HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 02-21-2006
.MIl,....
,~Iy ApIIWWstil .
"'c~
.f Da~ Grnt
~ Holdea
~lAl'llOIl.
Viaeentl'ellelriB
. ~,../ .
[".I1..c-...:
'."",
:,':;' ,
. .-. .
~
ArdellHillsCity Couadl.,
WORK SESSION
.-' ~"')'.- ,', " . , " .
lit;*ilAt N'
o 'T;'" Ltlllll
.,. 55IU.
. .. 6i'UlI.
,", 1/'
. .
5~OO p.lIl. .
Tuest;Jay;February21,.2806 ·
Agenda
,~,.;
1.~lm~r
~
2.
Afta~~
A- HI5~ee mWlew oftlRS
.
. B. J!'t!J;C Vf;sleEtl'lllll
l'.tIIR
,:It
.. ~:'f.
, ..
StafflPi'tleDters
Midlelle' Wolfe
PTRC Committee M.
Moore
Karen Barton
Kris Giga
Karen /Jarton/James Lehnlw
.:.- -,"-.
;~:\~:-:r~iit,
~,?~;~.:.
C. Old CHYaaWPublieWorb Site Appraisal
. D.ClPlNsumon
. E. ., 'Survey Requirements for Yariance
"Requests
~. Sign MoratoriUIIl
. G. ~dftorRFP Process
'7;Jf
Karen Barton
Murtuza Siddiqui
. ','
. -', -<-.:,
....;:,~:;.i~:...
3. t:~""'IIle8ofts.
A-
.B.
C.
D.
E.
C~rPeIIegriD
C...cilmembeJ' Holden
.' .
COlllleilRtemller Larson
COUJICBlUeIDIIter'Gnmt
Mayor Aplilwwski
'-"-.<
.
.
.
Message
Page I of 1
Jackie Freppert
From: Jackie Freppert
Thursday, February 16, 2006 1:28 PM
timesaver02@aol,com; bob, fletcher@co,ramsey.mn,us; bu Iletin@lillienews.com;
cwilson@ctv15,org; dprobst@mspmac.org; egurnon@pioneerpress.com; focus@mnsun.com;
kgprophet@aol.com; kmaltman@msn,com; mlsmith@startribune,com; smccann@startribune,com;
sschroeder@smithmicrotech.com
Subject: Council Work Session Agenda for 2/21/06
Sent:
To:
Jackie freppert, OfIice Support Specialist
City of Arden Hills
Phone 651.634.5120
Fax 651.634.5137
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
2/16/2006
.
~
~HlLLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
February 14, 2005
Mayor and City Council '. .I.l~ I d
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator ~'f
ITEM 2A
SUBJECT: February 21 Work Session Discussion:
Engineering Services 2005 Review
BACKGROUND
Every year, we attempt to meet with URS, our consulting engineers, and perform an annual
review. We look back at the previous year and answer a series of questions to try and evaluate
performance. Those five questions are:
1.
2.
. 3.
4.
5.
What are some of the things that you felt went well during the calendar year 2005?
What are some of the concerns that you had with the performance of the city Engineer
(URS) during the calendar year 2005?
Are there certain strengths and weaknesses that you would like to observe about the
performance ofURS in 2005?
What suggestions do you have for any changes during calendar year 2005?
Are there any other comments you would like to make about the performance of URS
during calendar year 2005?
All department heads were asked to submit their responses to these questions, and to consult with
the employees in their respective departments as appropriate. I also asked for input from the
City Council. The responses I received were compiled into the attached summary document.
DISCUSSION
In general I included all comments I received in the attached summary. In cases where
comments were similar, I combined them in some kind of summary statement, then indicated in
parentheses how many people made a comment to that effect.
We met with representatives from URS on January 31 to review this document. In addition,
URS prepared a bound booklet entitled "Summary of Project Design and Construction Activities
for 2004-2005". URS was invited to prepare a report with their responses and reactions to the
January 3 I meeting. That report is attached.
-
Page 2 of2
The thrcc attached documents provide a comprehensive review of engineering services during
the calendar year 2005. During thc work session we invite Council to offcr any additional .
comments and reactions to thc materials presented, and to ask questions.
In 2006 we will sce many changes to how we provide engineering services. The addition of Kris
Giga as Civil Engineer and designation of the City of Roseville as our City Engineer has been a
great change so far and we look forward to many positive improvements in the coming months.
Kris has been assigned responsibility for coordinating engineering services, administering the
contract with URS, and monitoring thc work of URS or any other consulting engineers who may
be retained by the City. One of her first priorities will be to work on a new agreement with URS,
as the naturc of the services we need from thcm has changed since the agreement was last
updated.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
lbis item is presented to Council as an opportunity to participate in the annual review process
and offer any final comments, reactions, and feedback. In addition, it would be an opportunity to
ask questions of URS, Kris, and me about the provision of engineering services as we proceed
into 2006.
.
e
\\Metro-inct.us\ardenhills\Admin\City Administrator\Engineering\2006\2-14-06 Memo to
Council RE Engincering 2006 Rcview.doc
.
.
-
2006 City Engineer Annual Review
Summary of Responses
I.
What are some of the things that you felt went well during the calendar year
2005? (Things that YOU think URS did well.)
a URS has worked very well with the 2006 Ridgewood neighborhood PMP
project. The neighborhood meetings were very good. Planning and
interaction with residents (3)
a Grey FoxlRed Fox PMP implementation. Communication with the
business for the 2005 Red Fox PMP. (2)
a Preparation of bids for lift station replacements in 2006. Project
management for lift station projects. (2)
a Help with decision on landscaping of Highway 96.
a Help with trail discussions with the Soo Line.
a Supplying of maps and materials to O&M in a timely manner.
a Organization and communication with Presbyterian Homes during the lift
Station #7 pump replacement program.
2.
What are some of the concerns that you had with the verformance of the City
Engineer (URS) during the calendar year 2005?
a At times, URS is not very good about meeting deadlines for City Council
meeting related items. Also, the quality of the reports is sometimes
lacking. It seems that last minute changes or follow-up calls are needed to
obtain necessary information for City Council packets. (3)
a Effective and consistent communication with the City Council.
a Effective and consistent communication with the staff.
a Perhaps too eager to appease all parties involved in a project.
a Accurate budget forecasting. (2)
a R-O- W acquisitions during a PMP. (2)
a Not enough staff personnel assigned to the City. (2)
a From the vantage point of a Councilmember, without the benefit of
frequent interaction that staff has with URS, no significant concerns.
a Removal of trees during lift station project.
o
J.
Are there certain strengths and weaknesses that YOU would like to observe
about the performance ofURS in 2005?
a URS does a very good job interacting with the public. The neighborhood
meetings that I have attended have been very informative and
professionally done.
a Again horn the vantage point of a Couneilmember, without the frequent
interaction that staff has, URS has done a good of communicating with our
residents and supporting City work.
o Greg and Nick have considerable experience and are credible in their
presentations,
o It's not always clear what the relationship is between Tom and URS (e.g.,
who's in charge). Part of the problem is that Tom is not an engineer, yet
must oversee enginecrs that havc broad training and expertise. I assume
that somc of this will change next year with the addition of the part-time
City Engineer.
o There was inconsistency in their performance. Their overall performance
was average but it was a roller coastcr ride at some points.
.
4. What suggestions do vou have for anv changes during calendar vear 2005?
o Make sure that engineering reports are complctcd properly and returned to
the City in a timely fashion. Please be more aware of deadlines for City
Council agenda items. There were a few instances were the Council
packets were not sent out on time due to an engineering report arriving
late. (3)
o Wc nced to prepare a new service agreement between the City and URS
and we need to do that as soon as possible. We also need to clarify thc
roles ofURS, and various City staff.
o This year will be important in terms of trying to establish a new
relationship, given the addition of a part-time City engineer at City Hall. I
think that it will be important for URS to be as responsive and helpful as
possible in smoothing the way for the new arrangement. (2)
o Given the above change, I hope that Greg and Nick will continue to be
assigned to our City so that we don't lose their expertise regarding past
and current work.
o Pay closer attention to details; R-O- W acquisitions. (2)
o Be on time for scheduled meetings. (2)
o More consistent high level of performance.
.
5. Are there anv other comments vou would like to make about the performance
of Citv Engineer URS during calendar vear 2005?
o Overall, I'm very satisfied with the work that they did and the rates that
they charge the City.
o There is room for improvcment. However, in my opinion, URS is a
valuable asset for thc City of Arden Hills.
o I am gencrally not completely satisfied with overall performance. It seems
likc there were constant issues with timeliness of reports, trying to track
things down and not being able to do so quickly, the wrong reports, data
being sent, budget information not being updated in a timely fashion (or if
it was updates, not being approvpriately communicated), getting to
meetings on time. So overall it seemed like a struggle, and that somehow
it should be easier for us and run more smoothly. However, I am
optimistic that the addition of an engineer on our staff will be a giant stride
-
.
.
-
forward in this regard. The City is not entirely blameless in some of the
miscommuncations and other issues that have taken place. I believe
having a truly centralized approach to engineering will not only be an
improvement for the City but also for URS. You will have one person that
you will get direction from, and that you can go to for the clarifications
that you need.
SOME GENERAL COMMENTS:
Some of the people who were asked to participate in this review simply provided general
comments and didn't answer the questions directly:
o The dealings "he's had with URS have been positive. They have responded to
his needs and requests in a timely manner and he feels thcy work effectively
together. His only 'complaint' is that he feels we pay too much for their
services. "
o "Overall, I like what they do for us and feel they do a very responsible job. I
find them credible and professional. My main issue with Greg is that he is not
easy to get in touch with. Lately, I have found Frank to get answers for me
quickly. There is a time lag."
.
\ I,Metro-inet. u.ilardenhillslAdmin\City Administrator\Engjneering\2006 Annual Review responses.doc
URS
Thresher Square .
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Phone: (612) 370-0700
Fax: (612) 370-1378
To:
Michellc Wolfe/Arden Hills
City Administrator
File:
37951005
From:
Gregory S. Brown
Date:
February 14,2006
Subject:
URS Performauce Review
We are very pleased that the City of Arden Hills has given us the opportunity to serve the City's
engineering needs over the past eight years and look forward to working with City staff and council on
City improvements this year and the future. We generally concur with the comments received by staff at
our review in January_ We will strive to build on our strengths while improving the weaknesses in our
delivery of service to the City as we move forward. The following are a few highlights of our work
performance that we would like to outline for the worksession.
.
Rcview of Project Activity
We have prepared a summary' booklet which oulliues URS' services over the past two years including
project descriptions, staff and some financial analysis to assist with the review of our services to the City.
In general, we fccl that the significant projects completed over this period have been received well by the
residents and businesses of Arden Hills and have been designed, administrated and managed effectively_
I believe that the URS staff interact with residents in a very positive and professional manner and truly
enjoy that interaction process which is so critical to the success of municipal projects.
Quality of Service
We have been generally successful in the variety of communication required during the course of project
development however we do acknowledge some lapses of communication between City staff and URS
which caused confusion and budget concerns in later part of project development. We also acknowledge
that we can improve upon our delivery' time of council memos and other documents to allow City staff
more time to review and comment before Council packcts are sent.
We have continued to dedicate the same URS staff over the years for our work within the City. This has
resulted in strong working knowledge of the City's infrastructure and a strong sense of "ownership" on
projects_ Both of these result in higher quality service to the City as well as a rewarding work experience
for our staff.
The financial performance spreadsheet analysis included in the booklet illustrates that collectively the 5.7
million dollars of capital projects over the past two years have been completed at 102.2% ofthe awarded
contract amount and 101.4% of the Engineer's estimate. Although we would prefer the completed
projects to be 95-98% of the engineer's estimate, we are very proud oftllC fact that change orders have
-
.
.
-
Memorandum
February 14,2006
Page 2
amounted to only 2.2% of awarded construction amounts (5%-10% is common in the industry). We
attribute this to good quality plans and solid supervision of contractors during construction to minimize
claims. [ acknowledge that we need to focus on improving our estimates for budgeting of future projects.
The financial performance analysis chart also indicates total URS design and construction services fees
as a percentage of the construction contract amounts collective]y at 18.11 %. These fees are based upon
our contract terms, We feel are fees are very competitive in the industry where fees range as high as 25%
for similar work (Ramsey County Public Works charges 24% for its engineering services to the City).
New City Organizational Structure
We are excited to continue our relationship with the City under the revised organizational structure with
the hiring of Kristine Giga. Most of the metro area municipalities that we work in have in-house
engineering staff and we are very comfortable working in this type of organization. We are confident that
the single point of contact will ease some of the strains on communication lines that have occurred in the
past. We agree that we should revisit our fee structure especially as it relates to retainer type services
which willlarge]y be performed by Kristine as we move forward.
"
'.
.
Summary of Project Design and Construction
Activities for 2004 - 2005
January, 2006
URS
Thresher Squara
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
612.370.0700
612370.1378
URS
Decem be r 30, 2005
Ms. Michelle Wolfe
City Administrator
1245 Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
.
RE: Summary of Project Design and Construction Activity for January 2004 - June 2005
Dear Ms. Wolfe:
The last 24 months have been steady for the City of Arden Hills with regards to capital improvement projects
including city projects, Ramsey County projects and private projects. URS has continued to provide a wide
range of selVices to help the City keep on top of these activities. There were seven new projects designed
andlor administered by URS during this period. These projects include the following:
· 2004 PMP Project: Reconstruction of the Edgewater Neighborhood.
. 2005 PMP Project: Reconstruction and overlay of the Red Fox/Grey Fox Commercial Area.
. 2005 Lift Station Rehabilitation Project {LS #4 & LS #9)
. 2005 Sealcoating Project
. 2006 PMP Project: Reconstruction of the Ridgewood Neighborhood
. 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Project (LS 1, 11, 12 & 13)
· Highway 96 Landscape Improvements
.
In addition, the three projects listed below were initiated in 2003 and included a minor amount of work during the
review period.
· 2003 PMP Project: Reconstruction of the Ingerson Neighborhood and the overlay of the Karth Lake East
Neighborhood.
. Booster Station Improvements: Complete renovation of the City's watermain booster station located near the
south water tower.
. Lift Station #7 and Karth Lake Pumping System Improvements: Renovation of Lift Station #7 (near
Presbyterian Homes) and the construction of a new pumping system for Karth Lake.
In addition to the stand alone projects, URS staff was involved on behalf of Arden Hills in three projects
undertaken by Ramsey County.
· Highway 96 Reconstruction: Complete reconstruction of Highway 96 from North Heights Church to
Lexington Avenue.
. Ramsey County Maintenance Facility Construction: Complete construction of a joint use maintenance facility
on approximately 40 acres of land.
. Lexington Avenue Reconstruction: Complete reconstruction of Lexington Avenue between Highway 96 and
Cummings Park Drive.
-
URS
. URS has also provided general City Engineering services as requested for a wide range of issues including:
. Plan reviews of private developments: notable cases include the redevelopment of the Old City Hall and
remnant parcel at Highway 96 and West Round Lake Road. Presbyterian Homes expansion plans have
also been reviewed and coordinated by URS.
. Maintaining the City's State Aid files which include annual updates to State Aid street mileage and needs,
official map updates and bridge certification. We have also completed the traffic counts for state aid streets
required every four years. (accomplished in 2005)
. MPCA NPDES Phase II Permit: URS prepared the city's permit application as required by law and continues
to provide monthly assistance on maintaining the permit.
. Capital Improvements Program Scoping: URS evaluated a number of potential CIP projects for the City over
the review period including sidewalk improvements along County Road E, pedestrian crossing under the CP
Rail Bridge along Old Highway 10, gateway signage, landscaping improvements along Highway 96 and
streetlighting improvements along Lexington Avenue. In addition, we have worked closely with City staff on
developing and refining the 5 year C1P as it pertains to street, storm drainage and utility infrastructure.
URS SERVICE TEAM FOR ARDEN HilLS, MN
URS is committed to maintaining continuity of staff that are assigned to Arden Hills services and most of the
core team has been serving the city for 8 years and are very familiar to City staff and council. A number of other
URS staff are utilized from time to time in order to meet special needs of the city or provide additional staff
during periods of significant design and construction activity. The following is a roster of URS personnel who
have worked on Arden Hills projects in 2004-2005
I
;.
Core Team
Gregory Brown: City Engineer services and URS project manager for Arden Hills
Frank Ticknor: Project Engineer
Matt Harder: Project Engineer
Mark Lynch: Construction Field Inspector
Kathryn Ryan: Landscape Architect and Field Inspector (for landscaping items)
Additional Staff
Jane Foley: Construction Field Inspector
Keith Dahl: Registered Land Surveyor (easement preparation)
Bob Burrell: Land Surveying Technician (easement preparation)
Etoile Strachota: GfS Specialist
Mark Maves: Structural Engineer (Bridge/Structural Design)
Eric Seiberlich: Traffic Engineer (State Aid Traffic Counts)
Steve McManamon: Environmental Engineer (TCMP assistance)
Lisa Basile: Plan and Specification distribution for bidding of projects
Tom Geear: Project Administrator (accounting, invoicing)
Tom Holker: Jim Freerks, Jeff Haley: Field surveying
Brad Caron: CADD Technician
Paul Johnson: CADD Technician
-
2
URS
2004 -2005 Work Summary
.
The URS professional services contract with the City of Arden Hills includes retainer services (fixed monthly
rate), miscellaneous engineering tasks (hourly as requested), and project related services (based upon
construction bid values). The following are summaries of the services URS provided in each of these general
categories for the review period.
A. RETAINER SERVICES
URS provides a number 01 services for a retainage of $2,180.00 per month. The retainage amount has
remained constant since our initial contract was signed in 1997. The following are highlights of the services
provided during the review period under the retainage billing:
. Attendance and participation at City Council Meetings by the City Engineer and Project Engineers as
requested: URS staff participated in approximately 50 Council Meetings over the review period
. Attendance and participation at Planning Commission meetings, City Committee meetings and task force
meetings by the City Engineer and Project Engineers as requested: URS staff participated in 6 of these
meetings over the review period
. Attendance and participation at City Staff Meetings (and special meetings as requested) by the City
Engineer and Project Engineers as requested: URS staff participated in approximately 35 staff meetings
over the review period
· General coordination with outside agencies on behalf of the City (not project specific) such as MnDOT State
Aid, Ramsey County and Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, MPCA, Rice Creek Watershed
District .
. Addressing resident questions and comments on non-project specific items
. General management and coordination of URS staff efforts (Greg Brown)
. Preparation of Monthly Billings and contract administration
B. MISCELLANEOUS ENGINEERING SERVICES
URS provides a wide range of services under the Miscellaneous Engineering category which are billed to the
City on an hourly basis using a multiplier of each employee's actual labor rate. These services are generally for
work which is not related to a specific construction project, however some projects with undefined scopes or
those not requiring the full services of a construction project are billed under this category. The following is a
summary of the major items of work included under this category during the review period:
General Planning Services and Planning Case reviews for private development
URS provided plan reviews and summary of findings memos to City staff for several private development
projects during the review period including the Old City Hall Site, The Holiday Station Store Site, the
Presbyterian Homes Expansion, Bryson Woods development and others.
MPCA NPDES Phase II Permitting
URS helped administer the MPCA NPDES permit as mandated by the State Legislature. The permit includes
requirements for monthly activities to promote better water quality throughout the city such as public education
materials, field inspections of drainage infrastructure and employee training. URS has assisted City staff with
these ongoing activities as well throughout the year.
-
3
URS
.
MnDOr State Aid Coordination
URS has provided the required coordination with MnDOT State Aid staff in order to maintain the City in good
standing with this funding program. There are a number of annual activities which are required of the City as of
part of the State Aid program including:
. Certification of the mileage of State Aid streets
. Updating of the City's official State Aid map maintained by MnDOT
. Revising the construction and maintenance needs (in funding dollars) for all of the City's State Aid routes to
assist MnDOT with the calculation of construction funds allocated to the city each year.
. Structural Inspection of City Bridges (one is located adjacent to TCAAP on County Road H, the other is
across Snelling Avenue just north of the intersection with TH 51)
. Completing the traffic counts of all city state aid streets as required by MnDOT every four years (completed
in 2005)
· Obtaining funding reimbursements for State Aid eligible construction projects
.:
.
