Loading...
CIty Council Minutes 01-23-1984MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL January 23, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus. Members Absent: None. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. A correction was noted under item 3, Citizen's Comments, changing the name from Barb Hemmel to Barb Hellman. After noting the correction, motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the January 9 meeting as presented. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests and Complaints. Mr. Bob Harwarth questioned whether any plans were in the works by the City for curb and gutter along West River Road near Otter Creek. Mr. Harwarth was concerned about the traffic that is continually cutting the sharp corner resulting in the boulevard portion being used for roadway purposes. He felt that possibly curb and gutter would eliminate this problem and further define the roadway surface. Council members discussed with the Public Works Director whether some other type of measures could be taken by the City to slow down the traffic in the area and also make the corner safer by possibly installing some sort of guard rail barrier or possibly just curbing a small segment of the street around the corner. Mr. Harwarth also asked if the City couldn't consider possibly establishing some sort of road from West River Street that would connect to County Road 75 in the area of the trailer park, which would help alleviate some traffic using West River Street and Otter Creek Road to get to County Road 75. It was noted that the City would check on a possible alignment of the present Kenneth Lane in Ritze Manor to see if this could some day be extended to County Road 75 to provide an alternate access. 4. Public Hearing - Revocation of Oakwood Drive by Wright County. Mr. Wayne Fingalson, Wright County Engineer, was present at the meeting to conduct a public hearing on the County's proposal to turn over ownership of a portion of Oakwood Drive between Highway 25 - 1 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 and Gould Bros. Chevrolet to the City of Monticello. Mr. Fingalson explained that as part of the I-94 construction in the early 70's, the State of Minnesota constructed a bypass service road to connect the old township road to Highway 25 and turned this road over to Monticello Township when the I-94 segment was completed. In September, 1974, the City annexed this area into its city limits, and the Township stopped main- taining this segment of road. The City, therefore, began maintenance in the fall of 1974 assuming it was a City road; but actually the State of Minnesota released ownership of this street to Wright County in 1975. The County is not interested in keeping this segment of road as a County road, and as a result is planning on turning over ownership now to the City of Monticello. Questions were raised by the Council as to whether the City should be reimbursed for its past 9� years of maintenance expense and also 1983's large expenditure for overlaying this segment of road with bituminous surfacing. Normally, before the County can release ownership of a road to a municipality, the road has to be brought up to County standards. The $13,000 the City of Monticello spent improving the road last year possibly should have been a County expense before the road could be given to the City. When the State of Minnesota turned over Oakwood Drive to the County in 1975, the State of Minnesota also turned over land which is now the commuter parking lot to Wright County, which the City acquired in 1981 for the use as a commuter parking lot. Before the County conveyed the land to the City for the parking lot, they attached a covenant restricting its use only for a commuter parking lot or it would revert to County ownership. The Council questioned Mr. Fingalson as to whether the County would release this covenant as part of the deal to accept the Oakwood Drive road. Mr. Fingalson noted that on December 20, 1983, the County Board again passed a motion indicating that the covenant would remain on the property. It was also noted by the Public Works Director that if the City accepts this road, the City of Monticello will be incurring a large expense in 1985 due to the planned upgrading of Highway 25,as the City would now be the owner of the property and would have to share in the cost of the improvements including a stop light, which could result in a $30,000 expense to the City. Mr. Fingalson noted that it is the County's intention to give the road back to the City re- gardless as to whether the City wants the road or not but noted that the County may be receptive to some sort of negotiations on past improvements or other consideration. After considerable discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that Mr. Fingalson relay to the County Board the City of Monticello's desire to accept this segment of Oakwood Drive contingent upon 1) that the County remove the covenant it placed on the commuter parking lot - 2 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 property, 2) that the County consider improving County Road 75 from the Monticello High School to East County Road 39 with shoulder improvements at their expense rather than being shared with the City, 3) that possibly the County consider reimbursing the City for some of the additional expense that the City will be incurring because of the planned Highway 25 improvements at this intersection resulting in an additional cost of approximately $30,000 to the City. Mr. Fingalson noted that our comments will be forwarded to the County Board for their consideration on Tuesday, January 24, at 10:00 a.m., and he would get back to the City Council on their decisions. 