City Council Agenda Packet 02-26-2007
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, February 26, 2007 - 7 p.m.
NOTE: SPECIAL MEETING AT 5:30 P.M. ON PROPOSED RENTAL ORDINANCE
Mayor: Clint Herbst
Council Members: Wayne Mayer, Tom Perrault, Brian Stumpfand Susie Wojchouski
I. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2A. Approve minutes of February 12, 2007 Special Council Meeting
2B. Approve minutes of February 12, 2007 Regular Council Meeting
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizen comments, petitions, requests and concerns.
5. Consent Agenda:
A. Consideration of ratifYing hires and departures.
B. Consideration of waiving statutory liability limits for City insurance renewals.
C. Consideration of temporary beer license for Monticello Lions Club for Riverfest
celebration.
D. Consideration of approving monthly renewal of pawn shop license for Walt's Pawn
Shop.
E. Consideration to approve a resolution calling for public hearing on the proposed
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No. I and the proposed establishment ofTIF District No. 1-38 (Walker
In -S tore)
F. Consideration of request to authorize WSB & Associates to proceed with the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the proposed Mills Fleet Farm site.
G. Consideration of accepting feasibility report and setting the public hearing date for the
2007 Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2007-01 C.
H. Consideration of approving final payment and acceptance of improvements for the 7th
Street and Highland Way Street and Utility Improvement Project, Project
No. 2004-02C.
I. Consideration of approving Change Order No. I for the 2005 Street Reconstruction
Program, Project No. 2005-01 C.
J. Consideration of approving final payment and accepting improvements for the 2005
Street Reconstruction Program, Project No. 2005-01 C.
K. Consideration of adopting a resolution to Wright County supporting authorization of
speed zone study on CSAH 18 between School Boulevard and CSAH 75.
L. Consideration of approving 2007 Parks Department Tree Program.
6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion.
7. Continued Public Hearing on adoption of revenue stabilization agreement with Xcel Energy.
8. Department Report - Police Department: Dan Anselment, Wright County Sheriff's Dept.
9. Consideration of needs study for Public Works Department and authorization to request
proposals.
10. Review of plans and specifications for repainting of Monte Hill Water tank and discussion of
logo for tank.
II. Approve payment of bills for February.
12. Adjourn.
---
Members Present:
Clint Herbst, Tom Perrault, Brian Stumpf and Susie Wojchouski
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, February 12, 2007 - 5 p.m.
Members Absent:
Wayne Mayer
1. Call to Order.
Mayor Herbst called the special meeting to order at 5 p.m.
2. Nuisance/Blil!ht Ordinance and Enforcement.
The Building Department staff and legal counsel Soren Mattick presented proposed
amendments to the blight/nuisance ordinances. The proposed ordinance amendments would
clarify portions of the existing ordinance and also establish procedures for administering the
City's blight/nuisance ordinances.
Brian Stumpf asked about the administrative ordinance and Soren Mattick explained it is
mechanism to enforce what is already on the books and also helps streamline the
blight/nuisance process. Under the administrative process, a notice of violation is mailed to
the violator. If there is no response a second notice of violation is sent. If the violation is not
corrected a citation may be issued in amount to be determined by the Council. If the violator
does not comply the city continues to issue citations. If the citations are not paid, they can be
assessed back against the property.
Soren Mattick stated that due process requires that you give the violator an opportunity to
plead his case. This hearing could be before the City Council or before a hearing officer or
criminal law judge. Ifthe nuisance is not cleaned up and there is continued non-compliance
with the citations issued, the City can always take the matter to court. The administrative
process would allow nuisance abatement to proceed faster.
Clint Herbst said he would like to see the blight/nuisance ordinance made tighter. The
Council discussed the fine amounts. The first violation would be $75 and each violation
thereafter would increase by $50 which is slightly different than what is proposed in the
ordinance amendment. There was discussion of the definition of calendar year. Clint Herbst
felt it should be marked from the date the citation is issued or 12 months from the date of
compliance. Gary Anderson noted that previously most blight/nuisance abatements were
done on a complaint basis or during sweeps of areas.