Preliminary Engineering/Seoping of Potential Improvements Projects
URS provides preliminary estimates and recommendations on potential improvements projects as well as
coordination with other agencies on roadway projects which affect the city. These services are provided when
requested by the Councilor City staff and sometimes requested by Ramsey County or MnDOT officials. The
following projects were included with our services during the review period:
· Highway 96 Landscaping Improvements Scoping
· Entry Monument Concept Design Development
. County Road E Sidewalk and Bridge Widening
CP Rail Bridge sidewalk/trail underpass along Old Highway 10
City Streetlighting Analysis (Lexington Avenue or Citywide)
Lexington Avenue Widening Improvements Review (Ramsey County)
. 1-694 Improvements EAW comments
Utility Systems
URS created comprehensive system maps for watermain, sanitary sewer and storm sewer for the operations
and maintenance staff to assist with day to day maintenance and to help with identifying segments of the City
utility systems for periodic maintenance including televising, hydrant flushing and dispatching crews to specific
utility locations. The maps identify all of the manholes, lift stations and pipe segments as well as the latest
known rehabilitation work done throughout the system. URS updates the maps with new data from capital
improvements and other data from O&M staff. URS also prepared laminated books with 8 y," X 11" blowup
views of the City sanitary sewer system and watermain systems for City staff use. URS facilitated the recent
Water Tower Inspection as a part of these services,
Street System
URS created a series of maps and spreadsheets which illustrate street classifications, street width, PCI rating,
curb and guller, sealcoating, reconstruction and overlay history. This data has been used to prioritize available
funding for roadway improvements during CIP Planning. The maps area also useful exhibits which have been
provided to the public to illustrate the City's recent and future roadway capital improvements program.
Citywide Drainage Issues
. URS assists City staff in the investigation, analysis and solution of drainage issues which arise throughout the
..City_ Recent examples include residential flooding south of County Road E (Old Snelling Avenue), Indian Oaks
Pond outlet and. Both issues were resolved with City O&M staff implementing URS design solutions.
4
URS
~
~
ro
~
~
~
~
'"
'"
=>
II)
II)
>-
...J
<(
Z
<(
W
U
Z
<(
:2:
0:::
o
LL
0:::
w
a.
...J
<(
U
Z
<(
Z
LL
I-
U
W
""')
o
0:::
a.
II)
...J
...J
:I:
Z
W
o
0:::
<(
~
'-
w
c.,; ~
~ '0,
c
c w
~ -
o 0
E ,0
<< 0'
o
g
c1"
o ~
o "
",<<
c '0
u:~
c
c
~ 1;;
o c
E 0
<<0
roo.
c
ii:
o
g
c
o
o
'"
c
ii:
1"
~
"
<<
w
'-
w
w
c
'0,
c
w
~~O'~~~::O-":~
if) 0> I'-- co <."'J 1'_ <:'-J 0'
wm=<ocoooOu-J
~...-,-- ,-- ~ ,,'< ~ ~
c
~
o
E
<<
]ij
o
>-
00000000
oc>ooq===
cr> 056 0 <.0 r---o 0
<:,)==o,po..,o
= = = '-0 -.::t <::0_"'- =_
<.o("")cr>00)-0-l~C>
(T")('-.,[<D~<'J""-.::to)
mGl"-l EA<oA-<hfh
~~~
2
~
."
1;;
W
c
~
o
E
<<
~ ~;:fi;:fi '0"
<.D = m 0
<.cil.Ornr--o
000>0,0
c
~
o
E
<<
000"<1"0
==0000
c:::ioc:>r--:o:
oc>c>"'1"C".l
<D-.::tCJ:.....-:>.~
0' cO 1O 0::> rn-
0J (0 m r---
~...-:3b">~
~"''''
w
o
c
e
w
'1=
i5
===
"<:t C> <D
NOG
==~
==~
wen-=
~ = ~
~I~~
c
~
o
E
<<
= =
<0 =
~ci
~=
=
"';0')
==
0.~
"'''''''
(0<00=
tD<OOl.D
r---:"<ib0-i
~ ~ ~
"! -I'-
lD t.ri" C'J-
~ ~ ~
<'? w~
;;0::;
'#'-"?F-*
= ~ =
cci0.iQ
===
===
===
0~c:>
~ ~ =
~ ~ =
<ON-.;:t-
= ~ =
~~=
~==
"<TOCCO
-.::t = en = c>
<rio0.icoc>
CO<::Ol'-lDC>
0-J I.D I'- r--- =
N cri 0 1'----.::tO
<ht--mtfl=
-~~I~
~
ill
~
'"
==
==
=0
==
~ 0
<0 -.q-
~=
~=
"'~
2
~
.s
w
w
00000==0 co
00000=00 C>
0:6600600 c>
00==000= 0
c>oOC>OC>OC> C>
NO.nN..oC'-iO'O t.D
ooa-.:T..q<.Oc>C'-Jo:) ..---
~CJ:2{fl&t~~$ ~
'" '" 0'
o
w
'0-
n:
"
w 0
" 0
~ ~
.0=0
Z"D
U;o~
~ -E "iij
~oZ
"DX
<'ll ~ 0
~ -iii ~
-g:z~
<<:I2C)......
g X ~
ttl 3 ol.~IN
I ~ ~ ~ Q:I~
I;: -0 ou 0
...=:wa:l1Il:;::
o ~
o..,*w
~~.e
"''''W
==0
==0
NNln
n. n.
"''''
n. n.
~ ~
==
= a
N N
c
o
..
~
U;
g
.~
E
~
n.
w
x
~
-'
~
"
,:<~
......
",;;I
c c
o 0
:;:::;:;::
Eii5
"''''
::::::i:::i
M
~
51~,_ ~
~121~ E
l:: -0 ~
~Eg2
~ ~ .c
(~~OE
cl ~..Q c:
~ E':g"n;
~I~ ~ E
:gl-~ -g ~
..elm 0 ~
w 0 "
e::: ~;p ~
c: C:'''::: c:
o <V "U Q)
::::..Jj2>
~(O.<(
1ZI00a..c
""I ~ '" B
..J 3: 0.. g
=I~ ~.-
a a x
C).-C)<1J
NIN..J
of?
=
'"
~
=
o
ci
o
=
=
;;;
,0
0'
~
=
~
-0'2.
~,
=
~
=
=
-.i
=
~.
=
~
=
=
=
c_
=
"'
'"
=
=
~
~
q
~
;;;
of?
.,;
~
f-
a
a
'"
~
a
'"
'"
q
;;;
'"
"'=
a
'"
N
'"
a
~
.,
~
~
ci
~
00
ui'
-
00
00
..;
<0
00
N
...
-
N
~
ui
~
'-'
a
~
"'
-
a
a
'"
=
a
ci
'"
~
"'
'"
w
l'
o
>-
'"
~
m
~
o
'6
~
o
o
~
'm
"
~
m
'"
"
~
D
D
Q
'"
m
~
'"
"
~
to
m
~ oj
o 0
13 (U
~Q
1:: ~
O-E
0",
m
m
~ ~
oj
m
"
'"
m
'"
.a
~
~
"
.S
"
~
D
E
fu
"
m
"
<(
C2
e
we
'"
"
~
'"
""
."
~
.2
~
o
~
m
~
o
"
~
Q
~
-"
~
J':
~
1;
'"
n
m
E
~
~
~
fu
~
~
o
"
fu
"
'"
"
D
(j
m
,S
u..
<0
o
o
,~
'"
"
~
Q
<0
S
~
'"
.a
'"
~
'C
"
m
0.
'"
~
~
m
'0
~
'"
fu
Cl
~
'2
'"
i'
Ie
C. PROJECT RELATED SERVICES
URS provides a full range of services under work orders for specific projects. Generally our services for specific
projects are based upon the construction value of the project at the time of bid. Our contract calculates the basis
for fees as the average of the lowest three bids received from contractors. Feasibility Report preparation, Final
Design and Bidding services are based upon cross referencing the construction basis with a fee curve adopted
by the American Society of Civil Engineers included with our contract.
Construction 01 Lake Lane Pond
The lower the fee basis, the higher the fee percentage for
feasibility, design and bidding. For example a $50,000 project
equates to a 10.05% fee while a $2,000,000 project equates to
5.75% fee. If the project does not require a feasibility report
(i.e,sanitary sewer or watermain projects), then the fee basis from
the curve is reduced by 35%, Another example, a $500,000
roadway project equates to a 7.0% design fee while a $500,000
lift station project equates to a 4,6% design fee, Construction
services are based upon a straight 10% of the construction basis
regardless of project size or type.
Land surveying for topography and easements are billed as additional services at an hourly rate similar to the
miscellaneous services, Expenses are billed through to the City with no markup. The following is a summary of
the projects, which were active between January 2004 and June 2005 including projects initiated in 2003 and
those still underway in 2004.
.
Interior 01 Booster Station
-
Grey Fox Road entrance to TH 51
I)
URS
2003 PMP PROJECT (INGERSON AND KARTH LAKE EAST NEIGHBORHOODS)
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
Number of Change Orders
Changes to the Contract Price
Actual Final Construction Cost
Contract Completion Date
Actual Completion Date
As-Built Completion
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
Construction Inspector
SUlVey Crew Chief
Greg Brown
Nick Landwer
Mark Lynch
Jane Foley
Jeff Haley
2004-5 Construction Activities:
. Completed all project punchlist items and landscape
inspection - final payment.
Comments:
y Femwood channel landscaping very well received by
neighborhood after much debate during design phase
y Residents were generally happy with the improvements
after much debate during the design phase
y Project substantially completed one month later than
planned due to delays resulting from Excel Energy
y A number of vocal residents (8+/-) caused significantly
more time in meetings/discussions etc. during design
phase of project and some construction issues
URS Total Project Fees: $336,039 (16,5% of construction)
.
June 4, 2003
Amt Construction Company
1,903.147.60
$2,082,000.00
1
$126,500
$2,029,600.
September 26, 2003
October 31, 2003 (substantial)
April, 2004
e
Ham/ine A venue
Femwood Channel
-
7
URS
i.
liFT STATION #7 REHABILITATION AND KARTH LAKE PUMPING STATION
~
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
~
j
!
Number at Change Orders
Actual Final Construction Costs
Contract Completion Date
Actual Completion Date
As-Built Completion
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
September 18, 2003
Jay Bros. Inc,
$232,772.50
$202,000.00
None
$206,116.00
May 21, 2004
May 14, 2004
July, 2004
Greg Brown
Frank Ticknor
Mark Lynch
Lift Station #7/ Prior to Soddinq
Karth Lake Pump Station
Comments:
>- Bids were higher than estimated however final costs were kept near original estimated amount
>- Work was completed on time and the lake pump was utilized in 2004 as well as 2005
>- URS and O&M negotiated a no cost agreement with Presbyterian Homes to eliminate the ongoing issue
of rags/clothing in sewage from their facility, Chopper pumps installed in July, 2005
>- Lake pump 50% financed by neighbOlTIood
*RS Total Project Fees: $42,807.00 (20.8% of Construction)
8
URS
BOOSTER STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT
.
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contracl Price
Engineers Estimate
Number of Change Orders
Actual Final Construction Costs
Contract Completion Date
Actual Completion Date
As-Built Completion
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspectors
Greg Brown
Frank Ticknor
Mark Lynch, Frank Ticknor
November 13,2003
EnComm Midwest, Inc.
$168,440.00
$255,000.00
None
$175,420.00
May 15, 2004
March 15, 2005
July, 2005
Comments:
~ Awarded amount did not include $6,980.00 for Bid
Alternate #1 (although Council motion was to award the
Bid Alternate).the difference is shown in the final .
construction costs
~ Very competitive bids significantly below budget
~ Station improvements well received by O&M staff
~ Station improvements provide more flexibility and
capabilities in operation of watermain system and have been utilized several times since completion of
the project
~ Some issues with initial pump installation required contractor to replace one pump (no City cost). These
issues delayed final completion for 10 months (although station was operable during this time)
URS Total Project Fees:
$28,466.00 (16.2% of construction)
~
9
URS
i'
,
,.
!
,
~. -
~
2004 PMP EDGEWATER NEIGHBORHOOD
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineer Estimate
June,2004
Amt Construction
$1,059,000
$1,000,000
Number of Change Orders
Changes to Contract Price
Actual Final Construction Costs
2
$59,415
$1,118,400
Contract Completion Date
Actual Completion Date
As-Built Completion
October 1, 2004
September 24, 2004
April, 2005
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
Survey Crew Chief
Greg Brown
Matt Harder
Mark Lynch
Jeff Haley
2004-5 Activities:
Preliminary and Final design
Easement Acquisition Documentation
Coordination with, property owners in project area, Rice Creek
Watershed District and private utility companies.
Construction Inspection/Administration
Construction at Edgewater Road
Comments:
1'- Work generally progressed and was completed within schedule including the replacement of existing
watermain which was found to be in poor condition
1'- Residents were generally happy with project and very cooperative with Contractor during times with
difficult access
1'- General neighborhood aesthetic is much improved
1'- City assumed ownership of county outlot to construct water quality pond
1'- End of construction neighborhood pizza party hosted by the Oddfellows lodge had 25 attendees! (URS
treated for pizza)
URS Total Project Fees: $223,068.00 (19.9% of construction)
10
URS
2005 liFT STATION 4&9 REHABILITATION PROJECT
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
February 15, 2005
Gridor Construction Inc.
$236,758.00
$229,000.00
.
Number of Change Orders
Changes to the Contract Price
Actual Final Construction Cost:
1
$5,71600
$242,474
Contract Start Date
Actual Completion Date
May 16, 2005
September 23, 2005
VRS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
Greg Brown
Frank Ticknor
Mark Lynch, Frank Ticknor
Comments:
>- Project was completed with no disruption to City Sewer
operations
>- Some issues arose out of lack of communication with neighborhood residents regarding tree removals
at Lift Station #4
Lift Station #4
.
VRS Total Project Fees:
$44,150.00 (18.2% of construction)
~.
Lift Station #9
-
II
URS
~
~
~
~.
~
(
(
~
~
~
cr
cr
J
J
1
]
l.
]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
2005 PMP: RED FOx/GREY Fox COMMERCIAL AREA
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
June 29, 2005
Amt Construction
$1,375,247.66
$1,345,000
Number of Change Orders
Actual Final Construction Cost (estimated)
None
$1,365,000
Contract Completion Date
Completion Date
As-Built Completion
November 15, 2005
November 10, 2005 (substantial)
December, 2005
VRS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
Survey Crew Chief
Greg Brown
Matt Harder
Mark Lynch
Jeff Haley
2004-5 Activities:
. Preliminary and Final design
. Easement Acquisition Documentation
. Coordination with MnDOT, property owners in
project area, Rice Creek Watershed District and
private utility companies.
. Construction Inspection/Administration
Existing Red Fox Road
Comments:
);> Design eliminated segment of costly street reconstruction
);> Design provided for water quality improvement in area of removed street segment allowing enhanced
water quality benefits
);> Design improved safety and efficiency of access to TH 51
);> Project was generally well received by businesses including the removal of the street segment
);> URS staff responded/adjusted to MnDOT requests as well as property owner requests at last minute to
accommodate changes into the project. (Jack Hoeschler, Smiths Driveway)
);> MnDOT Hydraulics review required nearly 4 months of meetings, detailed hydraulic modeling and
modifications which extended into the period of construction,
VRS Total Project Fees: $ 269,000 (19. 7% of construction)
12
URS
l
~
d
G
j
3
2005 SEALCOATING PROJECT
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
June 14, 2005
Allied Blacktop
$39,714.56
$42,000.00
,
J
Number of Change Orders
Actual Final Construction Cost
None
$38,547.84
]
]
]
]
1
1
1
1
1
1
J
I
Contract Completion Date
Actual Completion Date
August 31, 2005
August 22, 2005
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
Greg Brown
Frank Ticknor
Mark Lynch
2005 Construction Activities:
. City Crews completed crack sealing in the project area prior to sealcoating
· Contractor swept roadways and placed sealcoat material in Ingerson, Edgewater, Karth Lake East
neighborhoods as well as Cummings Park Drive,
· City Crews completed sweeping of gravel following contractor sealcoating.
Comments:
)> Project bids were extremely competitive and cheaper than any year in recent past
URS Total Project Fees: $6,500.00 (16,9% of construction)
.
.
-
13
URS
I.
1.
I
i.
:-
2006 PMP RIDGEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineer Estimate
Estimated Contract Completion Date
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineers
Construction Inspector
SUlVey Crew Chief
Greg Brown
Matt Harder, Frank Ticknor
Mark Lynch
Jeff Haley
2004-5 Activities:
Feasibility Report Preparation
Public Involvement Meetings (5 held)
Public Hearing
Agency Coordination
March - April, 2006
TBD
TBD
$1,500,000
September, 2006
Comments:
? Public Involvement process has been very well attended and residents are generally supportive of the
project
? URS accomplished field sUlVey under budgeted amount - used savings to provide benchmark sUlVey
for 2/3 of City
URS Estimated Project Fees:
$266,000 (17. 7% of construction)
Existing Roadway Conditions
14
URS
l
~
ci
cl
cl
d
2006ltFT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
~
J
3
1
J
I
I
I
I
Contract Start Date
Completion Date
URS Staff:
Project Manager
Project Engineer
Construction Inspector
Greg Brown
Frank Ticknor
Mark Lynch
Comments:
~ This project would complete the upgrade of the remaining
four originallif! stations within the City
URS Estimated Project Fees: $34,000-90,000 (16% of construction)
December 20, 2005
TBD
$304K - 564K(with Alternate)
$270K - 480K(with Alternate)
February, 2006
July, 2006
Existing Lift Station #13
15
fiRS
.
.
-
.
HIGHWAY 96 LANDSCAPING ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT:
Bids Open
Awarded Contractor
Awarded Contract Price
Engineers Estimate
January - February, 2006
TBD
TBD
$305,000
Contract Start Date
Completion Date
Warranty Completion
May, 2006
September, 2006
September, 2007
URS Staff:
Project Manager Greg Brown
Project Landscape Architect Kathryn Ryan
Construction Inspector Mark Lynch, Kathryn Ryan
Comments:
~ This project includes boulevard and median trees (paid for by Ramsey County) as well as additional
shrub planting beds along the corridor
~ URS proposed lower fee percentage than contract terms for this project
. ~ Approximately 50% of fees will be reimbursed by Ramsey County
URS Estimated Project Fees: $38,000(12,5% of construction)
------.._-~ -~-~ ------ -- ----
SWI
~fl:
~jc't
~b'.
~<;'-€-
.~.""."'"
-,---- ~~,~-' ~ -...... ~---
~:"':.=-!Z:=: ~""'!:---- ;':";s t?'~~~
<",. "A~n~C(;~OY"A
.~~ ?~~:ov.,"<'"
~=L..:':n'- ..
-
Landscape concept drawing
16
URS
.
.
-
~
/]'\~ HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Agenda Item - Worksession B
February 14,2006
TO:
Mayor and Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator ~ J- rno~
Thomas J. Moore; Director of Operations & Maintenance ~
FROM:
SUBJECT: PTRC Vision Plan Discussion
BACKGROUND
For the past few months, a subcommittee of the PTRC, chaired by Roger Williams, has met to
draft a Vision Plan for the park and trail system in Arden Hills. The subcommittee sought to;
. Articulate a vision, based on the 2002 Parks, Trails and Opcn Space Plan, that leads to a
park and trail system that enhances the health and well-being of the Arden Hills residents
and provides access to natural and recreational resources in the city and the region.
. Recommend possible strategies for bringing this vision into reality.
The PTRC is meeting on Thursday February 16, 2006 at 7:30pm to review and finalize a
DRAFT Vision Plan. At the Tuesday February 21, 2006 Council Worksession, the PTRC will
verbally present the DRAFT Vision Plan; discuss its possible implications for the parks and trails
system and community building in Arden Hills. Furthermore the PTRC will offer possible
recommendations for future consideration by the City Council.
.
