Loading...
City Council Minutes 03-09-1987MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, March 9, 1987 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Bill Fair, Dan Blonigen. Members Absent: None. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Bill Fair., seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held February 23, 1987. 4. A Public Hearing on a Proposal to Amend the City Ordinance Granting A Non -Exclusive Franchise to Rite Cable of Minnesota to Allow a Transfer to Jones Intercable. Minnesota's Cable Statute requires that a city council hold a public hearing to amend a franchise when it involves the transfer of ownership of a cable company. Each city council of the ten cities involved in the Cable Commission will be holding their own public hearing on the proposed amendment to allow for the transfer of ownership of the cable franchise and also the Cable Commission itself will be conducting a public hearing and make recommendations to each council on the proposed sale. Hearing no comments from the public, the public hearing was closed. After receiving input from the Cable Commission public hearing, the City Council will consider the adoption of an ordinance amendment allowing for the transfer to take place. 5. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution of Final Approval for the Issuance of Industrial Revenue Refunding Bonds for Monticello Medical Facilities. The Medical Facilities Company has completed all requirements for issuance of Industrial Revenue Refunding Bonds that will lower their interest cost on the original Industrial Revenue Bonds approved by the City a number of years ago. The refunding will save approximately $65,000 per year in interest cost to the Medical Facilities Company; and the City's legal consultant, Holmes & Graven, Inc., recommended the City approve the final resolution. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution of final approval for the issuance of Industrial Revenue Refunding Bonds for Medical Facilities. See Resolution 87-6. -1- Council Minutes - 3/9/87 6. Consideration of Entering an Agreement with MN/DOT for the City to Accept Financial Responsibility for the Monthly Utility Bill for Lighting the New Mississippi River Bridge. In 1929, the City of Monticello entered into an agreement with MN/DOT to pay for the necessary electricity costs to properly light the sidewalk across the current Mississippi River Bridge. In the late 70's, the lighting and wiring system on the old bridge began to significantly deteriorate and has not been usable since that time. MN/DOT is currently developing plans for lighting the new four lane bridge across the Mississippi River, and they have again requested that the City of Monticello participate in paying the electrical cost of lighting the new bridge. As proposed, there will be a total of six high pressure sodium lights that would cost the City approximately $385 per year to light if the City was responsible for the entire cost. It was noted by Public Works Director, John Simola, that since three of the lights would be in Sherburne County portion of the bridge, the Sherburne County Engineer was asked whether Sherburne County would be willing to pay for half of the lighting cost. Sherburne County, at this time, did not indicate a willingness to share in the lighting cost. Council members questioned whether all state highway bridges located in a municipality is the responsibility of the city to pay for the lighting cost or whether the City of Monticello would be unique. Public Works Director, John Simola, noted that some cities do pay for the lighting cost, but MN/DOT does pay for many others; and the set policy has not been established. It was noted that previously the City was responsible for lighting on the old Mississippi Bridge primarily because the lighting was for the sidewalk pedestrian traffic, and the light was not meant to primarily light the traffic lanes like the new structure would. As a result, a motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to inform MN/DOT that the City was not agreeable to paying for the lighting cost, as they felt the lighting was primarily for bridge traffic safety and not just pedestrian traffic like in the past. 7. Consideration of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing to Consider the Making of Public Improvements in Construction Five Subdivision and Along County Road 118. As part of the development of the Middle School south of I-94, the development plans propose an extension of an 8 -inch water main along County Road 118 to service the school site. Future plans for a new water tower near the Monte Club Hill would involve the construction of a larger water main along County Road118 which would duplicate the school district's proposed water main extension. As a result, the school district indicated a willingness to share in the cost of a larger water main to eliminate duplication of construction cost -2- Council Minutes - 3/9/87 and the City would consider adding this construction to the recently approved public improvements in Construction Five Subdivision near Lauring Lane. In order to add this segment to the proposed 1987 project, a public hearing was recommended to be held on the proposed improvements to allow the City the ability to assess benefiting property owners in the future for the water line extension. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution setting March 23 as the date for the public hearing on the proposed improvements along County Road 118. See Resolution 87-7. 8. Consideration of Entering an Agreement to Participate in a Fire Mutual Aid Training Program. The fire departments of the cities of Becker, Big Lake, Elk River, Zimmerman, and Monticello have discussed the possibility of entering a mutual joint powers agreement for the purpose of sharing training aids for the respective fire departments, primarily for the use of training VCR tapes. The Elk River Fire Department currently owns eight video tapes pertaining to specific subjects on fire safety and training that they are willing to make available to the five member organization. The purchase of additional video tapes to complete the first series of training tapes would total an additional $1,881. The Elk River Fire Department received an $800 grant from Sherburne County which would reduce the cost to $1,081 to be shared amongst the five communities for 1987. The preliminary draft of the joint powers agreement was reviewed by the Council, but questions were raised on the agreement and the future cost to the Monticello Fire Department in upcoming years. A representative of the Monticello Fire Department was not at the meeting to answer questions; and as a result, it was recommended that the item be tabled until the next meeting to allow for more information to be presented. A motion had been made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, to approve entering into a joint powers agreement if the agreement would allow for the City of Monticello to approve of the organization's budget expenditures by October 1 of each year and provided that all five cities join the association. Because more information was needed, the motion was unanimously defeated. 