 As is apparent from the above table, the watermain fund would require a budget amendment of approximately $80,000 if the project is awarded as bid. This work could be reduced or eliminated from the contract in order to remain within budget if Council desires (although this would need to occur following award by a deduct change order). Based upon experience throughout the City with poor operation of older valves in the watermain system the City Engineer and City staff recommend that the Council amend the watermain budget to include this work with the contract. Recommendation Amt Construction Company, has completed the 2003 and 2004 PMP projects in Arden Hills. Although the Contractor's attention to punchlist work was not as diligent as we would like to see for the 2003 PMP, their performance improved during the execution of the 2004 PMP and we are confident that Amt Construction Company, Inc. is capable of successfully completing the work included with this project. The City Engineer, therefore, recommends the award of the 2005 Pavement Management Program to Amt Construction Company, Inc. for the total amount of $1,375,247.66. The project schedule outlined below is based upon award by the City Council on August 8, 2005 . A ward Contract Begin Construction Complete Construction August 8, 2005 August 15,2005 November 15, 2005 A construction start date will be determined with the Contractor once the project has been awarded and affected businesses will be notified in advance before the project begins. Please call me at (612) 373-6479 if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, .~ attachment cc: Tom Moore/Ardcn Hills Matt HarderlURS File 31809691.00201 . -0 C 0 0 0 CD ..... :::D :i: <1l :i: . .2. C/) Q.. (j) ::J (') ::J <1l <1l ..... <1l -; (') z ..... -. ..... .-+ --0 ~ 0 CJ) ~~ Pl z 0 rr to 0 ::J ::J C to Pl (0 <1l .-+ ..... 0 ::J OJ w -0 1\:)0 a ........ ~ o -. co 0-< :i: 0 -0 CJ1 0 ::J c.o I\:) -o- m 0 to )> G) c.o 0 < ..... ........ CJ1 <1l Cl.. ..... <1l 3 <1l (0 ::J 0 <1l I -< ::J .-+ ~ en to ::J to (0 <1l 3 <1l . ::J .-+ -0 ..... 0 (0 ..... to 3 . '" ~ 0 - OJ JJ Q. '" '" .. "' '" ~ " => '" (J) c 3 ;:: 0 ." -; " J> 0 3 a: 0 0 ~ " :J. 0 '" <il :<- 0< 0> <l> ;:: !': (f) 0 0 OJ !': 0 r " 0 0 " -< 0 " s; => => Sf J> a " " !': ~ " '" '" '0 " '< 2 c =r " 0 ~ ~ ~ " 0 "" o' => " o' (f) => => OJ 0 0 => 0 ~ ." 0 0 5' 3 3 '!" 5' '0 '0 " " " 5' => => " '< "" => " " " - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0. 0. '" '" '" Gl '" '" '" ~ .., OJ '" '" '" '" '" => '" Co '" :::: <:> ~ '" Q. <0 <0 <0 .. -; 0 <0 <0 0 '" .., 0 <0 '" .. .. '" '" ![ .., '" 0 <0 '" '" . ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ g ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ t & ~ ~ ~ t ~ e ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a > > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i g ~ ~ ~ g _ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ; ~ ; ; ; ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - ~ - 0 ,~o ,~,~,~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ _ _ _ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g o 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ % % % " '" " " " " '" z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . n! ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ I; ~ ~ ,Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ " Q ! Hll ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ !ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 i ~ ~ : ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ;1i !!! ~ ~ ~ :;; ... ~ ~ li ?ii i ;;l iil ~!~~~ '" " " '" f" ~~~~~ ~ Iii ~ ~ :: ii: ~ ~ " ~ ~ .~ '" , ~ ~ - , . o ., o m ~ ~ m ~ I ~ I ., 1 ~ , 8 , ~ , 0 ~ ~ Si ~ , ' , 'In! nmn< -!!~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ s ~ ~ ~ :2 -5 I" 2 g ~ - - ! , , g g " < ~ Q ~ 0 ~ Q ~ ~ 6 . " } 'g! g ~ 888 '3 ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i 8 '3 8 8 8 8 8 '3 g ~ ~ 0 s ~ ! ~ i ~,. ~,.,' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 '3 8 8 g g g '3 '3 '3 ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ g I ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 I ~ I ~ ~ r ~ i to; t! g 1!l tl g 8 g 8 . ~~~ ~~ 888 8 8 8 ~ ! ; '/Z !:' 1:> ~ 8 8 i g ~ 8 8 co ; ~ ~ r ! ;: i & ~~~~'i~.:;;~ ~ 8 8 8 8 ~ i!: i!: ~ : f ; i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ::i~!~~;;;~~~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g i ~ tl ~ ~ g i 8 8 8 8 -~ -.. ~ ~ ~ g 8 8 ~~~18~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :il ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ , ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0-"" ~ ~ ~ , . ~ ~ ~ 8 , HI ~ z . > o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ Q 0 Z Q C 0 ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m ~ - m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,'" F 0 m ~ .~ ~~)?< ~~~ ~???r:~~m "'vw ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ,~. m ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ <;; '" '" " ! ! ! , 8 8 e ~ g ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ * ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 g ~ ~ ~ ! ~ 8 g ~ ~ 8 8 8 g g 88M ~ 8 8 8 8 8 888 8 8 B 8 8 ~ g ~ ~ % , , 8 " ~ ;;: i g g g ;i~~!:t tl * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 S 8 ~ ~ :l; ;-< E ~ ~ $ iinH~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" 2 ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .0 '" ~ $ i 8 , , ~ '" 1:\ 8 8 ~ 8 8 8 8 8 888 8 8 g 8 -ll ! 8 S ~ ~ g o 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g g " ~ ~ ~ :;:: ~ M M ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ 8 8 ~ ~ [ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ i ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ r .. ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ 2 g g 8 8 8 888 8 8 8 8 8 8 g 8 ! e~~g88~ ! ~ i ~ ~ ~ 8 g ~ ~ ; ~ ~ E i ~ ~ ~ p i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ; ~ t ~. 2 ~ i ~ ~ * * tl i ~ g g 8 8 g 8 ~ 8 ~ 8 g 8 ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ _ ~ 8 ~ 8 8 8 ~ i ~ 8 8 8 " ~ E * ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ Iii ~ i ~ i n 8 , ill "!l'"Ill 1l: ~ -z: * "!l' ~ ~ ~ :: ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 " " , I fl ll: ~ i i ~ ~ ~ 8 g ~ ! ! ~ s ~ ~ ~ 8 D ~ ~ r i ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 8 g 8 g 8 S g 8 b 88-8 8 8 8 8 ':' ":' ~ ~ -i'Hl ~ 8 8 8 8 :'l u~ 88 , i "r ~ -~-~~~~ !!i 8" is '" 8" .. * .. .. !hjj!1i~ ., is 8 8 ~ li: 8" 8 "r"r,l:: ~~i-!;l$~ 8" 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ $ ~ ~ t 8 ~ 8" 8 8 8 ; i ~ * ,s g 88888 . . . ~ t; ~ ~ ; i ; _ ~ ~ ~ J tl ~ j i ~ 8 ~ 8 8 0 8 8 g g g i ' ~ 8 ~ !!i o ~ I ~ ~ i ; ~ ~ . t: ~ i ~ ., i c g ~ , ; , , 8 ;:t; , . 8 , -,:0 ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ! ~ ~ ! ! ~ i i ~ , 8 8 " g i 88' g~~~~~ 8 8 ~ 8 S " ! i , , ~ 0 ":' ":' " " !' o 8 " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ii: ~ " , , - " - _ ~ i , r ..'" _ i '.~ g ;:3 ;:3 ~ 8 , g 8" 8 8" 8 S ; g t:l g: , g 8 S ~ ~ ~ g 8 ~ 8 8 ; ~ s ~ i ~ _ ~ i i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g i ~ i i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ,~ s S 8" 8 8 8 8" 8" 8 8 ~ g g ~ 8 8 8" 8 8" 8 S ~ 8 8 g g 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 , ! i ! 8' , 8 ~ I ~ ~ ~ t ~ : I 8 8" 8" 8 8" 8" 8 8 8 ~ 8" ; ~ ~ ti\ ill 8 , , ~ ~ ~ ':' ':' H~n 8 8" 8" 8 8 . . II , 8 i i ! i " ; 1i ; , , , , " 8 8 8 8" ~ 8" 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ i i , 8 , , i, " , liil 8 8 8 8 8 ~ -,:0 r t: ~ dll! 8 8 888 t: S r ~ .. .. ~ 8 i ii,! g , ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8" 8" g . -~ ~ , , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ _ _ i g ~ ~ ~ ~ t: ~ 8 i i i 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ 8 8" 8 g 8 8" 8 888 "r 8 ~ r "r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ g ~ g g 8 g 888 ~ t: ~ t: ~ ~ "r ~ ! ! i ~ " > ! ~ ~ i I i 888 8 8 8 8 8 8 888 t ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ "r ! i i ~ ~ i ~ 8 g ~ g ~ i ~ ~ 8" 8 8 8 C 8 ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 8 . g ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 g i! 0 " ~ i i i 8 g 8 g 8 8 ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ tt ! * * u, ~ ~ ~ 0 8" 8 8 ; 8 * 8 g g 8 8 8 8" 8 ~ ~ 8! 8 8 ;:; 8" 8" 1': ~" , , , . , 8 , ~ i 8 , " ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ i 8" 88"8 i ~ , , tltl . I . , ..':::,8 g ~ ~ 8888 " 8 ~ i 8 g, i ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ i 8 8" 2: g: - . ~ g g 888 . ~ , " " , ~ [$ s g 8" 8" 8" 8 ; g i , , i e ! ! . ! i , o ~ o ~ I t ~ ! ! ! 3 ~ [ ~ " " , ~ ~ ! 888 o ! ~ ~ ! ! > , Il . - ; ~ ~ ! , i ~ ~ g t< ~ 88 i j I i t ~ J ! , o . < ~ I , ~ "' , . ! , , , < . ~ I . ! ~ g iil .... s u ~ 3 N _ i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ! ! i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ! ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :;! :;! ~ ;,: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ " 0' 5" z ~ ~ i ;2;- ~ - o ! , ., ., rrl 0; ~ ~L" 0 'Ii ~ 2 ~ "" :<:: Z 0 ~l.HH z ~ ~ : : i' ;l! " , ill - g ~ x ~~~~6~ rn ~ ::; =I ;X ~ '" ~ ~ ~ E ; ~ ~ ~ ~ m", '" 0 ~ E E ~ ~ ~ . ~ g E: >i '" ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c z z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:q ~ ~ .II, ~ ~ g ;;j ':i .l1 i': ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 ~ 8 ~ f ~ ~ ~ 8 t g ~ g ~ ~ e e ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t : i , 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ , , , " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < < n , " ~ , i ~ ~ ~ o 0 , , n,!! ' f' B,~. ! II! !!, l ~ t ~ " " . ~ --< ~ '" 'I ~ ~ ~ oj ~ 8 8 I;' .11 .... 0 :!: i! ~ ~ ; :':i g ~ ~ ~ ;;: ~ ~ ~ ;ii ~ o !" .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u 8 ~ Q 0 Q 0 8 8 8 8 g 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ w i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ " ~ . - :;; -.. .. -~ .. ~ ~ ~~~*_~~1iJ i 88 8 8 8 8 8 8 . " b ~ r~ ~ ~ " ~ ;; ! i ~ r ~ ;! g !i tl ~ 88 g ~ 8 i 8 " " :;':;!; 88 r ~ ~ i ! ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ 8 g ~ 8' 8 ;;; 8 8 ~ 8 !': i i ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 . , 'i,H 8 ~ g ~ 8 8 888 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ 8' ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ Fj -~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ 8' i~hH 8 8 8 8 8. g dn g ~ ~ ~ ~ :IS .. tz .. .. s ~ ~ ~ g ~ 8 8 :3 ~ 8 8' ~ ! i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =~8 ;;~88 ~ & ij i r ~ r 8 i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E i i i ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 888 8 :3 " ~ ~ n ~ 88' ~ l': ~ ~ i:: . - * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s s s ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E;; ~ [3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ""Ie ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .;; ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' ''''~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o , , , :: i ~ .9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !'J ~ g; g: a ~ ~ 5 5 ~ g g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '4 4 4 4 ~ ~ ~ C L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ! ! i ; < ; ; ! ! ! ! ! 3 j i " , , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ! " 0 " , , ! ! !! .; ~ ~ " . ~ ~ ~ f r ~ M i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi 0 0 0 0 n:, o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~~~~~ "'''''' " " ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > . > :l '" J: ~:3~~~8~ t! ~ ~ ~ i i ~"t~'~M'~ 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ 8 g , l: g g D ; t' g 8 ~ ~.~.. o 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g 8 L l\: r 1l ~ ~~~~~g 888 8 8 " 8 , - -~-- '" ~ ., D ~ ~ ~88~~!~ 15 8 8 8 8 8 8 , " 8 ~ 11 I :8 :;l g 1:: 11 ; ~ & ~ ; ~ f ~ g ~ t 8 '8 '8 '8 '8 g ~ 8 8 8 8 8 Die 0 $ ~ ~ 888 8 8 - " ::: ::: , , ~ ~ ~ i ~ i f ~ i i ~ i i 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g 8 8 . " @ ~ Ii '" " 0 , . ;;: r " 8 g e tl ~ 1; t:: '8 '8 ~ ~ .~ '8 8 '8 8 '8 - r - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ -;!~~~~i~1ll~~ 8 8 '8 8 8 8 '8 8 8 8 8 . . t ~ 8 ~ g :3 :3 :3 8 8 ~ ~ ~ i a i ~ ~ rr ~ 888 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 j ~ t 8 8 8 ~ Z ~ I:'!!!!! ~ ~ ~ 8' 8' 8 8 , ! 8 8 ~ ;! ~ 8 ~ ,,'--' ~ l'1 8 8 g g g 8 g .. ~ i 8 g r _ Q t' ~ ! i!l~!83~~~~~ _ 8 t g ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ::.: i ; ~ t' ~ ~ z ~ it Oi ~ 1:I~~a~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 n l': 8 i r ~ ~ ~ ~ !! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i J J ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ i @ ; r ~ ~ ; ~ $ 8 ~ 8 g M 8 8 g ~ ~ ~ g ~ 8 .'3 .'3 "8 ~ "8 "8 8 "8 "8 8 "8 8 8 ~ 8 ~ "8 . " ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ " i , ! i! r ..; tI n~h.1 g g ~ ldd: 8 i ~ tr -,: -,: ~ ~ ~ * J ,. li ::: li ~ l'l ~ i i ~ ~ i i ; ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ li ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ,in" "8 l!1 g ~ l!1 - - r - ~ ~ ! ! ~ ~ i t ~ I ~ ~ ; ~ i ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ 8 3 ~ 8 ~ 8 ~ 8 8 g ~ g Z 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 H g" ....:t ~ i ~ ~ ~ 8 r r Q -,: r _ ~ : ~ ~ ; 8 @ 8 3 ~ ~ ~ I ! ~ ~ g~~~d; 8 8 8' g g S 8 ~ i i 88 8 8 g 8 l! !! tl ~ ~U!~g" g 8 8 8 8 g "8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~!~/'.l~ *8:3;80:;:; , ~ 8 ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ , " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ S S Q ~"8 ~"8 ~ 8 ~ g ~ ~ i ~ ~ -,: 8 8 8 8 8 "8 8 "8 "8 g ~~~~~~ii 8 "8 8 "8 "8 "8 "8 8 " d , 8 rtl~r-~ ~~~~~t 8 8 8 8 "8 8 ~ ~ x: '@ 1~ ~ ~ is 8 "8 "8 ~.. ~ l ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ f ! ! i ~ i . i i I ! ! ! l I g ! 8 ! . ! ! I I i 8' ~ 8' 8' 8' g 88'8 ~ '8 8 8 888 8 8 ~ 8' 8' 8 8' 8 8 ~ ~ i g ~ 8 " 3 li i 8' g i ~ ~ "88" 8 i " , n 88 ! i i .88 '" .., i! ~ ; !! i~~~~~ !'I888S 8 ~~lj~~i~i E ~ ~ <3 l'l ~ , ! 8 ~ 1;\ " , r i ~ ~ 888 g " '" ;!! ~ !! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~~~~8 8 8 8 8 8 , " nii 8 8 8 8 tlt:l:l't: !! ji,,,nnh 8 8 S "8 8 8 8 8 .'3 8 .'3 " - ~ g ~ 888 ~ ~ i ~ :5 '8 8 :5 , ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - .. - ~ ~ dldi! 8888888 ~it'"~~~ 8 8 8 ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ , , " ~ g , , ~ ~ i ~ ~ S ~ i ~ "8 8 "8 " 8 8 8 8 g 8 8 S g ": '" .. - 8 8 8 i ~ 8 .'3 8 8 .'3 8 ~ ~ ~ "8 ~ , j , < ~ i ~ <:l a ~ '! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r . , ~ ~ ~ o ; ! " " :;l III , , , ! i i 1 > ~.: I I ; 8 , ; , ~ ~ ~ ~ , ! ! ! ! ! . ~ 8 ~ ;: i ~ , :;: ! ! i If ~ I , ! ! ! , ~ If ~ ~ ! I " i i 8 ~ 8 '" < ~ . ~ ~!fILLS City ot Arden Hills Request for Council Action Prepared by: SC Depl.: CD Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/2005 Final Action Needed By: 8/8/2005 Agenda Item i~ Consider Extension of Roval Oaks Purchase AQreement Budgeted Amount: $0.00 Actual Amount: Funding Source: . . Council Action Request: Motion to direct staff to either negotiate with Royal Oaks regarding a purchase agreement extension or other direction as appropriate Staff Recommendation: Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): I2':l Memo/Letter: Staff memo dated August 1, 2005 D Resolution (No. ) D Ordinance (No. ) D Engineering Recommendation: D Attorney Recommendation: I2':lOther: Prior Purchase Agreement dated April 11, 2005 Royal Oaks letter, dated August 1, 2005 requesting an extension Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: See memorandum Action Not Applicable . . .... Not AppHcable Not applicable Page 1 of 1 ~ ~HILLS . MEMORANDUM DATE: August 1,2005 Agenda Item 6.B TO: Mayor and City Council Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator FROM: Scott Clark, Community Development Director SUBJECT: City HalllPublic Works Site Purchase Agreement Discussion Introduction On July 18, 2005, the City Council voted three to two to approvc the Planned Unit Development and related documents for the Royal Oaks condominium office park located at the old City Hall site at the southwestern quadrant of Hamline Avenue and Highway 96. Since the Planned Unit Development required four votes to affirm, the project was denied. Due to this action staff is seeking direction from the Council on how to proceed with the disposal of the property. There appears to be three general options: . 1) Do nothing for a selected period of time. 2) Renegotiate with Royal Oaks regarding a new purchase agreement. 3) Start a new sales process which could include a request for proposal, marketing by signage and/or contacting selected developer/brokers as appropriate. Status of Existinl! Purchase Al!reement According to the City Attorney the "existing" purchase agreement between Royal Oaks and the City was to be acted on by July 27,2005. Royal Oaks' options were two fold: 1) Formally terminate the agreement in writing or 2) By default, the City could cause Royal Oaks to purchase the property for the stated purchase price (purchase agreement attachcd). Royal Oaks did not want to effectively do either of these options but instead wants the Council to consider extending the existing agreement (or establishing a new agreement) that would terminate in March, 2006 (see attached). The reason for this date is that based on the City's Zoning Ordinance a new planning proposal can not be submitted for six months. Options Analvsis The following discusses some of the issues associated with the three general options described in . the introduction. City Hall/Public Works Site Purchase Agreement Discussion August 1,2005 Page 2 of2 . . I) Do Nothing Option: This is always an option but appears to be against the Council's objective of liquidating the property. The City has spent a considerable amount of money in enviromnental analysis of the property, wetland delineation, establishment of building demolition issues and an appraisal of the property. In addition, because of the past planning action, the site and design issues have been specifically identified, albeit no final resolution to the issues were completed. 2) Renegotiate with Roval Oaks: This appears to be the most straight forward option and one that could be acted on and completed by the spring of 2006. If the Council desires to proceed with this option, direction should be agreed upon as to whether a new appraisal should be ordered and the level of specificity within a new agreement. Most purchase agreements are written with the end use of the property generally described. Since the City has undergone hours of public testimony, had Planning Commission review and in-depth technical review of the site, one option would be to write into the purchase agreement specifics such as allowable street access, signage, square footage of buildings and other considerations. This may appear to take away from the planning process, but as stated previously, all issues have bcen raised and discussed. The last comment is iflesser building square footage is allowed, the developer will be asking for a lower purchase price. 3) Start a New Sale Process: If the Council seeks this direction, a key question will be the acceptable uses for the property. Based on the past planning application there was an agreement not to allow retail or restaurants. If this perspective remains, the list of acceptable uses that the City could submit, with a request for proposal to the dcvelopment/broker community, will be very limited. The other major question on request for proposals is whether the City will allow a company to submit a proposal "to act" as a broker on the property for a period of time. Most developers/brokers do not have a project "in hand" that could immediately be built on the property, so they will seek timc to put a project together. The results could mean a sale and dcvelopment in 2007. Conclusion . If the Council's objective is to have a sale and development occur in 2006, staffrecommends that the purchase agreement for Royal Oaks be renegotiated. The end land use appears to be acceptable and the kcy issues will be renegotiation of a sales price if lesser square footage is mandated, and finalizing site and design issues. The alternative, and potentially longer process, appears to be a general request for proposal, or simple advertisement to the developer/broker community, for a period of time to see what proposals could come forth. l\EarthIPlanninglMisc FileslCily Hall-PW Sitelcouncil-purchase agreement discussion-August 8 200S.doc ROYAL IjOOJOA KS --- REALTY, INC. August 1, 2005 Scott M. Clark Community Development Director City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Old City Hall site Dear Scott M. Clark: I am requesting that the City Council extend my purchase agreement to March 1, 2006. Thank you for your time, Sincerely, Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. ~-i'p-fh~~d(~ by! arcel Eibens einer, President . . . lOOO COLlnty Road E West, Suite 150 . Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 . (651) 483-55113 . Fax (651) 483-5642 wwvv. ray a I oa ksrea Ity. com . . . DRAFT #3 REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the 111:h. day of AT;xi \ , 2005, by and between CITY OF ARDEN HillS. a Minnesota statutory city, (the "Seller") and ROYAL OAKS REALTY, INC., a Minnesota corporation (the "Purchaser") . In consideration of the mutual covenants and undertakings contained herein the parties agree as follows: 1. Sale and Purchase of Property. Seller agrees to selL and Purchaser agrees to purchase, certain real property situated in the City of Arden Hills, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, consisting of: 1 .1 certain land legally described as follows, to-wit: (See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein), together with all the appurtenant rights. miner rights, privileges, and easements belonging thereto (collectively the "Land"); 1 .2 all buildings, structures, and other improvements located on the land as well as all fixtures located therein and lhereon (collectively the "Improvements"); The Land and Improvements are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Real Property". 2. Purchase Price. Purchaser agrees to pay to Seller, as the purchase price for the Real Property (the "Purchase Price"), the sum of One Million Three Hundred Eighty-five Thousand Dollars ($1,385,000.00) payable in the following manner: 2.1 $25,000.00, as earnest money (the "Earnest Money") upon execution of this Real Estate Purchase Agreement by Purchaser; 2.2 $1,360,000.00. in cash or certified funds on the date of Closing. 3. Title. Purchaser, at its sole cost, shall obtain a title insurance commitment and policy. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of closing, Purchaser shall provide Seller with a copy of the title commitment If title to the Real Property, as evidenced by the Commitment is not good and marketable of record in Seller and is not made so by the Closing Date, ~ ~ILLS City of Arden Hills CONTRACT NO. 05-03 Purchaser may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Seller in . which event this Agreement shall become null and void, Seller shall refund the Earnest Money and neither party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder. 4. Survey. Purchaser, at its sole cost shall prepare a survey for the Real Property and may enter upon the Real Property for such purpose. Purchaser shall hold Seller harmless from any liability resulting solely from the entering upon the Real Property or the performing of any of the functions necessary to prepare a survey pursuant to this Section 4 (the "Survey"). Purchaser shall provide Seller with a copy of the Survey. 5. Inspection. Purchaser, its agents and designees, are hereby granted the right at any time or times after the date hereof to inspect analyze, and test the Real Property and its various components. Purchaser shall hold Seller harmless from any liability resulting solely from the entering upon the Real Property or the performing of any of the tests or inspections referred to in this Section 6 by Purchaser, its agents or designees. 6. "AS IS" Condition. The Real Property described herein is being sold in an "AS IS" condition. Purchaser acknowledges that it reviewed the Demolition Survey Report attached as Exhibit B; the Wetland Delineation Report attached as Exhibit c; the Environmental Condition Report, attached as Exhibit 0; and has inspected the Real Property. As part of the consideration for the purchase of the Real Property, Purchaser, at its sole cost will undertake any remediation procedures required by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency or otherwise, as necessary, to remove any Hazardous Substances (as hereinafter defined), if any, from the Real Property and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from the payment of any such costs. . 7. Covenants and Warranties of Seller. Seller covenants and warrants to Purchaser as follows: 7.1 Ownership of Real Property. Seller is the owner of good, marketable. and insurable fee title to the Real Property free and clear of all title defects, options, rights of first refusal. easements, restrictive covenants, encroachments, survey defects, restrictions or limitations on the Real Property, liens or encumbrances, except those of record. 7.2 Encroachments. There are no encroachments upon any of the Real Property and no portion of any Improvement encroaches upon any 2 . . 7.3 property not included within the Real Property, or upon the area of any easemenf affecting the Real Property, except those of record. Real Property Taxes. Seller does not have knowledge of any pending or contemplated reassessment of the Real Property. Seller has paid all real estate taxes. if any, on the Real Property due and payable through 2004. 7.4 Hazardous Substances. Seller does not currently use the Real Property for disposal or storage of any Hazardous Substance and, except as indicated on Exhibit D attached hereto, Seller has no knowledge of any noxious, toxic. hazardous, unsafe or environmentally unsound materials, substances, wastes or Hazardous Substances (as hereinafter defined) in, at, under or on the Real Properly whether there by intent, spill, release, discharge, disposal, storage or any other means. Seller has not received any notice from any government agency, board, commission, authority or any other entity, and is not a party to any legal or administrative action or proceeding, concerning or relating in any way to the spill, release, discharge, transportation, disposal, storage or presence of hazardous or regulated substances or wastes in, at. under, on, or concerning the Real Property, including any pending, or contemplated search or investigation of the Real Property or any portion thereof with respect thereto. Except as identified on Exhibit 0, Seller has no knowledge of any activity on the Real Property which would subject any owner or operator thereof to damages, penalties, injunctive relief or costs or remediation or cleanup under any federal, state or local law. For the purposes of this Agreement. the term "Hazardous Substance means that and/or similar terms as defined in Section 1 04( 14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation a Liability Act of 1980, and as amended, 42 U.S.e. Sec. 9601 et seq. (14), and Section 2(8) of the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act. and as amended. Minnesota Statutes See. 115B.02(8), and includes the term "regulated substance" as defined in Section 9001 (2) of the underground Storage Tank Act. and as amended, 42 U.S.e. Sec. 6991 (2) and the term "hazardous waste" as defined in Section 1004(5) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. and as amended, 42 USe. See. 6903(5), and includes all regulations issued pursuant to any of the above statutes, and any unsafe, noxious, toxic or hazardous substance or similar terms under any other state, federal or local law, and any other applicable environmental, land . . 3 use or similar act, statute, ordinance or regulation or as alleged or determined under common law. The term "Hazardous Substance" includes asbestos and related substances, PCBs, and gasoline, kerosene and all other liquid or viscous petroleum products. Seller has complied and caused the Real Property to comply with all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and authorities having jurisdiction over Seller, the Real Property and the use by Seller of the Real Property, relating to any Hazardous Substances or material. . 8. Closino. Subject to the conditions contained herein, the closing shall take place on or before July 27, 2005. The Closing may take place on such other date as is mutually agreed upon, or such other date as this transaction actually closes as determined in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement (the "Closing Date"]. The closing shall take place at the offices of Purchaser's Title Company or at such other place as is mutually agreeable. At the closing, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser: 8.1 A Warranty Deed, properly executed on behalf of Seller. 8.2 A standard Seller's Affidavit with respect to judgments. bankruptcies, tax liens, mechanics liens. parties in possession, unrecorded interests, encroachment or boundary line questions, and related matters, properly executed on behalf of Seller. . 8.3 An affidavit of Seller in form and content satisfactory to Purchaser stating that Seller is not a "foreign person" within the meaning of Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code. Upon delivery of the foregoing items, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller the portion of the Purchase Price payable at the closing. 9. Taxes, Assessments and Utility Charaes. Seller shall pay all real estate taxes payable prior to the year of closing. Real estate taxes due and payable in the year of closing shall be prorated as of the date of closing on a daily basis. Seller shall pay all special assessments levied or pending as of the date of closing. All utility charges shall be prorated as of the date of closing. 10. Insurance. Seller hereby agrees that until the Date of Closing it will keep the real Property insured against loss due to fire and other causes as are covered by "extended coverage"insurance. Such insurance shall be issued by an insurer authorized to issue insurance in the State of Minnesota and shall be in an amount equal to the full insurable value of the Improvements. based on 4 . . . . current replacement cost. Such policies shall at the option of Purchaser be assigned to Purchaser at closing. 11 . Continqencies. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement. the consummation of this Agreement and the closing provided in paragraph 8 hereof is hereby expressly conditioned upon Purchaser receiving assurances satisfactory to Purchaser, in Purchaser's sole discretion, that: 11.1 Accuracy of Representations and Warranties. The representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement shall be true in all material respects on and as of the Closing Date with the same force and effect as though made on and as of the Closing Date (Le., a representation that a state of facts exists on or as of the date hereof shall be deemed to be a representation that such state of fact exists on or as of the Closing Date. and a representation that a state of facts has or has not changed between a date prior to the date hereof and the date hereof shall be deemed to be a representation that such state of facts has or has not changed between such prior date and the Closing Date), except as affected by transactions contemplated hereby and except to the extent that any such representations or warranties which were made as of a specified date shall have been true on and as of such date. 11.2 Performance of Aqreement. Seller has performed all obligations and agreements and conditions contained in this Agreement on Seller's part to be performed or complied with at or prior to the Closing Date. 11.3 Development Permits. Adoption of appropriate resolutions and issuance of development permits which allow the Real Property to be developed for an office/condominium project of approximately 70,000 square feet; provided that nothing herein shall obligate the Seller to issue development permits unless the Purchaser's development application complies with Seller's development regulations. 11.4 Park Dedication Fee. The park dedication fee for the office condominium project shall be $40,000.00. If the nature of the project changes, the City reserves the right to recalculate the park dedication fee required for the revised project. 5 If the contingencies set forth in this paragraph 1 ] are not satisfied, . Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice of termination to Seller on or before the Closing Date. In the event that Purchaser gives Seller any such written notice of termination, this Agreement shall be null and void, Seller shall refund the Earnest Money, and neither party shall have any further rights, obligations, or liability hereunder. 12. Risk of Loss. Risk of loss to the Real Property prior to the time of closing shall remain in Seller. In the event that prior to the time of closing, proceedings for the condemnation of the Real Property, or any interest therein. or any portion thereof are commenced by governmental authority having jurisdiction to do so, or the Real Property, or any interest therein, or any portion thereof, is damaged or destroyed, Purchaser may, at its option, terminate this Agreement by written notice to Seller whereupon this Agreement shall be null and void, Seller shall refund the Earnest Money, and neither party shall have any further rights. obligations, or liability hereunder. In the event of any such condemnation, destruction or any damage to the Real Property, or any interest therein, or any portion thereof, Seller agrees to fully inform Purchaser regarding any insurance providing coverage with respect thereto and the probable amount of any condemnation award or insurance proceeds recoverable on account thereof, and Seller shall, if this Agreement is not terminated on account thereof, assign to Purchaser its rights to any such condemnation award or . insurance proceeds. 13. Notices. All documents to be delivered and all correspondence and notices to be given in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing and given by personal delivery or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage repaid, addressed as follows: If to Purchaser: Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. Attn: Marcel Eibensteiner, President 1000 County Road E West suite] 50 Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 If to Seller: City of Arden Hills Attn: Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 With a copy to: Peterson, Fram & Bergman, P.A. Attn: Jerome P. Filla 50 East Fifth Street, Suite 300 6 . . . . st. PauL Minnesota 55101 Each such mailed notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given to or served upon, the party to whom it is addressed on the date the same is deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, properly addressed in the manner above provided. Either party hereto may change such party's address for the service of notice hereunder by written notice of said change to the other party hereto, in the manner above specified ten (10) days prior to the effeelive date of said change. 14. Assiqnment. This Agreement may not be assigned by Purchaser.. 15. Commissions. Seller warrants and represents that it has dealt with no realtor or broker in connection with this transaelion and will indemnify, defend and hold harmless Purchaser against any claim made by an agent or broker for a commission or fee based on aels or agreements of Seller. Purchaser warrants and represents that it has not dealt with a realtor or broker in conneelion with this transaelion and that it will indemnity. defend and hold harmless Seller against any claim made by an agent or broker for a commission or fee based on aels or agreements of Purchaser. 16. Survive Closina. All of the covenants, warranties, and provisions of this Agreement shall survive and be enforceable after the closing of this transaction. 1 7. Complete Aqreement. This is a final Agreement between the parties and contains their entire agreement and supersedes all previous understandings and agreements, oral or written. relative to the subjeel matter of this Agreement. 18. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. 19. Riqht to Repurchase. The parties agree that Seller shall have the option to repurchase the Property from the Purchaser (the "Repurchase Option") if construction of the office/condominium projeel has not begun by May 1, 2006 (the "Construelion Date"). The Construelion Date is subjee! to extension due to force majeure, the number of days past July 27,2005 to the ae!ual Closing Date, or the number of days the Purchaser is unable to construe! due to winter conditions. If exercised. the parties shall negotiate in good faith toward finalizing a Repurchase Option agreement. The Repurchase Option agreement shall provide (i) that the repurchase price shall be equal to the Purchase Price under 7 this Agreement, plus the amount of park dedication fee paid by Purchaser: and Iii) Purchaser shall agree to terminate this Agreement and release its interests. . 20 Captions. The paragraph headings or captions appearing in this Agreement are for convenience only, are not a part of this Agreement, and are not to be considered in interpreting this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf by its duly authorized representatives, and the Seller has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf by its duly authorized representatives on or as of the date first above written. SELLER: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS - By: Z{~ :i~ / Beverly liko ski Title: Mayor PURCHASER: ROY AL OAKS REALTY, INC. By i1!Af(~L. arcel Eibenst Iner President . F:\users\Jonice\Jerry\Arden Hills\Purchme Agreement. Prior City AOM Office-3.doc 8 . . . . EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REAL PROPERTY The west 1072.5 feet of the North 276.82 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 22, Township 30, Range 23, Ramsey County, Minnesota Subject to easements and restrictions of record. [Exact legal to be determined by survey] e e e Prepared by: PH ~ Dept.: Com. ev, Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/2005 Final Action Needed By: 9/26/2005 ~ ~HILLS City ot Arden Hills Request for Council Action Agenda Item .11I Resolution No. 05-52: ADorovinQ a Minor Subdivision/Lot Consolidation for 3568 RidQewood Ct. (PC #05-18) Budgeted Amount: $0.00 Actual Amount: $0.00 Funding Source: N/A Council Action Request: Consider Resolution No. 05-52 which would approve the requested Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 05-52; A Resolution Approving a Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation for 3568 Ridgewood Court. Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): ISI Memo/Letter: August 8, 2005 - Staff Report to the City Council August 3, 2005 - Staff Report to the Planning Commission ISI Resolution (No. 05-52; Approving A Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation for 3568 Ridgewood Ct.) D Ordinance (No. ) D Engineering Recommendation: D Attorney Recommendation: D Other: Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: Page 1 of 1 ~ ~HlLLS . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 05-52 RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION/LOT CONSOLIDATION FOR 3568 RIDGEWOOD COURT WHEREAS: on July 27, 2005 William Mitchell, the property owner of 3568 Ridgewood Court, submitted a completed application for review of a Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation which would subdivide a 5,600 square foot triangular piece of property from 3568 Ridgewood Court and consolidate the 5,600 square foot piece with the property directly north at 3576 Ridgewood Court in Arden Hills. WHEREAS: on August 3, 2005, the Planning Commission reviewing the application by William Mitchell and at the conclusion of the public hearing the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to one (1) condition of approval and after making a finding that the proposed subdivision and consolidation will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties or on the community as a . whole. WHEREAS: on August 8, 2005, the City Council received the recommendations of the Planning Commission. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Council of the City of Arden Hills approves the Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation for 3568 Ridgewood Court, dated August 8, 2005. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARDEN HILLS THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2005. Beverly Aplikowski, Mayor ATTEST: Michelle A. Wolfe, City Administrator e . . . ~ ~LLS MEMORANDUM DATE: Agenda Item 6. C August 8, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner ~ SUBJECT: PC #05-18, William Mitchell 3568 Ridgewood Ct. Minor Subdivision/Lot Consolidation Requested Action Consider the requested Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation. Planninl! Commission Recommendation At their August 3, 2005 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #05-18 and recommended approval (5-0) of the minor subdivision and lot consolidation, after making a finding that the proposed subdivision and consolidation will not have an adverse impact on the sUHounding properties or on the community as a whole; subject to the following condition: I. Recording with Ramsey County. The applicant shall file the minor subdivision and lot consolidation with the Ramsey County recorder and shall provide the City with a recorded copy. Deadline for Al!ency Actions - September 26, 2005 The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on July 28, 2005 Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue, the City must act on this request by September 26, 2005 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for and additional 60 day review period. The City may with the petitioners' consent extend the review period beyond the 120 days. Options 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial with reasons for denial. If the City denies the petitioners request, "...it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time it denies the request." \\Metro-inet.us\ArdenHills\Planning\Planning Cases\2005\05-t8 Mitchell Minor SubdivisiQIl (PENDING)\08-08-05 CC Report 05-18.doc Page 1 of2 4. Table for additional information. Attachments . 6C-I August 3, 2005 - Staff Report to the Planning Commission. . N:\PJanningCases\2005\05-18 Mitchell Minor Subdivision (PENDING)\08-08-05 CC Report OS-I8.doc Page 2 of2 . . . . City Council Meeting August 8, 2005 Attachment 6C - 1 ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM . DATE: August 3, 2005 PC Agenda Item 4.A TO: Planning Commission FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner SUBJECT: PC #05-18, William Mitchell 3568 Ridgewood Ct. Minor Subdivision/Lot Consolidation Requested Action Consider the requested Minor Subdivision and Lot Consolidation. Backl!round Surrounding Area East Low Density Residential R-l: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached Residential Low Density Residential R.I: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached Residential Low Density Residential R-I: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached Residential Low Dcnsity Residential R.l: Single Family Residential Single Family Detached Residential North South West Site Data Low Density Residential Single Family Residential R-t: Single Family Residential .691 acres (30,100 square feet) Slopes downward from east to west toward Siems Court. Overview The applicant is proposing to subdivide his lot and remove a triangular piece of property of about 5,600 square feet (.1286 acres). The applicant would then have the property consolidated with N:\PJanning Cases\2005\05-18 Mitche!l MinOT Subdivision (PENDING)\08-03-05 PC Report Mitchell Minor Subdivision PC~05-18.doc Page 1 of3 . . . . , the property to the north (3576 Ridgewood Ct.). The applicant is in the process of selling his home; by subdividing and consolidating the subject piece of property, existing sightlines would be preserved for the neighboring property owner. The applicant's property which was larger than the district requirements to begin, with will be left with a property which would still meet all of the requirements. The consolidation of this new piece with the property to the north actually improves the situation for that property as it appears that the house and deck there were nonconforming with City setback regulations. Since this is not creating a new lot no park dedication would be assessed. Plan Review 1. Zoning ~ Meets Requirements Single Family Detached Residential is a permitted use in the R-l: Single Family Residential Zoning District. Building Setbacks Following is a compmson of the proposed setbacks as compared with the setback standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. Minimum Setback Standards 3568 Ridgewood Ct. 93' 68' 36' 3576 Ridgewood Ct. 105' 7.55' 38' 2. Division/Consolidation - Meets Requirement Chapter II of the City Code lists the requirements for subdividing and consolidating property. Section 1150.04 discusses the procedures for "Division or Consolidation of Platted Lots of Record". Since the subject property is platted, and is being proposed for subdivision and consolidation, this is the section that would explain how the City should proceed on this matter. Requirements listed under Section 1150.04 include: a survey showing the existing and proposed lots, lots which meet City requirements for the zoning district, a determination regarding public welfare, conformity with other aspects ofthe Subdivision chapter as determined necessary, and payment of filing fees. Staff has reviewed these criteria and determined that: the surveys submitted by the applicant meet City standard, the resulting lots after division and consolidation would meet the requirements for lots in the R-1 District, the proposed division/consolidation will not be N:\Planning Cases\2005\05-18 Mitchell Minor Subdivision (PENDING)\08-03-05 PC Report Mitchell Minor Subdivision PC-OS-18.doc Page 2 of3 detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to adjacent tracts in the approximate area, and filing fees have been paid. . Staff Recommendation In Planning Case #05-18 staff recommends approval of the Minor Subdivision/Lot Consolidation William Mitchell, after making a fmding that the proposed subdivision meets City standards and will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties or on tbe community as a whole; subject to the following condition: A. Recording with Ramsey County. The applicant shall file the minor subdivision and lot consolidation with the Ramsey County recorder and shall provide the City with a recorded copy. Options 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial with reasons for deniaL If the 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. Deadline for Al!encv Actions - September 26, 2005 The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on July 28, 2005 . Pursuant to Minnesota State Statue, the City must act on this request by September 26,2005 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for and additional 60 day review period. The City may with the petitioners' consent extend the review period beyond the 120 days. Attachments 4a-l Location Map, other pertinent maps 4a-2 Plans and statement of request submitted by the applicant N:\Planning Cases\2005\05-18 Mitchell Minor Subdivision (pENDING)\08-D3-05 PC Report Mitchell Minor Subdivision PC--05-18.doc Page 3 of3 . " Planning Commission Meeting August 3, 2005 . Attachment 4a - 1 . . . ~ ;:\ ~ 8N~'" ~ >,.;::8 ~ I~:gxE :5g.z8!.~ EI~ ~ ~:l~~-E cs:x;nG O~~~~ d~I ~ 2 ~ c o :;::;0.. ~<<J o:E -' <{z - ill ill u.. o o CO 0 0 0 0 '<;/" '<:t II = .,.... iD l1l 0 0 (f) o o "" '" C> C> '" " ~2~" g;~ M~ g.g{HH!-~ -5 ~~~[c;!~ g~~~~~lij:g ~~~~i5{jJ~;:: E'21iliog~~ 8<;;oo~"'~~ "'~iilo.t:~ :~ ;~~~~~~~ E2~H~mJ31(l1 E g.~<i2!'!~~ l-~~~,!:~e% ~ e~.~~'~ ~~ .,ilE~g.~u!'! ~~~~g~~~ ~f5:!!i~~!~ ~~-a.!<>~E= o.~..o.~ ;;:::g~~"2~~ !~<;:t'lt~~~ "Oe!=~~hJ!.o ~ ...;;;O-.!l~'" g]::~..s:16~~ ,,"'CcolS'E<DU :glij~~~~5~ ",..;~_l'!_~Cu f~g~~~~~ ~~8~5~;:ij~ doH~"~~ o o~li}';<l-"'''' 0 C":;O,::"C1,sCo. g-ij...,g ot:'lliU m E3t:o>8 .,s~~ ~~-i-~~~!;;o gg!cc!!-,,;,utld> ",..s:*o~;:;iE~ ;$gE~*~~~ ..0 i o~. 0>"""'0 '" ",- '" ..5!.2~li uo.2g ..s'" _".!'!"'''' 001; ~...oilicE<:" ~~~~~~~;~ ~lij~gg:i5c~ ~E.2':4~~j~ f~~g2'~~..s:~ ~2 ~ ;~.26J~ 1--..s:..8"f;Z-f:g",{! _.. "'-" CD 6 '" :J ..0 '" lL 0. '" ::;: '" " '" ro U) (9 >> E :J o o >- '" " E '" lY Qj (l ... ::I o (Il , ' ~: i jl . ~ Jil ......=s,.l__ . -~ ~ iii! ~-l:::.f--"~!I::~ ~ i!~ i .It.~ll I ;-,;,!:.~!~.' H!!;.i~~.~, I t:!:~!~ - .. -.. -1- __ ! "',",',1',".', ;linH:!i r....\ilf. ... d~I'-al !d~;";': ! ,bi;!: ! m;!~r; i!;iM ':1''';, ! j:<I;H'1 ". T' ~ !"~".~!.U~. ~ i ~11~,i~l~~ ji~tl!il . , . - - · < ",' '., !11; I:~ ;; ~ j IhWi; · i ij,'.ii!t- i &P" ll~ (f) "l:il!!~ ~ :. '" i"!~ll" ! i"!~I[IJ. ~ ~ 4:< ~l I~!i t,-'"' t: }: $;i1'~f .; ~ .' .. ". 0... *-.. - t... ", '. I. _'~'<".:! ~ II) -. t:: t..t :>!:'iStl.; Ii ":"-!'" ." _ _, a. 5 :; i ~ ~u~. f I,il.,l' l.~ '- ~ !i-':Uf"l>. i i ~i:;~.I;! ~ F . j 0 - - , " I,.;.;.!! " ""'j!i1 . a,:. , i ::: g. .....1;. ., '1-:..., :,,; ;;~. .;j i " l' !, o,! a::..;. · . '" '.,. _,. "hl!:: ~ ~ 0;' '. ~., ;"'l!,! ~!. ~~i:;;il g'l !;;;"",,' o 1:; '" 11 ;. ~ t ;!~::l'" '! I, Ctl. "'l'lll' '~~. ~~, ~ z "':. ~':h -:11: '1. i g::;~i",3-~t .. I _ , ,. ~ .' ". . o. ". . , _ _ ,_, o~ ;'. .:,_ , j. '" ~ il 0:: l[, !g~.!",I;;:;t ~ t" ~::;:'I',i.,l.!.,. ...._ ::;I~.~!.i"~" t, - . - - ~i! ;,. !ii.!~l"! i 0# ~ i ~ f!_ !'< ~ M ~:;-,~!l! < "',,_ '0 __ . _ j. , ~. 0" -. a O' ':H..!>; ", -i'H,,! !'._~ ~,:.i:;li.-;f(l;; ~ ~"- ~ :. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i "II:Hh:;.! Sl- ;::It;~h '" ~ I -'l '0 ~ ,. " a -, '" . j_ " '11_".., ", 11' , '''.'_ ;~ x ., :; i 1, H{;!~j;: i ; IHI;;lo, ". <.__ " " " ""boo 0 ,~,,<'o. " .....""""""" . ~~........".:.:~~1Il1"~~~~i~t'~~I~.lItft) " 'c, .,<v .' "~~i;<~.'" .....- :Ii;:;! Z z;.: O l"lE- Oz - ll:;:, <J) ""0 - -0 > >- -0 ::.::w j~, Ucn ::i.i=' ~ ~o:;: n!~~ .........0.......",.1. :J <rill: <J) ~ o z Sf , "Si , ~ho ~i".. -" 8 ~:~ , ~<i ~ r.() -. it :Et . N ~. ~_. ';> ':5:3-- S l- '"i .~~ 0 f/~ .- ~lf . -.J I" 'f " ," " , -. ""'>" ~~tl ii, , , , . I ~ . ~. .n 00.,/ N :j ~~.. A - ~~~ Z :c "" ~." -<=tZ j;E ...W NO ll: w.." t;r.. ""0 i j , ~<, rj8 ~ "J;" ;l# If; s ~ ~ .. ~~ ~~ ;;~~~ is~~i ~~o;:;Q >- E- O '<I' N l- o -.J , , 1 , l i s~ - 15.l!:f l~iJi:;;::l f:b..:1 NI't ; l~!"i! !"l .- --\ ----~~--~ .. 6S!' '0 " ~ ~- ~"~ - () ~ ..~~ i ~ ~;~ '" ~ ~:M ':Z~_~... :illS ~ ~.",; :: "::l ~><..,.~ .11: :0-8:::- ~ ~ ; ,",2!;::I l:> ~ii '" ~ t' ~ ... ~ 't ~ ~::>J r~ -:'f~~<>... o . z w o "l i i . " g "\ {>O.OB~:~ "':! '-I: i'i li o " 0 !ill. tili],c. 11-' -'0- '0,"_._, .. ',:..'.........".,., ~'.-- '-: - - , -,.._, ..--':' o o " _n OOlI07JLO I'M l~'LnO ~ - 'N ~OIJ'llI"'!WO~I~(J\=.OJ,j\: . MJl' , o 2:: Yl", Wz ....a --<w...... -z: "'~ Ut;_"'1i 8; O:z. -011_: Yl f4 ~~l!. rn . ~:i_: - '" ",,"' -.. 15 2,..!i v ~ '~'. '"V> -oil-.. '" .~ p:: ~ ~~ We ll.z ;:;!j i~ ~~!f ~i~~7 ~l't;;~~ '.. :iN"''::;':; ~i~~i .. ~....... e ~ . >-- i:Ll > 0::: ~ w. j:r.., o i:Ll E-<- <I u,; ...... j:r.., ...... E-< O:::! i:Ll~ U~ e e e , City of Arden Hills Chapter 11 Subdivisions 1150.04 Division or Consolidation of Platted Lots of Record. In the case of an application to divide one or more lots platted into lots and blocks and designated in a subdivision plat on file and of record in the office of the recorder or registrar of titles for the county, into one or more separately described parcels, or an application for the consolidation of two or more such platted lots or parts thereof into one or more tracts, the City Council, upon review and after report of the planning commission, may approve the subdivision or consolidation, upon compliance with the follOwing conditions: Subd.1. Survey. The owner(s) ofthe platted lot(s) to be so divided or consolidated shall file with the zoning administrator a surveyor registered land survey oftbe lot(s) to be divided or consolidated. The surveyor registered land survey shall be prepared and certified by a Licensed Surveyor. Subd. 2. Relation to Zoning Ordinance. The parcels or tracts resulting from the division or consolidation, as depicted in the surveyor registered land survey, shall not have an area, dimensions or setbacks which are less than the minimum requirements specified for the zoning district in which the parcels or tracts are located in the zoning ordinance. 11 - 47 Adopted August 12, 2002 , City of Arden Hills Chapter 11 Subdivisions Subd,3. Public Welfare. It is determined that the proposed division or consolidation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to adjacent tracts in the area in which the subdivision tract is located. Subd. 4. Conformity. The proposed division or consolidation shall conform to snch other reqnirements of this chapter, which the plauning commission has specifically made such division or consolidation subject to at its first meeting at which the application for the division or consolidation is submitted. The City Council may add to or subtract from the requirements specified by the planning commission additional requirements of this chapter which it deems necessary for the protection of the health, safety, general welfare and convenience of the City and to secure the objectives ofthis chapter. Prior to the City Council's granting the owner(s) an exemption pursnant to this paragraph, the owner(s) shall comply with all the requirements of this chapter which the planning commission or City Council have specifically made the division or consolidation subject Subd. 5. Such filing fee as has been established in a resolution adopted by the Council shall be paid the zoning administrator with every application for an exemption nnder this paragraph. 11-48 Adopted August 12, 2002 e e e , e ifi 1Jf;' c "" ~.ii< >< i" !iil OJ , ,.., ;f. :;: ~ co co ... ... 'M :! ;f. ~ co ... ... ;f. - co ~ ~ '" 6 . co () ;f. N () co co 25 ... N T co '" ;f. ... . ~ co 25 M N N M co ,Q co ~ . M M . co ..... ~ :'!: .;.. .. co 0 N M co ,Q :'!:" co co N N m is '" ~ '" z co E M ~ '" .1; " a' '" ~ ~ ~ co ~ M ~ '" '€ ~ ~ <Z ~ ~ .. ~ <8 f-< " ~ .g .E u ::c N ~ '" b<) ti: co '" 'OJ U M ~ W :r: en 13 b<) f-< .... -,; ~ 0 Z ;:; ....l 3l ~ co -5 ~ -0 ~ " co '" '" ~ ~ ;::, ~' " - ...... '" ;;J ~? .s -0 0' .e- 0 :r:' m o- w ~ ~ " ~ 6 ~ ,; . .., 0.. '" ..0 .~ 1J w f-< '" " l; d ll' u .~ U Ji,s k 0 ;:; iil b<) ., .s.8 '" '" ~ ~ -" '" f-< 'E'3 '" d d 0 P. " '" en >0 >0- '" '" - ~ ~:S '" CQ '" t::l d ~~ '" .;! . ~ ,.., .; * * * * * , Planning Commission Meeting August 3, 2005 e Attachment 4a - 2 . . . . . 3568 Ridgewood Ct Arden Hills, MN 55 112 633 -%29 July 27,2005 City Planning Committee City of Arden Hills 1245 W Hwy 96 Arden Hills 55112 634 -5120 Ladies and Gentlemen: My wife and I are the owners of lots 24 and 25 at 3568 Ridgewood Court in Arden Hills. We would like to split off 1/3 ofIot 25 for combination with our neighbor's lot 26. No new lot will be created by this shift of the boundary between lots 25 and 26. The size and location of our house on the residual lots 24 and 25 would remain more than adequate to meet current city requirements. The neighbors house on lot 26 will benefit because their deck is immediately adjacent to the split off property. Attached is a recent survey showing the present and proposed boundaries, and the proposed legal descriptions. We request approval of the City of Arden Hills for the proposed change. Thank you for expeditious consideration of this request, o/L C ~William C. Mitchell ~ ~ I Carole H. Mitchell ~)~~: ~:; !l 1:1 :Ii~~ ,e, ... ." g~~ ~~i/<>--~--___ L-___,__:'~l~'N--- ~, < ,.. o IZl IZl~ ..JZ ..JZ :ai ,I" /fl' "l ,i I; ( / (- G , I II: ~~l , , / 'I k 'Sl ~~~~ /~ i'; ,In ~~; ~$o/~~~ s t" J "'.~~~ ,"H' , ~<I c ~ B~" ~i ~ ,/ I," If"'; ~ f1t ff "-~ ~ 5~3 f ~.~ ". ~J ~-----/ ~> z z - 0 ~;... 0'" - >>:z r.fJ <;:> - 0 > -u - - ;.::&; 0 o:::l ",-UlZl 00;:;: ::J ..J< "'>>: r.fJ .o- 0::: NIZl ..J 0 ",,:::l ziI: Z <z - ...~ ~ NO p::: ~< 0",- ..JO ;... ,.. ti ~ ~ "" ., .~'~ il~ :,( U o -1 rn el ~~,~ --" ;i;~~!~ ,. ~~!~ " i!lilll l' Hi~: ~~ ~- ~ ~ 8 Jlli !~ g J~ ,'. ~~ , ~iHlf~. . I' ll~~ . , ~ 0 ,! ~. ~ ~ ~ .. IS '!HH~~ , ~~ Pl". z Ji 0 , i ~ ~i1~ ~ ! ~ , f~ ~ ~ ii' . t"PI'" " ~>:~~ ii' , 1 v ;~ t~~p . r; !jJ~ 0 ~ ,~ ~ ~ j w g ~ -:; ; ~;i i 0 " 0 ! , ~ . I, ;~ i ~ , ~ .. ! " j:ii ~ " z 0 " ~ , ~ ~~~! "j ~'i 0' J 0 f~ .1: -. ! , 0 w ~ " h' i!'~" ~ e~ .. ~ ~ ., ;~iiI z ! . 0 " " ~ ! :;; ~ ~~ 1 0 !~~~i "-0 x , II: , .., i':;:J w " 1 . . if: 6~ :d 0 0 ,. 0_ " , ~ ! U in~; ~: H ! n~:;! ~~ 11 Iii '" 0 i ~ I Lf) I . N I " . ) " I- 0< ~ 0 .....J 'C::-. ,:'fco 5/ ~ t., ; ~I .% r--~~ ; I ! ~ ~ I f N w o ~ r;'T-- 1:\ #i ~lJ Iii! ~~ !r~ r'~ I-g: ", "I ' ~/ ;;--,;;1-- ~ b tb f \ - '~~..., '1 F\~' . .." Ii : ~~ ~~ l; i~~~~ i ~:3:3;tci , I- o .....J " , t i <>~ ~ ~~;~ i!~I~~ Ji~i~~ ~~~~~~~ /' I , I "-_ -.""co ~~~ "/ "''' ~. '1"'.., "." --~,;:O"!;'l] ---~ ,-- .z"O,_L_" I ^""<.lo .11),il.60 N_ ---. cl l ~ ~ } ~ :, B ~ ~, ~ :i' ! , " ~ , " ~ , o , ~ ~ o ~ , o ~ o z w ~ 60<?o(]~~~ t ~ ~ ~ i!d ';! 11 '~"")"~ 7--- -rs "".., '""'''~ '" . -v,:.3 171, '"""","lL';yJ R , l.E;o N- , " ------...... ~$~ ''7~,':.-~,,~~_~ \ ~ Wd lE:o :to ,OOVOVW "p' 0,1,0\ OJ. u ~ij~l i I {~fHji 0 iJ ~i~lH~ rn ~~8i._c' ~ ~ !~::::d3 .......:c:; ~!iIHi _"" ~ ~~~1~~~ ...... ~ I~;;~!! ~ ~ HW!!N~ ~ ~ 8~i.!Hh ~ t:LI mm~!l , \ ,,~.!: ~. ~ ""' ] " liiiiHi j ~ :/11' Ht<~~ , 111/ ;;~'" ~~ ~~ III; ~ ~~i~~ < v'j n //./ ~ ;/L~;l...!15 ~..'''''- /~ ~~~t:;"~3~ "'. 0.... .g:..:;:~~~.lii'~:" . ">~ ''-/-~" ~~ '....:~~i.~t.; .; ~5E ~ 4_ .~ C:: ,~~~' ''''''\~ ..............' ~::} ,-\' '~ , ,1,O\SlO>!OId\:N , Q , ! i lo~ , .. ~~;;;i ;ig ~g,; =!i;=;.'" @~"': ~~ ~g 62 @ ~~ 8 ~~ ~ "''' " . ~ n i , , ! >-< ~ >- ~ ~ if) ~ o ~ E-< <r: U ....... ~ ....... E-< ~, r....' ~ ..... " U" 'I f, I ' ' . 1-" .1 . _ iii!. ,_., 16 ,I l' '.i . ~i"'i' ''N t ~ /. ~ ,~- I- 1 <>, ". . ,i/ I "'. r.. . yo. :.: i':';~/~ I ,,'~I' LI1I~ 1 ,,' '.' .J....'.C.O.I . , "lr . .....' '<:"1 '?O~I -.Jfi:1 .,' ~". '-~/ '.'-"':~ l::f/ J...."'.QI'i.1 ,-'--0' (I) ._:,.:.... 01 ....."'.0"'1 "",0. 00, J. '. _. ,=,' . ..., 0.'/ .' .>--" I .r."iltIO~1 ...~ =<1 C'Y." - !n.......;' S.... ! ~....'....Lu:/' ,-c.,. .' ~.._..;0... . . . ~':I i ',!'):.'f'- Q , . ~".'[f: :n::",~:--,:: - . _'. _ .~: I, J,,' ./. "1' . ,'". / ." I 1 I EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS , , , I Mitchell Property 3568 Ridgewood Court (PIN 34.30.23.22.0027) I Lots 24 and 25, Block 1, Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota , , Tice / Wheeler Property 3576 Ridgewood Court lots 26, Block 1, Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 34.30.23.22.0028) PROPOSED FINAL DESCRIPTIONS PROPOSED FINAL DESCRIPTION FOR 1.11 TCHELL PROPERTY Lots 24 (Ind 25. Block 1, Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota, except that portion of Lot 25. Block 1, described os follows: Commencing at the Northwest comer of Section 34, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, 0 Ramsey County Survey Monument; thence S 60' 09' 00" E, bearing based on the Ramsey County Coordinate System. December 1991 AdjJstment, Q distance of 695.16 feet, more or less, to the Northeost comer of Lot 25. Block 1, Arden Hills, 0 found * inch iron pipe; thence S 10' 20' 34-" W 0 distance of 5.00 feet along the east line of said Lot 25 ond the westerly right of way of Ridgewood Court, to Q eet survey monument marked "Kemper 18407"; thence N 69 40' 43'" W a distance of 206.06 feet to (] set survey monument marked "Kemper 18-407"; thence N 0911'01. E a distance of 50.00 feet along the east right of way of Siems Court and along the west line of said Lot 25, Block 1, to 0 found *" iron pipe, for the Northwest comer of said Lot 25: thence S 7r OS' 36'" E a distance of 204.13 feet to the point of beginning. PROPOSED FINAL DESCRIPTION FOR TICE / WHEELER PROPERTY Lot 26, Block 1, Arden Hills. Ramsey County, Uinnesota, and that portion of Lot 25, Block 1, described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest comer of Section 34, Township 30 North. Range 23 West, a Ramsey County Survey Monument: thence S 60. 09' 00" E, bearing based on the Ramsey County Coordinate System, December 1991 Adjustment, a distance of 695.18 feet, more or less, to the Northeast comer of Lot 25, Block " Arden Hills, Q found 1i inch iron pipe; thence S 10' 20' 34" W Q distance of 5.00 feet along the east line of.soid Lot 25 and the westerly right of way of Ridgewood Court, to 0 set survey monument marked "Kemper 16407"; thence N 89' 40' 44'" W a distance of 206.06 feet to a set survey monument marked "Kemper 18407"; thence N 0911'0'" E a distance of 50.00 feet along the east right of way of Siems Court and aloog the west line of said Lot 25. Block 1, to 0 found %" iron pipe, for the Northwest comer of said Lot 25; thence S 77"05'36" E 0 distance of 204.13 feet to the point of beginning. DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM MITCHELL TO TICE / WHEELER ""il/I/II ~,~:.~~4t;;I///'i-;, .....~~. . , )i~~~~:~~:;i~~~ll:~llON I JtER~ CERllFY THAT THIS fl SURVEJ:; PLAN OR REPORT 1 B407 ~~EPARED BY ME OR UNDER fAY .... ~ SUPERVISION ANO ll-iAT I ................ f!A DULY UCENSED .' / , M I~~"'" SSlONAL LA SURVEYOR \\\\ NOER ll-iE LAWS F THE '/lIIHI11\\\\ STAlE MINNE TA. .--.- -~...- That part of lot 25, Block 1, Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota descnbed as follows: Commencing at the Northwest comer of Section 34. Township 30 North. Range 23 West, a Ramsey County Survey Monument; thence S 60. 09' 00. E, bearing based on the Ramsey County Coordinate System, December 1991 Ad;...stment, 0 distance of 695.16 feet, more or less, to the Northeast comer of Lot 25, Block " Arden Hills, a found 16: inch iron pipe; thence S 10' 20' 34'" W a distance of 5.00 feet along the east line of said Lot 25 and the westerly right of way of Ridgewood Court, to a set survey monument marked '"Kemper 16407"; thence N 89' 40' 44'" W a distance of 206.06 feet to a set survey monument marked '"Kemper 18407"; thence N 09'1'01" E distance of 50,00 feet olong the east right of way of Siems Court and olong the west line of said Lot 25, Block 1. to 0 found ~. iron pipe, for the Northwest corner of said Lot 25; thence S 77"05'36" E a distance of 204.13 feet to the point of b89inning, Said parcel contains 5,600 square feet, or 0.1266 acres. KEMPER & ASSOCIATES INC. LAND SURVEYING. ENGINEERING 721 OLD HIGHWAY No. 8 N1f NEW BRIGHTON, MINNESOTA 55112 651-631-0351 FAX 851-631-8805 2005 KEMPER &: ASSOCIATES, INC. @ !(j Itrj 1~ --3 ..... ~ ..... ;~ " \. J I> '0-3 trj o ~ UJ. c:: ~ -< trj '"< ~ m~~" .... .~ ,"< !~~~~ ~::::~gF I I V1n ~:;l1~:3 ""tt~:Il pN~ 4 . ' ! I ~ l .{ I ", . ' i I ~i ~ =~ 'IS i: rtcH:d; ~7h I a. m n- ~ -u~ , a' ~-~~ ~. '2 !';. ;; I, ji ~I - e 05150 /200503'37'52 P - ~ [J ^ ~ . , ~ i ~ ....... .>:.;.,', ~%\~ 181 ~ " a " . 00 ,., ;.'." ~ Z ~, ~ c<~ ,. 0 , . ~ 0 ~~6 . ~ ~ > , , ~ ~- ~ "c_ n . " " " ~"- ~ , ~ m "' g~~ ~ , 0 " ~ , ~ ~ 'c i/ ~, ~ 0 '<- ~ , n ~~~ g ~ z " " ~. c z c -, 2 ~ ~ m ,~, " ~ c ~~~ z ~ ~ > o .~ g c ,~ ~ l. 0, . . ~ . i I ~ i ~\I'~'-~' ~~i -=-- I i!l~.i'/' ;~!i~i! j.... -.." ~~i~i~ Ii" I I : , ~ . r o -I N .p.. ",.'0 ",".1)) '''''', ..... '"'C,,\ " ."" h..y ..' "') .::::~ ." .,' -..'". -'.' >/ "'0 . ,',.I 'or... :.:::" ,- .:) ',' \ .::; "77: - ':~", C; ::: :~) ',' :: 3::: c:;~;, :::_",~-""";'::;" .'t :;. -t..:. -. :;.":';::';~":;:"">:>}:;"~;"~,,,,, ',- t____ <~srt~n ~ ~~:,~~~~;:-:::,:?:::;:,~\::,;~,,?~~;.:~>'i::::~":~~~~S:-l~ - ----t (II<{ Or ~ : ~'" . ':.:;: >,;::",:-:,:"?f~'_:,:;'~'~';~~:,,:::i:::";,.,-..:_/,~;,,:,":~1-',;}r,::7j. ,~: //. 00 ," '" " \.\ ~:&:>',~--:r\;.~<>-~, ':-"'-;',::-:: ,","'-':,7;';,,: -':,:">,, c" ~-'f!-' ///11 1'-4 -_. o""i:c';,..........RI.D.. -C. ~.i:-.' ..W'...,~O":.~;,;..(,"'3+.. '0. ......... . _ ~ llll.<ii"'~g ~ II1I \'.\\"~~"':-""'" L 0 ~~"?dQ~1"'-<:""'-'-' . ,(- -. ("~------t___ >"~:~ i /III/{III"'\'\\\\ ......... . '~'"'"'''~[Y'0~;R~~!~"'''"_2''.,_~=='~ " 2~~', ^--::..~~._;.,,:_~: ,.:.~,.,',:':,'.::"':I_,-:,,:~~!::,::::,:,';:,,.< ------- /~i~ ~Uo!;-; f ~immm :~ liUHm ~ I HHHtH i! ! ~! ~ f ----=~~ .. i la!~ii"'iJ9.H 2g l~~fiiif;; ~ 1"\~Hr;~: ~ i ~ J!!"p ~ ~~. ~ 'l'i[l'l',.ll~ F~ ;1["".:. I ~ 'HI"j"'! ~ 0- ~ ~ ~ V1 ~~ , i. " ,~! ! 5" i oJ'" .,. '.! .l! . g" , !" ~ ~ ~ i fh;'!;~i .-"~ j!h,!;;.!' ~ !;ll'l ,,[ '~Sl I 1 ~ ~g . j 'l'f ~~. ,g~ ., "f "~ !. "'i.'~i I ~,., 1" ~ r ~~ . > a: ~ ill "'$f'\~ f'~ flf ~;!"~ .! i: ifJf __"'b i 0 if ~ ;- Ol rrl rH' ~ Z ~ ~ l!:~ ~f!. Ii ~.~ fils- JI." .., ~ ~ll.~ q.!l'l~: p ~::!J 1~ ~ ~ ~31 <i1 P u r OJ 'M 'L"~,I' , _ <. "~, : - z "c,. 8 '" .". It - ',-, 'll" ';', II: , Q '! r ! >'l g:J g ""\I'! ~~ 1,1-'" -' ~ ~;i;;'i! L ~ !; d 0 '" ..., · pr:/ ,! ~ !Il::i!~ i ~ 1'.."1' f' ~ I" i 8' ~ i t:j R" I iil;!~~I! ~ H'!ihiI1! iili!;H q ~ " i Hz ~ ! ~ .... <l 'I:d, ! .f I:Pd m q 'I~!l, } ~ 'ti [. ~ i '" ~ ~;l "!o, " '-I '-', I ~ ~;!,~!!o! I" ., ,~ ~ , . 1J.l 9~l f h .~tl i~[; [ i -!~!3!l. i' -:: ~ :s 1II 8 ~ ~ !ipHli ,jllil~lf ~ ~ hii1i! V1 ~.- ~ ~ s:3 -. ,.,:f~lif'l.l~ ~,f~~ffQ, c; ~ ~ ~ni:;g.[:: ~ 8 :;i\"" l'J 'Z W S.~!-<l!~' a!t~35:.f' 'P"'i[~'"l .~ is'.~ ~~~ E. i::! -- ~-!,-,'l:-~~~ ~~"i~l!.~""~ f ~:~J~,;:l,t. a 'V _ ~~~ :;; ~ ,-",: ~"" '. . ~""lj' - ~ ,., , ',~ - '""":I Q9.lh~J~ Qe,~l~~~f'- :~.l~g~.:~J i~li 2 ~ 1:'1 li.;)!-11 ll;'i~'! ! ,!.~1'1'1' j i~. j I. UJ. ,[".f 1 ;~l.I-~I,!i '.< ,'!Hl! 1 ,,' .. a~d~~~~~ ,.J."~ .. ~~ ~pt;;;~~~a'" ~~ ~ ..... 