.
e
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Agenda Item 2C
February 13, 2006
TO:
Mayor and Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
Karen Barton, Community Development Directo~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Old City HalllPublic Works site appraisal
ENCLOSURES:
1. Appraisal dated February 7, 2006
Per Council's direction, staff contracted BRKW Appraisals, Inc. to prepare the attached appraisal
for the old city halllpublic works site, 1450 West Highway 96.
The appraisal was prepared with the following assumptions:
· 6.82 acres (297,079), as vacant;
· "Limited Business" re-use of the property (allowing for offices, clinics, day care with
over 10 children, financial institutions, research, and clubs and lodges);
· Soils are stable and free of contamination;
. All public utilities are available;
· Highest and Best Use (deemed to be commercial, primarily office and/or medical);
· Access to Hamline Avenue
The appraisal was prepared utilizing a direct sales comparison approach, using five comparable
properties that sold within the past three years. The comparable sale prices range from $6.89 per
square foot to $8.45 per square foot. The chart on page 40 of the appraisal details the
comparable land sales with adjustments, resulting in an indicated price per square foot ranging
from $7.51 to $8.42, with an overall range of $8.01 per square foot.
Based on the above information, BRKW estimates the land value for the old city halVpublic
works site to be $2,375,000 ($8.00 per square foot).
.
A COMPLETE APPRAISAL
SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPORT
(BRKW FILE NO. 5512)
OF
A COMMERCIAL LAND PARCEL
LOCA TED AT
1450 WEST HIGHWAY 96
ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
AS OF
JANUARY 28,2006
FOR
.
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96
ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 55112
BY
WILLIAM E. PETERSEN
CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL PROPERTY APPRAISER
MINNESOTA LICENSE #400 I 649
AND
ROGER M. ROHRER
CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL PROPERTY APPRAISER
MINNESOTA LICENSE #4001238
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
REAL ESTATE VALUATION SERVICES
.
February 7, 2006
City of Arden Hills
Attn: Karen Barton
Community Development Director
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
RE: Commercial Land Parcel
1450 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112
Dear Ms. Barton:
.
At your request, we have inspected the above referenced property and have made a
study of conditions affecting its value. The accompanying appraisal report contains a
complete description of the property, presentation and analysis of market data in
support of the value conclusion, and demonstrates the valuation techniques employed.
The subject of the appraisal is the site of the former Arden Hills Public Works Facility
which is located on the south of State Highway 96 just west of Hamline Avenue. The
land area is 6.82 acres according to Ramsey County records. 6.82 acres equates to
297,079 square feet (SF). A more exact determination of the land area of tbe subject
property requires a professional survey. The land area is assumed to be 6,82 acres,
excluding existing road right-of-way, for the valuation herein.
The purpose of the appraisal is to provide a supported opinion of the market value of
the subject land based on its highest and best use. Property rights appraised are those
of fee simple interest. The opinion of value, as stated in this report, is predicated
upon the definition of market value contained herein. The date of valuation is January
28, 2006 which is the date on which the property was inspected.
-
S P Rue E
TREF
C E N T R E
5 U I T E
31 4
1600 UNIVERSITY AVE S1 PAUL MN 55104
651 646 6114 FAX 651 646.8086 brkw@brkw.com
.
.
-
The appraisal is made at the request of the City of Arden Hills which owns the
property and is the intended user of the report. Thc intended use of the appraisal is to
provide a value opinion to assist the client in the future marketing of the property.
Based upon our research and analysis, it is concluded that the market value of the fce
simple interest in the subject land as of January 28, 2006 can reasonably be estimated
as fo Ilows:
TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($2,375,000)
According to the City of Arden Hills, the general reuse on the land parcel is for
"limited business" which can be described as office, medical and/or limited retail. In
our opinion, the highest and best use of the land is for office and/or medical-related
purposes. Current zoning maps indicate the land is zoned NB, Neighborhood Business
District and R-I, Single Family Residential District. R-l zoning does not allow those
uses described as "limited business" by the City of Arden lIills so it is assumed
rezoning of the land will occur.
The property is appraised under the hypothetical condition that it is a vacant land
parcel which assumes the existing former public works building improvements have
been removed. As of this report, the land is improved the city's former public works
facility which was originally built in 1961.
To the best of our knowledge, the land area is 6.82 acres, excluding existing right-of-
way. Should a professional survey indicate a land area different from 6.82 acres, the
appraisers reserve the right to reanalyze the appraised value.
It is assumed the property has access from Hamline Avenue by virtue of an existing
35-foot wide road easement. For the valuation, it is assumed the soils are stable and
suitable for development, and the land is not negatively impacted by the existence of
hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions.
This appraisal has been made in conformity with the Code of Ethics and Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, and the Uniform Standards
of Professional Practice (USP AP) as developed by the Appraisal Foundation. The
appraisal assignment is not based on a requested minimum valuation or a specific
valuation. The opinion of market value identified in this report was developed
independent of any undue influence.
We certify that we have no direct or indirect present or contemplated future personal
interest in the subject property and in no way henefit from a future acquisition of the
property appraised. There is no conflict of interest relating to our appraisal of the
subject property.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 2
The facts and information contained in this report were obtained from sources that are .
considered to be reliable and are true to the best of our knowledge and belief, but are
not guaranteed. This appraisal report is contingent upon the assumptions and limiting
conditions included herein. Your attention is directed to the following report for the
supporting data, analyses, and conclusions which support the opinion of market value.
Sincerely,
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
n
deJtt;t ~~
William E. Petersen
Certified General Real Property Appraiser
Minnesota License #400 I 649
[ <It ~ ( t&-i~~
Roger M. Rohrer
Certified General Real Property Appraiser
Minnesota License #4001238
.
e
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
. SUMMARY FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS..............................................................I
SUBJE CT PH OTOG RAPHS .................... ..... ......... ..... ................ ........ ..... ...... .... .....2
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION .................. ...... ... ... ............... ..................... ......1 0
LEGAL DESCRIPTION ..... .................................................................................. 10
PURPOSE/INTENT OF THE APPRAISAL............................................................ I 0
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ......................................................................10
SCOPE OF WORK ..............................................................................................11
TAXES AND ASSESSMENT DATA ......................................................................12
ZO NIN G....... ..... ........ .......... ............ ...... ........... ................ .................... .............. 12
ZONING MAP. ,.......__...,....................,.......__.,__..,,__..,....__................,.......,.......__.__ J 3
HISTORY OF OWNERSHIP ................................................................................14
CO MPE TEN CY PRO VIS ION .... ............ ...... .... .......... ............. ....... .................. ..... 14
.
MARKET VALUE DEFINITION ..........................................................................14
CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS ....................................................15
COMMUNITY/AREA DESCRIPTION ..... .................................. ...........................16
AREA MAP................,...,...................,...,....,.....,........,.."......................... __..,..",20
TRAFFIC VOLUME MAP ......................____........................"........................____.......21
PRO PER TY D ESCRIPTI 0 N ............ ..... ..... ....... ........ .................... ........ ....... ........22
PLAT MAP .,........ ....., .................,....'.......... ,....,. ...,........__...__.., ,....,.... ......... ....,...25
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS ................................................................27
EXPOSURE TIME AND MARKETING PERIOD................................................... 28
MARKETABILITY AND ESTIMATED MARKETING TIME .................................28
THE APPRAISAL PROCESS ...............................................................................29
DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH... ...... ... ............... ....... ............... ....30
COMPARABLE LAND SALES ............................................................................. 3 I
COMPARABLE LAND SALES LOCATION MAP.................,....,....,......................,__...____36
COMPARABLE LAND SALES SUMMARY CHART ..............................................37
e LAND SALES ANALySIS....................................................................................38
COMPARABLE LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID............................................ 40
ESTIMATED SUBJECT LAND VALUE.............................................................40
CER TI FI CA TI ONS ..... ......................... ....... ............ ..... .;................ ..... ........... ..... 4 I
QUALIFICATIONS .............................................................................................43
.
.
e
.
.
"
SUMMARY FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Property Location:
1450 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota
Tax Parcel:
22-30-23-21-0141
Owner:
City of Arden Hills
Date of Valnation:
January 28, 2006 (inspection date)
Property Rights Appraised:
Fee simple interest
Opinion of Market Value:
$2,375,000
Property Data:
Land Area;
6.82 acres or 297,079 square feet,
excluding existing right-of-way (exact
land area is subject to survey)
Elongated rectangle with approximately
1,072 feet of frontage on Highway 96
Wooded, level to rolling terrain
Vacant public works facility (land is
appraised as though buildings have
been removed and site is vacant)
Currently zoned NB, Neighborhood
Business District and R-I, Single
Family Residential District. Property is
appraised assuming entire site is suited
'to limited business development.
Assumed stable and free of
contamination or environmental hazards
All available
Parcel Shape;
Topography;
Existing Buildings;
Zoning;
Soils;
Public Utilities;
Highest and Best Use:
As Vacant;
Limited business development including
office and/or medical uses
Appraisers:
William E. Petersen
Roger M. Rohrer
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 1
SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS
.
,'....
-;;'"
Looking east along Highway 96
~-' '-, ~ -;"
it
,:,f$~' '
;J[
from northwest corner of subject parcel
s:f'-
,
- .
~
,'!.-.
.
,
~
.
,
,~
'-'=-_;....,.."-~.'.;7~
Vacant former public works facility on west part of subject land
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 2
.
~
~~
--
-
~, ~ ~ - ~.:..~-~~-~
~. - -~ - -- !!2: ~';';""""'":l:
-~~ -'---- >
.~~~-~ ~ 1f~,'~'
~~<__ . . _ ~ G/r'"''''
:.~-;..&~~ ~"W- -.-')!".~'" .'~.'
~~ ~ -- ......> '
Looking east over subject land from southwest corner of property
.
.
Vacant former public works building
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 3
.
Driveway to former public works facility from Highway 96
~'-"..
":." . ". '
,. ., ,"
.
Looking west from driveway entrance
.
BRKW APPRAISALS. INC.
PAGE 4
.
"
--.
,-.....-.._~~
>.;:~~~.~~~ -. ~~---~,
-
~
\.
~,
Townhomes on land to south of subject site
.
..
Rolling terrain east of public works building
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 5
I
........,-- ..
-
,~ .....=-.....
~,.
....
""
~
'C~
--
Central part of site east of public works building
Looking east toward Hamline Avenue intersection
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 6
.
.
-
.
~
~-
~~-;,
,. .~
...
~~-" ,~...'
East-central part of site near Highway 96 right-of-way
.
,b
.~c~
.,
,
"
Looking south across east lot line of subject parcel
,.~
..'~
.-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 7
.
I-~
I
! I
,1
Wooded area In
of site
.
"" - -
- -..:~..-~- .. ~-.
- - ---- ._~
- . - ~ ~..... _. . - -..c
Looking east to Hamline Avenue over wooded driveway easement area
-
BRKW AI'PRAISALS. INC.
PAGE 8
.
.
..
..
-
-
1\
....
-,
r
,
~~
1 ..
...
'.
,
-"1".
Looking north across east Jot line of subject parcel
Development in northwest quadrant of Highway 96 and Hamline A venue
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 9
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
.
The subject of the appraisal is a land parcel located on the south side of State
Highway 96 just west of Hamline Avenue in Arden Hills, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
The site is the former Arden Hills Public Works Facility, addressed 1450 West
Highway 96. Photographs and maps elsewhere in this report depict the property. The
property tax parcel number is 22-30-23-21-0141.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The following legal description for tax parcel 22-30-23-21-0141 was obtained from
Ramsey County:
Except the East 253 feet, the North Y, of the Northeast Y, of the
Northwest Y, (subject to roads and easements) in Section 22
Township 30 Range 23, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PURPOSE/INTENT OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of the appraisal is to provide a supported opinion of the market value of
the subject land, as if vacant. The property is appraised under the hypothetical
condition that the land is vacant and not improved with any buildings. The opinion of
value, as stated in this report, is based upon the definition of market value contained
herein. The date of valuation is January 28, 2006 which is the date of the property
inspection. The appraisal is made at the request of the City of Arden Hills which is
the intended user. The intended use of the report is to provide a value opinion for the
City of Arden Hills to assist in marketing the property for development.
.
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED
The property rights appraised are those of the fee simple estate. The source of the
following definition of fee simplc estate is page 113 of the Dictionarv of Real Estate
Appraisal. fourth edition, published in 2002 by the Appraisal Institute:
"Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate,
subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers
of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat. "
..
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 10
.
.
..
SCOPE OF WORK
The Scope of Work describcs the extent of the investigative process which includes
collecting, confirming, and reporting data used in completing this appraisal
assignment. An inspection of the property was made on January 28, 2006 by William
E. Petersen and Roger M. Rohrer. The effective date of valuation is the date of the
inspection. A viewing of the immediate neighborhood and surrounding market area
was completed by both appraisers.
The subject property is the former Arden Hills Public Works Facility. At the request
of the client, the property is appraised as vacant land assuming the existing building
improvements have been removed. The City of Arden Hills informed the appraisers by
letter that the intended general reuse on the parcel is for "limited business" and the
appraisal should be based on that reuse. The client also stated the appraisal should
assume the land has access from Hamline Avenue by virtue of an existing road
easement to the southeast corner of the subject site.
General and specific information pertaining to the subject and its location were
analyzed as a basis to determine the highest and best use of the land. The highest and
best use analysis determines the market data research required to properly apply the
appropriate appraisal valuation methodology. The highest and best use of the subject
land, if vacant, is for commercial purposes primarily office and/or medical.
The appraisal is a complete appraisal since all three traditional valuation methods
were considered at the outset of the assignment. The Cost Approach, Direct Sales
Comparison Approach, and Income Approach were each considered. The Cost
Approach is applicable when there are building improvements to be valued. The
Income Approach does not apply since vacant commercial land parcels are rarely
purchased for rental investment vehicles. The Cost Approach and Income Approach
are applicable in the appraisal of improved properties. Since the subject is appraised
as vacant land, the approaches are not processed herein. The Direct Sales Comparison
Approach is the only approach processed. The Direct Sales Comparison Approach
provides an estimate of market value for the subject land based on an analysis of
similar comparable land sales.
Based on a prior agreement with the client, this is a complete appraisal, with no
departure from USPAP requirements, presented as a summary appraisal report in
compliance with the reporting requirements of Standards Rule 2-2 (b) of the USPAP.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 11
T AXES AND ASSESSMENT DATA
The subject laud is owned by the City of Arden Hills and is tax exempt. The property
is identified by Ramsey County as tax parcel 22-30-23-21-0141. The property is
appraised free and clear of outstanding special assessments, if any. According to
Ramsey County, the market value of the property for tax year 2006 is as follows:
.
$ 860, I 00 Land Value
$ 233,000 Building Value
$1,093,100 Total Value
ZONING
Based on the current zoning map on the City of Arden Hills web site, the easterly two-
thirds of the property, more or less, is zoned NB, Neighborhood Business District and
the balance is zoned R-I, Single Family Residential District. The NB zoning permits
uses which include office, clinics, day care with over 10 childre'n, financial
institutions, and retail sales and service. The R-I district has permitted uses that
include detached single family dwellings, day care facilities with 10 or fewer children,
and residential daycare with six or less. Offices and clinics are not allowed in the R-
I. The appraisers have been instructed to appraise the land based on its intended
general reuse for "limited business". Arden Hills has a zoning district designated
Limited Business District.
.
B-1, Limited Business District
Purpose: According to the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance, the purpose or intent of the
B-1 district includes the following:
I) To establish areas for the location and development of administrative
office buildings and related office uses which are subject to more
restrictive controls
2) To provide a district which is related to and may reasonably adjoin
high density or other residential districts
3) To establish a business district in which there is limited contact with
the public and no exterior display or selling of merchandise to the
general public
Permitted Uses: Uses permitted in the B-1 district include clinics, clubs or lodges,
financial institutions, offices, research, and day care facilities with over 10 children.
Retail sales and service, and restaurants, are not permitted and are not allowed even
with a special use permit.
e
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 12
.
e
-
-1
~._~. .~.- ~ '
I~' - - J' ..I.rD:[ if"
, r-l I, --l rri _ . . -'J r 5..::::1 >--
\./ :-J-rd'{ tI. 11 ' , I -LJ:::_~
\: I ~ \ ~ -""'""\ J
, .....~ --...... .. I
\ 1 \ \ ,,"-... I~
.. I "'y
r-\
i \ t-H~l'~ m~)\T1~ - ,.' ... rr-. - ~
II \" t:Y~ :-)'_. ': ( }:J ""1 <> .(.. 9(~..L r
'" ~\;: i/ ~ ~'. -'1. IT1 r .1 I'. /'fri ./-.?/
\ ~~1,,"1f~hit:@r..:;lJ:.~j ;- -=~~i ~.r 'I
\ ~\.q-i n4--~Ll.l ; I 1 ; 1-1 t..::-..:-, /./
t-. --.... \ ttf~ pD~; L_ ::l.., Legend
l j \t J tif_st -.... '--'Pt'\Y-~''';'3J 'r:~ / ~ :: ~:.::'::;::;~;.:::,,"""" "
'."i'~'/ _~ ~_-.... \ '",,~2'-1 "~T:M~~SlX...~...t-ltttlWI">.o.<>~...
''-'.}~i I't -:-,\ rrtT,' -t.r, 'I ~~, ""'...,""..,.;,,...'
,..'.> -- I -1l....1.l - I.........II........AI....'. I
":""'..-,~f~1 f~..t: '.~: Fl1~.~ 1. a ~~~;?j~
'... / )."k '-,),.lJ J..'. _ ~,.o ~~', ('Jr"WI
....1..t 1 ~,~-~-~,.~j _ ! j-' lmlM l-.j,$l!ll ~ltl1t;
""..,..Lj'_____-L-l____.I "'...u., ~ 1-:.:...........,t......t.oJ.,....
T m r~ _ "',"c,'~"
.., \ _ CC;;'~""'I\',,,,'Wl
" ,".' \: _ f';;ffI:."
P,ultel ,\-~,
......:'~
...\
,
,
'.
'.
"
'.
'.
Current Zoning Map
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 13
HISTORY OF OWNERSHIP
The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) requires that
appraisers report and analyze any sale transactions involving the subject property that
occurred during the three years prior to the effective date of an appraisal. The subject
property is owned by the City of Arden Hills and has been for an extended period of
time. There have been no sales within the last three years prior to the effective date
of valuation in this appraisal.
.
COMPETENCY PROVISION
Roger M. Rohrer has been a full time professional real estate appraiser since February
1972. William E. Petersen has been a full-time real estate appraiser since November
1986. Provided later in this report are summaries of their professional qualifications.
The educational training and extensive work experience of the appraisers, each of
whom is licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser, enable completion of
this appraisal assignment in a professional manner consistent with the intent of the
competency provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
MARKET VALUE DEFINITION
Market Value as defined by the United States Department of the Treasury through the
Comptroller of th'e Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision is:
e
The most probable price which a property should bring in a
competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair
sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably
and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit
in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified
date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions
whereby:
. buyer and seller are typically motivated;
. both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he
considers his own best interest;
. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
. payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial
arrangements comparable thereto; and
. the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold
unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by
anyone associated with the sale.
This definition is part of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
(USPAP) which was developed by the Appraisal Foundation.
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. .
PAGE 14
.
.
-
CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This appraisal report is subject to the following Limiting Conditions and Assumptions:
I. The legal description contained herein is assumed to be correct.
2. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for matters legal in nature affecting
the property appraised or the title thereto, nor do'es the appraiser render any
opinion as to the title, which is assumed to be good and marketable. The
property is appraised as though under responsible ownership.
3. No survey has been prepared of the property by the appraiser and no
responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches in this
report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property.
4. Information furnished by others is assumed to be reliable. However, no
responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the appraiser.
5. In cases where no soil tests have been submitted, the appraiser has assumed a
good subsoil condition, subject to visual observations noted in the report.
6. The appraiser assumes that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of
the property, subsoil or structures, which would render it more or less
valuable. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for such conditions or for.
engineering which might be required to discover such factors.
7. The appraiser is not required to give testimony or appear in court because of
having made this appraisal with reference to the property in question, unless
arrangements have been previously made.
8. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and
improvements applies only under the highest and best use of the property.
9. Disclosure of the contents of the appraisal report is governed by the Bylaws
and Regulations of the professional appraisal organizations with which the
appraiser is affiliated.
10. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of
publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the
party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser,
and, in any event, only with proper written qualifications and 'only in its
entirety.
I I. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or a copy thereof, shall
be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or
any other media without written consent and approval of the appraiser. Nor
shall the appraiser, firm or professional organization of which the appraiser is
a member be identified without the written consent of the appraiser.
12. The value conclusion assumes all taxes and special assessments are paid in
full.
Environmental Disclaimer: The value opinion in this report is based on the
assumption that the property is not negatively affected by the existence of hazardous
substances or detrimental environmental conditions, The appraisers are not experts in
the identification of hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions. It
is possible that tests and inspections made by a qualified hazardous substance and
environmental expert would reveal the existence of hazardous materials and
environmental conditions on or around the property that would negatively affect its
value. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 15
COMMUNITY / AREA DESCRIPTION
The subject property is located in the north-central part of Arden Hills on the south
side of State Highway 96 (also known as County Road G) approximately v.. mile east of
the intersection with U.S. Highway 10. Arden Hills is bordered on the south by
Roseville, on the north and east by Shoreview, and on the west by New Brighton and
Mounds View. 1-35W forms the border between Arden Hills and New
Brighton/Mounds View. The following chart summarizes population growth in Arden
Hills and some of the adjoining communities.
.
ARDEN HILLS POPULA TION HISTORY
1980 1990 2000 2004 (est)
Arden Hills 8,012 . 9,199 9,652 9,620
New Brighton 23,269 22,207 22,206 22,333
Mounds View 12,593 12,541 12,738 ]2,865
Shoreview 17,300 24,587 25,924 26,381
Ramsey Connty 459,784 485,783 511,035 515,41 ]
Source: U.S. Census and Minnesota State Demographer
Adjoining communities are essentially fully developed, as evidenced by their minimal
population growth since 1990.
The northern part of Arden Hills is the 2,300-acre former Twin Cities Army .
Ammunition Plant which constitutes almost 40% of the land area in the city. The site
is considered the largest developable land parcel in Ramsey County. If the arsenal
land is opened up for development, the population or the city will greatly increase.
The arsenal property is roughly delineated by State Highway 96 on the south, the
Shoreview border to the north, Lexington Avenue on the east and 1-35W to the west.
The Arden Hills City Council on March 28, 2005 voted to accept a master "framework
vision" of how redevelopment of the former ammunition plant would look. The city
vision references where residential housing, office, industrial, and other uses would be
located on the 661 acres of deve]opable land. The vision foresees 2,300 units of
residential housing. Environmental clean-up is estimated at $40 to $60 million. The
city is currently working on getting ownership of the property transferred from the
government to developers working with the city.
Highway 96 is a major arteria] road across the northern suburbs, extending from
Stillwater west to New Brighton. According to 2004 survey data released by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), the average daily traffic volume
on Highway 96 at the subject location is 18,800 vehicles. A traffic volume map is on
a following page.
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 16
.
.
.
The subject property is located 220 feet west of the signalized intersection of Hamline
Avenue and Highway 96. On the southwest corner of the intersection just east of the
subject is a day care facility called Children's World Learning Center. Residential
homes are on the south side of Highway 96 going east of Hamline Avenue.
In the northwest quadrant of the Highway 96/Hamline intersection are buildings
occupied by the U.S. Army National Guard, Ramsey County Sheriff Patrol Division,
Arden Hills Operations and Maintenance, and Mounds View Schools Maintenance.
The National Guard maintains 1,200 acres of the former arsenal land. The Arden Hills
City Hall is on the north side of Highway 96 a short distance east of Hamline Avenue.
The subject property is located in an area that is primarily developed with residential,
office and public buildings. Directly west of the subject land are single family homes
on Kcithson Drive. Adjoining the entire south lot line of the subject land is a very
large townhouse development through which Arden View Drive serves as an access
road.
Arden Hills does not have a large commercial retail base. Residents are afforded
convenient access, however, to Rosedale regional mall in nearby Roseville. Lexington
Avenue forms the border between Arden Hills and Shoreview, and is a major
commercial strip. A Super Target store is located on the Shoreview side of Lexington
A venue just south of 1-694. Cub Foods, restaurants, hotels, and strip centers are on
the Arden Hills' side of Lexington. County Road D is a commercial thoroughfare in
Arden Hills with gas stations, restaurants, offices, and strip centers.
The subject property has a very visible location along a major arterial road, and
benefits from convenient access to the nearby interstate freeway system. Highway 96
has an interchange with I-35W about 1.25 miles west of the subject.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 17
ld
I
--'
3 I i
'@--._-- -'
~-
~4m
','
em...
-:-(
6il
Metropolitan A
rea Map
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 18
.
.
.
.
.
-
'CI)
Community Map
.,
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 19
.
:...
!<J
!e
i
<:
t
ti
0:;
Cl _
Z
~
...J
U
Area Map
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 20
.
.
-
.
18800 @ /..... /' 200.000.
u.i ci ~ ",I>-RTH 1(4/Yrf./
0
> " r LAKE (
<3: Z '$ ~
0
Vl V IfW . rn
:J:
<.:J f-
Z ci w a NURSERY
-
-' a "" ;U
-'
w Vl ARDEN
z -'
-'
Me
VISTA
CT.
COLLEEN I<Y'
C 1. l>-~'V
C'OLLSEN AVE.
C; .
':j 8.;' INDIAN ~
6\ is' v
~ v INDIAN <(
-?<?
KNOLL DR. OAKS
0 .
;;:: f-
AMBLE :::J Vl RD.
C1. K
L
CUMN
.
w PARK
>
INDIAN OAKS <3:
CIR. a
w 0
z 0
-' ;;::
:::< z
<( a::
w
:J: lL.
\)OD
~
,,<<.: ~.
~<;:j c..'>
~
o
~
.
>- LA.
a::
a::
KS~E : DR.
a::
co
DAWN cm.
~ TR.
:::<
-:; OOt.
ROY AL LA. ClR.
FLORAL DR.
COU
,..
,1 Traffic Volume Map
.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 21
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The subject property fronts the south side of State Highway 96 220 feet west of
Hamline Avenue. The parcel is depicted on a plat map on a following page.
.
No soil test borings have been submitted which would indicate the composition of the
subsoil. For the purpose of this analysis, the site is assumed to have adequate subsoil
conditions to support normal development. In addition, no evidence has been
presented regarding any known or suspected subsoil contaminants. For this analysis,
it is assumed that none exist which would adversely affect the value of the site.
Land Area:
According to Ramsey County, the site contains 6.82
acres which equates to 297,079 square feet (SF). A,
more exact determination of the land area requires a
professional survey. Based on calculations made
from the plat map, the 6.82 acres excludes existing
right-of-way.
Site Dimensions:
1072.80 feet along south lot line
277 .13 feet along east lot line
(The dimensions are taken from the plat map)
Access/Road Easement:
The property has one curb opening on Highway 96 III
the westerly half of the site. There is a median in
the highway which limits access to right turn only.
The property is appraised assuming there is access
provided from Hamline Avenue by virtue of an
existing 35-foot wide road easement that is presently
unimproved. Hamline Avenue has no median.
.
Topography:
The topography of the land varies from level to
rolling and sloping. The site follows the grade of
Highway 96 and slopes downhill from west to east.
The highest part of the site is the west end. The
west third, more or less, is level and is improved
with the former public works facility.
The lowest elevation is on the east part of the site
which is level and wooded. The site between the
west third and the east third is rolling and slopes
downhill from west to east. The lowest part of the
site appears to be in the east-central portion near the
existing Highway 96 right-of-way.
The land is wooded and has extensive natural growth
vegetation throughout. The central part of the site
has piles of gravel and compost from former
operations on the land.
..
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 22
.
.
.
Utilities:
The subject site has availability to public utilities
including watcr, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, natural
gas, electricity, and telephone.
C u rb/G u lte rlSid ewa I k:
Highway 96 has curb and gutter. A bituminous
public sidewalk about 8 feet wide is provided in the
right-of-way.
Improvements:
The land is presently improved with the former
Arden Hills Public Works Facility which has been
vacated. According to Ramsey County, the facility
was originally built in 1961, For the purposes of the
valuation herein, it is assumed the building has been
cleared from the site and the land is vacant.
Wetlands:
According to a Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) map, there are no protected waters
or wetlands on the site. The map is on a following
page.
According to a National Wetlands Inventory map
made by the U.S. Department of the Interior, the
subject land has no significant wetland areas. The
map is on a following page.
Soils:
For this report, it is assumed the subject soils are
stable and adequate to support normal development.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 23
!
i ,
I Q
i ~
I
!.....
,1..'
'<it
if',
,.'
i"
, I
I
,-
:;....
}-..
'-.,
it
..
'-)
:--
co
0.
J:
t-=
.
(J)
..,
.
'3^V
!\-
d'
Ol'GGo'?
.....E"f.? J"
n____ ._~_." __n.",..-"::-::-_':'::-.~.:"::':"..mu.__.._... ~.
~ . ~ <
~ - f, I
t~ .,. ~ ~ i"~'" .;.
,. "4 I 1 " . ". ~~1
'" 10.. M ,t, 5..r ~ p.
:5- ..... ," f l' ...,......,
-..I. (;) ..... ..O:r~\~ '~\ ~! .' I
.... ; '-'\ ~\I""; \' ~ 1} .. ~ . ~
:> - . 11 ^"~ ~
<-./ > . ~...:;s. ..-;:. \f,!.
'~~";:';:"~-~-' . ,.....
~t'~~.~~...; ~U<~. ~~i;1 .\. ~:"-... .:+ r:\ .
.~ .. .J.?,., .2'!.-~ -e ~" ,-:'- ,'" . I!W
I":"...~ ...... ~ ."y. ",." "."',.n
~"'':''~'''~ ........ ._'.. ".i,h'", -,.-.
.....-.~,f ~~ .+ '.,. "-. I" ___~. ... ~.~.. ,
. " 'l": .;,i~...:i : p.~(
, 'I ~: :f .6J: ;;'"
__ .~.t,;'-f.Q..~-(."":
-- :t" . r.!: 1 i _ IlJ,
~'Cl" ~t50.9':'~.. ... _ -',:. l 'U";;: \ ~::'~
. ... ,... ~~.~ ,'f, .:: ..;,....~._ ..} .
:: "' 4- " _.~. J
~ .t' ~ ,,.,u, r'~
...,...... r-:-::t; \ .~
~ ~'5!: '"
:~.,\-'t'
'.t-~ Cl\~~>~
----r.J.1o:o 0 ,
<( ,-:t~,=--: fl r--t.:
.~, :-=
.~~ -, I'
,,,,~"i~.
-.~- 1-'-'
n- tt'-. ;
.
,~<
~
~i:it
~p
;:: ..,1\10/"' ~,~
f. ~/,.
o Q .
.... 0
i
"
L";
", z
~
~
"",
'''',
'",
'-,
>,
"
t"l.'tOt
0:
~ i3
""
'to.SOl
iii.
\.
o
..
,34.U110
NOSH.!.! 3)1
~
Plat Map
.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 24
.
.
-
".
-~
ARDEN HILLS
I
...
/'
10. .... (
ro~, 5149
...
''iW'
SHifAYIEY\
..-" '"
0.,..... -. ..eO.
DNR Protected Wetlands Map
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 25
National Wetlands Inventory Map
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 26
.
.
--
.
.
..
HIGHEST AND BEST USE ANALYSIS
The term highest and best use is defined in The Dictionarv of Real Estate Appraisal,
fourth edition, published by the Appraisal Institute, page 135, as:
"The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an
improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately
supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest
value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are
legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and
maximum profitability,
Land, If Vacant: At the request of the client, the subject property is appraised as
vacant land. The valuation is based on a hypothetical condition since the property is
currently improved with a former public works facility. The appraisal assumes the
building improvements have been cleared from the land.
The subject land has a rectangular configuration and approximately one fifth mile of
frontage on Highway 96. Soils are assumed stable and adequate for development. All
utilities are immediately available. Vehicular access is available on Highway 96 and
by a road easement from Hamline Avenue. The physical characteristics of the land are
favorable for development.
According to the City of Arden Hills, the intended general reuse on the parcel is for
"limited business". According to the client, "limited business" can be described as
office, medical, and/or limited retail. Approximately one-third of the land is presently
zoned R-I, Single Family Residential which does not allow these uses. Therefore, it is
assumed rezoning of the subject land will occur. Surrounding land uses are primarily
residential, office, or public in character. The subject is not located in a retail
setting, and is better suited to office and/or medical purposes.
The subject property is an attractive parcel for development in a city that has very
little vacant land available, excluding the former ammunition plant land. In the
future, the arsenal land on the north side of Highway 96 will be developed, rendering
the subject land even more desirable from a location standpoint.
The highest and best use of the vacant subject land parcel is for limited business uses
that are primarily of an office and/or medical nature.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 27
EXPOSURE TIME AND MARKETING PERIOD
According to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, exposure time
is a historical concept and is always presnmed to have occurred prior to the effective
date of the appraisal. The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 4th Edition, page 105,
published by the Appraisal Institute, defines exposure time as:
.
The estimated length of time the property interest being appraised
would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical
consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the
appraisal; a retrospective estimate based upon an analysis of past
events assuming a competitive and open market. The overall
concept of reasonable exposure encompasses not only adequate,
sufficient and reasonable time but also adequate, sufficient and
reasonable effort. Exposure time is different for various types of
real estate and value ranges and under various market conditions.
The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 4th Edition, page 175, published by the
Appraisal Institute, defines marketing time (period) as:
The time it takes an interest in real property to sell on the market
subsequent to the date of appraisal. Reasonable marketing time is
an estimate of the amount of time it might take to sell an interest in
real property at its estimated market value during the period
immediately after the effective date of the appraisal; the
anticipated time required to expose the property to a pool of
prospective purchasers and to allow appropriate time for
negotiation, the exercise of due diligence, and the consummation of
a sale at a price supportable by concurrent market conditions.
.
MARKETABILITY AND ESTIMATED MARKETING TIME
Based on current market conditions and the subject property situation, a marketing
time of six to twelve months is considered appropriate for the subject property to
achieve the market value estimated in this appraisal. The required exposure time is
also estimated at six to twelve months.
Estimated Marketing Time:
6 to 12 months
Estimated Exposure Time:
6 to 12 months
..
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 28
.
.
-
THE APPRAISAL PROCESS
There are three basic valuation methodologies that may be used in estimating the
market value of real estate: the Cost Approach, the Direct Sales Comparison Approach
and the Income Approach. These three valuation approaches analyze data from the
market to develop independent value indications for the subject property.
The Cost Approach is based on the premise that an informed buyer will pay no more
for a property than the cost of constructing a comparable property with similar utility.
In this analysis, the cost to reproduce or replace the improvements is calculated,
which is reduced by the estimated accrued depreciation that has occurred. Accrued
depreciation includes physical deterioration, functional obsolescence, and external
obsolescence. To the depreciated value of the improvements is then added the site
value, which is estimated through the direct comparison with other vacant sites that
have sold in the area in recent years, with adjustments made for dissimilarities. The
Cost Approach is particularly applicable and reliable when the property being
appraised is relatively new with little accrued depreciation, or is of a highly
specialized design and/or utility.
The Direct Sales Comparison Approach has as its premise a comparison of the
subject property with others of similar design, utility and features that have sold III
the recent past. To indicate a value for the property, adjustments are made to the
comparables for dissimilarities with the subject property. This approach is based on
the proposition that an informed buyer would pay no more for a property than the cost
of acquiring an existing property with the same utility. This approach is most
applicable and reliable when an active market provides sufficient sales of comparable
properties for analysis.
The Income Approach develops a value estimate for a property predicated on a
detailed analysis of its earnings potential and the rate of return on an investment
demanded by prudent investors in the marketplace. This analysis converts anticipated
benefits and income to be derived from ownership of a property into a value estimate.
Detailed income and expense analysis results in a net operating income that the
subject is able to generate, which is then converted to a value indication for the
property through the capitalization process.
The final step of the appraisal process involves the appraiser analyzing the strengths
and weaknesses of each of the three approaches utilized, with the value indications
reconciled and correlated to arrive at a final value opinion for the property.
As previously discussed, the single applicable appraisal methodology in the subject
instance is the Direct Sales Comparison Approach.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 29
DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
The Direct Sales Comparison Approach involves the direct comparison of the property
being appraised to comparable properties that have sold in the same or similar markets
in recent years. This approach is also referred to commonly as the Market Data
Approach.
.
Among the basic real estate principles reflected in the Direct Sales Comparison
Approach is the principle of substitution, which states in part, that the value of the
property replaceable in the market tends to be set by the cost of acquiring an equally
desirable substitute property, assuming that no costly delay is encountered in making
the substitution.
Market research provides information on recent sales of properties as similar as
possible to the subject. The sale prices of those properties deemed most comparable
tend to set the range in which the value of the subject property will fall. Differences
between the subject and the comparables are thoroughly analyzed. The reliability of
this technique is dependent upon:
. the availability of comparable sales data,
. the verification of the sales data,
· the degree of comparability and extent of adjustments necessary for
differences between the properties,
· the absence of non-typical conditions affecting the sale prices.
.
On the following pages is a presentation of several land sales which are analyzed to
ascertain an indication of the subject property value.
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 30
.
.
.,
......
~
'>
-l
m
~
l~
i~
~ .J-
~ r
liw I
':2. 1-
11-1
iici I
iidl ~
ii 'S I
.. z
fL-
.0
CIS>
"'"
U6'
"
"2/5
IFP 2~02 -
Land Sale #1:
12334-12370 Business Park Boulevard
Champlin, MN
Legal Description:
Lengthy, on file.
Buyer/Seller:
Wiley Properties, LLC/Belko, Engels, and Marx
Zoning:
C-2, Genera] Business District
Land Area:
]61,249 SF or 3.70 acres
Sale Date:
July 2004
Sale Price:
$],276,878 (includes assumed specials and
demolition costs to buyer)
Indicated Factor:
$7.92/SF
This property is located along the east side frontage road of U.S. Highway 169 in
Champlin, about 2/3 mile south of the Mississippi River. The buyer assumed
approximately $17,000 in outstanding special assessments. Severa] small buildings of
meta] and/or frame constructiou had to be removed by the buyer. The appraisers
estimate $50,000 in demo costs. The above sale price includes the specials and demo
costs. The comprehensive plan guides the land to office/medical purposes, and the
buyer intends to develop a medica] health campus.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 31
,.
-'2
I,
I
I,
~<
.
~,
.
I r-~
t:-..:J
= .
::r::: "'"
en ,
. ~,
/
I
I
I
,
_-'h"-"
Land Sale #2:
. SW Corner of Lake Road and Century Avenue
Woodbury, MN
.
Legal Dcscription:
Lengthy, on file.
Buyer/Seller:
Metropolitan Urologic Holdings, LLC/Jebco Group,
Inc.
Zoning:
B-1, Office Park District
Land Area:
297,123 SF or 6.82 acres
Salc Date:
January 2005
Sale Price:
$2,228,423
Indicated Factor:
$7.50/SF
This is the sale of a vacant land parcel located at the southwest corner of Lake Road
and Century Avenue in Woodbury. The intersection of Lake Road and Century Avenue
is not signalized. The wooded parcel has all utilities and a level to sloping
topography. Access to nearby 1-494 is at the extreme east end of the site at the
signalized intersection with Woodwinds Avenue. The buyer intends to develop the
site with medical office buildings. As of this report, the site is still vacant.
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 32
.
e
-
..
-...-
Land Sale #3:
Pilot Knob at Buffet Way
Eagan, MN
Legal Description:
Lengthy, on file.
Buyer/Seller:
Commercial Property Development Corporation/
Serve (MN) QRS 14-38, Inc.
Zoning:
PO, Planned Development
Land Area:
198,712 SF or 4.56 acres
Sale Date:
August 2005
Sale Price:
$1,625,640
Indicated Factor:
$8.18/SF
This is the sale of vacant land at the signalized intersection of Pilot Knob Road and
Buffet Way in Eagan_ The land includes the northwest and southwest corners of the
intersection. The land includes three tax parcels with a total of 4.56 acres, excluding
right-of-way. The land has stable soils and all utilities. An interchange with 1-494 is
one block north. The land was bought for the development of multiple story general
office space.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 33
.