The proposed ordinance clarifies the definition of a junk vehicle. Storage of vehicles in the
rear yard was also discussed. At the present time the ordinance allows parking in the rear
yard or in the side yard on the garage side. There was discussion about limiting the number of
cars that could be parked in a back yard. It was noted that any restriction on what could be
stored in the back yard would require an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Any
amendment to the zoning ordinance would require a public hearing. It was suggested that a
public hearing be held for all the ordinance amendments, as it would be a good way to get the
information out to the public and make them aware of the proposed changes.
Brian Stumpf felt the sooner the ordinance is in place the better. Clint Herbst agreed it should
go forward but he wanted to make sure the ordinance was written so it was effective and
enforceable. The Council didn't see any need for vehicles to be parked in the back yard so
they felt the Planning Commission should proceed with that ordinance amendment. Brian
Stumpf expressed concern about parking in the side yard. He felt off-street parking should be
restricted to the driveway with recreational vehicles being parked in the side yard as long as
the parking area was surfaced in some manner as to designate it for parking.
Soren Mattick said the administrative ordinance could be used to enforce the blight/nuisance
ordinances, zoning violations, building code violations, erosion control and other areas of the
code as designated by the Council.
The next steps in the process is to fine tune the proposed ordinance amendments, bring it back
to the Council for their approval and schedule a public hearing. The Planning Commission at
their March meeting could address the amendment to the zoning ordinance on what could be
stored in the back yard. The citation amounts would be made part of the fee schedule that is
approved each year. Clint Herbst asked if the City could justify the fee that is proposed.
Soren Mattick said since this is a penalty having it reflect actual enforcement cost is not as
important. Soren Mattick did note that in violation of the terms of the conditional use permit,
the City would take away the conditional use permit instead of imposing fines. The list of
offenses that would be covered by the administrative process would be set forth in a
resolution adopted by the Council.
A notice of public hearing will be prepared and notice given to previous violators and those
currently in non-compliance of the public hearing. In addition information will be put on the
City's website.
3. Rental Ordinance.
Jeff O'Neill reported staff is working on the rental ordinance. However because of time
constraints for this meeting staff would like to schedule a workshop meeting on the rental
ordinance for February 26, 2007 at 5:30 p.m.
4. ReDresentatives of the Monticello Times.
Kathleen Ostroot and Bruce TreicWer representing the Monticello Times were present to
discuss with the Council concerns about coverage by the paper.
Clint Herbst noted his concern with the reduced amount of coverage that the City is receiving.
Other members of the Council agreed noting that there are many important issues coming
before the City that residents would want to be aware of. For many residents the paper is still
the primary source of information on what is going on in the city.
Brian Stumpf felt that the paper should look at the City as a customer and try to meet their
needs. He expressed his disappointment that on major items such as fiber optics a
representative from the paper was not present. He didn't feel that being short of staff was a
valid reason not to have coverage for city meetings.
Bruce Treichler responded that regardless of staffing issues, the Council meetings are one of
the big items the paper covers. He said although he is new to Monticello, the paper has an
interest in serving the community. He asked that Council contact him if they have any
concerns regarding accuracy or coverage.
Brian Stumpf noted that when the Council discussed looking at other options for the official
newspaper he was surprised that it was three days before anyone from the paper contacted
him regarding the Council's discussion. Susie Wojchouski said in defense of the newspaper,
that the deadline for getting the paper out overrides other considerations. Brian Stumpf felt
that staffing issues was not an excuse for poor coverage. When the full Council meets to
discuss an issue, it is an important item warranting coverage.
Kathleen Ostroot responded that at least seven times fiber optics was covered in the paper and
she was not sure why the Council didn't feel there was coverage of this item. She stated that
the week of the Council meeting the events of the meeting are highlighted and on the off
Council week she devotes space to a more detailed story on one of the key issues of the
meeting. As managing editor it is her job to decide what stories are important.
The Council felt if the argument is used by the paper that coverage is not needed because the
item is on cable, the same argument could be made for not publishing the minutes in the paper
since there are other sources available to the public to get the same information.
Mr. Treichler reiterated that the Council should communicate any concerns about coverage to
him.
5. Adjourn.
The special meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
Recording Secretary
-....