10-"1'-' "-"1'" " 1-""-' :z ",01<j ,1:~'1 ~:"'j l (") , - - - -- N Q9"!8'14~ E 74.8J'_ --- QI'~/)Ju}rl ----N C9"l1'O. --- -2~,u~''-., 1 (: I'ti.02'_ "l <.tS1'~n 11-'" ',--< ~--- L><{ (Wo'[01S ~J i8 - - -. -60<lD' --., .24~e~~ ~8 _____. I OJ r o () ^ o~~~~ ~:..r_...~ ~:gSSz o ~'-7N"",., ::o~\Jl...;v :::n; ~~ _ Oc > S , ~ .. " " ~' a ~' a . -" r o ~ ~ ~ eMl ;~% ~~ ~~, ~9 r % 0 " "l -I ~ 0. ~ N '1 ~ (J1 ~ lii g. . ~ ~ 0 ~ . ~o 'c -> ;~~ ~ Or- ~!- cO ". .c ,-- e;;;:~ ~Q;'~ ~~r;; !~8 jgo $8 : , ~ , o " " ;/1 $// ~ f'OJ' /, \ p II -j 1. j,' " , e' I " 11/ I I IS, i' (") ..... '"' >-< "'~ ot:"" 'T:lO '"' >UJ. ggN >' 1:'1"'" >. ~o :z z- .~ .... "< ..... ~5 ::t: :z 0 "' ..... 0 0" t:"" 8~ r,: N '"Tl ~ :'~ 5J1 r- ~ Cf) i'm >~o C .~i!' a::: O""J t:::l:' ,.', UJ. (") 0 ., 1:'1- i" ~'" ,.- < - Cf) - o z ?,e~' I ;; 1!:~ , '? 'I- lEg; I~I @ r , S .f N , ~ s . , - n- o> c:~ :Zo '"'1:'1 :<:z s:::::t: .......... :zt- :zt:"" 1:'1UJ. UJ. o '"' > r . ~ .~HlLLS . City ot Arden HIlls Request for Council Action Prepared by: SC Dept.: CD Council Mtg. Date: 8/8/2005 Final Action Needed By: 8/8/2005 ""tD< Agenda Item "ll TCAAP Update Budgeled Amount: $0,00 Actual Amount: Funding Source: Council Action Request: None Staff Recommendation: Advisory Commission Action: Commission Date Action Not Supporting Documents (which are attached to this Action Form): D Memo/Letter: . D Resolution (No. ) D Ordinance (No. ) D Engineering Recommendation: D Attorney Recommendation: DOther: Financial Implications: Administrator/Staff Comments: Update on TCMP related activities . Page 1 of 1 . . . ~ ~~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: August 4, 2005 Agenda Item Work Session TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Murtuza Siddiqui, Finance Director/Treasurer 'l>15 SUBJECT: Final Report - Assessment Policy Task Force (Refuse Hauling) BACKGROUND: The Assessment Policy Task Force has completed their task and is forwarding their recommendation to the City Council for their approval. DISCUSSION: See attached report for details. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The report is provided for discussion purposes. I' . l . ~ ~ILLS City of Arden Hills Assessment Task Force - Refuse Hauling Final Report . Dated: July 13,2005 e . . . < TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction........ ....................... ................................,.......,............... .... 1 Review of Task Force Activity............................................................. 2 Summary ................................................................................................6 Recommendation....................................................................................7 Appendix Appendix A - Appendix B - Appendix C - Appendix D - Appendix E - City of Falcon Heights Organized Collection Study URS Memorandum Regarding Pavement Design University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Report Minnesota Statutes "Waste Management" Chapter Haulers Proposal and Draft Memorandum of Understanding . . . , , CITY OF ARDEN HILLS ASSESSMENT TASK FORCE - REFUSE HAULING FINAL REPORT INTRODUCTION In 2003, the Assessment. Policy Task Force was established. At the February 9, 2004 City Council meeting, the Council appointed the following members to the Assessment Policy Task Force. Assessment Policy Task Force Members: n Gerald Garski (chair) n Bill Gillies n Andy Holewa n Raymond McGraw n Charles Stoddard (former chair - resigned) n Jim Holden n David Grant, Council liaison n Gregg Larson, Council liaison (alternate) n Murtuza Siddiqui, staffliaison The original purpose of the Assessment Policy Task Force was to reVIew the eXlstmg Assessment Policy and to study alternatives and forward its recommendation to the Council. The Task Force completed its task and the Council adopted the 2004 Assessment Policy on September 13, 2004. As the Task Force was considering and evaluating vatious assessment methodologies and options, they started to discuss what the city ean do to preserve and prolong the life of the existing streets to minimize the special assessment (cost) burden on the residents. It was discussed that large vehicles, such as school buses and trucks can cause a considerable amount of wear and tear on the roads. It was indicated that a number of neighborhoods are served by three to four different refuse haulers. Often one hauler is in the neighborhood to serve only one or two Page I . e e , l residences, thus driving through a number of streets to get to their destination and causing the wear and tear on the city streets. Since the Assessment Task Force worked on the assessment issues and subsequently revised the Assessment Policy, it seemed logical that they undertake the task of evaluating and assessing the refuse hauler issues as their trueks make a significant impact on the streets. The revised purpose and scope of the Task Force was as follows: . To study the impact of heavy duty vehicles on the city streets. To review services provided by vatious haulers. To review their reputation and pricing structure. To consider contracting with a limited number of haulers to serve the entire eity. To draft a recommendation to the Council, outlining its finding and a course of action. . REVIEW OF TASK FORCE ACTIVITY The Task Force met seven times to discuss the issue of what the City can do to reduce the wear and tear on the streets. Since garbage trucks travel frequently through the city streets, focus was placed on them. The Task Force moved forward with the assumption that since garbage trucks are heavy vehicles, they cause wear and tear on the streets. Would the life of the streets be prolonged if the number of trips or number of trucks were limited? The Task Force looked at a few cities that had either adopted the organized collection system or are considering the option as a solution to reduce the wear and tear on the city streets. The city that was going through the final stages of this process was Falcon Heights, which became the point of focus. The Task Force reviewed their report to learn the process they were going through and the steps involved in the organized collection system. As part of reviewing this report, the Task Force also looked at two studies that were referenced in the Falcon Heights report. The Task Force had requested that the City Engineer make a presentation to the Task Force that shows the impact heavy trucks make on the streets. This was not an easy task for the Task Force. They went through an intensive educational process to ensure that whatever recommendation they make to the city council impacts the residents of the city. Page 2 e . . , The Task Force meetings were attended by an attorney representing the garbage haulers, representatives from various garbage hauling companies, and a local resident to observe and listen in to the discussions of the Task Force. The Task Force considered a number of options, as outlined below for addressing the garbage hauling issues as it pertained to the preservation of streets. They considered pros and cons of each ofthe options considered. Listed below are the options that were considered: Divide Existine: Haulers into Quadrants Pros: Limits only one hauler into the neighborhood, therefore, reducing the truck traffic. This will reduce the wear and tear of the streets. Due to efficiencies on the side of the hauler, residents may be able to get a price break . Fewer trucks in the neighborhood. Less noise and air pollution, and traffic reduction. . Haulers do not lose business if the neighborhoods are divided equally. Cons: Takes away the choiee from the residents. They will not have a choice to go to another hauler if they are dissatisfied with the existing hauler. . This will require some level of involvement from the City. Either up front, or on an on-going basis to monitor the activity. This may require an ordinance. lbis may be considered a form of "organized colleetion". . Legal Ramifications? City Nee:otiates One Price with All Haulers Pros: . Cost savings to the residents. The resident has a choice to pick any hauler of their choice. Cons: . Takes away the competitive nature of any business. Residents may not be able to receive any special deals. Page 3 . e e . City has to get involved. Up front and/or in subsequent years. Does not address the issue of wear and tear. Still has the same level oftraffie. Question of legality - priee fixing. Limit the Number of Haulers in the City Pros: Limits the number of haulers, in totaL Have four instead of eight or ten trucks going through the city streets. Only licensed haulers can serve the City. Less traffic. Less wear and tear. . Residents have a choice. They can pick a hauler of their choice. They have the ability to "hire" and "fire". Cons: . City would have to pass an ordinance to limit the number of haulers. (This is not necessarily a "con"). Legal ramifications? . On?:anized Collection Pros: The process can be centrally controlled. Possible cost reduction to the resident. Can use the City's "clout" to negotiate better rates. Traffic flow can be controlled. Less noise and air pollution. Have one truck in the neighborhood instead of multiple trucks. . Reduced wear and tear of the streets. Can require the hauler to haul all items. City can impose restrictions. Such as: Limit the truck size, use of floating axel, bringing in the trucks empty. . Permissible under the state statues. Cons: . The process is very lengthy and involved. Involves formal studies, residents' input, public hearings. Legal ramifications? May have to dedicate a staff position to manage the efforts, dealing with issues, and be prepared to be responsive to the needs of the residents. Strong opposition by the residents and the haulers. . Page 4 ~' . . . Work Jointlv with the Haulers and Their Representatives to Address the Wear and Tear Issues Pros: . Places the responsibility on the haulers and their representatives to offer options as to what they can do to save the wear and tear on the streets. Gives the City the opportunity to negotiate rates, and mandate the routing, the type of hauling, the size of the trucks, number of axles - (3 axles), reduction in axle weight, making sure that trucks come in to the City empty, etc. Has little or no increase in the cunent workload of City employees. Retains the competitive aspect of the hauling business. Enables the residents to choose whatever licensed hauler they prefer. Ask the haulers to accept all refuse. Work with the haulers to structure rates to tie to inflation. Require garbage trucks to have an onboard weight recorder so that it can be enforced. Only licensed haulers who fit the requirements of the City can serve the community. . . . . Cons: . If a particular refuse hauler does not have the right equipment/truck, they will not be able to serve the City due to non-licensure. If the requirement is to modifY the existing equipment, they may raise the fees in the future to recoup their costs. Who would realistically police the haulers for compliance with the terms of the agreement? . . Do Nothing Pros: . Residents may not want any changes - why go through the effort? Any alternative accepted will require holding meetings to educate the residents and be prepared to defend the position. Will require further research and must detennine if the residents do indeed want a change. This will require surveying and tabulating the results. Allow the residents to make their own choices. . Page 5 . . . . Cons: By doing something is to provide an improvement over the existing services, either preservation of streets or improved services. Summary In summary, during the first six meetings, the Task Force focused on the following items: 1. Read the report which was prepared by Falcon Heights. This report detailed the process they went through during the two year period, the feedback from the residents, and the studies they considered. 2. A report from the Arden Hills engineer. 3. Presentation and educational information provided by the vanous haulers and their attorney. At the sixth meeting, the Task Force discussed the pros and cons of the options discussed above and decided to select the option of working with the haulers to assist the City of Arden Hills in addressing the problem of wear and tear of the streets. The garbage haulers accepted this challenge and returned to the meeting of June 8th to offer their suggestions. The Task Force was not able to find any conclusive evidence that by reducing the number of garbage trucks on the streets of Arden Hills would prolong its useful life. It was also discussed that if the weight garbage trucks cause the damage on the street, then what about other commercial trucks that travel the local streets, such as UPS and other delivery trucks. Would the city place restrictions on them as well as the garbage trucks? At its seventh meeting, on June 8th, the Task Foree received a report from the garbage haulers that outlined how they could work with the city to preserve the streets. The Task Force has worked with the attorney for the garbage haulers to draft a memorandum of understanding. This memorandum of understanding is included with the attachments. Page 6 . . . RECOMMENDATION The Task Force recommends that the City of Arden Hills sign a memorandum of understanding with the garbage haulers that will serve as a goodwill effort on the part of the garbage haulers to help reduce or minimize the wear and tear of the streets, as well as other benefits that can be recognized by the residents ofthe city. Page 7 , . Appendix A City of Falcon Heights Organized Collection Study: Final Report Dated: October 13,2004 e - . - ,. City of Falcon Heights Organized Collection Study: Final Report October 13, 2004 City of Falcon Heights 2077 W. Larpenteur Avenue Falcon Heights, MN 55102 651-792-7600 Fax 651-792-7610 www.ciJalcon-heights.mn.us City of Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission Organized Collection Study: Final Report October 13, 2004 Table of Contents Exeeutive Summary .............................................,............ ......................,................3 Introduction. ...... ................... ..................,.................................................................5 I. Cost and Efficieney ........................................ ...... ...........................................8 II. Impact of Garbage Trucks on Our Community ............................................13 III. Deciding Where Our Trash Goes..................................................................18 IV. The Hauling Industry and Public Policy.......................................................24 Conclusions and Recommendations ... ....... ...................................... "....................29 Appendices Appendix A: Goals adopted January 28, 2004 ............................................35 Appendix B: Interim Progress Report of June 23, 2004..............................37 Appendix C: Proposal from the Haulers ......................,...............................42 Appendix D: Information on Rates..............................................................52 Appendix E: Impact on Streets ....................................................................55 Appendix F: Letters to Residents.................................................................57 Appendix G: Alternatives to Organized Collection.....................................69 City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 2 . , . \-e Ie , . Executive Summary When the Falcon Heights City Council passed a resolution of intent to organize waste collection under the terms of Minnesota Statute 115A.94 on March 24, 2004, Council members emphasized that final decision on organized collection would depend on the results of more in-depth study of the issues. The Council authorized the Solid Waste Commission to undertake this study and allowed an additional three months beyond the minimum 90 day planning period for the Commission to complete that work. Of the 16 goals in the original list that was approved by the Council on January 28, 2004, most, especially those related to quality service, are being met now under the existing open system, especially when residents "shop wisely" for service. The Commission focused its research on the areas where they felt the City's goals are not being met, addressing the following questions: . Do Falcon Heights residents pay more for trash pickup than residents of cities that have organized collection? . Would it make a real difference to our quality of life and our community infrastructure ifwe hadfewer garbage trucks on our streets? . What is the best environmental practice in disposing of the trash we do not recycle or compost? And is it important for citizens to have a voice in determining where their . garbage goes? The Commission's major findings are as follows: . Falcon Heights residents do pay more for garbage collection than residents of cities with organized collection. Average in Falcon Heights (not jncludin tax and C.E.C. Average of Little Canada, Shakopee, White Bear Lake, Stillwater and North Sl. Paul (all organized; tax and CEC not included $13.59 $15.56 $17.17 $8.13 $10.07 $12.19 . Table 1 . Significant savings in operating costs can be realized by efficiency - using fewer trucks to serve more households. In an open system those savings go to increased profits for haulers, not lower prices for customers. . Extra garbage trucks on our streets and alleys do have a significant impact, according to the definitive study by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. Vehicle axle weight is the largest determining factor in pavement wear, and garbage trucks account for a major share of the total weight load on our streets. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 3 " . Garbage trucks malce up one of the oldest, least fuel efficient, noisiest and most polluting fleets of vehicles in the United States. Governments have a role to play in . motivating conversion to quieter, cleaner trucks. . There are potential hazards associated with all means of municipal solid waste disposal. Under the Minnesota Waste Management Act, processing of waste for fuel (incineration) is preferred to landfilling. . Federal regulation has imposed major improvements in landfills, but land for these facilities is becoming harder to find. . Refuse-derived fuel provides much more electric power than landfill gas and greatly reduces the volume of waste that must be stored at the end. . In Ramsey County, haulers are contracted until 2007 to take all or part of the waste they pick up to the Resource Recovery Facility in Newport o In Falcon Height half the licensed haulers have the "all waste" contract and halfhave the "some waste" eontract . o The only way for the City to be sure that all waste goes to the RRF, especially after 2007, is to implement organized collection.. . The RamseylWashington County public collection study, among others, documents major consolidation in the waste hauling industry since 1995, with three major national corporations eontrolling two thirds of the business. o Open eollection has not stopped smal110cal eompanies from going out of business or being bought out by large companies; in fact the process has accelerated. o Continued consolidation of the industry in the future could leave residents with few choices, little power in the market place and no voice in environmental choices about municipal solid waste . Study after study has emphasized the importance of these issues and recommended organized collection as the option that best serves the interest of the community, even in cities and counties that have not, in the end, made that choice. The licensed refuse haulers ofFaleon Heights, through their representative, have proposed that Falcon Heights keep the present open collection system. They have offered some voluntary accommodations to provide some mitigation of the impact of multiple trucks on City streets. They have also expressed willingness to work with the City to facilitate public education on solid waste issues. If adopted, these measures would be formalized in a Memorandum of Understanding signed by all parties. From the fmdings of its study reported here, the Solid Waste Commission concludes that the interests of City residents would be better served in the long tenn by implementing organized collection. The Commission recommends proceeding with implementation of organizer! collection under the terms of Minnesota Statue 115A.94 City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 '. '. -,,---- 4 . . ,. Introduction On March 24,2004, the Falcon Heights City Council passed a resolution of intent to organize refuse eollection under the provisions of Minnesota Statute 115A.04 (1). At that time the Council called upon the Solid Waste Commission to undertake further study of all the issues related to the proposed change. The results of the Commission's study are presented here with a list of options for the City and the recommendations of the Solid Waste Commission. Background For many years the City of Falcon Heights has had an "open" system of trash collection. The City does not provide refuse collection as a municipal service but requires residents, apartment owners and businesses to contract independently with a hauler licensed in the City. Ibis kind of system is common in Minnesota, but it is not the only way to manage municipal solid waste. Trash collection can be managed by the city (or county), either with a municipal system using city trucks and city employees, such as in Minneapolis, or by contracting with one or more private companies to perform the service. This is called public collection or organized collection. In 1990 Falcon Heights considered organized eollection but did not adopt it, although the door was then left open for future consideration. Since then the solid waste industry and the regulatory environment have changed dramatically. In 2002 the Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission was reactivated at a time when Ramsey and Washington Counties were conducting a major study on whether organized collection should be implemented county-wide. As part of its mission to work toward a more effieient, more economical and more environmentally sound solid waste disposal system in Falcon Heights, the Solid Waste Commission followed the Counties' study with interest and began to reconsider the question of whether an organized collection system would serve the interests of Falcon Heights residents better than the open system. The Commission spent a year in preliminary study and discussion of the issue. Response to questions related to solid waste in the 2002 city-wide survey (which covered many topics, not just trash colleetion) indicated that there was some public support for the possibility of a city-negotiated contract if it could bring lower prices and more environmentally sound practices. There was anecdotal evidence that other eities had been able to negotiate lower refuse pick-up prices for their residents by implementing organized colleetion. Falcon Heights had recently undertaken a major series of street and alley reconstructions, and residents had expressed concern about the impact of multiple garbage trucks on this expensive new infrastructure and related impacts on the quality of life: safety, noise and air pollution. As a result of what they learned in 2002 and 2003, the Solid Waste Commission recommended to the City Council January 28, 2004, that the City formally enter into the process of organizing municipal solid waste eollection under the terms of Minnesota City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13,2004 5 '. Statute ll5A.94. The Commission also presented a list of goals related to how an organized system would look in Falcon Heights. (Appendix A) Letters were sent to all . the residents of single family homes in the City and to all the licensed haulers informing . them of the Commission's recommendation and announcing a public hearing before the City Council on March 24. As they had done with the RamseyIWasbington Counties' process two years earlier, the haulers mounted a direct mail and advertising campaign urging residents to contact the Council and express opposition to organized eollection. Many did so, but almost as many expressed their strong support of the idea. (public comment from that phase of the process was recorded and given to the Council. The public comment log is too long to be appended to this report, but it can be viewed at City Hall.) In the end the Council did approve the resolution of intent by unanimous vote on March 24,2004. At that time the Council stated very clearly that their approval of the resolution of intent was not a final approval of organized collection but a direction to the Solid Waste Commission to continue their study of all sides of the issue. The Falcon Heights 90-day planning period has been extended to allow for additional study requested by the Council. Progress since March 24 Under the terms of the statute, after a city holds the public hearing and passes a resolution intent, it is then required to spend at least 90 days in the development of plans or proposals for organized collection, providing to licensed refuse haulers the opportunity to . participate in the planning. Following the end ofthe planning period, the statute calls for another period of at least 90 days, designated for discussion of possible organized collection arrangements with the haulers. A city may implement organized colleetion at the end of the discussion period, unless all parties have reached some other agreement sooner. Since March 24, the Solid Waste Commission has met monthly to work on the study and to do the planning called for by statute. Members of the Commission toured the resource recovery facility at Newport, Minnesota, where municipal solid waste is prepared as fuel for producing electrieity, and the "state of the art" landfill at Elk River. Commissioners and Staff sought information from other cities that have considered organized collection and reviewed published information, not only on organized collection, but also on related economic, environmental and policy issues. A public information meeting was held on May 20. On June 23 the Commission announced the need for an extension to the planning period and gave an interim progress report to the Council. The report was published on the City website and is included with this report as Appendix B. Participation of Haulers In addition, the Commission held two informative and constructive meetings with the refuse haulers licensed in Falcon Heights. At those meetings haulers indicated that they would like to work with the City on alternatives to organized collection and they offered ,- City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Coilection October 13, 2004 6 . . - several ideas for voluntary ehal1ges they would be willing to make. At the Commission's request, those ideas have been put in written form by Mr. Doug Carnival, the attorney representing the Minnesota Chapter of the National Solid Waste Management Association (NSWMA), who was present at all the City meetings. That document is submitted with this report as Appendix C. Summary The Solid Waste Commissioners realized that many of the goals adopted in January are already being addressed by the existing system, depending on how wisely residents shop for garbage hauling service. This was confirmed by the eomments of residents and discussions with haulers. But several goals are not being met, and the Commission feels now, as it did in January, that these are important. We wanted to fmd real answers to these questions: . Do Falcon Heights residents pay more for trash pickup than residents of cities that have organized collection? . Would it make a real difference to our quality of life and our community infrastructure if we had fewer garbage trucks on our streets? . Is it important for citizens to have a voice in determining where their garbage goes? The information collected by the Solid Waste Commission is presented here in four major sections: 1. Issues of cost and efficiency 2. The state of the solid waste industry and the impact of the present system on our community 3. Where we send our trash: environmental and economic impacts 4. Falcon Heights' decision in context: the experience of other cities and counties Finally, the Commission presents potential plans for going forward, with its recommendations. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 7 I. Cost and Efficiency . Comparison of Garbage Collection Pees COllSmner cost was one important faetor leading the Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission to explore the possibility of organizing refuse collection in Falcon Heights. The table below gives a quick comparison oflocal communities. Type of City collection 30 !lallon 60 !lallon 90 gallon Falcon Heiahts (averaae of 6 companies) Open $ 13.59 $ 15.56 $ 17.17 Roseville (averaQe of 7companies) Open $ 12.85 $ 14.90 $ 16.84 Maplewood (averaqe of 9 haulers) Open $ 12.19 $ 14.11 $ 16.08 North st. Paul 2003 Oraanized $ 8.07 $ 8.86 $ 10.39 Shakopee, 2004-2005 Organized $ 8.60 $ 10.65 $ 12.24 Little Canada, 2002 (most recent rates listed) Oraanized $ 8.29 $ 9.77 $ 11.29 White Bear Lake Oraanized $ 7.50 $ 11.00 $ 15.00 Stillwater, 3 vears endina 12/31/05 Oraanized $ 8.16 $ 10.06 $ 12.03 Table 2. Note: The Falcon Heights average was calculated from the rate schedules haulers are required to submit with their annuai license applicaton. The County Environmental Charge is not included; taxes were subtracted from the rates that included them. More information is given in Appendix D.) ie During their preliminary study, Commissioners saw a study done by the City of North St. Paul in 2000 which showed that, among a surveyed group of Metro area communities, those with only one hauler or a consortium of haulers tended to have lower average rates than those with a high number of haulers. (1) This led the Commission to wonder if Falcon Heights residents could gain a bargaining advantage by "buying in bulk." In other words, haulers might be prepared to offer a lower price to customers if they could be guaranteed the business of the whole city or a section of the city. It seems to work elsewhere. For instance, few individual consumers can negotiate the same discount on a new car that a large corporation purchasing a whole fleet of cars can get. Ramsey County and the City of St. Paul have special purchasing contracts with vendors for all kinds of products and services, saving large amounts of taxpayer money. Through a joint powers agreement, Falcon Heights participates in this arrangement. Residents who shop at warehouse discount stores save money on per unit costs by buying in bulk. But does this principle work for trash collection? Haulers insist that it does not. In fact they have claimed that county or munieipal organization of waste collection would cost consumers more. When a City contracts for residential waste hauling, they said, prices go up. (2) In fact, structured price increases are usually built into service contracts that last over several years (for example, both North St. Paul and Shakopee built increases into their contracts). This is only fair when a provider's costs are also rising due to inflation. But Falcon Heights residents have also (. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 8 . . -- seen their prices go up under the open system, and there is no reason to expect that haulers would refrain from all futul'e price increases if the City decided not to go ahead with organized collection. Over the long term, prices are likely to rise, whatever option the City chooses. The question is, are the structured increases under a contract likely to be greater or less than the increases imposed on customers in an open system? And is there a "bulk buying" effect that drops the prices when a City organizes? Rates and systems vary widely around the country, from highly structured "pay as you throw" systems to those that charge a flat rate for any amount of trash. Commission research came up with information on many cities, some of which are included in Appendix D. Rate tend to be much higher in coastal states where land for landfills is scarce and costly and waste must be transported for longer distances. The most meaningful comparisons can be made with communities in the Twin Cities Metro area, especially in Ramsey County. This sample in Table 1 is not exhaustive by any means, but it does show that at least some nearby communities that have organized collection have achieved rates that are lower than the average charges in Falcon Heights, Roseville and Maplewood, which all have open systems. Efficiency The Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission set as one of its major mission goals improved efficiency in the City's solid waste collection system. But is this a meaningful goal? Does efficiency really matter? Yes, it does, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (7) The EP A cites a recent study by SW ANA (the Solid Waste Association of North America) showing that collection represents the most costly phase of solid waste management, up to 62% of total system costs. finding ways to pick up more waste with fewer trucks and fewer people in less time can have a big impaet on total costs. For a trash hauling business, costs per customer are minimized when the hauler serves a densely populated area. When customers are widely dispersed, the hauler has to pay more for fuel, labor, and truck maintenance to earn the same revenue. In an open system, a hauler who can accumulate the best customer density achieves the most cost efficient operation. "Using fuel and labor efficiently.. .has a positive cost impact for the haulers and should result in lower prices for consumers," according to the Minnesota Attorney General's Office. (8) The big question for consumers, however, is whether "those savings are passed on to them or pocketed by the hauler." Some communities have tried to make the efficiency factor work for them by joining together by block or by neighborhood to contract with a hauler. The Attorney General's report gives the example of St. Paul's Tangletown neighborhood, which was able to contract for significantly lower costs than the residents City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 9 had been paying individually. The City of Bloomington has a program to help their neighborhoods organize collection on their own. In Falcon Heights, the residents of . Hollywood Court negotiated as a group, with the common goal of having fewer trucks on their fragile alleys. University Grove has had grass-roots organized collection for years. Another way for the consumers to get back the savings from increased efficiency is through a city contract. "Municipal governments are in a position, by virtue of the way they proeure rubbish hauling services for their citizens, to dictate whether consumers or haulers will get the most benefit of customer density efficiencies." (9) Other Research . The 1993 report on organized collection from the state Attorney General's Office, Antitrust Division, has been quoted elsewhere as finding considerable price advantantage for consumers in a "competitive" system. However, the report does not equate "competitive" with "open," but includes competitively-bid city-wide systems in the "competitive" class. The "non-competitive" systems against whieh the report recommends are those in which a hauler has an exclusive contract that has been awarded or extended without competition. (3) . GBB Solid Waste Management Consultants conducted studies of metropolitan area rates in 1993 and 1994. They found that the average rates under organized systems was 13% lower than than for open systems for 30 gallon containers, about 9% lower for 60 gallon containers, over 16% lower for 90 gallon containers and 16.6% lower over all. (4) The GBB study also broke out averages by county. In Ramsey County, customers in open systems paid an average $13.30 per month for a 3D-gallon container, while customers in organized systems paid an average of $11.78. The differences are even greater for larger containers. See the Chart in Appendix D. (5) ^... j . Appendix 14 of the RmnseylWashington report also summarized findings from Oakdale, North St. Paul, Maplewood and Lauderdale, which had conducted fee comparisons in their own organized collection studies. In every case, monthly rates were lower for cities with organized collection than for cities with open systems. (6) Special Deals It has been pointed out that haulers have been offering as much as six months of free service to new customers. "How can an organized city system compete with that?" the Commission has been asked. Residents who have accepted these offers would do well to study the fine print in their contracts, especially if they think they will be able to switch to another hauler as soon as their free service period comes to an end. They are likely to find that they have committed to a minimum contract period of several years, with major penalties for eancellation. Businesses cannot offer these discounts without recovering their costs Ie City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 10 e . . somehow. Even if new customers can be fmanced by charging slightly illgher rates to everyone else, even spreading tlle increase across a huge customer base, the County Environmental Charge does not go away. \Vhi.le the customer is getting free service, the hauler is paying the CEC and needs to recover that cost. Over the lifetime of such a contract, with no ability to "shop around" when the rates go up or service quality changes, customers may find these are not such good deals after all. Stealing Service Minnesota law (Waste Management Act) requires cities with over 5000 residents to ensure that every household has refuse pickup service. With an open system, this is simply impossible. Falcon Heights code does allow "self-hauling" under limited circumstances, willch is supposed to mean that the householder transports ills or her own refuse to a transfer station, landfill or other legal processing facility and pays the tipping fee. What it means, in practice, as the Committee heard anecdotally in public meetings, is that some residents avoid paying the cost of the waste they produce by passing that cost on to others. Whether they take their waste to work and put it into the employer's dumpster or drop it off in a trash can at the mall or a city park, they are essentially stealing service and raising the cost to everyone else, the same as if they were running their electricity off of someone else's meter. Notes L City of North St. Paul 2000 rates comparison charts, provided by North St. Paul staff. See Appendix D 2. Tills claim featured prominently in letters sent to residents after the City announced plans to enter into the organized collection process at the end of January, 2004. The letters, generated from an industry template and reprinted on each company's letterhead, were nearly identical to letters sent out during the Ramsey-Washington Counties public collection study in 2002. See Samples in Appendix F. 3. Minnesota Attorney General's Office Report on Municipal Rubbish Hauling, 1994 (ftle copy) 4. "Comparative Economic Analysis ofMSW and Recycling Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area," prepared for the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance by GBB Solid Waste Management Consultants, September, 1994. 5. Appendix 14, "Public Collection Study: Final Report," RamseyfWashington Counties Resource Recovery Project, 2002. 6. Ibid. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 11 7. "Getting More for Less: Improving Collection Efficiency," EPA530-R-99-038, U.S. . Environmental Protection Ageney, November, 1999. 8. MN Attorney General's Office Report on Municipal Rubbish Hauling, 1994 9. Ibid. The Attorney General's report goes on to stress that these cost advantages for consumers are best realized when a competitive process is used to award the contract. At issue, in the report, was the difference, not between open and organized systems, but between cities that had a non-competitive contracting system and cities with a competitive process for contracting, whether solicitation of bids or requests for proposal. i. (. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 12 . II. Impact of Garbage Trucks on Our Community Impact of Truck Weight on City Streets Concern about wear and tear on City streets is high on the list of reasons why the Solid Waste Commission chose to reopen consideration of organized collection in Faleon Heights. Since the beginning of 1993, Falcon Heights has spent over $5 million dollars in eapital improvements to streets and alleys (Appendix E) and over $500,000 on maintenance (average $44,189 per year). Concern about the impact of garbage trucks on our infrastructure is not unfounded. A major study by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute concluded that "Fatigue damage to rigid and flexible pavements is most directly determined by maximum axle loads and pavement thickness." (1) Typical 3-axle garbage trucks have an axle weight of approximately 20,000 pounds per front axle and 44,000 lbs on the rear pair combined - the highest axle weight of any vehicle traveling city streets. (2) According to standard figures used to calculate the impacts of different kinds of vehicles on pavement, a typical passenger car has an Equivalent Single Axel Load (ESAL) factor of .0007, compared to a truck with 18,000 pounds per axle, which has a factor of 1.0, or the equivalent of 1429 cars. A garbage truck can be as high as 1.6 or 2286 cars; MnDOT uses a formula that says one garbage truck trip is equivalent to 1000 car trips. (3) e In Falcon Heights, we have quoted a mueh more conservative ESAL factor of 0.6 for a 2 axle garbage truck, or the equivalent of 857 cars, given by H.R- Green, City Engineer. (4) Even so, a little common sense calculation shows that garbage trucks account for a significant share of the vehicle weight on our streets and, thuS, a significant portion of the wear that is due to vehicle weight. (See Appendix E). This is most dramatic on those streets and alleys that get the least overall vehicle use. Duane Schwartz, Public Works Director of Roseville calculated that limiting the number of garbage trucks on Roseville's streets to only one hauler could extend the usefulness of the street 5 to 10 years, saving a typical homeowner $20 to $40 per year. (5) To put this amount into context, in 2005 the cost to the average Falcon Heights household for sealcoating and crack sealing will be about $20, for operation of the City parks, approximately $44; for fire protection the average cost will be about $60. Many cities that have adopted or considered organized refuse collection have cited street wear as an important factor. From the Carver County Environmental Dispatch, September, 1994: "There are many benefits to organized garbage hauling including.. . Lower street repair costs to the city. Reducing the volume of repetitive truck traffic on residental streets will also reduce wear and tear to roadways." Similar comments from many cities are given in Appendix 2E of the RarnseylWashington Counties Resource Recovery Project "Public Collection Study: Final Report," 2002. (6) - City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 13 Recent improvements in the design of garbage trucks mitigate some of the impact on pavement. At the April 20 meeting, Mark Stoltman of Randy' s Sanitation (not currently . licensed in Falcon Heights) gave a most informative presentation on garbage truck . technology to the Solid Waste commission. The relationship between truck weight and street wear, he demonstrated, is not simple. Other factors to take into consideration are the number of axles, the number of stops a truck malces and whether the truck is center loaded or rear loaded. Rear loaded trucks bear disproportionate weight on the rear axles, while eenter loaded trucks distribute the weight more evenly, reducing the impact of each axle. However, the Michigan study and the ESAL factors considered above are based specifically on axle weight, not gross weight of the vehicle. According to the Michigan report, axle weight is still the main determining factor. Clearly, the introduction of newer, better designed trucks into the refuse hauling fleet can reduce the impact of each individual truck. Haulers also referenced research that indicates the number of stops and starts may have a greater impact than the number of trucks. This factor is also covered in the UMTRI study. But the number of stops on any given street in Falcon Heights is a constant. It does not change. The only variable is the number of trucks. Furthermore, the RosevilIe report also cites the Michigan study evidence that "repeated starting and stopping (especially stopping) will increase the damage to streets by 50% to 100% depending on the speed of the truck and the weight of the load being carried." (7) e. In other words, the faster a truck is moving when it stops, the greater the stress to the pavement. A truck with fewer, more widely spaced stops is moving faster between stops, thus having more impact. The more garbage trucks that serve a street, the smaller the average share of the total number of stops each truck makes and faster the average speed of each truck between stops. Therefore, although the total number of stops remains the same, as the number of trucks increases, the greater the amount of damage from each stop. All the evidence seen by the Commission indicates that the one change that can do the most to reduce the impact of heavy garbage trucks on our streets and alleys is to reduce the number of trucks. Air and Noise Pollution Wear and tear on city streets and alleys is not the only impact garbage trucks have on our neighborhoods. In 2002 INFORM, Inc. a national environmental research organization released a comprehensive study of the nation's garbage trucks. The study found that the estimated 179,000 garbage trucks in the United States make up one of the oldest, least fuel efficient and most polluting fleets of vehicles in the nation. (8) - City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 14 e Among the findings of the study were the following (9): . Over 40% of the garbage trucks in use are more than 10 years old. Fuel efficiency is at its lowest, and environmental pollution is at its highest in tills stage of vehicle life. . Garbage trucks consume an average of 8,600 gallons of fuel per year - more than any other kind of vehicle except tractor trailers and transit buses. . Diesel garbage trucks are a major source of air pollution, including particulate matter, greenhouse gasses and eompounds that have a negative effect on respiratory health and quality of life. . Diesel garbage trucks generate noise levels up to 100 decibels, a level that can cause hearing damage - both to people who live along the routes and to the truck operators. . Dependence on diesel fuel threatens our national security. The study found that natUral gas burning trucks produce significant reductions in both air pollution and noise. These trucks have an "impressive level of fuel safety." However, despite their availability from most major truck manufacturers, they still comprise less than one percent of the garbage trucks in operation. Despite the benefits of conversion, it happens slowly. A natural gas garbage truck costs 15 to 25 percent more than a comparable diesel truck. According the study, cost "can be a significant disincentive to voluntary action by refuse collection agencies." . The study's conclusion calls for all levels of government to provide incentives to speed up the replacement of diesel vehicles by cleaner, natural-gas fueled trucks. Stricter environmental laws have provided motivation, as well as court-issued mandates and citizen lawsuits. But there are also economic incentives such as tax incentives, grant programs and lower fuel costs. "In areas where there is competition in the refuse industry, some haulers were motivated to use natural gas vehicles to give their organization a marketing edge over competitors." (10) Among the specific recommendations for local governments and communities are: . "Inform decision makers about the benefits of switching garbage truck fleets to cleaner fuels. Local clean-fuels programs and advocacy groups such as Clean Cities Coalitions, utility clean air vehicle programs, state chapters of the American Lung Association, and other grassroots environmental and public health organizations can play an important role in disseminating information about opportunities to expand the use of clean fuel garbage trucks." (11) . . "Develop and participate in public/private partnerships specifically created to implement alternative~fuel garbage truck programs. Many parties have an interest in the success of a campaign to shift to natural gas garbage trucks. Private companies can make or save money, government officials stand to gain from successfully implementing programs that provide significant public benefits, and community residents get healthier air to breathe. By collaborating, these parties can achieve their goals in a cost-effective manner." (12) City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 15 . "Encourage or require clean-fuels use in franchise contract negotiations and awards. The overwhelming majority of garbage trucks are operated by private '. companies under contract to local governments. These operating contracts give governments a powerful tool to set terms during the bidding process. Alternative-fuel vehicle specifications can be included in franchise contract negotiations and awards, creating an economic motivation and a contractual obligation to change fuels. Proactive governments can and shonId motivate their refuse truck operators to use alternative-fuel vehicles though this contracting process." (emphasis added) (13) Organized collection is the fastest and strongest tool Falcon Heights has to get the benefits of this technology. A contract can specify a type of truck or class of trucks that is acceptable. According to the City Attorney we cannot do this through licensing, and individual residents have very little leverage to motivate a change. At the meetings earlier in the year, the smaller haulers that serve the City argued that they would be at a disadvantage if they were required to replace the trucks they now use in order to compete for a contract in Falcon Heights. Ibis is not necessarily true. The City of Shakopee found a way to "level the playing field" between large and small companies. In its RFP Shakopee required the contracting company to purchase new garbage trucks for use exclusively in Shakopee. The five-year contract of guaranteed business in the City was long enough to allow the contractor to pay for the new trucks. They awarded their contract to a small, local company. (14) Falcon Heights is mueh smaller than Shakopee, but a similar strategy could work here. If the City shifts to a day/zone pattern '. (15), only one truck would be required to serve the whole city. Notes 1. "Effects of Heavy Vehicle Characteristics on Pavement Response and Performance: Final Report." Gillespie, Thomas D., et aI., University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, August 1992, p. ix. 2. Gp. cit., page 6 3. "Residential Solid Waste and Recycling Citizen Advisory Committee Report," City ofRoseville, 2002, p. 42. 4. Fax from H.R. Green, February 26,2002; also in a memo from Steve Manhart, October 30, 2003. 5. "Solid Waste and Recycling Report", City ofRoseville, May, 2002, page 43 http://www.ci.roseville.mn. u sfinfofwastefreport. pdf . City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 16 . 6. 7. 8. "Public Collection Study: Final Report," Ramsey Washington County Resource Recovery Project, 2002, appendix 2E. http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recovery/docs/2E.pdf Roseville report, page 43 "Press Release: New Study of Greener Garbage Trucks," INFORM, November 6, 2002, http://www.informinc.org/pr-9gt.php 9. "Greening Garbage Trucks: New Technologies for Cleaner Air," INFORM, Inc., 2003. INFORM, Inc. is a national non-profit organization that identifies practical ways of living and doing business that are environmentally sustainable. 10. Op. cU., p. 7 11. Op. cit., p. 9 12. Op. cit., p. 8 13. Ibid 14. Information provided by City of Shakopee staff. e 15. Day/zone system is used here to describe an anangement in which the city is divided into zones, each of which is served on one day of the week, not necessarily Friday. For instance, collection could be on Monday northwest of Snelling/Larpenteur, Wednesday southeast of Snelling/Larpenteur, and Friday west of Snelling. If one day, say, Monday, is considered most desirable the schedule could rotate once a year so everyone could get a chance at Monday collection. This system would malce it possible to serve the whole city with one truck, and each neighborhood would have one truck on non-recycling weeks, two trucks on recycling weeks. A change to the City code would be required. :It City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 17 ill. Deciding Where Our Trash Goes - According to Minnesota's Waste Management Act, the goal of waste management of the state is "to foster an integrated waste management system in a manner appropriate to the eharacteristics of the waste stream and thereby protect the state's land, air, water, and other natural resources and the public health." (1) The statute gives the following order of preference for waste management practices: 1. Waste reduction and reuse 2. Recycling 3. Composting of yard waste and food waste 4. Resource recovery through mixed municipal solid waste composting or incineration. 5. Land disposal (landfill) that does not produce methane gas or which captures the gas to use as fuel for the production of energy 6. Land disposal that produces methane gas and does not capture it for energy production. (2) The state's Office ofEnvrronmental Assistance, in its vision statement, gives as a further goal, "to minimize landfilling, with an increased focus on maximizing reduction, reuse, recycling and source-separated composting." (3) Faleon Heights' goals, adopted in January, 2004, are in line with both the state hierarchy and the goals in the OEA report. The Commission's vision for a solid waste system includes the continuation and expansion of the citywide curbside recycling we now enjoy, movement toward composting of yard waste and other compostables, and resource recovery, that is, sending Falcon Heights garbage to the Newport Resource Recovery Facility. ,e Resource Recovery The Resource Recovery Facility in Newport is one of three plants in the Twin Cities area that prepare municipal solid waste as a fuel to produce electricity. Commissioners visited the Newport plant on Aprill2. According to staff at the facility municipal solid waste is the best material for processing because it goes through quicldy and burns evenly. Commissioners learned that 78% or more of the waste processed becomes fuel, 3% is recovered ferrous metal, half a percent is recovered aluminum. The remaining residual material is sent on to landfill. The ash left over at the end of incineration also must be landfilled, but it amounts to a small fraction of the volume of the original waste. From Newport the prepared waste is trucked to burning facilities in Red wing or Mankato. Commissioners were told that these burners are very "clean" technology; each one produces about as much pollution in a year as a single old fashioned back yard incinerator. According to Gary White, plant manager, the facility produces fuel for enough energy to supply about 30,000 homes, or enough for, say, Woodbury and Oakdale combined. l~ City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 18 . There are two production lines running 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and room to add a third line. The limiting factor is capacity of the burners. It is not universally agreed that burning of waste is better for the environment than landfills. Some potential pollutants, such as heavy metals, are more concentrated in incinerator ash than they are in the unprocessed waste. At least one published "hierarchy of solid waste management" places incineration at the bottom, as the least desirable. (4) A study for the Minnesota EP A was inconclusive, but suggested slightly more potential for toxic pollution from incineration than from landfilling. (5. And see below.) Landfills At the meeting for haulers on May 12, the haulers made a strong effort to show that landfills are, at least, "just as good" as processing for fuel. Commissioners were shown an educational video about modem landfills and given a large amount of printed material, including documents from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency describing the regulations modem landfills must meet. e Since the mid 1990s, landfills have been required to meet impressively stringent standards (RCRA Subtitle D, which became effective in 1993) designed to keep waste from polluting the surrounding land. Rainwater draining through the waste leaches out toxic chemicals that can drain into the soil and pollute groundwater. Modem landfills are designed to be, essentially, enormous bathtubs that collect this water, called "leachate," and collect it to be treated. The pits are lined with a base of compacted soil covered with a membrane of thick plastic. Each day's waste is covered with a layer of soil. In the landfill the waste composts slowly, producing methane gas as a byproduct. Methane is a greenhouse gas, but at Elk River and many other modem landfills the methane is captured and burned to produce electricity. When a landfill is filled to capacity it is capped, and the space on top can eventually be used for another purpose, such as recreation. (6) On June 22, some of the Commissioners went on a tour of the Elk River landfill and had the opportunity to see the technology first hand. They watched the day's soil cover being moved into place and observed that there was very little odor from the landfill. Methane collected from the facility provides enough power for about 7500 households. Leachate (rainwater that drains through the waste) is collected and recirculated to speed the composting action. The site, which is operated by Waste Management, is 80 acres, plus an additional 40 acres that has been purchased on the north. They are trying to buy another 40 acres on the south or west, because the County has limited the height of the fill. The old dump will be capped off and turned into a ski hill. According to facility manager Debra Dehn the Elk River facility is "state of the art," but it will be full in 1 0 to 15 years' time. They need more land. <. According to the hauler's representative, all "active" landfills in Minnesota meet the current federal standards. When they asked about the waste that is shipped to landfills out of state, Commissioners were assured that those, also, meet federal standards. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 19 Today's landfills are a major improvement over the past, although it must be pointed out that all of the "old technology" landfills are still with us. Once closed, landfills must be . monitored indefinitely. Environmental researchers have expressed concerns about the long term effectiveness oflandfillliners. The plastic can be degraded by contact with household chemicals; compacted soil can erode and shift; seams can fail and membranes can be accidentally punctured. (7) Energy production Both landfills and incineration are used to produce electric energy. Incineration uses Refuse-derived Fuel (RDF) produced by resource recovery plants like the facility at Newport. Subtitle D landfills collect gases from the decomposition of waste, gas that would otherwise pollute the air, and channel it to generators. This is called Landfill Gas technology or LFG. The "bioreactor" technology that recirculates water to speed up decomposition in a landfill merely accelerates the rate at which the total amount of gas is produced; it does not increase the total amount of energy a landfill is capable of producing. (8) How do the energy production technologies compare? According to a 2001 study, the most co=on method of generating power v,ith LFG requires 750 tons of municipal solid waste to power one home for 20 years. If the theoretical maximum of energy production could be achieved - which has not yet happened - the amount could be reduced to 455 tons ofMSW. However, energy production from an individual landfill varies greatly from year to year. It peaks in the first 5 to 10 years and then tapers off as the decomposable material is exhausted. (9) '... , RDF technology, on the other hand, requires only 280 tons of material to power a home for 20 years. It uses a higher percentage of the waste: RDF can make use of materials that do not readily decompose under landfill conditions, such as plastic bottles and organic material that is shielded from moisture by plastic. RDF energy production is constant: on a given year the energy output can be between 32 to 54 times more than LFG for the same amount of waste. (10) The bottom line is that, of the two technologies, RDF is by far the most efficient converter of municipal solid waste to electricity. Risk and Future Liability Concerned residents have asked about the small print notice they receive from their haulers once a year advising them that they may be liable for damage caused by the waste they put into the trash. Ash from RDF, they pointed out, is much more difficnlt to link to individual residential sources; thus the risk ofliability would be lower if Falcon Heights' refuse could be guaranteed to go to Newport. . City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 20 . e . In response to these concerns, the National Solid Wastes Management Association provided the Falcon Heights commissioners with a memo from the association's general council David Bidennan that offered the following points: . Residential households were not originally exempted from Superfund liability but have been since the law was amended in 2002. . Since 1989 it has been the policy of the EPA not to name residential generators as potentially responsible parties . There was a case in Connecticut in which 47 homeowners were named as PRPs. (presumably this was before 1989.) . The 2002 exclusion does not apply if the waste "has contributed significantly or could contribute significantly either individually or in the aggregate to the cost" of cleaning up the site. . Mr. Biderman is not aware of any Superfund cases since 2002 in which a homeowner has been identified as liable. . He also not aware of any Subtitle D landfills that have been identified as Superfund sites since 1993. . Since Subtitle D facilities do not accept industrial waste and are carefully monitored, they are unlikely to become Superfund sites. (11) The memo did not address potential liability not related to the Superfund law. A 1991 study prepared for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (made available to the Co=ission by the haulers) compared toxic pollution risks associated with all methods of solid waste management, including recycling and composting. The study found the "regardless of the MSW management alternative chosen, certain levels of risk are involved," even in compo sting and recycling, which are popularly regarded as safer methods of management. The study noted that the information base is skewed and driven by public controversy and regulatory pressure and hindered by lack of data. It ended with only the broadest and most generic of conclusions, rating waste combustion (incineration) slightly worse than land disposal and composting worse than both. (12) Industry Competition and the Public Interest Since 1993, the solid waste industry has sought to become vertically integrated, with the large corporations buying up transfer stations, landfills and recycling processing centers in order to control each part of the waste stream. The landfills available to the smaller local hauling businesses are owned by their large, national competitors. On the other hand, every hauler pays the same tipping rates at the resource recovery plants as these are not (yet) controlled by the major companies. If Falcon Heights could specify that all of its municipal solid waste go to Newport, it would level at least the tipping fee part of the playing field between national and local companies. The only way for the City or for individual residents to set this requirement, and to enforce it, is through an organized collection contract; it cannot be done through licensing. City of Faicon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 21 At the present time, all the haulers licensed in Falcon Heights have a contract with Ramsey County to talce all or part of their waste to the Newport Facility. Contract to take ALL waste to RRF Contracted to take Dart of waste to RRF Horrigan BFI Gene's Superior/Onyx Waste Management Walter's This information is from the RamseylWashington Counties Resource Recovery Project website (13). At the Commission's request, Staff contacted the Ramsey County Environmental Health Department and confirmed that the web page is up to date and accurate. All of these contracts expire July 13,2007. Residents on both sides of the issue have clearly expressed their support for reducing waste, and that is also the Commission's highest goal, but there is still a need to make wise choices in the disposal of that waste that goes into the containers at the curb, to be picked up and hauled away every week. Under an open system, it is the haulers, often in distant corporate headquarters, who make that choice about at least part of the waste that comes from Falcon Heights. Without a renewal of RRF contracts in 2007, there may be no local voice in this decision for cities that do not have their own contracts. Notes 1. Minnesota Statute 1 15A.02. http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recovery/index.asp 2. Ibid. 3. 