",
, ;.rE.
1?>o~
--RO~O
.",!!fE.
~.1\01
~'
'N\-\A~EN
'\-Ai fOU
gjL~:~'
,I
\, ".;,
ItIG':" ,~' __
~/IJGI:'__'
~ I~
~ ' \ P
WI ' .'
.2:.1>1 : . \ ':
~ -r b \ I~
.~ :a::ol ,~_ f II! f/ ~ :'1 !:
z~ ~'l- [,_)
I ,. I ~ -1. I.-~~
~ -: ~~~ti ,,"~""''''~~~r_~T~~~ i I Ii ;F~ t~ -i,
10.01_ -II ,- ._-~ ~j 1:t.:!ll WESTlI _'"' ..,,/ ~11'
.-.,..1 '- ,.,:..,..:.....':. __... _._.~'- _ .- it.: 1;.. ~ \i,;>
. ,
.c
Land Sale #4:
SE Corner of McAndrews Rd. and Burnhaven Dr.
Bnrnsville, MN
e
Legal Description:
Outlot C, Highridge Second Addition
Buyer/Seller:
Burnsville Medical Property/BRB Development LLC
Zoning:
B-3, General Business District
Land Area:
246,114 SF or 5,65 acres
Sale Date:
September 2005
Sale Price:
$2,080,000
Indicated Factor:
$8.45/SF
This is the sale of a vacant commercial land parcel at the southeast corner of
McAndrews Road and Burnhaven Drive in Burnsville. The site is on the east side of
Burnhaven Drive from 140'h Street West to McAndrews Road, just west of a Kohl's
department store. The level site has all utilities. Residential housing is north of the
site across McAndrews Road. A day care facility and office buildings are across 140"
Street to the south. The buyer intended to split the land into two parcels and develop
3.3 acres with medical office space, and market the other 2.35 acres,
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC
PAGE 34
.
.
--
..
L
L_ r! ..
.. -:!
u+-
i I()JSl
-v--
ff"OO[; .
"It: IJ:~ lij
. >>1..* ~
B "(j
- "f-:'
I __[~:J
,
-~-
."f fi/: ..
- \ .. ~
-~
-.--
....
..-:...-.,
,
\
\
\
\
,
"
..\ ,
1'it .
~ \ !
~\;i
_ '5
...'Ii
~ "
~1
I.t.l;
~!\
: ~ .
!r'1l i o>:etnl COJW.QNS
:~
'ti
, --Ff-@Jt!$@{ftY
. , '
,.,j. tcl
l!t7:-
,,~ .....
~. ~ .,
\ i
I&.!.
~
~
.
~
.,
o
~
o
.;.
-
.
,
.,
.~,,".-
@@fr1fI!&l4
~
o
~..~..~
.
Land Sale #5:
SE Corner Zane Avenne and 101" Avenne North
Brooklyn Park, MN
Legal Description:
Lot 1, Block 1, Columbia Park Medical Addition
Buyer/Seller:
Columbia Park Properties, LLC/Vern Reynolds
Construction Co.
Zoning:
TC, Town Center District
Land Area:
216,537 SF or 4.97 acres
Sale Date:
October 2003
Sale Price:
$1,490,866
Indicated Factor:
$6.89/SF
This is the sale of a vacant parcel at the southeast corner of Zane Avenue and 101"
Street North approximately one half mile north of the Highway 610 interchange in
Brooklyn Park. The intersection of Zane and 101" Avenue North is not signalized. At
sale, the level site had stable soils and all utilities. The land was subsequently
developed with a two story 46,300 SF medical clinic.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 35
-~-'<...~$..... .....,';:1......., lM.) I '
" ~.l.", ., '! I~ i.
' SDiwrJonDIMFId I ~ ~ ~1. f t;}. :....! ~...y t25llAveNEi~
D>yOml' ""';;;J~~' to >'l'.....:. '1- "'... ~
,[>lil1'., '"~Y''' :f' \_ ~I~
- ~;8 . ....~.. J 'r
. I I Cham -~ " ~,i:'; J!(/IIaAwM:'!
~=l'<..'--.-".ir'!.-" -1- f-' .." J ~ ._-.
"':(!! 1~ ~~~st
> '~.", , I U!.<-~"a@' wn.. J
~:.:>_ J.. ~ , at B, i..-: _ .>0( 171~~ J I Bear 32_ ~;-.~' ~'
'-~~~ ;.1:::~ ~ ~. ~~~~'~ ",~.t}~o.;,(" _,~,
,,~",~1 ~ ,,~- ....:: H'! _ ~ !l=:i,,- ,"': c~
tee ~!_ ~~r.<~i.i:c'i; 11"~~ ';~~~::i~~ '"
~ ...... ';,.t.... 'f"'-.. ~ 1'-" - -. -, ~ I I -~~ ; Llitle ' I:;;' -:-::> ijiJ~
@5.B<-j'.!r '!'~' j~ ~ I'", k. ff r-.~ -""'" /'I;;: ~
i'.i~ ~;,," . '...'....'..$...... ;l~1~j,~.~~.~:~!, _,,,:;'"' ~ ~ ~~1. ',~~~t~~'
.' HI R"""" ,;;"",,"1' M" t ,-t r, r< l.liVi~ sm~c:;-.
" ~ '!l!-' ..,', 1 w... ,~... I""
, i ' " ,.~'" ." ~ "9iI "": JH ~~ \ ~ ~.. .. '" Jf!!J 1',1 . !
if 'r ~ --~'.' .,.,q,. .,.., . '" '" ~ '7~. . 'hi;; 1 .
~c~....',\,~,'i:;~.J,"'. ~~;...# .: ~ ~~)0~ ms.nt ~ I r--'E I ""J
: tG~' '-,'? ~';"':~~ ~~lDulIT't~tJf-~trl Vi j\ ". ',~ .-. I
;.:", ..no< ",r, . i I,",,' k.J_S \ '1\~~ .. I
j).;-, u..-~ """'^-i _~. ".', - J!"Y ~ '! j~.~ ~j~il i I 'J -r '~
~ ~~ _~ L __ J'~~~i 1"'~l1 ' N,~" 'I/~.:'" OJ,' ....';., ~
~.1l! .r "I , iJ! ,,~ ~6( .
"J'!{' ~~ I~~ !~"'}.,:~ · -fli'f · J,'
fD Vfil1 ";;;,. ~s' ::...' , "~j'" ~ If
~."':~ .J.!.1j3I_..: ~~.. tf:t ~~" H ~ ' iF.\ N.L,_~~
- '. -" , '~ ~,i~ ..' .""
\ Ed.o~it'", 1: i;l (,. ~". wU ~ I rh;..;.l ~ ' ~'\5O ~-n@-
.~ ".~ ,~~ 1<-q;OO\I,~:_1 lt~f'-'
~-r ______ · f-- , I! i'T)"~' ,- -""iI' ,.:A 1~(~"'S'
~ '''-., I ~ Q!));(: "'Tift, ~ I ~ ,'.. 1>'
~~ ,~ L, .k;;1<" L ,p .. ~ i...", . .. 1"
r,~~~~~ ~ / j 1[7 'J' )@'<!p , s.
" II ~\...!0~' ... '"'~v " ~ ( ,,, d;o
~~ ,~..t /'; -~,f--;(I'-H-T -
I _:!"~~~ '1_ .~. I !i V ~ ~^ 'it .
i~-~ _.r ~- i~3liiSf I .' . ~~FlI1E AppIevane( ~ 1 RORrnDtmt <f
~=. L"'U '\k4,' '-.@ ._SlW@!1 .. ","SEI ~-
.", '....C1iJ'Lob_,' ~ ,,.- <.. ~ ,,' ..D$J_ i
f" .s ~ 'b~<- '<;, f t'<;SJ- ,...u I ,<<"' I" I;
. Iii) __,,,,_, .G/,_~ . "_ .,\.. ' /~...: l _
'lY "9
./'4
Uno tks
:~ J !J ~
'!~ J~'S":
I "
,
,~ ......
~ IfF.
t: ~ tmtSt
..! "'~..
.
.
-.@
1Ni;;j;;
1.'
'Y
Comparable Land Sales Location Map
--
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 36
! COMPARABLE LAND SALES SUMMARY CHART I
.
# Location Sale Sale Land $/SF Comments
Date Price Area SF
(Acres)
1 12334-12370 Business 7/04 $1,276,878 161,249 $7.92 Parcel located along east side frontage
Park Boulevard (3,70) road of U.S. Hwy 169 in north
Champlin Champlin, next to American Legion
hall. Level stable site. Price includes
est. $67,000 in assumed specials -and
demo costs. Land is guided
office/medical by camp plan. Zoned
C-2, General Business District.
2 SW Quadrant Lake Rd. 1/05 $2,228,423 297,123 $7,50 Site located near Lake RoadlI-494
and Century Avenue (6.82) interchange. Level to .sIoping, wooded
Woodbury site with all utilities. Adjacent land is
residential in character. Bought for
future !Dedical office development.
Zoned B-1, Business Office Park.
3 Pilot Knob Road at 8/05 $1,625,640 198,712 $8.18 Parcel includes NW and SW corners of
Buffet Way (4.56) signalized intersection on Pilot Knob
Eagan Road, Located one block from 1-494
interchange. Bought for multiple story
general office development. Stable
site with all utilities. Zoned PD,
Planned Development.
4 SE Corner McAndrews 9/05 $2,080,000 246,114 $8.45 Level rectangular site located just
Road and Burnhaven (5,65) west of Kohl's. Stable site with all
Drive utilities. Bought for medical office
BurnsviJle development. Zoned B-3, General
Business District.
5 SE Corner of Zane Ave. 10/03 $1,490,866 216,537 $6,89 Located at southeast corner Zane
and 10ls1 Avenue N. (4.97) Avenue and 10151 Ave. N. Bought for
Brooklyn Park construction of medical office
building. Level stable site with all
utilities. Zoned Te, Town Center
District.
Subject: 02/06 --- 297,079 --- Rectangular site fronting Highway 96
1450 West Highway 96 Value (6.82) just west of Hamline Avenue. Level to
Arden Hills Date rolling, wooded site with all utilities.
Soils assumed stable. Well suited to
office and/or medical purposes.
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 37
LAND SALES ANALYSIS
The comparable sales presented on the preceding pages are analyzed to ascertain the
market value of the subject land. A typical common denominator in the analysis of
commercial land is the sale price per square foot ($/SF) of land area. Comparable sale
prices range from $6.89/SF to $8.45/SF.
.
Elements of comparison for which adjustments are considered include property rights
conveyed, financing, conditions of sale, market conditions/time, location appeal,
parcel size, parcel shape, soil conditions and topography, and zoning/intended use. If
a comparable sale is superior to the subject for the value factor under analysis, the
comparable receives a downward adjustment. Conversely, if a comparable is inferior
to the subject site for a particular value-enhancing factor, the comparable is adjusted
upward.
Property Rights Conveyed: The property rights appraised for the subject reflect fee
simple interest. Each of the comparable sales involves conveyance of the fee simple
interest and no adjustments are indicated.
Financing: The comparables are cash or cash equivalent transactions and no
adjustments are required for atypical or unusual financing.
Conditions of Sale: The salcs are arms length transactions and no adjustments are
indicated for unusual conditions of sale.
e
Market Conditions/Time: The comparable land sales transpired between October
2003 and September 2005. To reflect appreciating land values, an upward adjustment
of 5% (non-compounded) per year is indicated to each comparable from its date of sale
to the effective date of this report which is January 2006.
Location: The subject property fronts a major arterial highway in an area where
existing development is largely residential, office, or public in character. The subject
is not located in a retail area. Those sales which are considered to have a superior
location are adjusted downward in the analysis. Sales with an inferior location are
adjusted upward. The adjustment for location considers traffic exposure and
visibility, highway access, and quality and style of surrounding development.
Parcel Size: The subject land area is 6.82 acres. Typically, there is a correlation
between parcel size and sale price per unit of land area. Relatively small sites tend to
sell on a higher price per square foot basis than very large parcels. A concerted effort
was made to secure comparable sales reasonably similar in size to the subject land,
sales that would appeal to a similar type of buyer/developer. No size adjustments are
required.
-
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 38
.
.
-
Parcel Shape: The subject property has an adequate shape for development purposes.
Typically, regular-shaped parcels are more attractive for development than sites with
an irregular configuration. Adjustments for shape are made as applicable.
Soils/Topography: The subject site has a generally favorable topography which is
level to rolling, and soils which are assumed stable. The topography and stability of
soils havc been considered for each of the comparable sales.
Zoning/Intended Use: The zoning for each comparable sale has been considered, as
has the use for which each comparable sale was purchased. The subject's intended
general reuse for "limited business" includes uses that are office and/or medical. The
highest and best use of the subject land is for these purposes. The comparable sales
are sites that were purchased for office and/or medical development. The previous
adjustment for location appeal has adequately addressed any issues related to zoning
or use, and no further adjustments are indicated.
Presented on the next page is a grid which summarizes the adjustments to the
comparable sales.
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 39
I COMP ARABLE LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID I
Sale 1 Sale 2 Sale 3 Sale 4 Sale 5
Sale Date 7/04 1/05 8/05 9/05 10103
Price/SF $7.92 $7.50 $8.18 $8.45 $6.89
Property Rights x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00
$7.92 $7.50 $8.18 $8.45 $6.89
Financing x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00
$7.92 $7.50 $8.18 $8.45 $6.89
Conditions of Sale x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00 x 1.00
$7.92 $7.50 $8.18 $8.45 $6.89
Market Conditions x 1.075 x 1.05 x 1.02 x 1.02 xLII
$8,51 $7.88 $8.34 $8.62 $7.65
Location .95 1.05 .90 .90 1.10
Parcel Size 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parcel Shape 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Soils/Topography 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Zoning/Intended Use 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Net Adjustment .95 1.05 .90 .90 1.10
Indicated $/SF Factor
for Subject Land $8.08 $8.27 $7.51 $7.76 $8.42
.
e
Summary
The adjusted indicators provide a value range for the subject land area from $7.5 I/SF
to $8.42/SF, with an overall average of $8.0I/SF. The comparable sales are all multi-
acre parcels bought for the intended development of office and/or medical uses. The
subject land is best suited to these uses. Based on the preceding analysis, the subject
land value is estimated as follows:
297,079 square feet @ $8.00/SF ~ $2,376,632, rounded to $2,375,000
Estimated Subject Land Value
$2,375,000
--
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 40
CERTIFICATION
.
The undersigned does hereby certify that in this appraisal report:
..
1, This appraisal assignment is not based on a requested minimum valuation or
specific valuation for approval of a loan. The estimate of market value identified
in this report was developed independent of any undue influence.
2. The compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the
development or report of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the
cause of the client, the amount of value, the attainment of a stipulated result or the
occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of the
aporaisaL
3. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting
predetermined results.
4. I have no present or contemplated future interest in the real estate that is the
subject of this appraisal report,
5. I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter of this
appraisal report or the parties involved.
6_ To the best of my knowledge and belief the statements of fact contained in this
appraisal report upon which the analyses, opinions and conclusions expressed
herein are based, are true and correct.
7_ The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported
assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased
analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
8. This appraisal report has been made in conformity with and is subject to the
requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional
Conduct of the Appraisal Institute, and the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice,
9, No one other than William Petersen assisted in the preparation of the analyses,
conclusions and opinions concerning real estate that are set forth in this appraisal
report.
10, I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this reporL
I I . The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute
relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
12. As of the date of this report, I have completed the requirements of the continuing
education program of the Appraisal Institute.
13. The by-laws and regulations of the Appraisal Institute govern disclosure of the
contents of this appraisal report.
14. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as
to value, the identity of the appraiser or the firm with which he is connected, or
any reference to the Appraisal Institute) shall be disseminated to the public through
advertising media, public relations media, news media, sales media, or any other
public means of communication without the prior written consent and approval of
the undersigned_
J 5. I have the knowledge and experience to complete this appraisal in a competent
manner. Neither my company nor I have been sued by a regulatory agency or
financial institution for fraud or negligence involving an appraisal report.
.,
! d ...P' /J
I l€'f'--. r(r--li--~
Roger M. ohrer
Certified General Real Property Appraiser
Minnesota License #4001238
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 41
CERTIFICA TION
The undersigned does hereby certify that in this appraisal report:
.
1. This appraisal assignment is not based on a requested minimum valuation, a
specific valuation, or the approval of a loan or any proposed financing. The
estimate of market value identified in this report was developed independent of any
undue influence.
2_ The compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the
development or report of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the
cause of the client, the amount of value, the attainment of a stipulated result or the
occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of the
appraisal.
3_ My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting
predetermined results.
4. I have no present or contemplated future interest in the real estate that is the
subject of this appraisal report.
5. I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter of this
appraisal report or the parties involved.
6, To the best of my knowledge and belief the statements of fact contained in this
appraisal report upon which the analyses, opinions and conclusions expressed
herein are based, are true and correct.
7. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported
assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased
analyses} opinions, and conclusions.
8. This appraisal report has been made in conformity with and is subject to the
requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional
Conduct of the Appraisal Institute, and the Uniform Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice,
9. No onc other than Roger Rohrer provided significant professional assistance to the
person signing this certification.
10, I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the suhject of this report.
II. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute
relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.
12_ I have the knowledge and experience to complete this appraisal in a competent
manner. Neither my company nor I have been sue,d by a regulatory agency or
financial institution for fraud,or,n"!/!gence/fJv~ng an appraisal report.
(0~J1UMVl\~t-
William E. Petersen (MN License #4001649)
Certified General Real Property Appraiser
e
--
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 42
.
.
.,
QUALlFICA TlONS
ROGER M. ROHRER
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
Spruce Tree Center, Suite 314
1600 University Avenue
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
EDUCATION:
Graduated from the University of Minnesota in December 1966 with a Bachelor of
Science degree; forestry major. Attended and snccessfully completed the American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers courses I, II and III between March 1969 and March
1970; Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Parts 2 and 3 in January 1982; Valuation
Analysis and Rcport Writing in August 1983; and Case Studies in Real Estate
Valuation in September 1983; Advanced Income Capitalization in May ]997; most
recent completion of Standards of Professional Practice in April 2005; numerous real
estate and appraisal seminars have been attended since 1972.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS:
General Associate Member of the Appraisal Institute. Candidate No. M-76-371
Appraiser License No. 4001238, Minnesota Department of Commerce
Certified General Real Property Appraiser
EMPLOYMENT:
1967-1968:
1969-1972:
Forester for U.S. Forest Service, Dept. of Agriculture.
Right-Of-Way Officer in Federal Highway Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation.
Real estate appraiser with Muske -Tansey Company through
February 1978 and with Muske Company 1978 to ]991.
Vice President of Muske Company Inc. from January 1984
to February 199 I.
BRKW Appraisals (formerly known as Bettendorf Rohrer
Knoche Wall, Inc.) - Partner/Owner.
1972 to Feb. 1991:
March 1991 to Present:
CLIENTS FOR WHOM APPRAISALS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED:
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of St. Paul Port Authority of St. Paul
Ramsey, Dakota, Scott & Washington Counties Minuesota Dept. of Transport.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources University of Minnesota
Banking institutions in St. Paul and suburbs Numerous private companies and
individuals
TYPES OF APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE:
Residential - Both single and multiple family.
Industrial - Wide cross section including factories, warehouses, truck
terminals and general manufacturing
Commercial - Office buildings, central city hotels, service commercial properties,
retail stores, shopping centers
Other - Indian treaty lands in No. Dakota, So. Dakota, Montana, Minnesota
- Special purpose properties.
- Condemnation commissioner in Dakota and Ramsey Counties
Last Updated: September 2005
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 43
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
.