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, February 12, 2007 - 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Clint Herbst, Tom Perrault, Brian Stumpf and Susie Wojchouski.
Members Absent:
Wayne Mayer
1. Call to Order and Pledl!:e of Allel!:iance.
Mayor Herbst called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and declared a quorum present. The Pledge
of Allegiance was said.
2A. Approve minutes of Januarv 12. 2007 rel!:Ular Council meetinl!:.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 12,2007
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2B. Approve minutes of Februarv 5, 2007 special Council meetinl!:.
Tom Perrault noted that the special meeting adjourned at 9 p.m.
SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 5,
2007 SPECIAL MEETING WITH THE CORRECTION NOTED. TOM PERRAULT
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH BRIAN STUMPF
ABSTAINING.
I
3. Consideration of addinl!: items to the al!:enda.
No items were added.
4. Citizen comments, petitions. requests and concerns.
Mayor Herbst noted there was a special meeting held prior to the regular meeting addressing
blight/nuisance issues and how to address them. This item will be coming back to the Council
at a future meeting. The Council also met with representatives from the Monticello Times
regarding newspaper coverage.
No one else spoke under citizens comments.
5. Consent Al!:enda:
A. Consideration of ratifying hires and departures. Recommendation: Ratify hires and
departures for Fire Department, MCC, Parks and Liquor store.
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
B. Consideration of approving request for temporary liquor license for wine-tasting
event. Recommendation: Approve a temporary liquor license for Hi-Way Liquors
for their wine-tasting event at the Community Center on March 30, 2007.
C. Consideration of adopting a resolution in opposition to legislation to allow sale of
wine in grocery stores. Recommendation: Adopt a resolution opposing any proposed
legislation allowing wine to be sold for off-premise consumption at any outlet other
than an authorized off-sale liquor store.
D. Consideration of approving a request for a simple subdivision in an 1-2 (Heavy
Industrial) District. Applicant: Steve Birkeland. Recommendation: Approve the
simple subdivision subject to a finding that the resulting parcels are consistent with the
performance standards of the 1-2, Heavy Industrial District, and the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan.
E. Consideration of approving a request for a conditional use pennit for a comprehensive
sign plan for a retail strip center in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant:
Miller Architects and Builders. Recommendation: Approve the request for a
conditional use permit for a comprehensive sign plan as presented, based on a finding
that the proposed signage is within the allowed parameters of the ordinance and
consistent with the conditions for approval.
F. REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA.
G. Consideration of authorization to conduct a market study for development of a second
liquor store. Recommendation: Authorize staff to request proposals for updating or
completing a new study to include analysis of business viability and identification of
preferred sites.
H. REMOVED FROM AGENDA
I. Consideration of bids for used 936 Cat loader and consideration of award of sale.
Recommendation: Approve awarding the sale of the used 936 Caterpillar Wheel
Loader in as-is condition to Dennis Fehn Excavating of Albertville, MN for $ I 8, I 00.
J. Consideration of approval of additional year end fund transfer. Recommendation:
Approve the transfer of an additional $154,484.57 from Fund 240 (Capital Outlay) to
Fund 477 (CSAH 75/200-16C) to cover the final payment to Wright County and
eliminate a fund deficiency.
K. Consideration of approving appointment to the Monticello Community Center
Advisory Board. Recommendation: Approve an ordinance amendment increasing
the Community Center Advisory Board from a five member board to a six member
board and to approve the appointments of Ron Broekemeier and Robin Morrin to the
Community Center Advisory Board.
L. Consideration of approving bond counsel for proposed City broadband project.
Recommendation: Approve selection of Mr. Stephen RoshoIt and Mr. Mark Meaney
2
Council Minutes: 2/12107
of Faegre and Benson, LLC as bond counsel for the City's proposed fiber network to
the home. Funding for bond counsel costs have been included in the current budget or
could possibly be covered by future bond proceeds.
Items #5C, #5E and #5G were removed from the consent agenda. Clint Herbst noted on #5K,
Appointment to the MCC Advisory Board, that the MCC Advisory Board interviewed three
very good candidates and two of the candidates were selected.
TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE
REMOVAL OF ITEMS #5C, #5E AND #5G. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. Consideration of items removed from the consent aeenda for discussion.