2003 Solid Waste Policy Report to the Minnesota Legislature, prepared by the Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA), January, 2004. Executive Summary, p. 1. http://www.moea.state.mn.us/publications/policy2003-summary.pdf 4. "Environmental Hierarchy of Waste Management & Energy Production MethodslFuelsffechnologies," Mike Ewall, Energy Justice Network, http://www.energyjustice.net/technologies .pdf 5. "Risk Comparison Between Solid Waste Management Alternatives," prepared by Malcolm Pimie, Inc. for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, July, 1991, Table 6-1. 6. "Criteria for Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: A Guide for Owners/Operators," EP N530-SW-91-089, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March, 1993. Also, other publications provided by the NSWMA and communication with staff at the Elk River landfill. 7. "The Basics of Landfills," ACTION Center; http://www.ejnet.org/landfillslindex.html City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 . . 1_ - 22 . -.. ~.~ :- 8. "Comparison of Potential Electricity Production from RDF and LFG" prepared by Foth & Van Dyke for the Ramsey/Washington Counties Resource Recovery Project, November 2001, p. I 9. Gp. cU., p. 3 10. Gp. cit., p. 1 and p. 9 11. Memorandum to NSWMA Minnesota Chapter from David Biderman, General Council, RE: Superfund Liability, May 11, 2004. Provided by Doug Carnival of McGrann Shea Anderson Carnival Straughn & Lamb, Chartered. 12. "Risk Comparison Between Solid Waste Management Alternatives," p. 6-3 13. RarnseyfWashington Counties Resource Recovery Project web page "Does YOUR Hauler Use the Resource Recovery Facility?" http://www.co.ramsey.mn_us/recovery/where_ does --your -9arbage -9o.asp See also http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recoverylindex.asp City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 23 IV. The Hauling Industry and Public Policy . Industry Consolidation Since 1993, the solid waste management landscape has undergone major changes. U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1992 and 1994 limited the ability of governments to regulate the management of waste, in particular, the regulation of where the waste would go. The result was an increase in the amount of Minnesota waste that went to less-expensive, out of state landfills. States, counties and local city governments began to see an erosion of slow, hard-won progress toward their goals of increased recycling, conservation and resource recovery. Duringthe 1990s there was a major consolidation in the waste hauling industry, both nationally and in Minnesota. In Ramsey and Washington County, mergers and acquisitions reduced the number of active licensed waste businesses operation in the two counties from 58 in 1995 to 45 in 1999. At the same time the industry sought "vertical integration," that is, ownership and control of all phases of waste flow, through the acqnisition oflandfills, transfer stations, and materials recovery facilities (recycling centers). This allowed large companies to internalize revenues and gain an even bigger advantage over smaller competitors. (1) In 1995, most hauling companies were locally owned and operated. But now, according to the Ramsey/Washington County 2002 report, over 65% of the waste in the two counties is picked up by BFI, Waste Management and Onyx (Vivendi), three large international companies. (2) This means that the decisions about waste management, which used to be made locally, are now increasingly geared toward corporate goals. ;e In Falcon Heights the number of residential haulers is the same now as it was in 1990. Then, the most popular hauler by far was Woodlake, which was later bought out by BFr. Of the remaining five, Waste Management and Gene's are still in operation. Walters was in operation, but it was an earlier incarnation of the company that was also sold to one of the large national companies. The present Walter's Refuse and Recycling was started up five years later by members of the same family. Poor Richard's and Wiley's, both local companies, were gone by 1995. (3) There is no reason to suppose this consolidation process will not continue, with or without organized collection. "It should be noted that small waste collection companies, as with nearly any small business, consolidate, go out of business, or buy and sell without the impetus of organized collection." ("Organized Collection Study," City of Eagan, February, 1988, prepared by Pope-Reid Associates) Many residents of Falcon Heights have expressed concern about the dominance of the industry by large corporations that have no local accountability. Concern for local companies has been given as a reason not to implement organized collection. But keeping an open system will not save these companies from going out of business, or dissuade them from selling out to a competitor when they choose to. On the other hand, (. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 24 . other cities, such as Shakopee, have found ways to "level" the playing field for by structuring their RFPs so that small, local companies could truly compete for city business and have a stronger chance for survival. The Shakopee contract went, not to the lowest (or largest) bidder, but to Dick's Sanitation, a local company. Shakopee built local decision-making and local accountability into their RFP and their contract. (4) Other Cities and Counties During the fact fmding period the Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission has studied the experiences of other Cities. Some have chosen to adopt organized collection . . In 1999 the City of North St. Paul went through the organized collection process to ensure compliance with Minnesota Statute I 15A.94, although the city had a long tradition of contracted hauling. Their findings of fact stated that a single hauler would best meet their goals, and that is the system they have today. The City has four zones for collection on different days (5) . Little Canada instituted organized collection in 1989 and is served by a consortium of four haulers. Each hauler serves a designated zone of the city, and the same rates and services apply city-wide. Fees are volume based, and there is a charge for extra trash. The city offers a low income subsidy for households whose income meets Federal Poverty Income Guidelines and an at-the-door service subsidy for disabled residents. (6) :- . The City of Shakopee organized collection in 2000, finding very innovative ways to structure their RFP to make it possible for local companies to compete with large international corporations. A local company did get the contract. Shakopeeapplied for and received a grant to cover the cost of new containers for all residents. Fines for service complaints are built into the contract and paid through a deposit put in escrow by the hauler. As part of the contract, the City gets all its City Hall and park trash picked up for free. (7) . Lauderdale went through the statutory process in 2003 and is (at the time of this writing) considering bids. From the Lauderdale City Council minutes of February 11, 2003: "The Task Force has been studying organized collection for approximately two years, and there are many benefits to the idea that include lower costs and preferred environmental practices in addition to protecting the city's investment in its infrastructure that are part of the goals of the Task Force." (8) . Portland, Oregon, replaced open collection with a franchise agreement in 1992. Each hauler was given a district essentially equal to its market share at the time which "likely kept more small haulers in business longer than had open competition been allowed to continue." Rates have been "relatively stable" since 1992, and service has been standardized and, in the case of recycling, markedly improved. (9) . In its waste hauling "starter kit," Kettering Ohio, answered the questions "Why is the City of Kettering switching to a single-hauler system?" as follows: "The single- City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Coliection October 13, 2004 25 hauler system provides many benefits, including free recycling services, even at the low base rate, reduced traffic in neighborhoods, less vehicular damage to our streets . and alleys and fewer missed pickups." Kettering, which contracted with Waste Management, has a base rate that includes unlimited trash collection. Cart rental and yard waste collection are extra options. The city also has severallow-volumellow-fee options, including a pay-as~you-throw system that uses purchased bags. Senior citizens can get a 37.5% discount on the bags. All options include free recycling and unlimited bulky item pick-up. (10) Some cities have chosen to keep an open system, even in cases where their own studies reco=ended organized collection: . Among the key reco=endations ofRoseville's Residential Solid Waste and Recycling Citizen Advisory Committee Report, May, 2002, was the following: "Meet the City's and State's environmental goals by designing a garbage system that uses environmentally preferred management of waste. Of the methods studied by the Committee, an organized collection system run by a consortium of private haulers appears to give the City the best, and perhaps only, means to meet the City's and State's environmental goals and balance Citizen interests and concerns." Roseville did not proceed to organize collection. The city has 7 haulers and rates comparable to Falcon Heights'. (11) . A 1988 study for the City of Eagan looked at the pros and cons of six different systems, including a "no change" option and developed a comparison chart. The '. study concluded, "A version of organized contract collection may lower costs, .. decrease wear and tear on streets, and facilitate curbside recycling, but also increase aclmini,trative costs to the City and possibly impair the business opportonities of some haulers. Each system has distinct advantages and disadvantages." The consultant declined to recommend a specific alternative. Today Eagan has an open system. (12) . Chanhassen's Organized Collection Study Committee reco=ended not only proceeding with organized collection but, in the interim, limiting the number refuse hauling licenses to a maximum of six, with no new licensees to be added for attrition. Their survey found that "27% of the respondents were not at all supportive of organized collection, 48% were neutral and 25% were very supportive of organized collection. Chanhassen's findings cited many of the same reasons as other cities' studies - street impact, cost, vehicle emissions and noise - and made a special point that only by organized collection could the City comply with Minnesota law and ensure every household had waste collection service. Chanhassen does not have organized collection in 2004. (13) . Olmsted County, Minnesota, designed an organized collection system in 1996 but did not implement it. If an RFP had been issued, the County would probably have awarded a contract to one hauler. At the time there were 13 haulers. Now 91 % of the market is controlled by Onyx and Waste Management, with three other companies sharing the remaining portion. According to the Ramsey Washington summary, i. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 26 e . -- "Any concerns about not having the choice of haulers at that time, whether residents or businesses, have been mitigated to a good degree by the buyouts since 1996, resulting in few, if any choices available." (14) In 2002 Ramsey and Washington Counties initiated an extensive study of public collection that included a major effort toward public participation and education. Of the four alternatives considered by the two counties, the fmal report found that implementing public collection was the best solution to meet the goals of the counties. However, because this alternative required major system changes and met with much opposition, implementation was seen to be excessively difficult. The counties ended up pursuing a less satisfactory option - "Change Financing and Regulation" - which was seen to be easier to implement. Two changes that came about under this option were (I) the transfer of the County Environmental Charge from the property tax statement to each trash hauling bill, and (2) long term contracts with hanlers to assure delivery of waste to the Resource Recovery Facility. (15) The final report noted that public opinion is divided on the issue of organized collection: . Those that support public collection do so mainly for one of various reasons: because it would address garbage truck traffic; it would be more efficient; because of experience elsewhere; because it could cost less or because it supports environmental, health and safety goals. . Those that oppose public collection are quite vocal, and do so for several reasons: concern with increasing government involvement; desire to retain choice in selecting a garbage hauler; concern for small businesses; a perception that costs will increase; belief that there is no problem; not agreeing with the environmental goals. (16) These fmdings describe very well the public response in Falcon Heights. The report also notes: The waste industry is vigorously opposed to public collection, and is willing spend significant funds and take strong steps to prevent it. (17) That has certainly proved to be the case in Falcon Heights. The Ramsey/Washington report left the door open to implementing public collection at some time in the future if the compromise recommendations do not move the system toward the environmental goals. Notes 1. "Public Collection Study: Final Report," Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project, 2002, Appendix 2F. 2. Ibid. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 27 '. 3. The six haulers are those listed in the Falcon Heights 1990 Solid Waste Newsletter . Survey (file copy). This was compared to infonnation in the RamseylWashington County Resource Recovery Project research at http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recovery/HaulerConsolidationData.asp Additional information was provided anecdotally by Falcon Heights residents. 4. Co=unication from City of Shakopee staff. 5. Co=unication from City of North St. Paul staff 6. Co=unication from City of Shakopee staff. 7. City of Little Canada website, http://littlecanada.govoffice.comlindex.asp?Type=B _L1ST&SEC={ABBC96Eo- FB2E-44D8-9879-E3A90961 OEC7}#{47DFE93D-4BCB-4499-A 14E- 3317D117A6C1} 8. Lauderdale City Council minutes for February II, 2003: http://www.ci.lauderdale.mn.us/verticaIlSites/{5F73237E-9F78-407B-A78S- DAOD9F5C945F}/uploads/{0636991 B-A523-48C 1-821 D-3A35F03772E4}.PDF 9. Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project Case Studies: http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recovery/docslPortland_Summary.pdf le 10. Kettering, Ohio, trash collection service starter kit brochure: http://www.ci.kettering.oh.usIpdfs/trash%20starter%20kit.pdf 1 L "Solid Waste and Recycling Report", City of Roseville, May, 2002, pp 46-47. http://www.cLroseville.mn.uslinfo/wastelreport. pdf 12. "Organized Collection Study," City of Eagan, prepared by Pope-Reid Associates, February, 1988, p. 27. 13. "City ofChanhassen Organized Collection Study Final Report," Resource Strategies Corporation, no date, p.ll. 14. RamseylWashington County Resource Recovery Project Case Studies: http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/recovery/docs/Olmsted_Co _ Summary.pdf 15. "County Environmental Charge Briefing Paper, January 2, 2004," Ramsey County, http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/ph/eh/docs/Briefing_Paper.pdf 16. "Public Collection Study: Final Report," Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Project, 2002, page 5 17. Ibid. (. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 28 . / - ~. Conclusions and Recommendations Upon the ending of the planning period, Minnesota Statute 1 15A.94 requires a period of at least 90 days for discussion. Although the statute specifies discussion with the haulers, this time will also be valuable for discussion within the City, for the Council to consider and discuss the findings in this study, take comment from residents, and to consider the possible plans for going forward. The Hauler Plan The Solid Waste Commission is grateful to the haulers licensed in the City for their willingness to meet with the Commission, share information and discuss the issues. In the September 20 NSWMA memo to the Commission, the haulers pointed out many ways in which the City's goals are already being met under the present system and offered some additional acco=odations they are willing to malce to reduce the impact of trucks on our streets and alleys and to improve public education. They propose to formalize these accommodations in a Memorandum of Understanding or similar document that "would form the basis upon which waste hauling in the City of Falcon Heights would occur into the future." The specific changes offered by the haulers are . Bring trucks into the City empty . Train drivers to enter and exit from alleys with left turns, so trucks are less likely to run over curbs and boulevards . Cooperate with requests from residents or the City not to drive on streets or alleys where they have no customers. The NSWMA also expresses eagerness to work with the City on public education and willingness to include informational inserts in the billings to customers. Otherwise, the proposal advocates keeping things as they are now. Comments on the Hauler Plan Although the Commissioners especially appreciate the haulers' willingness to work with the City, the proposed changes to the trucking operations would be have a very minor effect compared to actually removing the additional trucks from the streets and alleys. The first change simply moves a portion of the axle weight impact problem from Falcon Heights to some other city. There would be no effective way to monitor whether or not the trucks actually do come to Falcon Heights empty. The third change would be meaningless unless residents on a block or street cooperate to choose the same hauler (See Appendix G: Other Alternatives). Falcon Heights residents would still have to choose from among the higher rates they pay now and might have no voice in deciding where their garbage goes after July 13, 2007. The Commission is concerned that there would be no way to monitor compliance or to enforce a Memorandum of Understanding over the long term. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13,2004 29 This plan is, with a few small changes, the same open system we have now. The haulers have made it clear that it is in their interests to keep open collection. The plan does offer individual choice, and it would not create any additional administrative burden for City Staff, as long as the haulers keep their commitment. Potential Advantages of Open Collection . Residents can select the hauler that provides the level of service most compatible with their individual needs and can shop among the price options that are available. . Since Falcon Heights already has an open system, residents would not be inconvenienced by change. . Administrative cost is minimized for City. . Small haulers will face no additional competitive challenges beyond what they face now within the indnstry. Potential Disadvantages of Open Collection . Although choice is available, "inertia may be a compelling force" for a resident to stay with the hanler he/she has. (Quote from "Comparative Economic Analysis of MSW and Recycling Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area," GBB Solid Waste Management Consultants for the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance, 1994, page V-2.) Residents must take the time and trouble to shop around for a better rate - which can be temporary and come with strings, long term contracts and cancellation penalties - or just give in and go along with higher prices or unsatisfactory service. . Under an open system, costs must be spread over smaller and more uncertain customer base, so fees must be sufficiently high to cover fixed costs. In other words, we pay more. Operational cost savings of adding to the customer base are more likely to go to higher hauler profits than to lowered prices for customers. . It is impossible to determine whether Falcon Heights is in compliance with the Waste Management Act, which requires all residents in communities of over 5000 people to use solid waste collection services. . Individual residents and the community as a whole will have no leverage to support local businesses and keep them viable as the industry consolidates. . MSW trucks are heavy and have a demonstrated impact on street longevity. City streets and alleys will continue to be subject to the impact of additional truck traffic. . Another consequence of overlapping routes and more trucks is more air pollution and more noise. . Residents do not have a choice about where their refuse goes. If they choose a hauler on the basis of where the hauler says the trash goes, there is no assurance that (a) the information is correct and (b) the hauler will not change practices in the future. . Major decisions that affect quality oflife in Falcon Heights and the future of our environment will be driven by corporate priorities, not local interests. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 30 . 1. (. . ~. . Organized Collection In the process of research, planning and discussion so far, the Solid Waste Commission has revisited the original set of goals many times. . Some of the goals can be met now. These are the goals concerned with standards of service. They were included in the list in the fIrst place to assure residents that the proposed system would maintain high standards of service. Residents can find most of these options by shopping around and making good choices. . The goal of using billing mailings as a vehicle for public education is also one that can be met now, with the cooperation of the haulers. . The goal of composting is probably unrealistic at this time, although Cities should keep an eye on developments in this technology. But the Big lbree are (1) lower prices, (2) fewer trucks, and (3) community control over where our garbage goes. These are not trivial goals or imaginary issues. These themes carne up over and over again in the documents of other cities and counties that considered changes in solid waste management. In this study the Solid Waste Commission found that organized collection is the most effective, if not the only, way to achieve these goals in the long term: . Cities with organized collection do get lower prices for their residents. . Garbage trucks do make an impact on our infrastructure and quality oflife. The biggest difference can be made by reducing the nurnber of trucks on our streets and making sure the trucks that remain are "greener". . Finally, organized collection can ensure that important decisions, especially decisions about what happens to our trash, are made our community, not detennined by corporate managers driven by business priorities. There are disadvantages to organized collection, especially the loss of choice of haulers, which is very important to some residents. There would be increased workload for City staffmanaging a change of this magnitude. The time window for the City to implement organized collection may be limited. In 2003 the waste hauling industry sponsored legislation that would have taken away the rights of local governments to adopt public collection. Continued consolidation of the industry in the future could leave residents with few choices, no power in the market place and no power to make sound environmental choices about municipal solid waste. There will always be an option to return from a city contract system to an open system, but the reverse may not be possible in the future. Potential Advantages of Organized Collection . Lower consumer prices: Cities which have adopted organized collection have been able to negotiate lower rates for their residents. With a city contract, operational cost efficiencies can come back to residents in lower prices. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 31 . Garbage truck wear and tear does make a difference to our streets and roads. We can make our infrastructure last longer if we can reduce the number of trucks . Rate increases will be structured and predictable for the duration of the contract. . Residents would have a clear, one-stop menu of services and costs and will not have to try to compare apples to oranges. Busy residents will save time and energy not having to shop around . A contract can specify where our refuse goes, whether to a landfill or for fuel processing. We can ensure this decision serves local interests and local environmental goals, not corporate priorities. . Fewer trucks means less noise and air pollution in our neighborhoods . Rates can be better structured to encourage reduction of waste, including the ability to offer pay-as-you-throw options for residents who produce a very low volume of trash. . With a contract, the City could control the size and quality of trucks used, specifying lower pollution, better loading and weight bearing technology. Dependable city business can assure smaller haulers that new truck for use in Falcon Heights is a good investment, helping to level the playing field. . A city contract can enforce good service by building schedule of fines and escrow account into the contract. A contract can insist on a local phone number for service calls, answered by a local person. . City would have a way of enforcing the Waste Management Act that requires residents of co=unities with over 5000 people to have garbage picked up. There is no way under the present system. . Although it would require a change in the City Code, an organized system could be structured so that different zones of the City could have their collection on different days, including Monday (which residents have asked for). The schedule could rotate every year or two, to give everyone a chance at that popular Monday collection day. Potential Disadvantages of Organized Collection . Although customers would have a choice of service levels, they would lose the choice of service provider. . A major public education effort would be required to make everyone aware of the changes, and the transition would be more difficult for people who are uncomfortable with change. . Some residents may experience an increase in price over the artificially low rates offered by haulers campaigning against organized collection . Residents will have to choose their services from the standard set offered. This may not include some services they receive now. . There would be an increased administrative burden associated with getting a new system up and running, including developing the RFP, evaluating proposals, developing a contract agreement. The City would also have to monitor and enforce the terms of the contract. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 32 . (. . - ....-' '" :8 . Residents opposed to organized collection have been far more vocal than residents who support organized collection. Staff and elected officials are lilcely to experience negative feedback from those individuals. In otller cities, this has been temporary. . Decreased business opportunities for haulers. The Commission's Recommendation At every stage of this process the Commission has kept in mind the question, "What is in the best interests of the residents of Falcon Heights?" After an extended period of study, the Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission has found that: . Residents in cities with organized collection pay significantly lower fees than the Falcon Heights average . Only with a contract can we make the decision about where our garbage goes, based on our environmental interests, and make sure we have a voice in other important decisions about our municipal solid waste. . If we can reduce the number of garbage trucks serving the City, we can make our streets and alleys last longer and reduce exhaust and noise pollution . Continued consolidation of the industry will leave individual residents with decreasing choice and decreasing power in the marketplace, if the City keeps an open system. It is the consensus of the Commission that the interests of the residents of Falcon Heights ean best be served by implementing organized collection in the City. Accordingly, the Commission reco=ends the following plan and timetable . On October 13, end the statutory planning period and commence the 90-day discussion period . Put the Co=ission's report and recommendation and the haulers' recommendation in the hands of resident as soon as possible after October 13 . Take comment from the public under guidelines to be determined by the City Council for a limited period to be designated by the Council. . Make available an opportunity for haulers to participate in further discussion during the 90 days . Make findings offact, as required by Minn. Stat. 115A.94, in January, 2005, at the end of the 90 day discussion period or soon thereafter. . Pending the will of the Council, after the expiration of the 90 days, issue a Request for Proposal that o Serves the best interests of the residents of Falcon Heights, fmancially and environmentally City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 33 o Moves toward all the goals articulated in January, 2004 Covers all types of residential solid waste discussed in the original goals, except recycling, which shall remain separate for now. Makes every effort, including innovative strategies developed by other cities, to ensure that all haulers, large and small, now licensed in the city, have a fair chance to compete for a city contract o o Whatever the Council decides to do in the end, there is room for improvement in the way Falcon Heights manages its solid waste and opportunity to make positive changes now. Whatever system the City chooses to follow, the Commission hopes that through this process residents have become better educated about this essential community service and about ways they can make wise, healthy and environmentally sound choices about the waste they produce. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 34 '. . '. . -- ,- ~ Appendix A Goals of Solid Waste Collection in Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission of Falcon Heights January, 2004 It is the mission of the Falcon Heights Solid Waste Commission to develop a more ejJicient, more economical and more environmentally sound solid waste disposal system, and build a waste management education plan for all age groups, starting with our youngest citizens. Based on this mission statement, the Co=ission has developed the following goals for solid waste collection in Falcon Heights. More Efficient 1. Refuse collection shall be on one day of the week for all residences in single- family residential zones. 2. Waste collection base plan shall include refuse, recycling and yard waste, with options provided for appliances and other large objects. 3. There shall be an efficient quarterly billing procedure with clear, itemized charges for each resident. 4. The City shall manage service and resident concerns. More Economical 5. To reduce road maintenance costs, each street or alley shall be served by only one hauler, one truck per collection day. The City may choose the option to designate one or more zones, one hauler to a zone, and may choose to contract separately for recycling. 6. The City shall specify the maximum size of garbage trucks, in the interest of safety and protecting citizens' investment in City infrastructure. 7. Prices shall be competitive with what Falcon Heights residents are paying now and with what is being charged in other Metro area cities. Pricing options shall be the same in all neighborhoods of the city. 8. A choice of service levels shall be provided, based on bin size. An e1.'ira-small size shall be available. Residents shall be allowed to share service_ Service shall include options for additional services or special pick-ups. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 35 9. Residents shall have option of temporary suspension of service, with either a one- month or two-month minimum. 10. Any contract for organized collection made by the City shall be for 3 or more years and shall include conditions for termination prior to the end of the contract. More Environmentally Sound 11. Refuse shall go to the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Facility in Newport, or a similar environmentally sound facility at the direction of the City, if the Newport facility is no longer available. Hauler(s) must certify this quarterly. 