5. Public Hearing - Rezoning Request to Rezone from R-1 to B-3, Applicant - City of Monticello. A public hearing was held by the City of Monticello to consider the possibility of rezoning from R-1 to B-3 an area located south of Golf Course Road (County Road 39 West) and the intersection of Elm Street. The initial action stems from a request by Mr. Marvin Scherer to build a storage building on his property adjacent to County Road 39 located next to the Bridgewater Telephone Company storage property. Through previous Planning Commission and City Council action, Mr. Scherer's request for a storage building was denied, as the property was zoned residential; and Mr. Scherer's planned building would not be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. A public hearing was requested to consider the possibility of rezoning this area to commercial,.as additional property in the area is currently being used for purposes other than residential such as the Bridgewater property, Griefnow Sheet Metal facility, and other uses such as NSP and City Maintenance Garage. The Planning Commission, in reviewing this rezoning request, felt that the area does still have residential uses and is adjacent to a large residential development, Country Club Manor, and that the property should still remain residential in use. Mr. Marvin Scherer again indicated that he felt the property should be rezoned to commercial, as none of the adjacent property owners have objected to the rezoning. Councilman Maus noted that the area, in his opinion, is predominately used for other uses rather than residential, and possibly the City should consider rezoning this area to commercial or industrial. Councilman Blonigen also felt the City should consider as part of its Comprehensive Plan review the possibility of placing Ruff Auto Parts in its proper zone, which would be industrial, rather than leaving the property residential, which just hinders their operation. - 3 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 As a result of the discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to incorporate this area into the Comprehensive Plan for further review at a later date. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to table any action on the rezoning at this time to enable the entire City Comprehensive Plan to be reviewed at a future date. 6. Consideration of a Preliminary Plat Called Par West, Applicant - John Sandberg. The Planning Commission, at its last meeting, recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat called Par West consisting of 49 lots. The entire subdivision as presented consists of a combination of R-2 and R-1 residential zoning and contains applications for Conditional Uses for up to 40 townhouse units within the R-2 proposed zone. The townhouse units would be primarily adjacent to the Golf Course property. As part of the Planning Commission's approval, it was their recommendation that park dedication requirements be made in cash donation based on 100 of the market value of the land rather than the City accepting more park land. Mr. Sandberg proposed to the Council that the City accept 2.8 acres of land located on the west end of the plat adjacent to its existing park area in lieu of cash. It was the staff's opinion, along with the Planning Commission's recommendation, that the City of Monticello currently has plenty of park area in this end of town and would rather see cash be contributed for Mr. Sandberg's park dedication requirement, as these funds could be used to develop the existing park areas. Mr. Sandberg noted that 100 of the market value would result in $11,500 being required for park dedication purposes; but he indicated a willingness to go with the County market valuation of $38,500 or $3,800 in cash, and he would still give the land in addition. After considerable discussion on compromise figures, it was suggested that Mr. Sandberg contribute 50 of the market value of the property in cash or $5,750 plus 50 of the land consisting of the north half of the proposed park area, which was considered to be usable property. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, to approve the preliminary plat as presented and the preliminary Conditional Use allowing for 40 townhouse units in the R-2 Zone as proposed, and to accept park dedication consisting of cash equaling $5,750 and 50 of the land area consisting of the north half of the proposed park area totaling approximately 1.4 acres. Voting in favor was Maxwell, Fair, Grimsmo, and Maus. Voting in the opposition was Blonigen, as he felt the City should require only cash donations. - 4 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 7. Consideration of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet Prepared for Meadow Oak Subdivision. On November 14, the Council adopted a resolution requiring that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet be prepared for the development of Meadow Oak Subdivision. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet was reviewed by the City Engineer, City Planner, and City staff, and appeared to be acceptable for Council review. A copy of the final draft was submitted to the EQB, which recently informed the City that based on the projection of 536 residential units in the total development, Meadow Oak falls into a category which mandates that an Environmental Impact Statement be done. As a result, the developers of Meadow Oak have indicated that they may consider reducing the number of residential units within the total development to avoid the possibility of preparing an entire Environmental Impact Statement, which in their opinion would be very costly. The City's requirement at the present time would be to accept the Environmental Assessment Worksheet as prepared and set a public hearing date for review of the EAW, which defines the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement that will have to be prepared. Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to set Thursday, February 16, at 2:00 P.M., as the date for the public hearing to determine the scope of the EIS that will have to be prepared. 8. Consideration of Renewing Fire Department Mutual Aid Agreements with Various Communities. Updated Mutual Aid Agreements for fire protection were reviewed and approved by the cities of Becker, Big Lake, St. Michael, Elk River, Buffalo, Maple Lake, and Albertville. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to approve entering into Mutual Aid Fire Agreements with the above communities and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the documents. 9. Consideration of Renewing the Contract with OSM. Mr. John Badalich of OSM reviewed with the Council a proposed contract and fee schedule for engineering services for 1984. Mr. Badalich noted that some changes were made in the proposed contract which he felt made the contract more competitive with other engineering firms and should help reduce the City of Monticello's cost slightly. - 5 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 Briefly, some of the adjustments to the contract include 1) lowering the multiplier from 2.25 to 2.15 for the positions of construction observer and survey crews, 2) the hourly rates stipulated in the contract are maximum hourly rates and the City would be charged only the stated hourly rate even if the employee is paid more than this amount, 3) transportation charges and other items such as clerical, photocopying, secretarial charges, have been built into the multiplier and not billed separately as in the past. After discussion on the fee schedule, motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, to renew the engineering contract with OSM for the year 1984 as presented for engineering services. Voting in favor was Grimsmo, Fair, Maxwell, Maus. Voting in the opposition was Blonigen. 