#5C, Resolution in opposition to sale of wine in grocery stores: Tom Perrault stated that he
has talked to a number of people who would like to see the sale of wine in grocery stores and
he stated his opposition to the proposed resolution. Clint Herbst felt that limiting the number
of facilities allowed to sell alcohol gave better control in preventing the sale of alcohol to
mmors.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OPPOSING ANY PROPOSED
LEGISLATION ALLOWING WINE TO BE SOLD FOR OFF-PREMISE CONSUMPTION
AT ANY OUTLET OTHER THAN AN AUTHORIZED OFF-SALE LIQUOR STORE.
SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH TOM
PERRAULT VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
#5E, Conditional Use Permit for Comprehensive Sign Plan: Brian Stumpf said he would
like to know what transpired on this development, how it progressed the way it did and why
the footprint for the retail center had changed. Clint Herbst stated it is important that the City
is consistent in how they handle development applications. Jeff O'Neill stated it was a
judgment call on the part of staff. They did not feel the changes in the plan were significant
enough to justify having the developer wait another 30-45 days to proceed with his plan.
Brian Stumpf questioned besides the change in the drive aisle location, if the width had been
changed from 12' to 10'. Brian Stumpf agreed with the Mayor that everyone should be
treated the same in the development process and no on should receive special treatment. Jeff
O'Neill explained that they were trying to expedite the process for the developer. Brian
Stumpf stated that something like this important enough to be included in the Council update.
TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN AS PRESENTED BASED ON A
FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE IS WITHIN THE ALLOWED
PARAMETERS OF THE ORDINANCE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CONDITIONS
FOR APPROVAL. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
#5G, Development of a second liquor store site: The Council has periodically discussed
developing a second liquor store site but nominal activity has taken place on this matter. The
City had originally looked at locating the store in the area ofCSAH 75/CSAH 39. There has
3
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
been considerable commercial development in this area and it was felt that ifthe City still felt
this area was the suitable location for a second liquor store site, they should be looking at
specific properties and negotiating prices.
The Council discussed various sites in the area but felt they needed someone with greater
expertise to look at the available sites and make a recommendation as to which site would be
most suitable for the second liquor store. The Council questioned whether a market study
should be done at this time or after a site has been selected. Once a site is selected and land
costs negotiated, the City could then research the cost of constructing the building and
determining whether there would be any profitability in having a second store.
Susie Wojchouski raised the question about the possibility of grocery stores and other outlets
being able to sell alcohol and what impact that would have on proceeding with a second
liquor store. She also asked that the Council consider the possibility ofleasing space if they
proceed with a second liquor store site. Tom Perrault felt that the City may fmd that with land
costs and building costs, a second liquor store site might not be feasible. He also noted that a
second city owned site would take another piece of commercial property off the tax rolls.
Clint Herbst felt that City won't know the feasibility of pursuing a second liquor store until
they know land costs and construction costs. He said there are a lot of questions and he
wasn't sure about the right steps to get all the questions answered.
SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO GET THE NUMBERS FOR THE
PROPERTIES LISTED ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA AND GET INFORMATION ON
LEASE SPACE AVAILABLE IN THE CITY AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL.
BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH TOM
PERRAULT VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
7. Public Hearine on revenue stabilization aereement with Xcel Ener2VINSP.
The Council had previously held a public hearing on the proposed revenue stabilization
agreement with Xcel Energy. At that point the Council had directed that certain points be
negotiated and some terms contained in the agreement be clarified. Xcel Energy has refused
to make any adjustments to the terms of the agreement. The Council received information
from Sherburne County listing concerns the County had with the revenue stabilization
agreement. Jeff O'Neill said the agreement made sense from a financial standpoint for the
City. He noted there is political activity taking place on legislation to increase the
classification rates for utilities. The Council has to decide whether to approve the agreement
or hold off on the agreement until the impact of the proposed legislation is known. Darrin
Lahr from Xcel Energy had indicated that Xcel Energy expects the Department of Revenue
changes would be in place by April I ,
4
Mayor Herbst opened the public hearing on the proposed revenue stabilization agreement
with Xcel Energy. No one spoke for or against the proposed agreement.