12. Waste collection service shall be consistent with sound public health policies and a clean city. 13. Within the first year of the contract, hauler(s) shall provide a viable plan to implement collection of organics for composting. Public Education 14. The City shall have the option to provide informational inserts to be sent out with bills, at the City's discretion. 15. Hanler(s) shall provide accurate quarterly tonnage reports to the City. 16. The waste hauler(s) shall support the City's efforts to educate residents and students on solid waste and recycling issues. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 36 .. . . (. e Appendix B Solid Waste Commission Interim Report on Organized Collection Study June 23, 2004 Introduction On March 24, 2004, the City Council passed a resolution of intent to organize refuse collection under the provisions of Minnesota Statute 115A.04. The Council stated very clearly that their approval of the resolution of intent was not a fmal approval of organized collection, but a direction to the Solid Waste Commission to continue their study of all sides of the issue, with the final decision to be made later. Since March 24 the Solid Waste Commission has met six times: . Commission meetings on April 14, May 13, and June 10 . Meetings with haulers on April 20 and May 12 . Public informational meeting on May 20 In addition the Commissioners have gathered a large amount of research material and met with the City Attorney to explore options. Comments from residents (and some non-residents) have been collected in a dossier that has been copied to both the Commission and the Council. Comments from Residents It . . . . . . . Total number of residents whose comments are recorded in mail/phone log: 71 Number favoring organized collection: 22 Number opposed: 34 Number who said they had no opinion: 8 Number who only had questions: 7 Ratio of "opposed" to "in favor" at March 24 hearing: Estimated at 2 to I May 20 public meeting: All but I person were opposed. A letter was sent to all R-I residents on January 29, enclosing a copy of the Commission's goals, but by far the most comment seemed to be generated by mailings from haulers. These letters, generated from an industry template and reprinted on each company's letterhead, were nearly identical to letters sent out during the Ramsey-Washington Counties organized collection process in 2002, made unsubstantiated predictions about price rises, and encouraged a negative response to the City's efforts. - In spite of these mailings, many residents contacted Staff and Council to express their approval of the idea of organized collection. Some of their reasons are summarized here: . More wear and tear on roads caused by extra trips under current system . Extra trips mean more fuel consumed, more air pollution, more traffic congestion . More traffic is a safety concern . Organized collection is more efficient - basic logic - suggesting being able to pass savings on to residents . City has more bargaining power than an individual owner yielding potentially better price for residents . In answer to concerns about whether organized collection will be more burden for the City, the City has plenty of experience with contracted work. Many current City services are outsourced. . A larger number contacted the City or came to the public meetings to express their disapproval. "Choice" is a very important factor to these residents. (Reference: March 24 Public Hearing, May 20 Public Meeting and communications from individuals) . Many want "choice" so they can keep the hauler they have; they are concerned that a city contract would force them to have a hauler they don't want. . Many prefer a local hauler and do not want to give their business to a large, non-local corporation. . Some have the misconception that the Commission is ONLY supportive of a single hauler in the City. The goal explicitly states zoning and multiple haulers. . Some assume that a city-wide contract would mean that local haulers would not be considered and would be put out of business, although this is certainly not a goal of the Commission or a necessary outcome of the organized collection process. . Some residents say they like being able to change haulers whenever they want, to improve quality of service and/or reduce cost. [italicized portion added by Mayor Gehrz at Council Meeting of 6/23/04] . Some are opposed to government involvement in anything. Environment and city infrastructure are also very important issues to most residents (Reference: Public Hearing on March 24, Public Meeting on May 20 and communications from individual residents) . They do care about where refuse goes . They do care about the impact of trucks on the street . They do care about how much trash is produced and want effort and education directed toward reduction. Ie Hauler Meetings The tVvo meetings on April 20 and May 12 were generally positive and constructive. The haulers have provided a large amount of research material to the Commissioners. (See Res~ch section.) Commissioners and haulers agree that most of the goals proposed by the Commission can be met under the current system (Reference: April 20 hauler meeting), provided: . all the residents of Falcon Heights make informed, wise and environmentally sound choices. . The haulers come through with adjustments and compromises they have informally offered (See below) The following goals can be met by residents making wise use of service options available to them now (Reference: April 20 hauler meeting) . Competitive prices . Temporary suspension of service . Choice of bin size <- City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Coliection October 13, 2004 38 . . Service options such as yard waste . Quarterly billing Haulers have expressed willingness to voluntarily impose the following adjustments that would mitigate the effects of trucks on the streets and alleys. To date only two haulers have acted on these expressions of concern. We have reservations about follow-through when all we have are verbalizations of concern. (Reference: April 20 and May 12 hauler meetings): . Bring trucks into the City empty . Train drivers to enter and exit from alleys with left turns, reducing the damage to curbs and boulevards . Cooperate with residents' or the City's requests not to drive on streets or alleys where they have no customers In addition the haulers have also informally stated that they could voluntarily do the following: . Allow the City to provide educational material to be enclosed in bills . Take all garbage from Falcon Heights to the Resource Recovery Facility in Newport Commissioners are mindful that, without an organized collection contract, there is no way to enforce these voluntary accommodations over time. Research in Frogress . Truck Impact on City Streets and Alleys (in progress) The number and weight of trucks is the variable that determines how much impact this industry has on our streets and alleys. (Reference: April 20 and May 12 hauler meetings) The haulers themselves acknowledged this at the May 12 meeting. They agreed that the goal ofreducing the number and weight of trucks will not be met under an open system. . They argued that the freedom of the market outweighs this consideration. . One hauler offered the idea oflimiting the number of hauling licenses in the City - which can be done without organizing collection. The Commissioners point out that limiting the number of haulers is not necessarily consistent with the haulers' desire for a "free and open competitive market" . Haulers presented evidence the relationship between truck weight and street wear is not simple. Other factors are: nuDlber of axles, whether the truck is center-loaded or rear-loaded and how many stops a truck makes. . Haulers have referenced research showing that the number of stops and starts have more impact than the number of trucks. However, in Falcon Heights, the number of stops and starts is the sanle regardless of how many trucks malce those stops. Destination of Refuse (in progress) ~. Most trash in Rmnsey County goes to the Resource Recovery Center in Newport. This is an outcome of the Rmnsey-Washington County organized collection process in 2002. Commissioners visited the facility in April City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 39 . All haulers who operate in the two counties must contract to deliver all their trash or a percentage to the RRF. Some are contracted to deliver all their refuse to the RRF; others are contracted to deliver a percentage of their refuse to the RRF. . Most haulers licensed for residential pickup in Falcon Heights have stated that all Falcon Heights trash goes to the RRF. However, without organized collection there is no way to verify that this is true on an ongoing basis, or to guarantee that it will be true at any future time. . The contracts between haulers and Ramsey County are for a limited term. . The RRF is most efficient when it has a guaranteed stream of waste, which can only be achieved on our end by organized collection. . . In terms of reducing the need to consume primary energy resources, such as oil and natural gas, RRFs are much more effective. . Modem landfills are equipped to deal with waste from a resource recovery facility in a safe way. Incineration produces energy and greatly reduces the volume of waste that eventually goes to landfills. . There are concerns about the production of dioxins and other pollution from burning. e Haulers presented educational material about modern landfills in an effort to show that incineration (via the Newport Resource Recovery Facility) is not necessarily a better option, environmentally. (Reference: May 12 hauler meeting and packet of printed materials submitted by Mr. Doug Carnival) Commissioners have arranged to visit the Elk River Landfill in late Jnne. . All landfills in Minnesota and surrounding states comply with strict federal standards that are supposed to keep pollution from seeping .into soil and groundwater for at least 20 years. The technology is not old enough to evaluate its effectiveness over a longer term. . Commissioners concede that waste management technology has improved since our "father's dump" days. This has largely come about through legislated and legal precedents. However, Commissioners are interested in meeting more t11an minimum standards especially when it comes to our children and grandchildren's future. "We do not want to leave a 'mess' for them to clean up." . Modem landfills also produce energy from the burning of methane gas ;~ Options for Achieving the Goals The major goals that canoot be met t11rough the present open system are . Reducing the number and size of trucks on our streets and alleys . Controlling such factors as fuel efficiency and load type for trucks . Controlling the destination of our residential trash. (see below) It has been suggested that the City can accomplish these goals through licensing. According to the City Attorney, the City's ability to achieve any of the goals through licensing is limited (Reference: City Attorney Roger Knutson). Licensing could control the following: . Number of hauler licenses available in the City Licensing could not be used to control the following ,. . Where the trash goes ~ City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection 40 October 13, 2004 - e - . Weight and configuration of trucks (e.g. center-loading vs. rear-loading) .. Fuel efficiency of trucks .. Limiting truck traffic to streets and alleys ONLY where the haulers have customers . Controlling the truck miles traveled to collect our trash .. Controlling the emissions of the trucks used The following goals can be met by residents making wise use of service options available to them now (Reference: April 20 hauler meeting) .. Competitive prices .. Temporary suspension of service .. Choice of bin size .. Service options such as yard waste .. Quarterly billing The Solid Waste Commission expects to submit a final report in .July. Note: The study requested by the City Council required more time than the Commission estimated in June. The study was completed in late September, 2004, for presentation on October 13. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13,2004 41 WILLIAM R. MCGRANN ANDREW J. SHEA DAVID S. ANDERSON OOUGLAS M. CARNIVAL ROBERT O. STRAUGHN PETER L COOPER KA"lHLEEN M. LAMB JOHN R. SCHULZ COREY J. AYLING HENRY M. HELGEN lU RANDOLPH W. MORRIS SCOTT B. CROSSMAN CARLA J. PEOERSEN PAMELA HODGES NISSEN KAlliLEEN MICHAELA BRENNAN JOSEPH T. BAGNOll McGrann Shea Anderson Carnival Straughn & Lamb, Chartered ATTORNEYS AT LAW U.S. BANCORP CENTER 800 NICOLLET MALL SUITE 2600 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-7035 . GREGORY P. GAITf JENNIFERA. JAMESON TIMOTHY J. FOSTER AMY L COURT ROGER STELLJES SEAN O. SKRYPEK AMANDA R. CEFALU TELEPHONE (612) 338-2525 FACSIMILE (612) 339-2386 September 20, 2004 Jeff Alexander Chair of Solid Waste Commission City of Falcon Heights 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue Falcon Heights, MN 55113 Dear Chair Alexander: \e Falcon Heights Zoning and Planning Coordinator, Deborah Jones, has requested that my client, the National Solid Wastes Management Association (NSWMA), Minnesota Chapter, provide you with a written proposal for inclusion as an option in a plan which the Solid Waste Commission will recommend to the Falcon Heights City Council regarding future collection of solid waste. As you know, NSWMA and its Minnesota members have for some time, encouraged the Commission and the City Council to work with the haulers to voluntarily achieve common goals to provide environmentally safe, efficient, and competitively priced waste services to the residents of the City of Falcon Heights. We have suggested that the Commission and the City Council achieve these goals through a collaborative effort with the haulers rather than pursue the route of organized collection. Further, numerous City residents have indicated to the haulers, as well as the Commission and the City Council, that they strongly support their right to choose the garbage hauler with which to do business. We have met with the members of the Commission on a number of occasions in an effort to voluntarily achieve the goals of solid waste collection in Falcon Heights as set forth by the Commission. It is our belief that those discussions have been fruitful and have provided a substantial amount of information to the Commission on numerous issues such as environmental protection, truck use and technology, and the business and operational aspects of waste hauling. ce e - . Jeff Alexander September 20, 2004 Page 2 At your request, we have hereby reduced to writing our proposed plan for future handling of solid waste collection in the City of Falcon Heights by stating your goals and those activities which are currently occurring by the haulers in the City of Falcon Heights and those which we feel would be valuable as we go forward. We suggest that if the provisions of this plan are acceptable to the Commission and the City Council, they be incorporated into a Memorandum of Understanding or similar document which also contains a mechanism by which the signatory parties can ensure that the commitments are met. This Memorandum of Understanding would form the basis upon which waste hauling in the City of Falcon Heights would occur into the future and would obviate the need for any further discussion or implementation of organized collection. The following are the "Goals of Solid Waste Collection in Falcon Heights" adopted by the Commission and the NSWMA member haulers' suggestions with respect to those goals. More Efficient 1. Refuse collection shall be on one day of the week for all residences in single- family residential zones. It appears that this goal has already been attained since refuse is currently collected in the City of Falcon Heights only on Fridays. NSWMA member haulers are comfortable with this arrangement since it is already occurring and no further changes in practice are needed to meet this goal. 2. Waste collection base plan shall include refuse, recycling and yard waste, with options provided for appliances and other large objects. NSWMA member haulers who are currently hauling in the City of Falcon Heights collect refuse, recycling and yard waste. They also currently provide options to their customers for appliances and other large objects. Some collect them as a matter of course and others make arrangements with their customers to provide the collection service for these objects either directly or through other available service providers. As a result, the current practices of the NSWMA member haulers in Falcon Heights meets this goal. 3. There shaJ/ be an efficient quarterly billing procedure with clear, itemized charges for each resident. Each of the NSWMA member haulers in Falcon Heights currently bills its customers either on a quarterly or more frequent basis providing itemized charges for each resident it serves. The current billing practices of all of the NSWMA member haulers currently meet this goal. '. Jeff Alexander September 20, 2004 Page 3 . 4. The City shall manage service and resident concerns. Currently the NSWMA member haulers handle customer concerns directly with their customers. This provides an efficient, effective and direct way with which these independent businesses can ensure that their customers are satisfied with their seNice. The NSWMA member haulers are eager to work with the City of Falcon Heights to bring to the City's attention, concerns which they are hearing from their customers and provide the City with the solutions they have implemented to resolve those concerns. Further, the NSWMA member haulers are eager to receive any concerns which residents raise with the City about hauling seNices and provide the City with a report on the solutions that have been undertaken. It is the goal of the NSWMA member haulers, of course, to provide the best seNice possible to their customers so that long term relationships can be established. More Economical 5. To reduce road maintenance costs, each street or alley shall be served by only one hauler, one truck per collection day. The City may choose the option to designate one or more zones, one hauler to a zone, and may choose to contract separately for recycling. e As was mentioned above, the NSWMA member haulers and the members of the Commission met on a number of occasions to discuss ways to voluntarily meet this goal. These haulers are willing to make a number of adjustments in their business operations to help mitigate the effects of trucks on the streets and alleys of the City of Falcon Heights. Among those adjustments that the NSWMA member haulers are willing to make are to: 1. bring trucks into the City empty; 2. train drivers to enter and exit from alleys with left turns, reducing the damage to curbs and boulevards; 3. cooperate with resident's or the City's request to not drive on streets or alleys where they have no customers. Although the NSWMA member haulers are eager to prevent any damage to curbs and boulevards, it should be noted that there appears to be some question as to whether past damage to curbs was due to garbage collection or other industries' vehicles. (See attached memorandum of Eric Sederstrom of Walters Recycling and Refuse, Inc. to George Walter regarding his conversation with the City Engineer on this issue.) - . . ". Jeff Alexander September 20, 2004 Page 4 6. The City shall specify the maximum size of garbage trucks, in the interest of safety and protecting citizens' investment in City infrastructure. The comments made above in number 5 address this goal as well. 7. Prices shall be competitive with what Falcon Heights residents are paying now and with what is being charged in other Metro area cities. Pricing options shall be the same in all neighborhoods of the City. Currently, each hauler in Falcon Heights sets its own prices with its customers. This competitive marketplace provides each resident of the City with the ability to shop among the hauling community to determine what services that customer needs and what prices he/she is willing to pay. Further, it gives each individual resident the opportunity to change service providers if that resident is unhappy with either the price or the service he/she is receiving. This healthy competitive environment is the same as exists in all of the communities in the Metropolitan area which have open hauling systems similar to Falcon Heights. 8. A choice of service levels shall be provided, based on bin size. An extra-small size shall be available. Residents shall be allowed to share service. Service shall include options for additional services or special pick-ups. Currently, the NSWMA member haulers in Falcon Heights provide volume based pricing to their customers. The competitive nature of their. businesses provide residents with various options that meet the needs of their particular families. Further, the NSWMA member haulers indicate that they have no objection to the idea of permitting residents to share service with their neighbors if those particular residents decide on their own to do so. The NSWMA member haulers are eager to provide service that the customers request and are prepared to make arrangements with their customer, should a customer request that he/she be permitted to share service with a neighbor. Currently, each of the NSWMA member haulers provides options to their customers for additional services or special pickups that might be necessary. As a result, these special services would continue to be provided in the future by the NSWMA member haulers to their particular customers. 9. Residents shall have option of temporary suspension of service, with either a one-month or two-month minimum. Currently, the NSWMA member haulers do provide their customers with the opportunity to temporarily suspend service if they request it. They have no objection to continuing to provide this opportunity for temporary suspension and would be willing to do it on either a one-month or two-month minimum basis if requested by their customer. 1 a.Any contract for organized collection made by the City shall be for 3 or more Jeff Alexander September 20, 2004 Page 5 . years and shall include conditions for termination prior to the end of the contract. Since this goal presupposes the adoption of an organized collection system, it is not relevant for the NSWMA member haulers to comment upon it since they do not support organized collection and the City's entering into contracts for hauling services. Further, if the NSWMA member haulers proposal is adopted, this goal would no longer be necessary. More Environmentally Sound 11.Refuse shall go to the Ramsey / Washington County Resource Recovery Facility in Newport, or a similar environmentally sound facility at the direction of the City, if the Newport facility is no longer available. Hauler(s) must certify this quarterly. During discussions between the NSWMA member haulers and the Commission, a substantial amount of information was provided with respect to environmentally sound disposal facilities. As was pointed out, modern federally permitted Sub-Title D landfills, which are the only landfills which are permitted in the State of Minnesota and its surrounding jurisdictions, are safe and environmentally sound facilities for waste disposal. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has set these requirements out in its Federal Regulations. NSWMA is not aware of any failures or environmental hazards that have been caused at these federally permitted facilities. . Today's modern MSW landfills are well-engineered facilities that are regulated under strict federal and state regulations to ensure protection of human health and the environment. Modern MSW landfills are operated, located, designed, monitored, closed, and cared for after closure to ensure environmental performance. The federal requirements contain location restrictions, liner requirements, operating practices, groundwater-monitoring requirements, closure and post-closure care requirements, corrective action requirements, and financial assurance requirements for all active MSW landfills. In addition, modern MSW landfills collect and treat the leachate (the water that passes through the waste) and gas (from the decomposition of the waste). Recovered landfill gas can be converted into energy (electricity, steam, heat, vehicle fuel) to reduce America's dependence on petroleum products. (A graphic depiction of the major components of a modern MSW landfills in compliance with Federal Regulations is attached.) Currently, most of the waste generated in the City of Falcon Heights goes to the Ramsey I Washington County Resource Recovery Facility in Newport, Minnesota. However, some waste does go to these modern federally permitted Sub-Title D landfills .. which are environmentally sound disposal facilities. The NSWMA member haulers .. e :,. Jeff Alexander September 20, 2004 Page 6 currently have contracts with Ramsey and Washington Counties to provide all or a specified amount of waste generated within Ramsey and Washington Counties to the resource recover facility at Newport. The NSWMA member haulers will continue to prOVide that waste pursuant to their contracts and will continue to use federally permitted Sub-Title 0 environmentally safe landfills as the only two destinations for waste generated in the City of Falcon Heights. Since the NSWMA member haulers are not aware of any scientific proof that danger to the environment is any more likely by disposal in the resource recovery facility or a Sub-Title 0 landfill, the NSWMA member haulers propose that they continue to use these two options pursuant to their current contractual arrangements providing environmental disposal facilities to the citizens of Falcon Heights. 12. Waste collection service shall be consistent with sound public health policies and a clean City. Current hauling practices of the NSWMA member haulers are consistent with sound public health policies and a clean City. Further, these haulers pledge to continue their current policies to ensure that these goals are met. 13. Within the first year of the contract, hauler(s) shall provide a viable plan to implement collection of organics for composting. Currently, the NSWMA member haulers collect yard waste from their customers. These haulers propose to continue this practice into the future. With respect to organics, the NSWMA member haulers recognize that various organizations are studying the possibility of collection and composting of organic material. No systems have been set up to date to effect this program. As a result, the NSWMA haulers feel that it is premature to propose a system for the collection of organics but suggest that they will work with the City to explore possibilities in this area to determine whether it is economically feasible and meets sound public health policies. Public Education 14. The City shall have the option to provide informational inserts to be sent out with bills, at the City's discretion. The NSWMA member haulers are eager to work with the City to provide informational inserts in their billings to their customers should the City request that service. 15.Hauler(s) shall provide accurate quarterly tonnage reports to the City. The NSWMA member haulers can provide quarterly tonnage information to the City, but because their disposal loads are often generated in multiple communities, it is very -, Jeff Alexander September 20,2004 Page 7 . difficult to provide exact data. However, these haulers are willing to provide estimates which will be as close as possible to exact data. This should satisfy this goal. 16. The waste hauler(s) shaff supporl the City's efforls to educate residents and students on solid waste and recycling issues. Again, the NSWMA member haulers are eager to support and work with the City's efforts to educate residents and students on solid waste and recycling issues. These haulers feel that they have a wealth of knowledge and experience which can be of great assistance to the City and its residents. They view this as an opportunity for collaboration and education. The foregoing plan is put forth by NSWMA and its member haulers in an effort to show their good faith and desire to work with the Commission and the City Council to meet the City's solid waste goals and the expressed desire of the citizens and the haulers to continue to provide waste hauling services on a competitive and individualized basis. We hope that this proposal is adopted by the Commission and the City Council so that superior waste hauling services can be provided to the residents of the City of Falcon Heights without the imposition of organized collection and the loss of customer choice and the competitive marketplace. ~~) Douglas M. Carnival Counsel to the National Solid Wastes Management Association, Minnesota Chapter . DMC/mlh 177510 . e - e Jeff Alexander September 20,2004 Page 8 Typical Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Components Liner systems can include clay, geotextiles, and/or plastics on the bottom and sides of the landfill to prevent liquids Liner System from leaving the landfill and impacting groundwater resources. In the cross-section, the liner system is comprised of a compacted liner overlain by a synthetic liner. Leachate collection system (LCS) is placed on top of the liner to collect and remove water (rainwater or liquids Leachate Collection System contained in the waste) draining through the waste. The water passing through the waste is typically referred to as leachate. Leachate collected in the LCS is treated on- or off-site. A final cap with the same hydraulic conductivity as the liner is placed on top of the landfill when the final height has Cap System been reached. On top of the hydraulic barrier, a vegetative laver is installed to nrow veaetation. The cap svstem Jeff Alexander September 20, 2004 Page 9 prevents precipitation from infiltrating into landfill after closure. A gas collection system is installed in the landfill using perforated vertical (wells) and horizontal pipes to prevent Gas Collection System methane and other trace organic gases from escaping. The gas is extracted under vacuum and pumped to a destruction devise such as a flare or energy utilization facility. . A network of storm water drainage channels are installed on and around the landfill to collect precipitation and collect Surface Water Control it rainwater retention pond. The storm water collection System system controls erosion on the cap and adjacent areas to prevent surface water contamination. A comprehensive environmental monitoring system is Monitoring System installed around the landfill to ensure that the liner system and gas collection system is operating properly and human health and the environment are protected. . ,.... 1. ce .. . =- ..~J'. ~........'..'.'...'..... ---..-. . . . . . '. . . ,- ,,' ,- _.- " . ." . . . . . . ~lItr RECYCL1NGAND ~ ~" REFUSE INC. P.O, Bbx67 . Circle Pines,MN 55014- (76~) 7BO'B4ll.4..Fax(763).7BCl='.5620 Mlj)', 12;ZtJ04 Tn: GeOrge Walter FtI:mt:E#c!Sederstrom RE:FaloonHeights Thave:col'llpletedathorot;gh .investigation oftl1e:a11~)!s.m.f.aJconlIel~~'. Thetlamage in.the.residenfiatalleys<.app.earedtobe. caused.by dilvers.iuniingI1JO shittJlarriundcomersWhelletlteting 6f:eJdtirigthealle)'Whys.Tberilarnres 6f'l:lie truck drove ov= thelawn.at:tb(c'tmd of the alleys' !cilHngthe grll$S anditrsome C3$es;thetites sunk. mto.the lallaL I flIIlllybelieve thattPis'~ofdmnage can be prevented witb;the pro~trBitiingofthe~"ers. . .. 1'11= wasonea11ey thll.treqtiuedasphaltandcuro ~pair. fCOl\tai:t~ De.botah Jones..