WILLIAM E. PETERSEN
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
1600 University Avenue, Suite 314
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
Telephone: (651) 646-6114
Facsimile: (651) 646-8086
EDUCATION:
D.D.S. Degree, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 1970
St. Paul Central High School, St. Paul, MN 1963
PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE STUDIES
S.R.E.A, Course 101: "Introduction to Appraising Real Property", 1987
S.R.E.A. Course 102: "Applied Residential Property Valuation", 1988
S.R.E.A. Course 201: "Principles of Income Property Appraising", 1987
S.R.E.A. Course 202: "Applied Income Property Valuation", 1989
Appraisal Institute Course 410: "Standard of Professional Practice (Part A)", 1991
Appraisal Institute Course 420: "Standards of Professional Practice (Part B)", 1991
Advanced Yield Capitalization, Prosource, 1993
How to Avoid Environmental Hazards Liability, Pro source, 1994
1994 Appraisal Standards and Regulatory Update, Pro source, 1994
Discounted Casb Flow Analysis, University of St. Thomas, 1994
Appraisal 205: Office and Retail Appraisal, Prosource, 1995
Appraisal Institute Course 430: "Standards of Professional Practice (Part C)", 2001
2003 National USPAP Standards and Ethics Update, Prosource, 2003
2005 National USPAP Update Course, Appraisal Institute 2005
Various other short courses and seminars.
.
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY:
Staff Appraiser - BRKW APPRAISALS, INC., St. Paul, MN, April 1996 - Present
Staff Appraiser - Dahlen & Dwyer, Inc., St. Paul, MN, November 1986 - March 1996
Dentist, Northpark Dental Clinic; Blaine, MN, July 1972 - November 1986
Dentist, U.S. Army, July 1970 - July 1972
APPRAISAL MEMEBERSHIPS/LICENSES:
Certified General Real Property Appraiser - State of Minnesota - License #4001649
Expires 08/31/07
--
BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.
PAGE 44
.
.,
-
Professional Qualifications - William E. Petersen
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Appraisal assignments have been completed for the following purposes:
Mortgage financing
Con d emua t i on/L i t i gati 0 n
Estate Valuation
Feasibility Studies
Real Estate 'Tax Abatement
REO Portfolio Valuation
Buy/Sell Decisions
Client Consultation
Property types appraised include the following:
Apartment Buildings Manufacturing Bldgs. Recreation Facilities
Auto Service Centers Medical Clinics Restaurants
Banks Mini-Storage Retail Stores
Churches Mixed Use Properties Townhomes
Office Buildings Shopping Centers Convenience Stores
Office-Showrooms Single Family Homes Dealerships
Office- Warehouses Special Purpose Properties Gas Stations
Subdivision Land Railroad Corridors Vacant Land
PARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS
U.S. Bank, Bremer Bank, TCF Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, Minnesota Department of
Transportation, Dakota County CDA, Ramsey County, Hennepin County, various
municipalities, law firms; builders, developers, and investors.
Revised: September 1. 2005
BRKW APPRAISALS, tNC.
PAGE 45
.
.
-
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
February ]6,2006
AGENDA ITEM 2.D
TO:
Honorab]e Mayor and City Council
Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer ~
Murtuza Siddiqui, Finance Director
FROM:
SUBJECT:
2006-20] 0 C]P Discussion
BACKGROUND
Staff has continued to review the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) based upon previous
direction from Council and further financial analysis. Attached is the information that was
provided to you in August of2005 when staff first began to review the CIP, as well as a current
draft CIP worksheet, on which severa] changes have been made. We anticipate more revisions
before formally submitting the proposed CIP for approval, as staff is requesting more input and
guidance from Council on severa] factors.
In the summer of 2004, the City hired a consultant to conduct a Utility Rate Study. The primary
purpose was to review the existing utility rates as well as to determine if any modifications to the
rate structures were necessary in order to rccovcr the operating and CIP-related costs. Based on
thc best estimates available at that point, new rate structures were set in place. At that time,
Council also made an informal decision to maintain a certain fund balance in all three utility
funds (Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Water). Fund balances determined were as follows:
Water - $1,000,000; Sanitary Sewer - $500,000; Storm Water - $500,000. The study was based
on actual 2003 numbers and the future years were projected. It should also be noted that this
study was prepared on a cash flow basis.
As part of finalizing the 2006 budgeting process, the Finance Director reviewed actual numbers
versus the projected numbers that were ineluded in the study. It was discovered that the actual
numbers for 2004 were significantly higher than the projected, both in the areas of operations
and CIP. In the area of operations, the charges to Met Council for sewer experienced a
significant increase. There was also realignment in personnel charges in all three utility funds
where the actual charges reflected staff that supported the function in a more realistic manner,
\\Metro-lnet.us\ArdcnHiIls\PR&PW\Operations & Maintcnance\Engineering\2006\2-] 6-05 Memo ClP.doc
2006-2010 CIP
2!l6/2006
Page 2
whereas in the past, charges associated with utility funds were not accurately allocated to the
proper areas and instead allocated to the general fund. In the area of the CIP (PMP), there were
some change orders towards the end ofthe year, plus continuation ofpre-2004 PMP projects that
were finalized in 2004/05 that were paid later. As a result of all the above mentioned
modifications/adjustments, the utility fund balances have been adjusted accordingly, as
compared to original numbers from the 2004 Study.
DISCUSSION
The Finance Director has worked with the consultant on the utility rate study to revise the
relevant pages and determine the fund balance numbers by year. The following discussion
addresses the fund balances in relation to proposed projects in the CIP. Overall, ifthe City
replaces all four lift stations and takes on the 2006 Ridgewood Neighborhood project, as well as
the other CIP items currently listed, the fund balances will be as follows at the end of 2009:
Water - $675,000; Sanitary Sewer - $200,000; and Storm Water - $625,000.
FUND BALANCES
Sanitary Sewer Fund
. Lift Stations- If we eliminate all four lift stations in 2006, the fund balance would be
about $900,000 at the cnd of 2009, as compared to the old number of $644,707. If we
decide to reconstruct two lift stations, the balance drops to about $500,000, as compared
to the old number of $644,707. If none of the lift stations are reconstructed at this time,
the O&M department feels that the lift stations will be able to be properly maintained.
While it is difficult to acquire parts for these lift stations due to their relative age, O&M
has successfully managed to manufacture necessary parts as needed. Another reason
O&M feels the current lift stations can be maintained as-is for the next few years is that
these stations serve areas oflow flows. While some of the failures that have occurred in
the past three to five years havc triggered the alarm systems, the problems were
addressed and failures repaired prior to causing any sewer back-ups. In the case of Lift
Station #13, which was struck by lightning, the back-ups resulted from an error in the
notification procedure, causing a delayed response time.
. SCADA
The City of Roseville is currently in the process of meeting with vendors to explore the
options of upgrading their sanitary sewer system with SCADA. As has been discussed in
thc past, an upgrade occurring jointly in Arden Hills and Roseville could result in the
sharing of costs, benefiting both cities. City staff is currently evaluating liability concerns
as it relates to lift station failure in order to recommend priority of rebuilding lift stations
versus acquiring SCADA. If the concern lies in the notification and response time to lift
station failure, SCADA would improve the efficiency of notification, and therefore,
decrease liability concerns.
.
.
-
.
.
-
2006-2010 CIP
211 6/2006
Page 3
. Inflow and Infiltration (1&])
City staff met with Met Council to discuss the current problem with I & I. Based upon
current data and conditions, the City could face a $500,000 surcharge with Met Council if
1&1 is not reduced. This charge would be paid over five years, starting in 2007, but would
be rctrievable if the City spent any money to reduce 1&1. However, the City could "opt
out" of the surcharge by committing an cqual or greater level oflocal funding, (whatever
amount is necessary), to implement 1&1 reduction. Staff is looking at what nccds to be
done to avoid the surcharge and is estimating costs of the necessary improvements. Staff
is also gathering information from past O&M procedures and projects that could be used
as to assist in 1&1 reduction as well.
Staff recommcndations: Based upon the projected fund balance, the possibility of acquiring
SCADA, and the immediate necd to address 1&1, staff is recommending to delay the lift
station reconstruction project and reject thc current bids. Once additional information is
gathered regarding costs associated to each of these potential projects, staff will evaluate
when sufficient funds would be available to completc the lift station reconstruction.
Storm Scwer Fund
The 2006 PMP project includes a proposed estimate of $410,000 to be used from the Storm
Sewer Fund. This amount will cause the fund balance to dip significantly below the informal
balance of $500,000. However, at the end of 2009, the projected balancc is estimated to
recover to about $600,000.
Watermain Fund
If the City takes on all the CIP and PMP projects as currently listed in the draft worksheet,
thc projccted balance at the end of 2009 is estimated to bc about $650,000.
PROJECT SCHEDULE 2006-2010
The extent of the projects that are planned for 2006 and the remaining four years of the CIP are
dependent on scvcral factors, including those listed below. Staff would like input from Council
as to whcthcr to continue with 2006 projects as planned and input on the other factors for future
projects.
2006 PROJECTS (excluding 2006 PMP and Lift Station Reconstruction, discussed
above)
CSAH 96 Landscaping Proiect
Ramsey County will be participating in the funding of this project; the County will pay for
tree replacement at a 2:1 ratio of the number removed during the reconstruction of Highway
96. This equates to approximately $150,000 (45%) of the total project costs. Thc project may
also be eligible for up to approximately $30,000 in reimbursement from MSA funds. The
remainder of the costs (approximately $170,000) would be paid from the General Capital
Fund. Staff will be meeting with the County to discllss the cost-participation agreement, and
2006-2010 CIP
2/16/2006
Page 4
.
will be reviewing the City's MSA fund balance to determine the amount that may be used
towards this project.
Emergencv Vehicle Pre-emption (EVP)
Ramsey County has identified nine intersections in Arden Hills that eurrent]y do not have
EVP installed. The intersection TH 10 and Highway 96, with an estimated cost of $9,500,
will possibly bc funded by Ramsey County andlor MnlDOT as a part of their signal
improvement project this summer. Three intersections are shared with Shoreview; costs for
these intersections would also be shared. Shoreview has budgeted for their upgrades to be
completed in 2006. At a minimum, staff believes that the costs for the intersections shared
with Shorevicw (approximately $8,000) should bc included in Arden Hills' 2006
improvcmcnt projects. The cost to upgrade the remaining five intersections is estimated at
about $18,000. Costs incurred for the EVP project would be eligible for reimbursement from
MSA funds. Attached is a spreadsheet listing the intersections and associated cost estimates
for these improvements.
FACTORS I-OR FUTURE PROJECTS
MSA funds
StalT will be meeting with Ramsey County staff to review the City's final costs for the .
Lexington A venuc rcconstruction project and to determine which costs are eligible for
reimbursement from MSA funds. Once thc rcview is complete and staff has a better
understanding of the MSA fund balance, staff will be able to set asidc amounts to be used for
the MSA cligib]e unassigned projects. City staff is sccking guidance from Council in
prioritizing the unassigned projects listcd on the current CIP.
General Capita] Fund Balance
While developing and modifying the CIP, it would be helpfu] to receive some direction from
Council as to fund balanccs. What is Council's level of comfort for a minimum balance?
Where would Council Iikc to see the balance at the end of the 5 year plan? We can have a
more detailed and accurate discussion after the 2005 audited numbers are finalized in May.
Street rehabilitation cvcle
The PMP Projects scheduled for 2007 to 20 I 0 are based on current PCI ratings and current
rehabilitation cycle as developed by URS. Given the fund balances, it may be time to
reevaluate the current cycle. The support agreement Goodpointe Technologies proposed to us
would be able to assist thc City with the PMP budget analysis. What Goodpointe has done in
the past with other communities is to run an analysis using the cxisting cycle and existing
spending patterns. Another scenario typically analyzed includes dctermining a desired
average PCI rating for the City and spending limit to determinc how many years it will take
to reach the desired goal. The average weighted PCI rating for Arden Hills as calcu]ated by
Goodpointe is 68.25. Goodpointe indicated that several other communities strive for an
aver:dge PCI of around 75.
-
.
.
-
2006-2010 CIP
2!l6/2006
Page 5
CONCLUSION
Staff requests Council input and direction as outlined in this report. We will then continue to
study and evaluate all possible options, revise the CIP and bring it to a future work session for
more detailed consideration and final approval.
e
~,..!-'!"~
g~~~~
;;~~3m
=-O:"'~-
~~~~g
~- ~ ~ ti ~
~~fl~~
o.gNOC.
gro'ji8:;
~ ~ g ~ ~
~ :: ~:? ih
:u ~ ~ ~:2
~ !!: (0 '" ::0
3 " ,\.l' ~ ~
: ~ 'g_ a' 5-
~gffi~~
~ ~ ~~ :3:
~J~-~~
,,:;,- OJ"
<0 - OJ - ~
~ a' R ~ i'i
.,,3:j"-(:;
i::>'"T'I<1>W
~g~~it
~ 9 t'~ ~
8;;':: i!~
~i:i~~?
.;; _0 ~ ~ p.
~ g~ ~'~
~~~a~
g.~e~6.
8.g Z ~ Vi
~g~&~
ro"", :;:
",="l ::J
g ~ ~ ~
R~~ !
8" tii 0' Q
~;~ ~
It ~ 16 9.!.
~ ~ ~ "3
a ~ ~ ~
~-:: ~ ~
o;~Q ~
m <ll"O '"
"''''0 3
~ 01~' ;
". ;;; ~
~ ~
"
5
~
,
5
"
.
,
"
,
"
cr
"
~
o
o
,
"
o
o
5
S
o
o
o
o
a
~
~,
"
"
.
"
~
g
~
[
~
~
o
o
~
o
m
;
&
l
,
cr
!
o
o
g
,
.
.
~
[
~
8
o
o
.
t
~
Ii
if
I
~g~~g~~~g~g~gg~~;: ~
~~W~5g~~=-~=-"a=-~~~ ~
~.ro>n ::o~::o::o::o::o~~!.~
>111) (!J > (j) 2 (/J (/) 0 ::;; 0 '" " 0 " c~. <,",
~I~ ~- ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
co"'=3~~'Oommmm",",~ro
ro:;:Nro_(/)~WI~~(fJ(fJ(j)(/J(/J~~~c.
::0 rtl , (/)" _ I'" ~ - a: is: is: i5: ro ro .., q,
..., "" -. "';!l. ;:l ~ 0. '" <1l '" ro.....::O 0 !"
0' g; ~ ~ ~ ~r 31 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:tl lll' ~
i~1 g:",c. ~~~~~ ;~~
-I.., g );> " .~ ~ ~ 13 3 3 3 3 "'8 rcc c
~g~3 :t~~ ~a3aa "c: ~
~. g:t :-- R 9 I~ i6 ~ i6;t !:l- ~~ 5
"'~"' ,.., "" []I '33,3 33 "'In;
r;;; Ig' ~ ~ ~ ro ~ I~ ~; 9, r; 9.
ga ~~g &~-~~~ g~~
loll .;..>1::.5 nZVHll'JJ I J\J ~
Fcl e!. ft 'J g g "', 5: g 3
, i 'Ii ~:::r5'([I ([I al ([I
1 ~3 =~~(Il(ll a;a.
!' :.... 5 ~;<" *'" : !!. (I)
; It ",,;' 3
I~~ a~ ~~
(I) (Il Z I <I>
" ~ ~ g
!OO ~
ig, ~ '
F
<Jl....."....""<I'''''Q?'-''VI~........V>........
.I__,~N""_~_NN_NN_~
..~o"'ola ". _ ", " N, ., 0, ", . 0,
0,00'0000000000000
~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~
gig g@ ~ g ge ggg g g g g g
o
,
"
~
,
g
~
3
~
"
"
"
,
~
~
.
o
"
a
~
[
~
o
.
i
~
3
.
"
g
g
o
a
a
00
u
~~
*18;
5''''1
00'
;j;1 g,!
~l
~ is"
~~
,j
",
."
"
If
'0
~
.
a
.
o
.
a
g
.~
g
a
,?
.'
i
.
.
a
g
g
.
'8
.
a
o
w
"
a
g
.
.
a
..
~~
.0
ob
co
a.
00
a.
....""....""1...."'"
.
N
g
I~
.
.......N....
'-""'NON""
000000
~g@g~~
g~8~gg
.
.
0'
.
.
o
.
.
g
g :
.
.
.
;:;
a
'.
g
.
.
o
~
o
"
o
a
~
.
""'....""'....
.............N
'" 0 <.11,0
'" 0 010
g~~lg
0000
0000
a
~
~
"
N
g
ffi ~
'I ;
Q' 8"
gl ~
!. ~
g ~
o .
" 0
a i
~ "
g
5'
.
*
a
~
0-
~
~
~
j[
S
~
~
"
5
"
.
"
c
~
.
.
~
,
~,
0,
~j
~
. "
E !
: gl [
~, ~
~ ~i
0'
"I
j
,
*
o
,
~
;;
~
,
,
I
.
~
.
S
...,"
au
~"'"
. " .
O'~~
" ' S
~"Q
0..
~ .
03.
!!lilt
" ,
. z
;is:::
~c.
o
a
"
~
..
>
"
a
.
g
;
i~
,~
,-
'"
I~-
l
..
.
o:A ""
,
-
o
I~
"
~
o
.
"
a
a
&
"" ....;'"
,
~ ~~!
I'" g g g
'~ : : g 8
[
~.
. "
i~
;0
ig
"
'"
.
..
--
00
.0
o.
~~
..
. .
~ ~
o 0
. .
a .
o 0
a .
.... l>'>i
;;;
g
8
a
~
. .
0;
o
g
~
"
o
~
o
.
~
.
a
o
o
.
e
"
"
g
a
a
o
a
o
~,t:
bb
a a
? ?
~~
t.
i~
bb
8 g
"" i:>
o 0
~
o
g
o
a
.
r.r.
-"''0
~ ~
~'g
o a
15 is
~
o
g
~
iH:
00
..
N
O~
00
~o
,,~
e:"
~e:
e:~
,..e:
,.,..
...,.
-...
<-
m<
...m
0'"
...0
I~ >
",r
co'"
-<co
.,,-<
e:'"
XC
oX
o
>1(;
o c'
~ ~ i
... .'
mal'
00
~~
~
. .
~j~
jjij-J
.....,....
.......''0
gi15
~~
I_-
i.....'"
!~ :z
'0 "
n
~ :s
. .,
~ <;;1
"8 i'
~ g
~i:
0;'"
n
g g
. .
..
. .
~I~
'::'Rj
8.
g~
. a
~ g
]
, I
Ci~$l~~ir~
[m;;;~83l1"o
. '116 g 2!. J1.:
d' ~ ] '"' OJ ~!1l.
....... ~ ~
~ ci' W g, ~ ~7;
Q c <Ii O;:l (U
(ClQl&~~~5
~ ~ 5..'" ~ ~
'" <;lJ;to- ([l ~
""'!<.~a.~~
~~~~~'1J
03.~<~n>
S~gl ~
,(/)"':;1 0
~1iI, >'~ ~ ,
to ()Q. .
~ "" g OJ
~ ~~ ~
g- (I) 0 ~
(;l "'0
3 ~ ~
[ GJ
!
~
[
$
"
.
[
"
I
f.;:;;Joo~j~ ~
:,:so~ ~ L~ b 11"8 ;:
08880 ~
88888 g
w
"
!
..
~
~ ~
j~
. .
.................
"
o
g
~
i0~1
00
00
. a
00
o.
..
..
"N
00
00
'00
a.
00
gg
. .
"'
0'
~ I
"
'"
.
~
~
. .
,:
'8
o
~
e
"",.,""...."" ...
~
~
o
o
, 0
-V>l>'> .......
or:::;
00
~ ~ g
g g ~
~
i
"
~
.
,
~
~
a
"
~
3
m
~
5
G
,
~
"
o
o
'"
o
,
g
c
ii
"
~ . w
~ >-J
o i ~
go 0"
~ !g
g "':0
* ~
8 ~
i~ :e
. ..
b~
~ "
g ~
~~
. ..
;;, p,
~ g
~ ~
-l>Z"TlUl
~ * ~ g ~
w ~ ~ ~ 5"
Q' ~~. ~ ~
::::~~~~
~ ~ Cll ~ ~
, 0
~ ~ ~
a~ 2"
~;D- Q-
:;10: 0
8w .
""" ~
1!02 V'
* I Q
~ : ~
g ~
c
o
I
~
~
!
...."" .......
..
~~
o.
gg
00
8"
_0
, i-:;:-:;:
b~i'e }:!