Clint Herbst asked if it would be wise to table this matter in order to look at some of the items
raised in the information from Sherburne County.
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
Martha Ingram indicated they are good reasons to enter into the agreement, however there
some questions that are problematic such as definition of some of the terms. She indicated
that any further negotiation would not likely be fruitful. She felt it was a policy decision on
the City's part if they wanted to wait a couple of weeks to see what happens at the capitol.
Clint Herbst stated this is an agreement of magnitude that could significantly impact the City,
and the Council needs to feel comfortable signing it. He didn't feel the
City was in a position to gamble on something that they didn't know the full impact of.
Susie Wojchouski stated she would like to discuss the legislation with Amy Koch and do
some additional research with the communities of Red Wing and Goodhue County. For that
reason she would like to see the item tabled for a couple of weeks. Clint Herbst suggested
that when the hearing takes place on the legislation to increase the classification rates for
utility companies the City should have representatives present.
Susie Wojchouski asked if there was anything that indicated that it was required to approve
the agreement tonight. While she was not opposed to entering into the agreement, she did fee
more information was needed.
Martha Ingram said the public hearing could be continued until the next Council meeting.
Clint Herbst asked if the clarification of terms in the agreement was an unrealistic request.
Martha Ingram indicated the utility's position was that these issues have been negotiated in
agreements with the other utility cities. Xcel Energy wants consistency in all of their
agreements and is not inclined to make any changes. Clint Herbst stated he has concerns
about the vagueness of the terms in the agreement.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REVENUE
STABILILZAITON AGREEMENT TO FEBRUARY 26,2007. TOM PERRAULT
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. Public Hearine on Chelsea Road Improvements from CSAH 18 to Fallon Avenue.
Proiect No. 2006-31c and consideration of orderine proiect.
Bret Weiss from WSB and Associates gave a presentation on the proposed reconstruction
project. When the feasibility report was presented the Council had suggested that the pathway
and street lighting be removed from the study and had also directed the engineer to look at
ways of reducing the storm sewer cost.
The reason the project is being considered is because it is part of the overall interchange
improvements. This is a planned improvement which is called for in the Monticello Industrial
Park Agreement.
The project proposes to construct Chelsea Road to a 44' urban section with storm sewer and
ponding alternatives. Some additional sewer and water services are also being considered.
In looking at reducing the storm sewer costs, WSB and Associates will be bidding the use of
plastic pipe as an alternate. Using plastic pipe in lieu of concrete pipe would reduce the cost
by approximately $140,000. As part of the interchange project a portion of Chelsea Road was
constructed. This project would pick up Chelsea Road from that point and extend it to Fallon
A venue. An alternate option would be to construct Chelsea Road to the ponding area and
5
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
have Fallon Avenue line up with the future Fallon Avenue overpass. Bret Weiss noted that
adjacent property owners are not in favor of reconstructing Fallon A venue. The issue with
improving Fallon A venue relates to the need to have a deep trunk sanitary sewer line
installed. Bret Weiss noted there is ponding proposed on the existing City site but additional
land would be needed from WSI. The existing pond is midway between Fallon A venue and
CSAH 18. Monticello Industrial Park is looking to have the pond location changed. Staff
has some concerns about the well at the existing pond location and would request that any
pond be lined with clay. The pond does not have to be added at this time so there are some
options that can be studied.
Clint Herbst asked if there was some reason the ponding could not be placed entirely on City
property rather than acquiring WSI property. It was noted the reservoir site on Chelsea Road
has room for a future treatment plant and two additional reservoirs. Staff is concerned about
maintaining as much property on the site for future use rather than committing it to ponding
area. Bret Weiss stated that Monticello Industrial Park provided 12.5 acres to the City in lieu
of an assessment.
6
Bret Weiss discussed the intersection design for Fallon Avenue which would be a 90 degree
intersection that would line up with the Fallon Avenue Overpass. Future improvements to
Chelsea Road would include the construction of the pathway estimated at $132,000.
Originally the plan called for two 8' concrete pathways to be constructed. Now only one
pathway is being proposed. Street lighting in the amount of$178,000 was removed from the
project with the City Council wanting to look at covering this improvement with funds
generated from a franchise agreement with Xcel. The developer wants to have both the
pathway and street lighting included in this project.