(city.of Falcon.Heights)..and Bill.Maertz (Falcon Heights Public Wotks}to..discllSs' t}$.pllttiauIar'SUe.. BillM!iem did a drivethruthe city, Wedne~y;May lath .tQ~t this site and eheek fpf'otherproblenim-eas. .Hereportedb~k!1>metha.t theteparrl1t. Albert &'Idahowasdueto.a:utilitY r:epairand,hedid.not 'see~!lther damages f.t'Uvughout1he.alley;;thathe cou,Id.attribute. tothe.garpage'.trucks. Sinee:tbe last council meeting in April, Idiscussedthese' issues with our:dtivers andlhave implemented a mote intense<lnlit)ingpro.gramJoelimlna.te this ,t:ype,;of damage. (s~e attached). It may bein our hestintetest to share this in{ormation with.the other haulers in FalconHeights. su:cere) ~ ~*~ Eric-SedersL~m . Appendix D . Customer Trash Hauling Charges I. Falcon Heights Rates for 2004 Falcon Heights residents pay several charges related to disposal of solid waste. Recycling is billed with the property tax. Trash hauling bills include a base rate for pick-up and disposal of trash, the volume- based County Environmental Charge (which used to be paid on the tax bill), and state tax. There may also be extra charges for yard waste, special pickups or other extra services. The scheduled rates of the City's licensed residential refuse haulers for basic collection are listed in the table below. Haulers are required to submit a rate list armua!ly when they apply for their business license, and to notify the City when there is a change of rates. The rate schedules do not include any discounts or special offers that may be available. Hauler Container sizes Monthly rate Comment (gallons) Sm Med Lg Small Med Large BFI 32 68 95 $ 15.31 $16.41 $ 17.51 Includes tax Gene's 38 60 90 $ 13.25 $ 16.95 $19.28 Before tax Horrioan 30 60 90 $ 12.00 $ 14.50 $ 16.60 Rates do not include tax OnyxlSuoerior 35 65 95 $ 12.38 $13.48 $ 15.67 Wrthout non taxable services Onyx/Superior 35 65 95 $11.89 $ 12.99 $ 15.18 Wrth non taxable services I Walters 38 64 98 $ 16.00 $ 17.65 $ 18.65 Excludes tax, special discounts, Recycling & other specialty rates Refuse Inc. Waste 32 64 96 $15.31 $ 17.51 $ 18.60 Includes MN waste assessment Manaoement but not CEC It Note that container sizes vary as much as 8 gallons among companies. However, the rates do not match proportionately with container sizes. For example, even allowing for tax being included in the BFI rate, their customers pay more for the 32 gallon capacity than Gene's customers pay for a 38 gallon capacity. And businesses with equal size containers do not charge the same rates. To simplify the calculation, each category was grouped together. After taxes were subtracted from rate lists that included them, the following averages were computed for charges in Falcon Heights. Smallest size container (30 - 38 gallons): $13.59 Medium size container (60 - 68 gallons): $15.56 Large container (90 - 98 gallons): $17.17 . City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 52 .. II. MOEA Study, 1994 ,e . Tllble ID-2. Average Regional Residenful MSW Collection Charges Under Open and OrgaIDzed Collectinn Systems in 1993 ($/Household/Month)l Container Size Organized Systems Open Systems P=t Difference 30-gallon $12.12 $13.72 13.20% 60-gallon $14.78 $16.08 8.80% 90-gallon $15.69 $18.25 16.32% More thlln 9D-gal10n $19.14 $20.01 4.55% I Median i $15.23 I $17.16 I 16.61% I lBased on the average of reported monthly collection fees for weekly refuse collection from GBB survey of haulers and municipalities (1993) and Chanhassen organized collection study (1993). Note that service levels may vary, including special clean ups, bulk collection, etc. m. North St. Paul Study, 2000 City #of 30 gal GOgal 90gal Comments haulers North Sl Paul 1 $ 9.44 $ 11.58 $13.43 Solid waste only Stillwater 1 $11.45 $ 13.24 $15.10 Solid waste, recycling, yard waste, aooliances White Bear Lake 1 $ 9.50 $ 10.60 $12.15 Solid waste and recycling White Bear Township 1 $11.06 $ 11.86 $ 13.61 Solid waste and recycling Hopkins 1 $11.00 $ 13.25 $14.45 Solid waste and recycling Blaine 1 $ 8.90 $12.40 $14.40 Solid waste and recycling St. Louis Park 3 $ 8.90 $12.40 $ 14.40 Solid waste, recycling and yard waste Maplewood 11 $ 15.97 $ 18.60 $ 20.51 Solid waste and recycling Anoka 7 $12.74 NA $ 15.95 Solid waste and recycling Vadnais Heights 4 $ 10.89 $ 12.48 $14.70 Solid waste and recycling Little Canada 4 $ 10.55 $ 12.11 $ 14.30 Solid waste and recycling Roseville 6 $12.72 $ 17.01 $18.51 Solid waste only City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 53 '. IV. RamseylWashing10n Counties Research Recovery Project, 2002 . In "Public Collection Study: Final Report" from the RarnseyIWashington Counties Research Recovery Project, data from Ramsey and Washington Counties into the following table in Appendix 14: $11.78 $13.30 $12.83 $1.2.90 $12.12 $13.72 12.89 16.01 16.56 1537 14.78 16.08 14.84- 18.62 19.10 17.70 15.69 18.25 19.36 19.50 20.56 no data 19.14 20m 2.12 no data 0 1.58 1.12 1.50 LlO- no 1.25/bag U5- .74 UO 1.5O/bag charge- 1.25lbag 1.50 The full text of Appendix 14 is available on the web as a pdffile: http://www.co.rarnsey.mn.us/recovery/docsI14.pdf V. Sample of U.S. Cities Outside of Minnesota . City Type of collection Fee information from city website Austin, Texas Municipal 30 gallon $11.75; 60 gallon $14.50; 90 gallon $17.25; tax not included. Additional charges for garbage that doesn't fit; anti-litter fee; discounts on extra containers Kettering, Ohio Contract (WM) $14.25 for "unlimited"; $13.25 for "low voiume" (up to 2 35-gallon containers per week) Seaverton OR Franchise contract 30 gallon $18.00; 60 gallon $29.50; 90 gallon $37.00. Includes recycling and yard waste. Has 20 gallon low- voiume for $15.50; discount for extra carts Alpharetla, GA Contract (8FI) 60 gallon $11.50; 90 gallon $13.00, plus $2.00 environmental fee for all customers; plus pay-as-you- throw for overflow, Includes recycling: yard waste is extra Keller, TX Contract $7.42 per month without recycling; $9.49 per month ($8.46 for Senior Citizens) with recycling, Collection is every other week Waverty, IA Municipal $7.70 per month flat service fee for each resident, plus $1.25 for each 33 gallon container or bag for EACH pickup. Residents purchase stickers; trash is not picked up without a sticker Aiamogordo MN Mu n icipal $10.43 per month for all residential customers; no other information I \-'-- City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13,2004 54 . ,'. .",. 0 0 '" . .., "" "" ..... '" ..... ..= bJl .~ Q.l ::P = '" 0 u ..... - Q.l to Q.l ~ ... ..... = en .~ = '" 0 Q.l ..... ... "" ::; to - .~ Q.. "0 13 = Q.l l-( Q.. K I'-< I'-< =- .tl "0 Q.l "0 Q.l = ... Q.l ..... Q.. en Q.. ~ - "'0 to to OJ 0 .S! 13 "" 13 OJ u "0 ::J ::J ~ ~ ~ ~ Q. ::J fj) fj) '" OJ to to 0 ~ 0 8 0 to U ~ OJ OJ N c:: c:: . ro ~ ~ ...J c:: c:: "'0 1!f <( <( 0 0 .$ to U "" OJ 10 10 U '5 0> 0> ::J ::J E 0> 0> ~ ~ to ::J ~ fj) ro OJ ~ ~ In 0 c:: > c:: to :g 0 .: .: 0 0 ::J 9 ::J ::J U U ::J 0') .$ .$ OJ OJ ~ 0 E to to ~ !~ fj) 0 - ~ ~ to N ~ 0 . '" ~ ~ .$ OJ u '" ro ro <( ~ '" -= ...J ...J "E c:: UJ 0 0 ~ 0') "E <:: ro 0 0 ~ 0> OJ '" "'0 0 0 0> E E ro N N <( ~ OJ '" ::J ~ "E ~ "'0 > > 0 to 0 to 0 0 W ro ~ 0 ro ~ ~ ~ N Z "'0 "'0 ~ E E ro ro "E 0> ~ ::> ::J 0> ID ~ 0 0 ro ~ 4J 0 ~ ~ ~ :I: W W "'0 <Ii z z ro U5 ..... .~ .S! .~ ::J '" _S UJ 0 ::> .l!l E '" 0') "'0 "'0 "'0 ~ ~ to " 0> 0> to to to 0 0 w '" .~ ro 0> 0> :::; :::; :::; :I: :c z > :I: ~ ~ .: <( 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -0 D.. "'0 "'0 ::J ::> ::J ::J ::J ::J ::J c:: c:: to .$ .$ '" '" 2 .$ '" .. ro '" .!!! ~ ~ ~ c:: to to c:: to to e to 0 ~ Oi Oi OJ ~ :g. a 2i ~ ~ ~ "'0 OJ 'g; > > > a; e ..<!! ..<!! '" ~ ~ ~ to 13 rn ro ro ro ro '" ro .<: 0 U U U ...J ...J ...J ...J ...J ...J ...J en z '" 0> 10 .... 0') a:> 0 10 N ~ <D N 10 0') '" 0 ~ ~ N N co , a:> to 10 0> a:> '" '". N. "! 10 .... '" .... o. Q) .... 0> co 0> E N N ~ 0- 0') '" 0 <D co 0 0') ~ a:> 0> 00 <D 0> 0') 0') Q) 0> N ~ 00 <D <D .... '" N <D ~ > 0 ~ 10 <; .E to ~ III .". .". .". .". U .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". 00 to 0> .... ~ 0 N N N co '" 0 OJ 0> <D .... 0 0> .... 00 '" 0') '" 0> to 0 <D 00 ~ 10 to .... 0 .... 0 0') to .... to 0 N ~ Q) 0> <D . '" '" 00 to N to .... ~ ,-: 0- '" u ~ ~ to 10 to 0') 0') 0') '" 0') 10 '" to 0') '" " 10 III to Q) ..... to 'Iii ::E .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". .". . ~ . . to ~ 0') '" lO <D .... 00 0> 0 ~ N 0') '" to ~ to 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Q) Q) 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N f- <C to to In :c 0> 'ij; :c e 0 u a; lL 0 lO 10 .... g to '" .... 0> U .S! co 0 '" ~ ~. t5 ~ ill 0 2 0- .0 0 "'~ u 0.- ....0 "'0 '" '" '" N 0 'j'" to rn rn to 0> u: (; r: e 0 0 .".!!2 t 0 0 C. "'0 OJ to c:: ro 0 ro c:: e .. >. u: In ~ .0 .El >. Q. "'0 .<: 2 In " '" 0> a; >. >. U Ll .ID~ In ro "E 'S: ID Ll '" ::J Q) e :co ~ 0 OJ to .<: 0 ::l C. eN ~ ro .Ql () ~ o . U5 In :c u e .2'" - ID "'0 ::l 0 ro~ -'" ~ -- a '" e OJ ~"'- lL ~ > "'_ rn _OJ '" ~ ::J " '" E 2 U5 ?= ro 0.0 D.. ~ ., ~ >..9 -"0 :?: .5<c ~o UO .8 U 0> '" :J 0. -0 0> E ~ 0> "- ...c co UJ '0 E .2>-e i3 ",-0 e ~ m 2 0--"_;>0>..... '" Q) II rn 1.0 ~(I) 0 ..c::.o..':l:::1.O ........ ~ (J co .- m =:IN $: cr.d::;-.q- = CO .- .... '" - = <.> - '" U '" '" = '" rn , = CO e e CO u -=~ bJJ = CO ~ ~ {31:; "'0> E"W ~ .- :s=: 0 m tI) oE-;;-e"ti ~.g.g ~~ l'! Q) II m N ~(f} 0 ...c..o~'V _......0...- .- m :J r-- ~ C>ZT'" -'" u 131: ::s Ctl 0> l;; 0...- 4> E!g 0> "- :> 0 ro oE-;-e ~.g~~ '" ~ == ~ 't:l = '" '" .... '" '" ... .... rn ... = o = CO 12 <.> = ... E-o '" bJJ '" ..c ... '" ~ ..... CO .... <.> '" c.. e ..... ~II ~ ~ m~ ~ :5-eOr-- .- m 2 LO $: O>~ 00 ~x ""'>. 0>- 0>'- '" $:or- 0> 0> ~ >- (/) 0>= 0- > (1]';:: <(01- (j) 0> ~ U5 .... ..... '#-'#.'#.#.~ COUJ{\'),,-W (OC")<.OT""~ O>Mr-.:t--lt) N..q-LOCOCO 1.D1OLOlOt.O C')CO('l')WCO ~co'VC"')O) ....:rmt--(O'V ~ '#.'#.'#.#.'#. IDM"'<;;j--q-O VVNO>~ -o::iMlri-riT'" ---NM-q-r- 'Q""";;l"""';;f'"..;;t-q- (0 T""" ID ..- ..- coC"')coco'V ...--t--...;;tMN ~ ?ft."Cf..?fi?(f!.'if:. O>f'-..mcov t-NC"?O)C) ~M.......a:it.ri T"'NNLO t--t--l'-t-r-- o 1.O 0 r.n l!) ovomLO ....(O'VNT""" ~ 00000 lOOLODO 't""""(D..-."...r-- OIJ')(Y}N ~ 00000 mOlODa -vtOv(V')...... ~ 0> e ~ .~ S: 2 E _0>'" .c m (I) C ~ J: 0 0> m.9Ir"E ;;:g.8(!l_ O=COID :S~~lp~ ::::J U) m '-- 0 ~ - c.9 ~ tE e '" to Q) rnt-.;; c"E C Q} -;:,.. o m 0..0: >- ~(OJ~<3 " ,,~ .2:; E '" > 0 lu"'C '" "., c " o..r:: u- ~ ~"' o "., S -0" ~ .~ .::3 0 ..r:: ~-o gJ,g r.;:: 00'" '" .... .- " 15 g . '60 '" c 8u:i 5.0 .... .- ~u " " ......r:: -o~ ;;'0 -0 " d- > .s.., '" '" s~ o 1A ~ e ;f ~ " c '" O5h .;3 c ._ u:i '" .g~ U.9 ....r.. 1d ~"'S ~~ " g Ea ~ ".,..r:: .0- -0-0 " " -o-i:l .- " i5..r:: .... u ;:~ " - !;jtIJ OIl . ~ ~ q:.a "'E 0", ....l ~ ,,~ ~ :~ '" " OD.S c '" .- " 00.';::: - .- c c.> " ... '"2 ~ >"+' .- 0 " "., $.0 ~-o ....l2 < "0 "'- u:i ~ bD';:l ri ~ .... tr.l '(ij a := O.;ig .:.:: <.> = ... ..... " bJ) '" ..c .... '" bJJ '" o ..... ..... = " - '" .eo = 0" '" - ..c bJ) .- '" ~ oS .~ ~ <.> = ... ..... '" bJ) '" 'f '" bJ) = o == <:> ,.., '" '" 6 = '" '" < '" - '" 6 .- - '" ~ '" .. .- ..... '" t '" '" == o U " ... o ~ '" ..... ..... 0> 0> ro en .0 "'" L " '" " (OJ; "#- (]) c 00 :J .1: uN O__Ql(ON 00..- a.. () CD E ro~3:._ .2 '" t1) II en LD ~ en 0 J::..o~l.O -"Io..UOO '-cn:JN s: o).~..q CD 0> "'en .0 -'" ~ " "''' (OJ; ~~ 0'<= _ 0> ..........Qi 53:'0 0- ro uoo. ~~.E Q) " N ~(/) =-e-u~f? '-CO::Jr-m ~ cd:..... 0 CD 0> ro .0 "'" L () ro :J (OJ; L o~ -.<= (,/) .Ql - OJ 53:-0 0- ro uoo. g~ J~ ~IJ ~ "(-ctI~~ :5-EO,..... '-ro21D $: O>~ 00 :5 .f2_ .~ w ~ ~ ..?:- CO)....... 0 .::t:. 0 co: ~o WC..Clrot- goroCD:2 .:> ..- C)~___ ~x ""'>. 0>- CDm $:Or- 0> m ~ >. (J) Q) = .a. > m't::. <(01- a; 0> ~ U5 'J?;ft.~cf. ..qIDCON ~LO<:-N oc.oci<<:i M ('f) ~."'Q. U1lOlt)1.01D OtDOl.OJ.!) O"<;;f"OCDlO MCOCO-q-C"') N"t"'""..-..-T""" ** co 0 ~ ~ mN ~ *#."#. N<O(]) COO~ -icrico ~~ ~ 'o;;f'"'V"I:f'~'V cYJQ)MCOCO vcoor;;t('t)Q) QtO(Y)NO N.... <or- ~..- ?ft?f."#.'#"#. COlOT"""M-..r tOOMON 'l;;tcri~o:io) r-f'-r--r-r- f'-Nr--..NN l.DOlOLO__ O)l.ON....O ..-....~..- T""" 00000 Nr-Nt--r-- r-....r-CON CO""-..-OCD T""" "1"""""- T""" 00000 1.001000 ..-(O..-..-r- OLO("')C\I ~ 00000 I,{)OI.OOO vco..qC').... ~ 0> e ~~~ 2E.f!! c co l1J l:: ~J:glCD Oi.8O::"E -'g.9(!l '0 & c 0 iii ..1::Q3w.........= ~ c "El e ro 5 U) j>~ to .2 (l)cu,..J:::: _ ro rn~ctlt~ t: ~ C t1l :>. ocoo-o> ~C!>4:<.3 .S - >'~Ill ""0 l-<..o .a 1n .....~ '" '" " .... ;:: ~ cti""5iJc.S .~'o e ~::r:~ ~5f-< " . ~ ~ 10 ~~e . ::= tj ~ CD a> 0.::: ..z::: "0 DD;: ~ d a: .... " '" ~ ~ S o 0._ -1;; t::= CD 0 ::s ~ 0 0"- " "" " Ofl:lo.. ro-~._ og~ ~.;: =' .::> S " "- ~ g> '" _.0 OIl - ;;.S o 0Ilt:: ~ '" .s -e '" '" 6' ~] ...!:::Q}bO f-< -:;;.S ...;c:tP-. ~tI]c.. ._ ~.s " u '" '" " " !:l.<:> . ~::='"O ~ o CD....... 0 .- ...... :::I - "'5~o'7i.l i> ~ ?; ~ .s~S~ ..2D;:/~'E ~......::::8 ........c: 0 '-' .E .~=E & .- a> po iU !1 '" ... '" d iU G) Q.) ..r::-o;S .;13 ___ ~ ......4-l::a cd 0 fIl..::::l -:$1)8- ;; '" C :; a> ~.e ~ ~.5 ~ ~ -Z <U S co d) ~ p Q.) ..t:J iU.=...o ~t1u:9 O.S ~ ~ ~ ..."....... 0 - ~ OIl '" .S.S ~ '" t::t::_-", o ro'- 0 0..1;] .8 e ~~"'O- ';:: = C';S III >-. ro -= ~ l3 gr'~--B o 'a.t:: gb '" 0. " o B~ E -,.,..!::l [I) Q.) 0 :1tl~~ iU....r:::: ~ @ ::O:~Q) .s ::: 8 ~ -.- ~rl3t::d Q) ..... m ::J ....r:::: 0 0.. 1) ~ U m m , . <0 10 e c .Q <> ~ "0 (J -0 CD .!:! c '" 0> o C o - L o 0. (lJ 0: ro c Ii: 2 .c m IDV Ig eN o _ "", ~- ,,"-- ;::0 (JO .e Appendix F: Letters to Residents 1. Letter from City of Falcon Heights to Residents, January 29, 2004 2. Letter from City of Falcon Heights to licensed haulers, January 29, 2004 3. Letter from Walters Recycling and Refuse to Falcon Heights customers, March 1, 2004 4. Return piece provided with Walters' letter, March 1,2004 5. Letter from BFI to Falcon Heights customers, March 9, 2004 6. Return piece with BFI letter 7. Letter from Walters Recycling and Refuse to customers during Ramsey Washington study, 2002 8. Return piece from 2002 9. Letter from BFI to customers during Ramsey Washington study e - City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 57 l. CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS 2077 W. LARPENTEUR AVENUE FALCON HEIGHTS, MN 55113.5594 PHONE (651) 644.5050 FAX (651) 644-8675 January 29,2004 A note to Falcon Heights residents from the City's Solid Waste Commission: About a year and a half ago, the Solid Waste Commission was chartered to study solid waste removal and disposal in our city - that is, everything having to do with recycling and trash. Our mission is to develop "a more efficient, more economical, and more environmentally sound solid waste disposal system, and build a waste management education plan for all age groups, starting with our youngest citizens." Last year we began to study the question of whether our residents could get better trash hauling service at a lower price if we band together as a city to contract with a hauler or haulers. This is called "organized collection," and two of our neighborhoods already do something like this on their own. Under Minnesota Statute 9 115A.94, cities are allowed to consider organized collection; many cities around us have done so. We carne up with many questions. Here are some of them: . Could we get better prices for everyone if we negotiate as a city? . Would our streets and alleys last longer ifwe had fewer garbage trucks on them each week? Would we save money in future street maintenance assessments? . Can we keep the same quality of service we have now? Could we maybe get better service, with more features like extra-small, reduced-rate trash cans for small households? Could we keep the convenient Friday all-City pickup? · Ifwe had a contract through the City, who would I complain to about poor service or a busted wheel on my garbage can? . Ifwe negotiate as a City, how can we make sure small, local haulers are included? · Where does our trash go after it is collected? Do we have any say about this, as a city or as individuals? Are we doing the best we can for future public health? We, your neighbors on the Solid Waste Commission, are reco=ending to the City Council that Falcon Heights begin a study and discussion process, according to the rules set by the State of Minnesota. We have set 16 prelim;nHry goals, which are enclosed. What do you think? Please attend our first Public Hearing at City Hall, 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 24, and give us your input. Thanks! The Solid Waste Commission HOME OF THE MINNESOTA STATE FAIR AND THE U OF M ST. PAUL CAMPUS " e . - 58' CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS 2077 W. Larpenteur Avenue Falcon Heights. MN 55113-5594 email: mail@cLfalcon-heights..mn-us websITe: www.ci.falcon-hei9hts.mn.us Phone - (651) 644-5050 Fax - (651) 644-6675 January 29,2004 Hauler name Hauler address City, State Zip Invitation to participate in City of Falcon Heights' consideration. of organized refuse collection under Minnesota Statute ~ 115A.94 For the last year, our Solid Waste Commission has been researching and discussing many issues of recycling and waste disposal, including organized collection. The Commission has decided to recommend to t"e City Council that the City of Falcon Heights enter into the process set forth in . lvIinnesota Statute (l115A.94. As part of that recommendation, the Commission has formulated and offered to the Council a set of prel;min~ry goals to guide the process. . On January 28, 2004, the City Council accepted the recommendation and goals of the Solid Waste Commission and directed City Staff to. initiate the process ordained in Minnesota Statute (l115A.94. Only single-family residential zones are under consideration; we are not considering changes for businesses and multi-family residences at this time. We invite residential haulers licensed in Falcon Heights to be included in the process. The date for the statutory public hearing is set for Wednesday, March 24, 2004, 7:00 p.m., at the regular meeting of the City Council, after which the Council will consider a resolution of intent. During the follovving 90-day study period, there will be additional public meetings and a meeting for haulers to provide their input, the dates of which will be announced. The enclosed letter has been sent to all the residents in our single-family zones to inf= them of the Council's decision to embark on this process. We will keep residents informed with future mailings and our City newsletter; we will also publish updates as needed on our City website, http://www.ci.falcon-heights.mn.us. Please contact me at 651-644-5050 if you have any questions. Our hope is that you will join us in malcing this process effective, to the benefit of all our residents. Sincerely, . Heather M. Worthington City Administrator HOME OF THE MINNESOTA STATE FAIR AND THE U of M INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE S1 (J0 ~<,K) PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER :3 7;:-iZ-I f;-;2.:' >~ ,<<~ !.B"Y ,.1, i f~,;:'__~" ';)'Lf2:. J~1~'j-' ~ ":;.. , fi,,,' ~ ~ ',0-: I .' ,~PC' "'.C" ,~-~., - ,~~ I tliJ '~~~ .#~ RECYCLING AND t. ~ REFUSE INC. P.O. Box 67 . Circle Pines, MN 55014. (763) 780-8464 . Fax (763) 780-5620 ~LZ"l. ~ March 1, 2004 Dear Customer: We feel it is important to update you about a serious proposal being considered by the City of Falcon Heights. This proposal would radically change how your waste hauling services are provided. Citv's Proposal will Hurt.Consumers . The proposal by the City of Falcon Heights would eliminate the current system where customers select the waste hauler that best meets their needs for service and price. Instead, the City wants to impose government-managed/public collection system where the City determines who hauls your waste and determines the rate you, the customer, will pay. We believe this country was founded on Freedom of Choice. We do not endorse the city taking this from it's citizens. '- . Some of your city officials believe the elimination of competition between garbage service providers will significantly reduce the damage to the streets but they apparently don't have a plan to eliminate competition by your many other service and delivery providers who also use your streets on a daily basis. ;e Losing the right to choose your waste hauler as well as the rate you will pay and the service level you will receive is a high price to pay where there is no guarantee of an offsetting benefit. We Need Your Help We take the City's proposal very seriously and are encouraging support from our customers in the City of Falcon Heights, local elected leaders and others who would likely oppose such a move. Please, help stop government-mamiged/public Collection. Let's preserve customer choice, competitive prices and reliable service. Take a moment to complete and return the enclosed support card. We will share your card with members of the city council. You have our assurance that your private information will not be sold or used for any commercial purpose. We are proud to be your waste service provider and appreciate your business. If you have any questions please contact George Walter at 763-780-8464. Thank you. !U~ George Walter President - roo e e ,e .~ STOP GOVERNMENT-MANAGEDIPUBLIC WASTE COLLECTION! Preserve Customer Choice, Competitive Prices and Reliability The City of Falcon Heights is considering a proposal to radically change your waste collection at the expense of you, the resident. This proposal would terminate customer choice system of waste hauling, where individual homeowners negotiate the rate they pay and choose who provides their waste hauling services. Instead, the City wants to impose government-managed/public collection where the City determines who hauls your waste and the rates consumers will pay. 11 Yes, I am opposed to govemment-mHnHeedJpublic waste collection and give my ~al to share this card and my co=ents with local elected officials. Name (please print): Street/Box: City: Zip Code: Tel: ( ) Email: Signature: Share your comments about overnment-mana ed waste Collection: Providing thei'!farmation requested "n this card is strictly voluntary. II is intendedfor the use-afNational Solid Wastes Management Association (NSWMA) and may be shared wilh local officials and media. NSWMA will nol seU.or use your personal i'!formation for any commercial purposes. Information is subject to the Minnesota Data Practices Act If yau have any questions or concerns. contact Walters at 763-780-8464 &1 b '~l Bfl ",../co_ March 9, 2004 Dear Customer: We feel it is important to update you about a serious proposal being considered by the City of Falcon Heights. This proposal would radically change how your waste hauling services are provided City's Prooosal will Hurt Consumers The proposal by the City of Falcon Heights would eliminate the current system where customers select the waste hauler that best meets their needs for service and price. Instead, the City wants to impose government-managed/public collection system where the City determines who haUls yaW" waste and determines the rate you, the customer, will pay. . . Some of YaW" city officials believe the eIimimrtion of competition between garbage service providers will significantly reduce .the damage to the streets but they apparently don't have a plan to eliminate competition by your many other service and dellvery providers who also use your streets on a daily basis. Abdicating the right to choose your waste hauler as well as the rate you.will pay and the service level you will receive is a high price to pay where 1here is no guarantee of an offsetting benefit We Need Your HelD . We take the City's proposal very seriously and are encouraging support from our customers in the City of Falcon Heights, local elected leaders and others who would likely oppose such a move. Please, help stop govemment-managedlpubllc collection. Let's preserve customer choice, competitive prices and reliable service. Take a moment to complete and return the enclosed support card. We will share your card with members of the city counciL You have our assurance that your private information will not be sold or used for any commercial purpose. We are proud to be your waste service provider and appreciate your business. If you have any questions please contact Craig Selm 651-286-4570. Thank you. Sincerely, ,- /J ~ c::1 BF1-St. Paul Hauling PLEASE CONTACT FALCON HEIGHTS CITY COUNCILMEMBERS AND MAYOR: .r Mayor Sue Gehrz 651-641-1229 Counciimember Robert Lamb 65] -646-0059 Councilmember Laura Kuettel 651-646-7099 Councilrnember Peter Lindstrom 651-9]7-2977 Councilrnember Richard Talbot 651-646-6624 St. Paul Division. 4325 E. 66th Street .lnver Grove Heights, Minnesota 55076 Phone 651-455-8634' Operations/Sales 651.286-4548' Fax Administration 651-286-4547' www.awin.com " .0 - lit e (,2 e - :~ b Stop Government-Managed !Public Waste Collection! Preserve Customer Choice, Competitive Prices, Reliability The City of Falcon Heights is considering a proposal to radically change how household waste is collected. This proposal will terminate you right to hire and fire the company that provides waste removal.services at your home. The City wants to impose government-mandated / public collection, instead of you deciding who provides service to your home the city will determine who services your home and how much you will pay. DYes, I am opposed to government-managed / public collection .and give my approval to share this comment form and comments with local elected officials. Name (please print) : Street: City: Telephone: ( ) E-Mail: Signature: Please share your comments about government-managed waste collection: The information provided above is strictly voluntary. It is intended/or the use of the National Solid Waste Management Association (NSWMA) and may be share with local elected officials, NSWMA will not sell or Use your personal information far any commercial purposes. Information is subject to the Minnesota Data Practices Act 6j 7 . #~ RECYCLING AND t. ~ REFUSE iNC. . p.o. Box 67. Circle Pines, MN 55014. (763) 780-8484. Fax (763) 780-5620 ~..._.. - ~ ""'.~ . . : .$ -'-' ... -.,_.'^" Dear-Customer: . We. feel that it is important to update you about a serious . proposal be.ii1g considered by . Washington and Ramsey Counties that would radically change how your waste hauling . _ 'services-are'provided. . . Counties' Proposal will Hurt Consumers The proposal by Washington and Ramsey Counties would -likely eliminate the current system...... where you select the waste hauler that best meets your needs for service and price. Instead, the counties want to impose government-managed/public collection where the counties would likely detemrine who hauls your waste aiu:i set the rates consumers will pay. Although the counties say this change is for environmental reasons, we believe the real issue is the counties' desire to control the g!Il"bage volume going to the Newport waste processing . ',.... facility.. A move to a government managed ~tem would allow the counties to control the amoUnt of Waste sent to the. Newport waste prOCessing facility, but may result in a substantial cost increase to taxpayers. We Have a Better Plan The waste mdustry believes there is a better solution. Our proposal includes the following four points: 1. Preserve Customer Choice.. Allow consumers to continue to choose who provides _ . waste service "to their home or busitiess. Consumers would also be able to continue.to negotiate the rates.they pay and the services they want to receive. Environmental Protection... Haulers certify that we will utilize waste disposal facilities that meet or exceed strict" state and federal environmental standards, regardless of the type of waste disposal method used. rlOte.."'t County Contracts. Haulers have assured the counties. that we will sUPrly enoUgh waste volume to the Newportwaste processing facility to payoff the remaining contract obligations. . . Increase Recycling. Haulers are willing to work together in a public-private partnership to reduce .the challenges associated with waste disposal. We want to st:rengthf!n t.iIe pa:rb:tership between state and local government, waste lW.ulers and consumers to achieve OUT common objective to, reduce, reuse and recycle. - (e 2 3. 4. C:,L( . .. ~. . . We Need Your Help We take the counties' proposal very seriously and, with 9ther area hauler.;, are encouraging " support from our customers in Washington and Ramsey Counties, local elected leaders imd others who would likely oppose such a move.. P1ease.he1p us stop government-managed/public collection. Let's preserve custo~ choice, competitive priceS and reliable service. T.ike a moment to complete and return the enclosed suPport card. We will share your card with members.of the countv board. You have our assurance that your Private information will not be sold or used for any commercial llUtl!05e. We are proud to be your waste service provider and appreciate yom business. If you have any questions please contact me or Ken DuFresne at'763-780-8464. Thank you. Sincerely, _ .4 w"k George Walter President ~ ~ Stop Govemment-MqnagedlPublic Waste Collection! Preserve Customer Choice, Campetitive Prices, Reliability ~ and~ Ci:iulItie& _ <IevtIcplng. J>I"!>OIOl *' ",diGIl!y d>u1# your,.ate ""_ ~ at t.e ""peNN! ot-...ty "'Ii_and ~ 1b;s~ "'Iluld~l!..cumml:ty!lttm where c:ustomers ~lbe_1uuIeT thotbat_ their _cis for sorvice and price. Inmt<l.lbe C<lllllli"_' tolmpue S"'eI'nINnt-""""'lIedJpubl;c c_on ...i>ele lhr _ties delennine.."" luws y""" w.o. aM set e.. "..... t<JJlSU:Men ..w pay. D YES, I -0J'I'0S"d 1o~'''''''''''Fd/pQ)~_ <lllleetion andp"my.ppr......n 10 share Ihis can! and my ~ wjth 1o"Ol e1e.:ted oflicials. N-",~.r. StreetlJl..... Oty: PhotIc: ( Zip 0,4c: s..Moll: Com.m.t21ta: Sb...aft,.,~.... _.~, ~wal. -"" ~...-~~..._.-d....4ir ..d.....a.olll'Cl-,..~...IaI:lot.._......-.1...... ,.....wMl....Dr...,.....,......:I........_....~.fM'I'I'lL ..........M~IIiII_~O"'P~An. . e tA \!II' ("c, 9 · m;n. 1-7.02 . DearCusto~er: We feel that it is important to update you about a serious proposal Peing oonsidered by Washington and Ramsey Co~ that would radically dlange how your w~ hatUing: .. serviceS ilte ptOv"iaed. CoUnties' PrQpoliaI will Hurt Consumers The FOPCsal by Was.'iington and Ra..lSej' Counties ",'OUld likely e1iminllte the c:um!Itt sy-..tan where you select the waSte-hauler that best meets your needs for service and ptice. Ii1stead, the counties want to impose gQVermrtent-managed/public ro1lection where the counties would likely determine who hauls your wasteimdset the.:ates consumetS will pay, - Although the counties say this change is fOr environn..enlal reasonS, we believe the real issue is the cowUies' desire 10 control the garbage volwne going to the Newport ~ pruu:::>:>ing facility. A move to a govemnent managed system would allow the COWlfies (0 contrOl the amount of waste sent to the Newport waste pL~i...g facility, but IIlil}' result in a substantial cost increase to taxpay.e.."S. We Have a Bette; Plan The waste industry believes there is a better solution. Our proposal includes the following four poin~ 1. Preserve Customer Choice. Allow consumers 10 continue to choose who provides waste service to their home Ol: business.. ConsumerS would also bE! ;!hIe to continue to negofuite the rates they pay and the services. they want to r.eceive. . . 2. . .uv!ninmental Protedion.. Haulers certify that we will utilize waste disposal facilities that meet or exceed strict state and federal envirOIlIIl2lltal standards, regardless of the type of waste dispcsaln'letbod used. 3;. Protect Courtty Conltacts. Haulers have assured the COllItties that we will supply enough waste volume to the'Newport waste processing facility to payoff the remaining coniract obligations. .. 4.. Increase Recydiqg.. Haulers arewilling to work togetheI- in a public-private partnerShip to reduce ihe challenges associated with waste disposal. We want to strengthen the partnership between. state lUld local govenmrent. waSte hauIezs and CCltlStIInetS to achieve ow; common:objedive to reduC2, reuseandrEicycle. . " '. 