10. One Year Review for Conditional Use Permit and a Variance Permit - Dr. Clarence McCarty. On January 10, 1983, Dr. McCarty was granted a Conditional Use Permit to allow a retail commercial activity in an RB Zone. Dr. McCarty was also granted a one-year variance on the requirement of hard surfacing of the parking area, and he appeared before the Council to request an additional one year extension on the requirement for hard surfacing of this parking area. Dr. McCarty's Conditional Use Permit was to allow primarily a wholesale activity in sales of birds with minor retail sales of birds and related items. Dr. McCarty felt that the parking requirement was not necessary in his business, as he has never had more than one customer at a time since his business is primarily wholesale in nature. It was also the Council consensus that they would like to be sure a business will be continuing before requiring hard surface of parking lots, especially in areas adjacent to residential districts, as if the business fails, the property may revert to primarily residential use and be stuck with a hard sur- faced parking area. As a result, motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to extend the Conditional Use Permit to Dr. McCarty for an additional one year for his retail/wholesale commercial activity for birds only and to grant a variance for an additional one year on the requirement for hard surfacing of his parking lot. 11. Consideration of an Amendment to our Sanitary Sewer Discharge Control Ordinance, Title 14. On April 1, 1983, the City of Monticello enacted a Sanitary Sewer Discharge Control Ordinance to provide a system necessary to monitor and control sanitary sewer discharges through the use of wastewater discharge permits and discharge reports. The Ordinance was reviewed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, which suggested five minor changes or amendments be made by the City. - 6 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 The recommended changes concern certain definitions such as commercial user, significant industrial user, falsifying information, permit application requirements, and prohibited discharges. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to approve the six recommended changes to definitions and other areas within the Sanitary Sewer Discharge Control Ordinance, which became effective April 1, 1983. See Ordinance Amendment No. 131 for detailed listing of definition changes, etc. 12. Consideration of an Amendment to the Ordinance Regulating Transient Merchant Recently, the City of Monticello adopted an ordinance regulating transient merchants, which required establishments such as motels, restaurants, service clubs, and shopping malls, to obtain an annual permit to allow transient merchants. In addition, the ordinance required that each transient merchant who operated from within a permanent structure be required to pay a daily permit fee of $10. Concerns were expressed by the owner of the Monticello Mall who felt they should not be required to collect the $10 fee from each transient merchant, as it was their primary business to lease re- tail space as opposed to a motel, whose business is renting of rooms. As a result, it was recommended by the City Attorney and City staff that the ordinance be amended to still require a shopping mall to obtain an annual permit to allow transient merchants but to exclude a shopping mall from the requirement of collecting the daily permit fees from each individual transient merchant. Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to adopt an ordinance amendment exempting transient merchants conducting their business within the confines of a commons area of a shopping mall from the requirement of the daily permit fee. See Ordinance Amendment No. 132. 13. Department Head Reports. The quarterly department head meeting was held by the Council with Mr. Willard Farnick, Fire Chief, Karen Hanson, Senior Citizen Center Director, Mike Melstad, YMCA representative, Buddy Gay, Wright County Sheriff's Department Deputy, and City staff. Willard Farnick, Fire Chief, informed the Council that the Wright County Commissioners were considering purchasing hydraulic power tools and air bags that can be used by fire departments for extracting people from cars involved in accidents, etc. Mr. Farnick noted that the City of Monticello currently owns a hydraulic tool, and the County is willing to either allow the City to trade in its present tool and - 7 - Council Minutes - 1/23/84 receive a new updated piece of equipment that would match the other four communities in Wright County, or the County Board would be willing to upgrade its present tool to provide more capabilities. Because the City of Monticello is one of the only communities in Wright County to have its own extraction tool, concerns were noted as to who would actually own the new equipment should the City trade in its old equipment to receive the new one similar to the other communities. The reason is that the County is actually purchasing the equipment and placing it with five fire departments in Wright County, but the ownership question has not yet been resolved by the County Board should they purchase the equipment. One possible suggestion made by the Council was that the County could provide the City Fire Department with a new piece of equipment and allow the City to keep its old tool to dispose of as it sees fit. The Council advised Mr. Farnick to report back to the Council at a later date once more details are established by the County Board. Karen Hanson, Senior Citizen Center Director, informed the Council that the Center will be applying for approximately a $4,000 grant from the McKnight Foundation to be used by the Center for acquiring additional tables and other equipment at the Center. It was noted that some roof repairs will be needed at the Senior Citizen Center building and that possibly the Center should consider applying for some grant money to help cover the necessary cost of repairing the roof. If the grant is approved, one-fourth of the grant must be supplied by the local Senior Citizen Center, which Karen Hanson indicated was available through their fund raising activities. 14. Consideration of January Bills. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to approve the bills for the month of January as presented. Rick Wolfstelle Assistant Administrator