I_N <.To.!-" ~
g g g ~
g 15~ g
~;j.~ "~
iSg;ig g
000 0
gg~ g
ij g ~
g:8 g
00 0
g~ g
"
o
o
'"
~
o
z
~
~
,
e
-1>1lmQ(")OJ::tl<n;;OUlji;
o "c3(1),,"..roQ"rtlrtl....:
S' ~ S. 'J: ij" -I ~ ill 3 g?, f*;;;;;
1ii3 ~ !!l~~ ~g@ g~& 9
O'g-1('l~~~$c.<1>;l'J~
~1;i;;;: '" "'!!J o;:_.~ ""
g~1=K~~~'~~~~~
"-lg:~~3' 19~j8Sc"'::!:
~ !!J <il 8 g ;.;']~ :::: 0 g
~ ~ ~ '" ;:lJ ~!1il ~ >< ~
~~a_~ ~~ ~~~~
'" 0" g @ g co Q '" r-
8~,..'" r.r ~~~~
-I:l 3 ~ or. .. 8. '"
(f)< <>>,0. g . ?
*!1l-,~ ~:!! Q ~
,? ~i; ~ ~ ~ ~
:~:;~ ~;
~ il ~ ~
'" 3 ~"'"
3 =:::;
~ ~ ~
~ ~I~
I ~!~
~ !rlif
il ~!~
"
"''''b'll>'><:A''''<:A''''l>'>o:A ....
,
~
g
o
8
N
~f;:~ggg:g~ ~
10000000080
ig gig ggg g g
@g@~egg g g
~ . ~
~ ~ ~
o <::> to"
~ ~ 6
.@.g
....!...
g
~
g
l>'>j....
N
.
~
8
~
i~
o
o
.~
""
'0
'8
o
o
o
1'..>;;;
,.
00
00
00
00
00
~ ..
. N N
a 00
o 00
c <::. 0
~ is 8
o Q C
o 00
~ ..
.
:5 ;:;;
C cl
g ~
g
o
o
~
o
o
a
'"
~ . ~
g i
g .
~ g
,
,
,
,
, ~,
@-"g-
~ ~
~~~
3:ig
~ c ~
;g~
~~!
0."
R Q. 5'
~,~' 9.,
g~:!l
~ "l"_ Cil
~gSQ
;;;"<:T~
g. ^ g'
10i!._~
. ~'"
Jl siB-
=> :.~.
ft ~ I~
W'
o
,
.
,
N
~
3
I
,
,
,
[
J
i
o
~
~-
o
j
~'
!
,~
,
"
~
j
~~
gg
00
00
00
V>"" ~ liE>l>'>
~
"
.
o
o
.
"
.
- ~i
. ,
"'.
~'.~
~g
~ ~
-~ ~
" 0
.",
--:.: ~
. 0
:3 ~
. "
'" a
~ . ~
I~ g
n
g .s
. ..
~
g ~
. "
o '"
"
c
c
...
-1>;:UG)(f)mn-lI:D;:U;:U
a:::"'!!~_~~gf!:~ '
~rn ~~ @'~ I(f!~g ~
"'3"'''' ~~" !18
O'!!ld\1~ ""3~~o.
~~a:l~~~~~Cz
0:. (I) G) ":r ~ 'J~ ;;>~.
g~g~~~&.\~Qg'g:
=>ai!.~"tl5'CQg-~
VI'?.. "l". Cil ", '" 0
~ ~ 5.~. ~ ~ if 5 ~Ia
~m~g 6-~~ g:iP
'" ("l:?:"" is'.... 8
@ ~~"'~ ~:~
eg~ 2 ff ~ .N g,
it 10 -n (I) ! g
!' I~ ~ g '^'
0. >.9 ~ ':!l
~ ~Is:
'l '(fl I
;::; g
~ ~
~ ~
~
~.
.
.
!t'\<At'\<Au!(/)W(f!{fl
I
'I CO
,^,,^,~fN)::j.;..>,-,,.;..> ~
001'-" 1Jl'0 N,-" 01'"
00'00'00000
00'00'00000
o OiO 0'0 0 0 0 0
666 ofo 0066
000000009
.
.~
o
is
'0
i3
~
N
o
o
g
o
o
~
w
"
~
~
,
~
i~
'g
o
.
:~
'8
o
o
o
.~
.~
~.
N
NO
'0
~~
gg
,
~i
o
g
o
.
I. ,
N
.
g
o
g
Z -l("lG)rr1Ul
~ <:I 0 <Il ::> III
a. ii 5 ~ 5" ~
I a, 1J 6 g g
~"I a~, 3 ",' ;r
@ 8 ~ "'I~ ~
at;.)" gl~J
f.'> '" a ~ 10 ~
;: 5: ~:> ~
~ ~.[~ ~
[ !rr1~ ~
~~~ ~
~ 14 ~ 0
,0 (") ~ a
r8 ~ 3
0" .
Cilg.a.
, 0
(I) '" 5"
3', '"
1tt:5~
"g~
~" (Il
~ -
cr
~
~
~
~
.
.
l
~
~
~
"
[
~
i
~
.
~
~
~I (")
~ ~
l
!
"
.
"
o
. --
~ g
I ~:g
i .
VI"""" ""
.
'-~ WO> ~
,,~'-" N ....
~~~ ~
(;, 6 6 <=>
009.e
"
o
o
..
6~~0;U~g(")~'~[~
S" ffi ffi" -;.. S! ;}1515' 1:> <> -n
Ii" ~ ~ " If, ~R'fg :=r no 0
~~~~~2!l/.8' 3~':?i
Q .a~-"~U~ ~>~a::> iii
J\J"I)" ;;'-; ;6 ~ i'f",~
o(l)~, [~~~ec;lJ(ilJl
c 3 "<Il (IJ ~ _" ~ '" ~ g ><
VI!!l;;; ~":. ft::i:::U 3 m:;:
<O~ g5l~~fLT1 ~
~ ::u ":: '3 ii " ~ 3:i
0. ~ 1: "l" 3 (1)_:: 5' '" '"
;;;:(1) ;,.g 3g",it<>
"'g: <0 om-~,;-<a
8~ ~~Jl ~2
~ g' I ~~,:3 :r g"
'" ' "'" g rn '"
:i(") <:l n
> ~ ,$l ~ c::
i5:., '3' ~ 3
o~ 'cr 3 3
g; S; I~ ~ "
~ <Il :; ("l
l 00
00
3. :>'"
~
~ I
[
! !
....iUlUlUll>'>I....l>'>UlUlUlUl""....
N I I . '
~ -~~' 8~L-!;"g;
,~ P:---' !'l"'-~ 9'19':-"'9,'"
~ g g g g 8i~n~ig ~
.. ggggg:gggg
~!
<0 ~
N. _~ w
~ ~ r:;
6 ~ 8
.s .e 0
1 "
I ~j
81
~
.
o
8
I
I
~~.
i
~ ~
. .
:3 ~
IS ~
,
i
8
o
8
g
.
o
8
~
,.
'E~
.'" 9
Pi
00'
"'0
8
~
o
.
.
;;; ~
o ~
~ ~
~ ~
fl
~
.
"
o
~
~
8
.
N
~
~
"
o
D
g
~
~
~
o
o
!"
-; -; ttl (l:I ~ "tI1t:ll mOl UI UI
~ir~e;~~~~"~el~
.,~~:s.\l1.:2,~iil~~:s.
~"o_c: ~~C[cc:~
s J" ~ m, l ' , .
~:;r j,i::;'I/Il _"11 rt1"l1 ro
ffi ~ " ,,- Ii:> 5':! 5' a:
!l \r ~ ~....::g \l1. 3. 3"!O!. (")
g~()(")~:l'2a- ~g
g ~ ",' ("l ii: 3 "'" IA
ff-[U[hH
~ n ,g () JJ 3 cr> IA g 2,
::f ag:o ~ g? Q G) ~ 9,
;:j ~ o.!::!.::: a. 1)!( n g
m;:o::'3mi:c.m;;,;:;
3" ~ ~ 3' ~ _.~. ...
~ 0.' '" ~ '" \:3
s'l! (") '-"
all< ~~ (")
1a~ "'= 1a
'" ~~
".
9'5'
g.
o~
t:5f:5
~8
~ ~
~~
!~ ~,
i~ ~
~~
~
[~
"
~
;;
"
>
"
~"
&
m
.
~
~
.... ~ ~
S 5. ~
~ ::i.?
~ ~~
,~
"
i~
8
~..
~ 8
gg
O.
~2
.
!--:.: ;reg
.~ ~<f
o ~ >
g .:';0:
o
'"
~
~
I~ 0"
'8 3
16 ::::
~ ~
'"
."
C
,
~
S'
~
'"
o
~
~ g
~ ~ ~
c, ~ R.
8 ..
. .
'"
~
.
"
o
c
'"
~
"
;';1~
."
""
CO
5.~
o
Q
~o
"
.0
:to;
~ -
I;?g
~
o
"
~~
f
'"
o
o
~
>'
,8
o "
i
~
~
"
."
Q
'ir
!l
o
.
.
o
"
)?
S'
"
~
~
a
o
t
>
'"
o
m
z
J:
'"
,..
'"
"
,.
."
~
r-
f
."
'"
o
<
m
s:
m
z
iil
."
'"
o
Cl
'"
,.
s:
."
<:
m
-<
m
,.
'"
'"
c:
s:
s:
>
~
8
'1'
"
o
"
o
o
3
3
o
"
"
m
.
~
S
z
~
"
m
,
m
m
~
>
~
."
~
.
~
/]'\~ HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
August 10, 2005
AGENDA ITEM 2.C
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator ~
SUBJECT: 2006 ., 20 I 0 CIP
FROM:
BACKGROUND
Staff has begun detailed review of the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Due to a
number of considerations, the City Administrator's proposed CIP is not finalized at this time.
These considerations include:
.
. The PCI ratings are not yet complete and this information will be very valuable in
determining the priority ranking of these projects
. We are in the process of getting more accurate cost figures for the 2005 and 2006 PMP
projects as well as the lift station upgrades
. We have not yet completed the South Water Tower Inspection that is budgeted for this
year. This inspection will allow us to morc accurately budget and plan for improvements
necessary on this water tower.
. Finance staff needs some time to analyze the utility funds in light of project activity in the
last year as well as the proposed projects in future years.
Attached is a draft CIP worksheet that we are working Irom at this time. However, we anticipate
several changes before formally submitting this as a proposed CIP. For example, Tom Moore is
suggesting some changes for the timing of some of the park projects and equipment purchases.
Also, as noted above, there are several steps that need to be completed that will assist us with
putting together the proposaL
DISCUSSION
In addition to receiving some of the information olltlined above, it would also be helpful to get
Council direction and input on a number of items in order to proceed with the development of
the CIP. Some discussion points are outlined below:
Fund Balances
.
PCI Ratings for City Streets
May 12,2005
Page 2 of 4
.
Planning and budgeting for CIP projects is somewhat dependent upon our philosophy or policies
regarding fund balances. We have some internal policies regarding where we would like our
utility fund balances to be as a result of the 2005-2009 utility rate study, However, we should
discuss some other funds:
. The Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) fund was established to temporarily
finance pavement management projects being partially financed by special assessments
or for high cost improvements for which bonds have not becn issued. Balances in debt
service funds after bonds have maturcd are credited to this fund a~ are special
asscssments for improvements financed by this fund. However, as illustrated in the
attached spreadsheet, anticipated expenditures will be higher than revenues. We should
determine an appropriate balance to be maintained in this fund.
. The Special Revenue Park Fund was established for park/trail acquisition and
development. Revenue for the Park Fund comes from developer park dedication fees,
contributions, state grants, and investment interest. During the next five years we are
anticipating expenses of $21,000 for trail signage and $$32,000 for the Tony Sclunidt
Park Underpass. Without additional revenue this would result in a rcmaining balance of
approximately $178,000. Therc is also a play stmcture at Valentine Park slated for
replacement, in the amount of $55,000, which had been planned for 2006 using general
fund dollars (we are looking at moving that to a future year). Again, we should have an
idea of what kind ofbalancc wc would like to see maintained in this fund. Development
projects approved over the next. five ycars that include park dedication fees will provide
additional revenue to this fund but we do not have a good way to anticipatc what those
amounts may be,
. The Non-Assessable Fund was ereatcd to account for county and other projects the City
of Arden Hills will bc rcqucst to cost participate in a well a~ some capital projccts the
City will be unablc to asscss property owners for. There is no steady revenue source for
this fund. Primarily funds have been transferred here from general fund. The current
CIP workshcet would result in the fund decreasing from $1.5 million to $642,565. It
would seem we need to discuss the philosophy of this fund as well.
.
MSA_@lds
Minnesota State Aid dollars are used for qualified improvements on appropriately designated
streets, We receive a designated allotment each year. As has been explained in the past, it is
possible to "borrow ahead" for MSA dollars (called "advancing"). There are limited dollars
available each year for the advancing program. It is also possiblc to finance improvements
internally and the "pay back" the City from future MSA installments. The attached worksheet
illustrates a program that will not require advancing or pay back. If we chose to delay the
Snelling Avenue project, we would have a very healthy balance available. We could then choose
to use some of it for Unassigncd Projects listed at the bottom of the spreadsheet. In any case, as
we continue to examine the results of our PCI ratings and other information being gathered, and
to evaluate priorities, it would be helpful if we had a philosophy regarding the use of MSA
.
.
.
..
PCI Ratings for City Streets
May 12,2005
Page 3 of 4
dollars. For example, are we completely opposcd to advancing or financing for pay back? Are
we generally opposed but willing to consider under limited circumstances?
Gcneral Fund
For the pa\t several years, the annual operating budget has included $200,000 for various CIP
projects. Depending on priorities, fund balance philosophies, and other factors, we could
consider varying that amount. For example, wc could increasc that amount (within budget and
levy directives from Council) and use it as revenue into the non-assessable strcet fund. We could
also finance some park projects (for example, playground replacement) from thc general fund.
The amount would be based on an approved CIP plan.
Prioriti,,~
In general, we need to determine some pnonlles. Some factors that weigh into that
detcrmination, in addition to everything outlined above, include:
. Resident input, requests, and complaints
. Existing plans and documents (for examplc, the Parks and Trails Master Plan)
. Availability of grants or partnerships on projects
. Offset to potcntialliability (for example, lift stations) or operating costs
On the spreadsheet you will notice a largc Ilumber of projects at the bottom under a hcading of
"Unassigned Projects", This category was called "Floating Projects" in previous renditions of
the CIP and included some projects that we were not able to program but wanted to kcep in mind
for future considcration (such as West Round Lake Road, Snelling Avenue Regional Trail, and
County Road D Trail). As we have been reviewing the CIP recently, I was concerned about the
heavy use of MSA funds and the depletion of the some of the funds addressed above. Therefore
several projects have been movcd to the "Unassigned" category, including CSAH 96
Landscaping, County Road E Sidcwalk, Old Highway 10 Sidewalk, and SCADA. Some of these
we may be able to re-program into the five-year CIP after we have complcted further analysis of
funds, developed some working policies, and received the additional information outlined in this
report.
CIF Fonl!at
We are in the process of moving to a new format for the CIP. We plan to distribute a samplc
copy to you on Monday cvcning. We are still in the process of updating the information in the
new format, but we wanted Council to have an opportunity to see what it looks like. In addition,
the document coutaius additional infonnation about each project, such as project descriptions,
that we think can be a helpful resource. The document is in a database format, which provides a
number of ditkrent reports that can be generated from the CIP data.
PCI Ratings for City Streets
May 12,2005
Page 4 of 4
CONCLUSION
Staff requests council input and direction on a number of areas as outlined in this report.
will then continue to work on the CIP for more detailed consideration in September.
\\tarthlAdmlnlCity AdminislratortMemo\2005 \05-054J5 Memo to Council HE PCl Ratings.doc
,
We
.
.
.
e
::" 0:. '" ~ ,'"
~'H>~~
:;911'\i;\~$
"0&,_,
~~~ KH
~ TI:::j - (0'-'
~.[~~~~
(ll .,.:r ~ ~i co
p?:8~1
[@~~;~
~" ! 1 ~ j' -
e ::l r::r _ \il
~ Cl, <1l '" 3"
C:: '" ~ c. 5. "':
"~;h}
~., ., !
~~p~~
_O""'~~~
~ a ~~ S 0
~Hhl
~BH!
&" ~ 'Ti ~ ~ ~
ag~i H
~ -l ~',!;:"~,
g 2,... ~ if~
~ g~ ~p
~8~~~i
!:!, er $" ~ :1' ~
nn~,l
~.'~-s
~gl> _
<1l n ;;
g,2S ::l
~~~ 3-
~~:j ~
H' ,
~ 0 ~ R
& <: :: \t
(1' ~ ~
i3 ~ ~ '<
-o"':J ~ ~
~&:'"
~':: ~ [
?'i ~ ~ ~
I'TI&;'" 5-
l:i~ [
~. ~
<
o
"
~
i
~
~
~
o
5'
o
~
o
~
:;
"
.
o
~
.
a
"
!
.
j
e
,
"
~
~
..
o
!i:
I
n
,
,
,
o
,
I
~
~
,
t
~
N
o
o
"
~
(1
;;
~
l
~
8
[
~
nH~~HHH~
~'~.$ "" :r~,"~ m
pn[!UU~d~ I
:iEg~Oommmm~b;'iQ. [
;:lJ1~ ~ $' ~ 0 0 ~ f ~ ~ <1l ~ ~
Ih-'~~f ~~~o, '00
Q"!!!.?if ~ ~ ,",,;:.c Cll "" ~ /tI 8
[~ ~ ~ .::: : ~ "~~
~ ~ ! I;~~ 3 0 ~ ~ '
p ~I ~ pill l ~
~ ~"~." > ~I ~
i. ~ [~ ' >
>4 ~)::. 9' lC It> ~
! . ~ ~ '" :l
5 ;;:'~
~, !I<
~ ~I;
- ',I~
H
1
II
4.'It.'O~./,<IfA!""""""""""''II''l'll''lfo'l
II
L .-
8;S88~;S~8~~~~8
~~~~~8U~~U~
88888888@8888
8
~
1 8
~
~
j!:
8
8
~
8
8
*
>
~
3
~
~
~~~
~
~
8
~~~
~U
888
~
~
~
~
~
...
...
.
.~ p~'"
! . ! ~~
~ ~ l 3 -
~ Ii: ~ ~ g'
~ ~ 'tI""'::r
,,- ["
. <> .
'- - ~ '-
I~ ~ ~ ~
1- ~~-
!~ ~!r'
~ 8 ~
- ~i;;
.
I ·
, !'
, "
~
a
[
[
~'
&
~I
~
~
~
.
~
~ ~
~
~
~ ~
" ~
~ ~
8 8
~
'" (A EA""'~
;;I. w w
(ii' ~ (..> i7>
[ ~ -.j -1:3 g:
'" N .01.t.Jt. N
~1:;g88~
8. g 888g
~
,
.
~ ~
-
~
~
~
o
o
..... tot "",.,.
f .
,N g
~ ~
:5 8
Ii
..... ........ fA...
I
, I
,
it'll
rwi
.g
8
8
I
I ,
i
~~
II
-'"
~g,
U,
8~ i
~~
""....EA.;A.c,.<H........ ""
-~
gg
~@
88
gi~~18;;~ @ Ig
8 8 81~ 8 8 88
888.11888 8
~
I
i ~
i~!
81
....(,01 !
I
58
@~
88
i
.
,,-
!
>
l
i
g ~,
~ i
o
~ ~
,.
[ ~
3
s
I
~
~
"
~
[
i
~
,
..
~
r
"
J
~
>
w
~
,
.~
~
i
.
g
~
g
~
8
~
~
~ 8
'88,
8 8
~ ~
~~
"
"'" bo>..... """,
~ , ,
t: 88
:;;H
g 88
........ ........
~ ~I
o "
.~ 81
~ b,
~ 8
g 8
~~
I
ft-
I.- 8
eg
o 0
o 0
~ ~
N
i:.
~ ~
~ 0
, 0
g 8
N
..
...
..
~
-
~
=
b
!:
g
~
"~
g!"