1:,7 , . We Need. Your-Help . We- take the counties' proposal very seriously and, with other area haulers, are encouraging support from our customers in Washington and Ramsey Counties, local elected l....ilt"S<l1'lQ' othen; who would likely oppose such a move. Please, help 1.lS stop govemment-managed/puhlk co1lectiori. Let's p~CUStomer choice. competitive ~ and reliable service. Take a moment to ~ and return the enclOsed suPDOrt card. We will share vour card with members of the _ board. You have our a$SUrance thatvour private information will not be sold or used for anv.anmiterciaI p~ We are proud to be your waste Service provider and appreciate your business.. If you have-any . questions please contact one of our friendly customer service representativEs at'65H55..8634. Thank you.. . &:f #~_/ Craig Seim 8Fl Manager . ,,:if e - '. Appendix G: Other alternatives to organized collection: Grass Roots Organizing, Licensing Grass Roots Organization Residents are free to band together and choose a hauler as a group voluntarily - on an alley, a street, a neighborhood. Two sections of the City, University Grove and Hollywood Court, have done so already. They solicit bids from the licensed haulers and negotiate a contracts as a group. The City is not involved. The City of Bumsville supports a similar program, called the Neighborhood Block Rate Program. It was set up in the 1990s as an alternative to organized collection. The City provided how-to kits for residents who wanted to organize voluntarily in their neighborhoods. But Burnsville's Solid Waste Management Committee reco=ended that "the collection issue be reviewed and a stronger management tool for the collection" of waste be developed if participation did not reach 30% of single family homes by 1999. ("Burnsville Neighborhood Block Rate Program: A how-to guide for organizing solid waste and recyclable materials collection," City of Burnsville, Minnesota, 1998) It is not known what the participation rate is at this time; Burnsville has an open system. Voluntary neighborhood or block organizing does require some organizational effort on the part of residents, to get started and keep going. With the cooperation of the haulers, it can reduce the number of trucks and possible gain residents a more advantageous price and some extra service. However, residents might not be able to specify where their trash goes under a neighborhood agreement Still, self-organizing does work. It is working in parts of Falcon Heights. Licensing It has been suggested that the City can accomplish some of its goals through licensing. The Commission met with City Attorney Roger Knutson to seek his advice on what could be done through licensing. He informed the Commission that the City's ability to achieve any of the goals through licensing is limited. The only effective change the City could legally malce through licensing is to limit the number of refuse hauling licenses it issues to the number it issues now and not grant any new licenses. (In fact, this possibility was suggested by one of the haulers at the April 12 meeting.) This would, over time, reduce the number of trucks in the City, but it would not necessarily serve residents well with regard to service and price. And it would do nothing to keep environmental decisions under local control. City of Falcon Heights Final Report on Organized Collection October 13, 2004 69 . Appendix B URS Memorandum Subject: Pavement Design Dated: March 9, 2005 . . . . . URS MEMORANDUM Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis. MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370.0700 Fax: (612) 370.1378 To: Murtuza Siddiqui Copy: Greg Brown/URS Tom Moore/A. H. File: From: Nick Landwer, P.E, Date: March 9, 2005 Subject: Pavement Design Virtually all streets owned and maintained by the City of Arden Hills are bituminous (asphalt) roadways. Therefore, this discussion is based on the design and load characteristics of bituminous pavement. Concrete roadways have different mechanical characteristics, are constructed differently and for economical reason have a different design life. It is commonly accepted that a 20-year design life for bituminous pavement is the most economical in the state of Minnesota. In Arden Hills a 9-ton pavement design is used for residential streets to account for heavier vehicles such as delivery tmcks, buses and garbage tmcks. Pavement is designed considering three main factors; 1) pavement base, 2) pavement surface and 3) drainage. With these factors in mind the following information is used: · The underlying soils are tested to determine the strength and stability properties. · Traffic loading and the distribution of types of vehicles are projected over the life of the pavement. · MnDOT design standards are and have been used on all new residential and commercial road design in Arden Hills. Pavement Base This portion of pavement design considers the underlying soil for strength and stability. The gravel base thickncss is determined this way using MnDOT design charts. The gravel base is the strength of the roadway and is designed to carry most of the traffic load. Pavement Surface The pavement surface is the bituminous portion of the road section and, although it does contribute to the strength of the pavement, its primary purpose is to create a watertight and smooth surface. The projected amount of traffic for a section of roadway determines the pavement thickness and the aggregate and binder oils to be used in the bituminous mixture. The binder oils used in Minnesota are typically designed to handle the extreme temperature ranges experienced here, . . . Drainage Drainage is accounted for on the surface and in the subsurface of the pavement section. It is extremely important to keep water from saturating and undermining the pavement and base. On the surface the pavement is sloped to get the water out of the roadway and into the storm sewer system. In addition surface cracks are sealed to keep water from draining into the pavement base through them. Typically a 12-inch sand layer is constructed beneath the aggregate base to add strength and to drain the base. In many cases perforated drainpipes are installed in the sand base to route any subsurface water in the pavement base to the storm sewer system. Because water is drained from the sand base the road becomes much less susceptible to freeze thaw cycles. The main causes for deterioration of bituminous pavement over its life span are the strength and stability of the pavement base, traffic volumes, type of traffic and environmental factors such as water, temperature, sun and pollutants. Traffic For design purposes traffic is estimated for the 20-year design life based on traffic counts and projected traffic growth rates averaged over the design life to determine the Average Daily Traffic counts for the roadway. In most cases MnDOT has traffic distribution tables for the perccntages of different vehicles that will be using the road. The traffic counts and the distribution of vehicles are used to calculate Equivalent 9-lOn (NI8) Single Axle Loads (ESALs.) The ESALs are used to determine both the base and surface thickness of the pavement section. For example, using ESALs, a typical garbage truck has the equivalent loading of approximately 1500 passenger cars. Although passenger cars are typically the largest percentage of vehicles to use the road the roadway section is designed to handle the loading of the larger vehicles. Tables H.l and H.2 from the MnDOT Geotechnical and Pavement Manual are included to show typical vehicle type distributions and the load factors applied to a particular type of vehicle. Environmental Water is very hard on the pavement section particularly in cities like Arden Hills where the clay soils under the road can trap water and become a problem during freeze thaw cycles. On pavement with no hard edges such as concrete curb and gutter the water can also contribute to the raveling of the pavement on the edges. The bituminous pavement itself becomes brittle over time from the effects of temperature, sun and pollutants. Typically most cracking exhibited in properly constructed bituminous roadways is due to temperature changes causing the pavement to expand and contract. For this reason, cracks are sealed and roadways are generally seal coated with a bituminous slurry and covered with a fine aggregate. Seal coating is typically recommend every 7 to 10 years to maintain and possibly extend the life of the pavement. It has been observed that many of the older streets in Arden Hills, particularly the rural design with no curb and gutter, rely more on the pavement as strength and do not have very good aggregate bases and generally do not have a sand layer. It is assumed that many of these streets began as gravel roads and have been overlaid with a bituminous surface with varying thickness. . . . A typical newer pavement section in used on residential streets in Arden Hills is: . 12-inch sand base . 8 to 12 inches of aggregate base . 4 to 6 inches of bituminous pavcment Summary Although vehicle types and loading contribute to thc wear of the pavement section, environmental factors also contribute to the deterioration of the pavement section. A properly designed bituminous surface should be able to handle the traffic loading ovcr its design life including heavy truck loadings experienced in Arden Hills. Reducing the number of heavy truck loadings should have positive effects on the lifespan and quality of local streets however, environmental factors are generally responsible for the majority of pavement wear and deterioration for Arden Hills streets and therefore significant extensions of pavement life are unlikely. . . . . APPENDIX 8(24) GEOTECHNICAL AND PAVEMENT MANUAL April 1, 1994 Appendix H.1 Assumed Distribution Factors By Vehicle Type (Table 7-5.038) Rural Truck Local Rural Highway Metro and CSAH Vehicle % of %of %of Type Descriotion MDT MDT AADTu 1 Passenger Cars 78.1 83.5 75.7 2 Panels and Pickups (under 1 ton) 10.0 9.0 16.0 3 Single Unit - 2 axle, 4 tire 1.4 1.6 2.4 4 Single Unit - 2 axle, 6 tire 3.9 1.8 2.6 5 Single Unit - 3 axle & 4 axle 1.3 0.5 1.7 6 Tractor Semitrailer Combination - 3 axle 0.3 0.3 -- 7 Tractor Semitrailer Combination - 4 axle 0.5 0.4 0.1 8 Tractor Semitrailer Combination - 5 axle 3.0 2.4 0.5 9 Tractor Semitrailer Combination - 6 axle * * * 10 Trucks with Trailers and 8uses 1.5 0.5 1.0 * Too few to establish a value at this time. ** Data for local roads is from 1975 and 1977 County Roads Pilot Project, and these should not be used in preference to current seasonally adjusted classification counts. This is Table 7-5.038 From Mn/DOT Road Design Manual January 31,1982, reference 5. . April 1, 1994 APPENDIX 8(25) . . GEOTECHNICAL AND PAVEMENT MANUAL -I ::r 'Jl 'Jl -I III 0- CD ..... I 01 o W o . If- .. :It ~ ,. ,. ~,. C ~ -l C (f) CO~a> "'0 0 (D~:--'m OCDNO w~U1- ......,...._0 00'" - .., N ~g:5:1ll ~-l)( ~~OiD CO =o-co E: (f) C ll> ::r(f).., 0- ll> l!l 0- m (/) ll> m < . co ~ ll> <D ~- ..., C cm o ll> ;>;~ "'~ ::r (J) - ., o 3 s::: :J -... o o -l :no o ll> a. o m (/) co :J s::: III :J C III L III :J C ll> .., '< W ~ ~ (0 (D N ., m - CD .., m :J o m 01 ~ 3 m ~ ..., C o ^ (f) ~ ~~ o <OOl.....OlO1./>. WN ~ m -- 0 CD -I-l-l-l-l(fJ(fJ(f)"u\J 0 .., -- -,..."..., ---_OJ)) Pl m Clllllllllll>:J:J:J:J(f) (/) o UUUUcococo <Il (J) 0 @oooo<Il<llm(i)~ rQ' ..., ...., -,. ..., ~ (f)(f)(fJ(f)CCCIllCO .... -- :J :J :J :J <ll 0 S:3333;:;:;:;:;:;:a."" :J -l -- -. -. -. I I I "U 0 ..,~q-::;-~ --S)) ll>lllllllllll>WNNo", _'___'_'__ ^(f) -----lllll>ll>C m<ll<D<Il<Dxxx"Q -,-..,....,..,-,--- : oooo<D~_<D (/) :Jooool/OO)./>.c a.3333./>.~~:J 0" U 0- cr ~. ,. 0- m -. - -. -. ~ (!) (!) CD c:J:J:J:J ,. ..., cna~ae<D ~ <D _.-.-.-- ~ .... (/)0000 ~ 0 ":J:J:J :J ~ * ~ :J I I I I ~ 0>U1./>. W ~ ~Sn~ (!)<DCD(!) 0 ,.pppppppp T1Z-l:n ./>. *o)01U1./>.NOOO III ~Ic o a> .., N Jt(DWCD~~-a.OO ..... . ll> .....0 o - ./>. ..., 0 ,.pppppppp T1ZS::: ./>. *rn'/>'N01NOOO ll> --' (!) N ~W""'-&.""f\)"""'oo gCD~ .....0 o 0 ./>. ..., "Tlz5:0r 0 ,. p p p p p p p P lll--'c(f)O W *U1(")--'./>.NOOO UO>:I:>o ./>. *<000101--'--'00 o i)-Ill> .....0 ~ -0'1>>:::0 ./>. ll> :J C -a.Q1 - --'r5: I I !'lrv!'lrvwww I 011lll> NO)NOl' - - I co x I I 01\)0~000 I -Ill> - 0 :J :l"-~!'l:-,ppp 0 5: :::0 --'<0./>../>.0>00 0 ll> ll> I I 0.......010.......--....1-'- 0 ?< s::: :J co I I ON 0 11l <ll 0) ll> (J) pppppppp s::: C ..., 00000000 - 11l I I N Ol N.~ --' 0 0 0 :J a. I I 0)00>(11(0(,)00 OlW . :> < m .., ll> co m Z --' 0> TI ll> 0 ~ 0 ..., :x> f/l m -0 "< -0 < (tl <D ::l ::r Q. 0 >< m I -l I\) '< "0 m ~ -l III 0- m ..... I 01 0 (,) 0 ~ . Appendix C University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Report {(Effects of Heavy Vehicle Characteristics on Pavement Response and Performance" Dated: August 1992 . . Feb.08 05 09:23a Cit~ of Falcon Heights 65t6448675 p.2 ~ 5)'i . . UMTRI 92-2 EFFECTS OF HEAVY VEHICLE CHARACTERISTICS ON PAVEMENT RESPONSE AND PERFORMANCE FINAL REPORT Project 1-25(1) . Prepared 10 r National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Board National Research Council Thomas D. Gillespie Sleven M. Karamihas David Cebon Michael W. Sayers Mohammad Asghar Nasim Will Hansen Nadeem Ehsan . August 1992 ~,\lI I, UMIRI The University of Michigan ~ rra~p~mtionR~~hlmtirure Feb ~8 05 09:23a Cit~ of Falcon Hei~hts 6516448675 p.3 . SUMMARY . The wheel loads of heavy trucks contribute to various fmms of pavement dis!tess. Of the various typeS. fatigue (which leads 10 cracking) and permanent deformation (rutting) are of greal importance and are the primary focus in this study. Among heavy trucks. all do not cause equal damage because of differences in wheel loads, number and location of axles, types of suspensions and tires. and other factors. Further. the damage is specific 10 the properties of the pavement, operating conditions. and environmental factors. The mechanics of truck pavement interaction were studied 10 identify relationships between truck properties and damage (fatigue and rutting). Compnter models of trucks were used to generate representative wheel load histories characteristic of the different trucks and operating conditions. Rigid and flexible pavement strUcnrral models were used to obtain pavement "influence functions" which characterize the pavement response to tire loads at any location on the roadway. The pavement responses arising from the combined loads from all wheels of a truck were then evaluated to estimate overall pavement damage caused by each truck. The study assessed the significance of truck. tire, pavement, and environmental factors as determinants of pavement damage. While most of the findings reinfoICe the existing understanding of pavement damage from heavy truck loads the treatment in this study provides a systematic overview of the interactions, as well as new insights on the mechanics involved. It is of most interest to examine the findings from the perspective of the truck characteristics that affect pavement damage. and the pavement and environmental factors that influence sensitivity to truck wheel loads. ; TRUCK CHARACTERISTICS AFFECTING PAVEMENT DAMAGE Fatigue damage to rigid and flexible pavements is most directly determined by maximum axle loads and pavement thickness. Fatigue damage varies over a range of 20: 1 with typical variations in axle loads and over the same range with typical variations in pavement thickness. Other vehicle properties have a smaller, but still significant. influence on fatigue. The relationships between damage and certllin truck properties of interest are discussed below: . Axle loads-Fatigue damage is dominated by the most heavily loaded axles because of the power-law relationship of load and fatigue. The first-order determinant of overall fatigue damage for a vehicle combination is the sum of the ESALs (Equivalent Single Axle Loads) for each axle. Typical truck axle loads vary from 10,000 to 22,000 Ib (10 10 22 kips). Assuming a 4th power damage relationship. a 22-kip axle is 23 times as damaging as a 1 Q-kip axle. Although the relative fatigue damage varies with the elCpOnenl assumed in the power law, the importance of axle load dominates for all reasonable val\les of the elCpOnent . IX Feb,08 05 09:24a Cit~ Or Falcon Heights 6516448675 . . Tandem suspensions-Theoretically, tandem axles have the potential to be no more damaging to roads than single axles with equivalent load per axle (i.e., a 36-kip tandem can be no more damaging than two IS-kip singles). In practice, certain deficiencies in the performance of tandem suspensions preclude these benefits: _ Inequalities in static load sharing cause disproportionate fatigue from the heavily loaded axle. Load sharing coefficients Ooad on the heaviest axle normalized by the average of both axles) have been observed to vary from 1.02 to 1.21. A 34- kip tandem with a load sharing coefficient of L 15 produces damage equivalent to two 18-kip axles (ESALs). _ Most tandem suspensions produce dynamic loads comparable to their single axle equivalents. The walking-beam tandem suspension is an exception in that it produces unusually high dynamic loads. On rough and moderately-rough roads. walking-beam suspensions (without shock absorbers) are typically 50% more damaging than other suspension types. . Axle spacing-Aside from the suspension effects discussed above, locating axles at a close spacing does not contribute to pavement damage. Damage on flexible pavements is largely insensitive to axle spacing down to the limits dictated by cunent tire diameters. Rigid pavements actually benefit from stress interaetions between axles and produce less fatigue with closely-spaced axles. Thus, axle spacing is not an important truck characteristic affecting pavement damage. . Tire inflation pressure-Elevated tire inflation pressure greatly increases the fatigue damage of flexible pavements. Over-inflation of conventional tires (e.g., llR22.5) by 25 psi nearly doubles flexible pavement fatigue. Similarly, over-inflation of wide- base single tires is especially critical, increasing fatigue by a factor of four. Tire pressure has a moderate influence on rigid pavement fatigue. . Tire configuration-Of the various tire configurations used on trucks, the most significant to damage is the heavily loaded conventional tire on steer axles. Single tires, typically loaded to 12 kips, cause the steer axle to be more damaging in fatigue and rutting to flexible pavement than a 2O-kip axle (the current legal limit) with dual tires. Steer axle loads should be reduced to 11 kips or less to eliminate this disparity. Wide-base singles at their rated load capacity cause more fatigue and rutting damage than conventional dual tires on a 2O-kip axle. Load on wide-base singles would have to be limited to approximately 90% of their rated capacity to eliminate this disparity. Of the truck properties discussed above, axle loads have the greatest influence on fatigue damage of flexible pavements. However, flexible pavements may also be damaged by rutring. The permanent deformation of the asphalt concrete layer caused by a vehicle is directly dependent on its gross vehicle weight. To the extent that frieghl must be carried by trucks, rutting cannot be alleviated by regulating truck gross weight, because lower weight limits will ouly put more trucks on the road to meet commercial hauling needs. Among the vehicle factors, tire type and inflation pressure have small influences on rutting. . . x p.4 Feb.08 05 09:24a Cit~ of F~lcon Heights 6516448675 , . PAVEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS . Over the range of pavement designs typical of primary and secondary roads, fatigue damage wries by a factor of 20. The primary pavement and environmental factorS affecting damage are: . Roughness in the road surface excites truck dynamic axle loads which increases fatigue damage. Rough pavements (2.5 PSI) experience damage at a rate that is approximately 50% greater than that of smooth roads (above 4 PSI) for most typical truck suspensions. With a walking-beam tandem suspension, however, rough roads may experience damage as much as 3 times greater than that of smooth roads. Roughness does not systematically affect rutting damage of flexible pav=ntS. . Elevated temperatures increases permanent deformation of the pavement layers in flexible pavements. Over the temperature range from 770 to 1200F, the rutting damage from this mechanism increases by a factor of 16. . The temperature gradient in a rigid pavement slab is most important to fatigue damage, because of the thermal stress created. With a gradient of one degree Fahrenheit per inch in the slab, the fatigue damage from most truCks increases by a factor of 10 over that of a zero..gradient condition. In the process of conducting this study, sholtcomings and deficiencies in the knowledge affecting our ability to predict truCk-road interactions have been identified. The pavement models for flexible pavements need general improvement, along with the methods for predicting damage. Rigid pavement models need more development for analysis of damage accrual at cracks and joints, and methodology for studying damage needs to be modified to inveStigate damage under stress conditions that include tensile and compressive loading. Broad sholtcomings in the knowledge of trucks are apparent More empirical information on the dynamic properties of trucks and truck suspensions is needed, along with more infonnation on truck tire properties. . xi p.5 . Appendix D Minnesota Statutes "Waste Management" Chapter . . 'MillJ;lesota Statutes Display Document 1 of 1 . -.-. Minnesota Statutes 2004 Display Document 1 of 1 g II __lIlIlIlIaJ Page I of2 Chapter Title: WASTE MANAGEMENT Seetion: 115A.94 Text; 115A_94 Organized collection. Subdivision 1. Definition. "Organized collection" means a system for collecting solid waste in which a specified collector, or a member of an organization of collectors, is authorized to collect from a defined geographic service area or areas some or all of the solid waste that is released by generators for collection. . Subd. 2. Local authority_ A city or town may organize collection, after public notification as required in subdivision 4. A county may organize collection as provided in subdivision 5. Subd. 3. General provisions. (a) The local government unit may organize collection as a municipal service or by ordinance, franchise, license, negotiated or bidded contract. or other means, using one or more collectors or an organization of collectors. (b) The local government unit may not establish or administer organized collection in a manner that impairs the preservation and development of recycling and markets for recyclable materials. The local government unit shall exempt recyclable materials from organized collection upon a showing by the generator or collector that the materials are or will be separated from mixed municipal solid waste by the generator, separately collected, and delivered for reuse in their original form or for use in a manufacturing process_ (c) The local government unit shall invite and employ the assistance of interested persons, including persons licensed to operate solid waste collection services in the local government unit, in developing plans and proposals for organized collection and in establishing .the organized collection system. . (d) Organized collection accomplished by contract or as a municipal service may include a requirement that all or any portion of the solid waste, except (1) recyclable materials and (2) materials that are processed at a resource recovery facility at the capacity in operation at the time that the requirement is http://ww2.revisor.leg.state.mn.us:8181/SEARCHlBASIS/mnstatlpubliclv.wwIDDW?W... 12/1712004 > "Mil1\lesota Statutes Display Document I of I . imposed I be delivered to a waste facility identified by the local government unit. In a district or county where a resource recovery facility has been designated by ordinance under section 115A.86, organized collection must conform to the requirements of the designation ordinance. Subd. 4. Cities and towns; notice; planning. (a) At least 180 days before implementing an ordinance, franchise, license, contract or other means of organizing collection, a city or town, by resolution o~ the governing body, shall announce its intent to organize collection and invite the participation of interested persons, including persons licensed to operate solid waste collection services, in planning and establishing the organized collection system. (b) The resolution of intent must be adopted after a public hearing. ,..More Page 20f2 UlIJII1I5I1I1IIIaJIII1 . . http://ww2.revisor.leg.state.mn.us:8l8l/SEARCHlBASIS/mnstat/public/wwwlDD W?W... 12/17/2004 . Appendix E McGrann Shea Anderson Carnival Straughn & Lamb, Chartered Letter Subject: Haulers Proposal and Draft Memorandum of Understanding Dated: June 8, 2005 . MCGRANN SHEA ANDERSON CARNIVAL STRAUGHN & LAMB, CHARTERED . ATTORNEYS AT LAW WILLIAM R_ McGRANN ANDREW .J. SHEA DAVID S. ANDERSON DOUGLAS M. CARNIVAL ROBERT 0_ STRAUGHN PETER L. COOPER KATHl..EE:N M. LAMS .JOHN R. SCHULZ COREY .J AYUNG HENRY M. HELGEN '11 RANDOLPH W. MORRIS SCOTT S_ CROSSMAN CARLA J. PEDERSEN PAMELA HODGES NISSEN KATHLEEN MICHAELA BRENNAN JOSEPH T. BAGNOLl U_S. BANCORP CENTER 800 NICOLLET MALL SUITE 2600 GREGORY P. GATT' JENNIFER A. JAMESON TIMOTHY J. FOSTER AMY I:... COURT ROGER J. STELWES AMANDA R. CEFALU SEAN 0 _ SKRYPEK ALBERT E. LI MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-7035 TELEPHONE (6t2) 338-2525 FACSIMILE (612) 339-2386 June 8, 2005 Dear Members of the Arden Hills Transportation Task Force: At the last task force meeting, Chair Jerry Garski asked the Haulers to return with a proposal that addresses a number of issues which might help reduce wear and tear on the streets of Arden Hills. In this letter, we have provided an explanation for how we plan to accomplish each of the objectives of the City. Attached to this letter is a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which formalizes these objectives. . The following is a list of items which the Haulers feel can be successfully accomplished. These would be beneficial to the residents of Arden Hills and assist in reducing wear on the City's streets. It should be emphasized that the Haulers are eager to work with the City's staff, including the City Engineer, so that the removal of refuse from Arden Hills is done in a way that meets customer needs and preserves the streets. The following are measures which the Haulers are prepared to take: . Structure routes so that lighter-loaded trucks travel on the streets with the poorer construction. Having seen the map provided by City staff of the condition of the streets in Arden Hills, the Haulers are now in the process of replanning their routes so as to achieve this goal. They are eager to continue discussions with the City Engineer so that their trucks are the lightest when they pick up trash on the streets with the poorest construction. Changes in the routing system will be achieved through each company's individual efforts, thereby protecting the City's streets to the greatest extent possible. . . Haulers will begin their routes in Arden Hills with as small a volume of waste in their trucks as is practicable. Since Haulers have routing systems which include numerous communrties, it is impossible to come into every community with empty trucks. As a result, Haulers will make their best efforts to ensure that their trucks will have as small a volume of waste within them when they begin their routes within the . . . Arden Hills Transportation Task Force June 8, 2005 Page 2 City of Arden HHls. This, coupled with beginning those routes on streets which are currently in the poorest condition. will help reduce wear on Arden Hill's streets. . By October 31, 2005, the Haulers will only use tandem axle trucks when picking up throughout the City. The practice will help reduce wear on streets by distributing loads over more axles. By the end of October, all Haulers will have acquired all the necessary equipment to complete the conversion to all tandem fleets. . The Haulers will assist the City by alerting the City staff to unlicensed Haulers who may be coming into Arden Hills. The City's interest in this regard is identical to the Haulers'. Any company which is picking up residential trash within the City limits without a license is unfairly competing and violating City ordinances. The Haulers, like the City, support the enforcement of the law in a way that recognizes that those who have sought licenses and complied by City ordinances should be the only Haulers entitled to do business within the City limits. . The Haulers will furnish the City with a list of telephone numbers (updated on a regular basis) to be used for complaints. Since customer service is the most important part of Haulers' business, the Haulers are eager to know of any complaints which their customers may have. As a result, they welcome contact by the City staff should one of their customers lodge a complaint with the City. They will provide City staff with a telephone contact list which they will keep on an updated basis to ensure that communication between the City, the Haulers, and their customers is as easy and prompt as possible. . By October 31, 2005, all Haulers will provide their customers with refuse containers which contain the current name and phone number of the Hauler. Again, the Haulers, like the City, feel that this is an important way by which customers and the City know who is hauling waste within the City's limits. All containers which have obsolete markings will be either removed or remarked with the appropriate information. This process obviously cannot occur overnight and the Haulers expect the conversion to be complete by this coming October. . The Haulers will continue to provide a volume-pricing system for their customers. Currently all Haulers in Arden Hills, and throughout the state, provide each of their customers with volume-based pricing. There are typically three levels of service based on container size. The prices vary based upon competition and the fixed costs each Hauler has in performing its service. . . . . Arden Hills Transportation Task Force June 8, 2005 Page 3 . Haulers will assist their customers in disposing of larger items like refrigerators, water heaters and appliances. All Haulers currently offer their customers an opportunity to dispose of these items. Some Haulers pick up and dispose of these items themselves, while others make arrangements through specialized carriers. Obviously, these additional services require additional reimbursement to the Haulers. Each Hauler will make arrangements with its own customers with respect to handling of these articles. The Haulers appreciate the work that the Transportation Task Force has performed and its willingness to work with the Haulers to reach a sensible and appropriate set of ideas which will benefrt the City of Arden Hills and its residents, while at the same time permitting those citizens to choose their waste hauling services based upon preferences and needs in a competitive and open environment. We look forward to implementing these innovations and continuing the excellent hauling services which the City of Arden Hills has enjoyed to date. Douglas M. Carnival, Legal Cou el National Solid Wastes Management ASSociation Attachment 207001.00C e Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Arden Hills and Licensed Residential Solid Waste Haulers This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into on the _ day of ,2005 between the City of Arden Hills (City) and the undersigned Licensed Residential Waste Haulers (Haulers). Haulers shall abide by the following provisions: I. 2. e 3. 4. 5. 6. . The Haulers will structure routes so that lighter-loaded trucks travel on the streets with poorer construction. The Haulers will begin their routes in Arden Hills with as small a volume of waste in their trucks as is practicable. By October 31, 2005, the Haulers will only use tandem axle trucks throughout the city. The Haulers will assist the city by alerting the city staff to unlicensed haulers who may be coming into Arden Hills. The Haulers will furnish the city with a list of telephone numbers (updated on a regular basis) to be used for complaints. By October 31,2005, all Haulers will provide their customers with refuse containers which contain the current name and phone number ofthe Hauler. 7. The Haulers will continue to provide a volume-pricing system for their customers. 8. The Haulers will assist their customers in disposing of larger items like refrigerators, water heaters and appliances. . . . The City and the Haulers will meet on an annual basis, or sooner if needed, to discuss any issues that may arise regarding the aforesaid commitments to ensure that all parties are satisfied that efforts are being made to abide by the commitments and remedy any problems that may arise. City of Arden Hills Signed: Mayor Date: Attest: City Administrator Date: BFI Waste Services Signed: Date: Ace Solid Waste, Inc. Signed: Date: Walter's Recycling and Refuse Signed: Date: Waste Management ofMN, Inc. Signed: Date: 207D13.DOC 2 . . ul~lrIcj) t/20/oS Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Arden Hills and Licensed Residential Solid Waste Haulers This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into on the _ day of ,2005 between the City of Arden Hills (City) and the undersigned Licensed Residential Waste Haulers (Haulers). Haulers shall abide by the following provisions: I. 2. . 3. 4. 5. 6. e The Haulers will structure routes so that lighter-loaded trucks travel on the streets with poorer construction. The Haulers will begin their routes in Arden Hills with as small a volume of waste in their trucks as is practicable. By October 31,2005, the Haulers will only use tandem axle trucks throughout the city. The Haulers will assist the city by alerting the city staff to unlicensed haulers who may be coming into Arden Hills. The Haulers will furnish the city with a list of telephone numbers (updated on a regular basis) to be used for complaints. By October 31, 2005, all Haulers will provide their customers with refuse containers which contain the current name and phone number ofthe Hauler. 7. The Haulers will continue to provide a volume-pricing system for their customers. 8. The Haulers will assist their customers in disposing oflarger items like refrigerators, water heaters and appliances. 9. The Haulers will offer their customers the option to temporarily suspend service during exteaded absences from home. 10. The Haulers will begin their hauling routes in Arden Hills at times that comply with city ordinances. . . . The City and the Haulers will meet on an annual basis, or sooner if needed, to discuss any issues that may arise regarding the aforesa,id commitments to ensure that all parties are satisfied that efforts are being made to abide by the commitments and remedy any problems that may arise. City of Arden Hills Signed: Mayor Date: Attest: City Administrator Date: BFI Waste SelVices Signed: Date: . Ace Solid Waste, Inc. Signed: Date: Walter's Recycling and Refuse Signed: Date: Waste Management ofMN, Inc. Signed: Date: 207013.DOC . 2