9. Consideration of Ratifying the Proposed Date for the 1987 Board of Review. The Wright County Assessor's Office had tentatively set May 18 at 7:30 p.m. as the date for the annual Board of Review, which was accepted by Council consensus. -3- Council Minutes - 3/9/87 10. Consideration of Authorizing the Purchase of Certain Public Works Equipment. Public Works Director, John Simola, presented a request to purchase five items budgeted for in 1987. The items requested included a magnetic locator for $615, a pressure washer for $2,714.84, an emergency rescue boom hoist for $2,523.10, an air tamper for $695, and the installation of a lift station alarm system for $1,800, totaling $8,347.94. It was noted that PSG, Inc., the contractor of the Wastewater Treatment Plant, would pay $605.78 of the cost of the emergency rescue boom hoist bringing the net cost to the City for all items requested at $7,742.16. After further discussion of each item, motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the purchases as outlined above. 11. Consideration of Authorizing Repair of Manholes. The city currently has four old brick manholes in the downtown area sewer system that were in need of extensive repairs. The manholes are located at the intersections of 1) Linn Street and Third Street, 2) Broadway and Linn Streets, 3) Broadway and Locust Streets, 4) Locust Street just south of Broadway. The estimated cost of replacing the four manholes would be in the neighborhood of $18,000; and as a result, the Public Works Director has been investigating the alternate method of repairing the existing manholes by casting an entirely new manhole inside the old manhole. Water Products Company of Eden Prairie has successfully performed this work at other communities and quoted a price of $4,920 for the repair of the four manholes. It was recommended by the Public Works Director that the City consider this alternative rather than replacing the manholes with new structures at an estimated cost of $18,000. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to authorize Water Products Company to repair the manholes at the quoted price of $4,920. 12. Consideration of Ordering the Preparation of a Development Design for Downtown Monticello by Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban. Over the past two or three years, a number of meetings and informational sessions have been held with the City's Planner, Howard Dahlgren and Associates, along with the downtown retail community to discuss the possibility of downtown rehabilitation along Broadway and adjacent streets. Throughout the process, the downtown retailers have been presented with a concept/sketch plan that was prepared by the City Planner which indicated the various kinds of elements and design features that could be drawn into a proposed rehabilitation plan. -4- Council Minutes - 3/9/87 Recently, the downtown retailers had been asked to arrive at a consensus among the members as to the types of improvements they would like to see designed. As a result, the retailers presented three key elements that they would like to see designed in a downtown rehabilitation program including 1) upgrading of pedestrian walkways, 2) the lowering of the street lighting, and 3) placement of plantings to soften the concrete and asphalt rights-of-way. A majority of the property owners in the downtown area signed a statement indicating they would like to see the City proceed with the next step in a development design incorporating these three features. The City Planner estimated the cost of preparing a development design stage at between $10,000 to $18,000. The development design plan would carry with it a certain number of detailed options, but the basic layout would be finalized. The actual final details would be left until final plans and specifications were prepared. Since the downtown rehabilitation study has been proposed for a number of years, a motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to approve ordering the preparation of a development design plan including a cost estimate of the proposed improvements. After the plan is presented and the cost estimate is reviewed, a determination would be made on how the project would be financed or assessed to the benefiting property owners. 13. Consideration of an Offer or Offers to Acquire the Old Fire Hall. Recently, the City Council ordered that the City initiate action to market the old fire hall site at the corner of Cedar Street and Third Street. This action resulted from an offer made by Dr. Clarence McCarty to purchase the fire hall site for $65,000, which was rejected. Since that time, Mr. Curt Markling has expressed an interest in acquiring the property and presented a purchase agreement indicating a willingness to purchase the property for $80,200 contingent upon the City approving the buyers development plans for an on -sale liquor establishment. Along with this purchase offer, Dr. Clarence McCarty also presented a purchase agreement offering $80,100 for the site to be used for a dental office. Since the two offers received were primarily identical in price, the Council then turned their discussion towards the proposed uses of the site. Councilmember Bill Fair questioned the parking requirements that a liquor establishment proposed by Mr. Markling might require and the effect the parking would have on residential properties in the neighborhood. It was noted that the liquor establishment would require a greater number of parking spaces which are not available on the site but could possibly be leased from the City's municipal parking lot. It was noted that even a dental clinic would require more parking spaces per City Ordinances than were available on the site but would be much less than a liquor establishment. Mr. Markling indicated that his present plans are to add a 900 sq ft addition to the building in addition to the remodeling necessary for the liquor establishment. -5- Council Minutes - 3/9/87 Discussion by the Council included the idea of requesting sealed bids for the property. In addition, some Council members were concerned whether accepting an offer to sell the building would require the City to, for example, approve the developer's plans and require the issuance of a liquor license. It was noted by the City Administrator that prior to the issuance of an on -sale liquor license, a public hearing would have to be held and any development plan for the property would have to go through the normal channels, including a Planning Commission review of the proposed development, etc. After further discussion on the two proposals, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Blonigen, to accept the purchase agreement offered by Curt Markling to purchase the property for $80,200 with the contingency that Mr. Markling would have 60 days to receive the necessary approvals for his proposal. voting in favor was Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Arve Grimsmo, Dan Blonigen. Opposed: Warren Smith. 16 � C Rick Wolfstelle Assistant Administrator M