~~
815
~
N
~
N
"
N
~
~
o
, -
1- ."
I~ g
ig g
:0 a
:b ~
o 0
:.... ....
1-
'~1
~~
o ~
o 0
=
8.~
. f
8-
@@
~~
-~
8.
, ~
8~
8~
~~
~
-~
,.
~~
88
NN
<>0
<><>
'f''''
N'
n
n'"
c:n
"c:
c:"
S;c:
"S;
<"
m<
.,m
0'"
>9
...>
"'...
'"'"
-<to
-n-<
c:-n
zc:
~~
>f(',
g~
" .
... ,
m.
00
~ 0:
~~
e
~I
z
~
N
..
..
00
IH
H
O'~"'f'" a~~g>," .,~p ~9'"
!! ~ ~ '~!II.. a ~ a. ~ ~ h." ~,~
I,fl(ll~ Ii UllIIm ~,. ellll~~"lii
Q'!oKm Q'P[~m Q'[;~ "~~
N " . ~ i:!. J'o,):; ~ ~ N "lJ1~ lS ~. $; ~ _
Q~Q,lOCl)lIlQ,lgCl):EC)~
::E ~,~ ~~G:$'~ '-J ~*8&~("J
~' = ~ () I'll :l "I ~ I'll
7~~~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ; [ d~' ~ ~
E..[~"" a ~... i3.?l[[~;;;....
~; ;., ~ ~;., ~ ~~Ii:;"
g. 0 0 8 "0
~_~' ~ -I ~ -f 2 ~
gi~ ~ ~ ~ k ~
III ~ <1l <1l !'i ~
~- ~ t" 0
~ ~ ~ ~ I
[ I I I f
~
~
.
~
~ ~
~,
[
~ I '
, I
~
~'
.
[
.... ""''''' ... ........ ... ....VltA'-'l(,oll
,,-
.'='.</J
~ ~
"'"
~ 8
:s g
~~
w~
.........
, 0
o 0
g=
oS
Q b
o 0
~ ~
~'"
~ ~
g'g
o 0
is is
I::
e
o
.
8
o
o
=
8~
U
88
-
'"
,
o
~
is
,.
t::.
~
.
g
is
~ ~
EA'" ........
-
" '.
ON
~~
n
88
*"'toot ........
.~
~
~ .~
p en .~ w
8~ P
8 g g i '
........"" I .........to<!
'it
o
.
g
"
o
::
~o
g~!"
~8~
88g
-
B ~
- "
~....
00
Q N
~ ~
,.,
~ -
. ~ N
'''' -
u.~ .<li> N
~ ~ -.~
~, ~ 0>
8' <:> <:. ~
o o.
~
=
'0
~
00
~
o
~ ~
....-tA..........1.............. ........ "".,..
"
~ i!
'g~
o 0
b i:>
o 0
~~
~
i
o
o
-
~ 0;
~ ~
~ ..
g 8
.... toot.,.,..,.......... ........""'........ (A(Il....
- .
n
H
<::0 <:.
Q 0
~ ~
~
'il
o
.
8
~
Q
~" -
5 N ~
~H
8 g g
@g8~~
~~~n
88888
to<I.... ........
w
N: N
N W .
(JI. l.oJ N
8 t i...a 3:
o ~ !; er.
g g ~ ~
""to'!"", ....to<I
:.
jJ1"'~ ~
Y'.UliJ, ....
U!l\ ~
88 g g
N
..
..
....
u~u
N
g
'"
~H
H~
N
Q
..
'"
....to'I .........,..
"
: I ,1
I'
I I
~[:!:~!fril~ ~i~~~~f~ in~HJ
~. @ ~[ii'_ i!. ~ i. - -~~!S Illh
~ ~~ ~~!a !;? ~ :I~~~~~>~ -Qg'
N~"""R,,~.N ~ );~m.~ g .
~ pg.~~~. ~ ,~ "hi. gail
o a ~ c ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ll:;;~ ~ .
i~~ff~ ;[! i !~-U~I~~!
~h..~, ~ iAg'['3'
8iw::~g 8 ~\r" ~.g
~~ ~~~ ~ Hi ~~'"
S[~ ~K w titS .mg
i w~ ~- f~
~ ~ ~ [
[ [I~I~
i i ~~
~ ~
~' I l
K ~
.... ......................,.,...... ....tA.............................l,<I.............
"
~
.
o
o
~
o
I
, "
Ul N~ ....)/l.~
<.JINO(,/lNO':'
~ nlU ~ ~
8888888
"~ -~ .
~8....C:'Si:$()'~Ul~,dE~
u~un~'n~
88888888888
~
~
o
is
""'.....: ....
,;,,1
U\~ i
;:g~ .~ w
~ g: ::::::i
e;. eo-
8 ~ is 8
..
~
~'"
o~
.gj;;
8~
8~
~ ~ ~
..... ..... .....\:f'I
~ l:'
~ ~[
b .,.,::JJ
~ i.1
~H
, '~
-.: [~
~ t:i~
0-
~ -
~ ~
~ ~
g is
~ -
" _; N I
N ... - .... i
~ ~ ~ ~
8 g g 8
~~ ~
~
~
~
~~ :
~~ ~
'5 ~ e
88 8"
~
8
~
~
8
....'lI'l..... .......................-b'l
lo4...HA....
~
~
8
r.
~
o
'=
8
o
o
~ ~ ~
~ ~
, "
....!"" ................................ !
~ ~
N .....
~ ~
Nf..!
Q 0
00
g g
~ ~
. ~
8 ~
bb
S S
g g
N
,'5 "l:
g 81
g "8
~ ~
N .~ N
j~ g 8
Ig ~ ~
- ~
""4ooIl ....""
"
~
'0
o
o
8
ru.;
~ J~~ Ig
"2:f i~
~ ~ Ie
8' OIQ
o 0
~~
.....io'O ...."".....""4ooIl
'-
!~
I.
S
is
"'-
~.:s; ~!
, !:.
~!'I ~
8 g is
...,1.... ""~ 400Il ""
1 ,
j ~1.~
8 ~ g
8 g g,
"
~
.
o
~
o
o
~
~.N ,~
~ ~ is 8
88 d
""..... ""(A
k;;
8.~ ~
"f. I
~:"" g I
8 ~ g ,I
....""1
...fN -;;
.~~J;; .g
"~'~ ~ 8
<:S!p!-" e
8@,:5 g
(A"", ....""
b
~ -
N II) IN
'g~ I~
5, 8
8 g 8
1 1
,
~I~
8~
88
8N ~ "9
, 0 N
8;g ~
8 g 8
""r..... .......
r.~
, .
~ ~ .
. ~ .c
8,. g
8 ~ gl
~
""... ....""
.8
8
8
~
8~ ~
.~ ~ ~
8:3 8, I
""..... ....""
"'-
~.t ~
. = .
8 ~ g
8 g g
o
"
~
8
o
.
~
l
~
"
,
~
~
...,..... ""iA
.8:.~~.u>
8888
8888
;;;"
~ 0 ~
0.0 8
. g .
~, g
8 g g
,g.~
88
88
8
~
'8
~ ~ ~
~
..
1S
~
o
, I
!
~ ~ ~
~ ~,
~I
~~
~ N I'
N 0
1c ~ 8
~ 0,
g ~ 8 I
.. gJ ~~
~.N Ct'l'
~~~t
8:3 ;;
,
! ~
~I lC
~ I go
~J g
.' ..
~! 11l
!~ N 8
" 0
~ 'g ~
g g 8
N
,
"
8
8
~~ ~
~~
I
I
I~'~
,~ ~
8~
~I:
b
- ~
000
.0....
8~
8 g, '"
_,
...f.-;; ~'I
- ~ 0
_0);: Q I
8di
g e gl.
"".....1 I""
, ,
~
",,) ""
I!
I "I;:;
I .@~ .~
I~n
@ ~ is
~
8
c
,~ i~1
8 8i
8 ~i
I
,
1
I
I
~~
"",(oOI'4r'I ""
~
~ "
8~.::j ~
Ut ~
88 g :;
~H
~p
a'
~~!1
~
,~~
~ i ~
~ ~ i.
~a~
~"g
g~&
~
U
H
Ii
5g
I *~
'v.
~
:t '"
~ ~
:. ~
t
g
~~gil'U~~
a~~~aua
~"~UU
g 'HH~
o/~~~~~"~
i-:H H
[ iH.n
~ ~~~ ~~
g H ,~~
~
~
8
,
~'
~~
~ [
,:,
~~
~
a.
1i
2
o ~
~-
" 8
I ~
3
~
~~
. ,
. "
"
i
~
.
:;>
o
a
o
.
.
~
-s'
0'
,
~
2
.
1
~
~
~
~
~
,
"
~
c
m
z
:I:
F
~
'"'
>
."
=<
>
...
!i:
."
:1J
~
m
;:
m
~
."
:1J
8
:1J
>
;:
."
<:
m
-<
m
>
:1J
</l
c:
;:
~
:1J
-<
N
:5
~
~
...
..
~
"
~
~
<;
z
~
~
.
Ii
c
~
-
N
o
o
~
. Opticon Pre-Emption Devices
(EVP's)
Intersection
Tier 1
Highway 96 & Highway 10 (All) .
Highway 96 & Round Lake (N, E, W)
Tier 2
Lexington and 694 South Ramp
Lexington and 694 North Ramp
Lexington and Red Fox
County Road E and Highway 51 West Ramp
County Road E and Highway 51 East Ramp
Tier 3
Lexington and Grey Fox
County Road E and Pine Tree
TOTALS
Arden Hills Cost Shoreview Cost Total
9500 9500
7000 7000
1500 1500 3000
1500 1500 3000
2500 2500 5000
3000 3000
5000 5000
2500 2500 5000
3000 3000
35500 8000 43500
.
.,
Information from Ramsey County Public Works
Priorities for Tiers recommended by Ramsey County Sheriffs Department
'Per letter from Ramsey County dated 2/8/06, EVP's will be installed via joint MnDOT/RC signal project
in 2006,
.
.
.,
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
February 14,2006
Agenda Item 2E
TO:
Mayor and Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
Karen Barton, Community Development Director ~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Survey Requirements
Attachements
1. Land Use Application
Currently, the City of Arden Hills requires all Land Use applications to submit a
professionally prepared survey as part of the application. The survey is used by staff
and the Planning Commission for analysis and to formulate a recommendation. This is
particularly important when the legal description of the property is being
affectedlchanged (i.e., minor subdivision or lot consolidation).
While a survey does add a significant cost, it is also an important tool for evaluating
variance requests. A survey is used to verify the location of lot lines and to determine
exactly how far a structure would encroach on a setback or exceed other zoning
requirements-both of which are essential for accurately evaluating the request and
determining if a hardship exists. When a resident is requesting a variance that is close
to the property line, it is particularly important to know the exact location of lot lines to
ensure that new structures or additions are built entirely on the applicant's property.
Since the right-of-way is almost always larger than the actual surface of a City street, it
is also not uncommon for applicants to be uncertain of where the right-of-way ends and
their property begins, which is crucial for front setback variance requests. Requiring a
survey ensures a higher level of accuracy that reduces the possibility of errors related to
lot dimensions. lot line location, lot coverage, and setbacks.
Requiring a professionally prepared survey does add additional cost to the homeowner;
however it allows for a higher level of accuracy and helps to ensure that development
projects are implemented as proposed. It also assists in protecting the City from
lawsuits associated with encroachment on private property. Additionally, a survey with
topographic information is very helpful in determining if a property has an actual
Survey Requirements Memo to Mayor and Council
February 14,2006
Page 2
.
hardship. A unique topographical challenge (i.e., steep slope, a wetland, odd lot angles,
etc) is often a key factor for approving a variance.
Even if a homeowner is able to locate the pins, we cannot be assured that those pins
have not been moved over time, unfortunately.
We do encourage homeowners to meet with staff prior to submitting a variance request
to help determine the likelihood of an approval, and more importantly to help formulate
alternatives to a variance request, if possible.
While surveys are important and even vital in many land use and variance request
situations, staff does recognize that there are instances in which a survey may not be
necessary (i.e., increasing the height of a non-conforming use). The Arden Hills
application does not give staff the explicit authority to waive the survey requirement.
In order to best serve the residents of Arden Hills, as well as maintain and conform to
legal and professional requirements, staff is requesting that the Council consider
authorizing staff to determine administratively if a professionally prepared survey is
necessary, and allow for administrative waiver or partial waiver (i.e., waiving the .
requirement for 2 foot topographical measurements on the survey).
\\Earth\Planning\Forms\City Council Memo Form,doc
-
.
~
~HILLS
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112
Telephone (651) 634-5120
Fax (651) 634-4137
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
For Office Use Only
Planning Case No, 06-
Submittal Date
Application Accepted By
Receipt Number
Council Decision
Council Decision Date
2006 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information
Applicant:
Address:
Telephone No,:
Fax No,:
Email Address:
Property Information
Property Owner
Owner Address
Address of Property Involved:
. Legal Description:
.,
Property 10 No.:
Current Zoning:
Type of Use:
Property Acreage:
ape of ReQuest*
Apportionment of Assessments ($30)
o Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($300)
o Final Plat (including in Preliminary Plat)
o Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($300)
o Planned Unit Development ($600 + escrow)
o Preliminary Plat ($400 + $25 per lot + escrow)
o Rezoning ($300)
o Site Plan Review ($400)
o Special Use Permit or Amended Special Use Permit ($300)
o Vacation of Easement ($250 + escrow)
o Variance (Sign Ordinance) ($250)
o Variance (Zoning Ordinance) ($250)
o Zoning Ordinance Amendment ($300 + escrow)
Page 1 01'3
. Applicants are responsible for
reimbursement of consultant
fees associated with filing,
reviewing, and processing of
this application. Such fees are to
be paid in escrow up front or
upon receipt of statement from
the City of Arden Hills. Fees
include costs for consultants
retained by the City and include
consultant planning services,
attorney, and engineer.
Payment of park dedication
fees, established by City
Ordinance, are required with
certain procedures,
Brief Description of Request (please also include a detailed leller explaininQ the proiect):
.
Filinq Requirements and Payment of Fees
The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the
application process, requirements, and deadlines. The undersigned acknowledges that she/he
understands that before this request can be considered, all required information and fees (including all
deposits) must be paid to the City in advance. If additional fees are required to cover costs incurred by
the City, the City Planner has the right to require additional payment from one or more of the
undersigned, who shall be jointly liable for such fees. Such expenses may include (but are not limited to)
direct city payroll and overhead costs, fees paid to consultants and other professionals, and the cost of
printing, mailing, and supplies. The City may withhold final action on a land use application and/or .
rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised that an escrow
deposit is required at the time of the submittal of the Land Use Application to offset costs associated with
the proposed project.
Required Submittal Information
The City of Arden Hills requires the following submittals for all Land Use Applications:
. A certified land survey.
. Site plants) (for all development projects),
. Five (5) large scale copies, folded in sets no larger than 8 y," x 14" with the print side facing out,
. Fifty (52) copies of 11"x1T' reductions of ALL PLANS MUST BE 3-HOLE PUNCHED AND Z-
FOLDED.
. Mailing labels of all properties within 350 feet of the property (this information may be obtained from
Ramsey County),
True and accurate representation of the requirements outlined in the procedural form for the specified
type of request is the responsibility of the applicant.
Complete/Incomplete Applications
An incomplete application will delay the processing of land use requests. The application approval time
commences and an application is considered officially filed when the City Planner has received and
examined the application and determined that the application is complete. A decision on whether the
application is complete or incomplete shall be made within fifteen (15) days following the submillal of the
application, When the application is deemed to be "complete" it shall be placed on the agenda of the first
possible Planning Commission meeting occurring at least thirty (30) days from the date of official
submission of the application.
e
Page 2 of3
.
.
.
Notice of Meetinq Attendance
In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter will be tabled until
the next available agenda.
AQenda Deadline and MeetinQ Schedule
The deadline for submittal of land use applications is required according to the schedule outlined below.
There are no exceptions. All Planning Commission meetings are held on the first Wednesday of each
month at 7:00 PM, City Council meetings are held the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM,
Meetings are held in the Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills,
Minnesota 55112, unless otherwise stated, Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or
workshops are scheduled when necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission.
2006 SCHEDULE ('subject to change)
APPLICATION
DEADLINE
DATE'
DecemberS 2005
Januar 3
6
March 6
TENTATIVE
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING'
(Generally held on
1'tWednesda at 7:00
4
1
June 26
October 4
October 30
September 5
OGtober2
November 6
December 4
December 6
Januar 3 (2007)
December 11
Januar 29 2007
Acknowledqement and Siqnature
I acknowledge that I have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application
and fully understand that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of
this application,
Date
Applicant Signature
Please contact the City Planner at (651) 634-5134 if you have any questions regarding your application.
Additional copies of this appHcation form are available on the City's website:
htto://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us/Deoartments/Communitv DevelonmentIPlannina/olannina forms. him
Page 3 of3
e
e
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Agenda Item 2F
February 13,2006
TO:
Mayor and Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
Karen Barton, Community Development Director~
"'ROM:
SUBJECT:
Proposed Sign Moratorium
Several months ago, the cities of Eden Prairie and Hopkins found themselves facing lawsuits
related to their sign ordinances. At issue is the limitation of free speech through restriction of
sign content.
These cases are still litigating, however, should the cities lose, their entire sign ordinances will
likely be struck down resulting in the plaintiffs being allowed to put up signage without
placement, size, lighting, or height restrictions.
Arden Hills City staff is in the process of amending our sign ordinance to be consistent with
recent changes' in Minnesota Statutes, to be consistent with recent case law in Minnesota, to
resolve any doubt that the City's policies and procedures do not inappropriately restrict free
expression, to match ordinance to practice, and to make requirements less broad and more
specific. This process is anticipated to take six to twelve months to complete.
Given that the City is potentially open to litigation with our Sign Ordinance in its present form
and that it will take a pcriod of several months to amend our sign ordinance, staff is requesting
the City Council consider implementing a sign moratorium on all new permanent sign
applications, for a period not to exceed 12 months.
e IIEarthlPl,nninglForrnslCity Council Memo Fonndoc
.
.
.
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
February 16, 2006
AGENDA ITEM 2.G
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Murtuza Siddiqui, Finance Director
SUBJECT:
Auditor Selection Process
BACKGROUND
The City of Arden Hills has been receiving the annual audit services from the CPA firm of Abdo,
Eick, and Meyers for over the past ten years.
DISCUSSION
It's a customary practice for a number of cities and other governmental entities to bid for audit
services every three to five years. This is a good practice first to ensure that the pricing is
competitive, but also to explore the option of getting another audit firm to examine the
organization from a different perspective,
There are pros and cons of retaining the same audit firm for a lengthy period of time and they arc
outlined as follows:
Pros:
. The auditor is very familiar with the organization and its accounting practices. The
auditor maintains very detailed records of all activities and can be a tremendous source of
information, especially, if there is a staff turnover or gaps in filling positions. The City
has experienced a number of changes in the Finance Department over the past few years.
. Staff does not have to spend an enormous amount of time explaining the organization and
its particular systems or its uniqueness to auditors each year and to discuss details as they
are already very familiar with the system.
. Since the auditors are very familiar with the City's system, they can very helpful to the
staff over the entire year as they have questions about treatment of any particular issues
pertaining to accounting.
. They can be very helpful, particularly if the staff is new, and especially if the size of staff
is small, as is the case in Arden Hills.
C:\Docurnents and Settings\michelle.wolfe\Local Settings\Temporary Inlernet Files\OLK43\Auditor Selection Memo.doc
Auditor Selection Process
2/16/2006
Page 2
. Field work is smooth and less taxing on staff.
Cons:
. Unless an organization bids, it never knows if they are receiving a competitive price. It
may force the current auditor to give a lower price for retention purposes.
. A long-term finance employee can learn the auditor's audit techniques and can work to
their benefit.
. An organization may not receive a fresh perspective if they receive services from the
same auditor year after year. A standardized treatment.
If the City chooses to place an RFP for audit services, the process should start in early summer
and concluded no later than the end of summer, with selection made no later than the start of fall.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is providing Council information for the Council to solicit an RFP for the City's Annual
Audit Services.
.
.
.