The estimated project cost is $3,334,150 with the City's portion of the cost being
approximately $1,903,500. Bret Weiss explained the 10% contingency which is used because
the project has not gone through the design stage. After the project is bid the 10%
contingency is no longer used. The 28% indirect costs includes engineering, legal, fiscal fees
and administrative. Bret Weiss noted that in most cases the actual indirect costs are closer to
the 15% to 20% range.
The proposed assessments would be reconstruction costs of $ 70/front foot for non-residential
properties plus the cost of any new improvements. Storm sewer assessment is based on
contributing areas and there may be future assessments for pathway and street lighting
improvements. He noted the City is paying a portion of the reconstruction costs including
utility adjustment costs. Bret Weiss reviewed the area proposed to be assessed.
Bret Weiss stated the feasibility report had looked at improving Chelsea Road to Edmonson
Avenue but there did not appear to be any interest in proceeding with this. He also noted that
the former Clow Stamping site owner had expressed an interest in acquiring the excess right-
of-way. Bret Weiss indicated there is a proposed commercial development for the 35 acres
on the south side of the road.
Bret Weiss stated he had received a copy of the letter from the IDC relating to this project and
wanted to address some of the concerns raised in that letter. He said the 2007 date is not stated
in the agreement but implied in it. He stated the assessments for the Monticello Industrial
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
Park property will be deferred until 2011 or until the property develops. The deferred
assessment will be extended as long as it takes the City to complete Chelsea Road
construction project.
The condition of Fallon Avenue was discussed and while it is believed that Fallon Avenue
should be reconstructed the question is the deep sanitary sewer line that is required. Until the
City needs to put in the sanitary sewer line for capacity needs, the City would delay
improving Fallon Avenue. Bret Weiss stated the developer couldn't effectivly market their
property if the improvements are not in ahead of time.
Bret Weiss reviewed the schedule for the project. It is proposed to award the contract in June
with construction to start shortly thereafter and the first lift of blacktop to be in place by
November 2007. The assessment hearing would be held in 2008 with the assessment to be
payable in 2009. Bret Weiss stated that the bidding climate is favorable now with contractors
looking for work so the prices should be competitive.
Clint Herbst stated that the street lighting should be covered by the franchise fee so there
would be no assessment for it. Bret Weiss suggested one option with the pathway would be
to put in through the undeveloped portion of the project only. Clint Herbst stated he didn't
feel the pathway was practical in this area and should be left out ofthe project. The street
lighting should be included in the project but not assessed.
Tom Perrault questioned the difference between the plastic and concrete pipe for the storm
sewer. Bret Weiss responded that the concrete pipe is more fail safe. Plastic pipe has not
been around as long as concrete pipe. Bret Weiss said they have not used plastic pipe in the
size needed on this project. John Simola indicated that placing the storm sewer in the
boulevard area of Chelsea Road was discussed but that it was not covered in the feasibility
report. Bret Weiss responded that there was not a cost savings by doing so but agreed it
would allow for easier access. Bret Weiss said they would look at this in the design phase.
Mayor Herbst opened the public hearing.
Mike Benedetto, Vice Chair of the IDC Committee read a letter from the IDC regarding the
Chelsea Road reconstruction project. The letter raised a number of points that the IDC felt
should be addressed. These included: 1) the 28% indirect costs for engineering, legal, etc.; 2)
the speed with which the project was moving forward and the complexity of the issues
involved in this project; 3) the fact that the 2007 commencement date for the project was not
referenced in the assessment agreement; 4) the fact that Fallon A venue appears to have a
greater need for reconstruction than Chelsea Road and; 5) the fact that there is no specific
development or rezoning application in placed. The IDC is not opposed to the reconstruction
of Chelsea Road but questions why it needs to be done right now.
Clint Herbst stated that Chelsea Road is about 20 years old which is close to the end of the
useful life for a roadway. He acknowledged that Fallon A venue is probably in worse shape
but the cost of the sanitary sewer line needed for Fallon Avenue does not make it feasible to
improve Fallon Avenue now. He pointed out there is possibility of development at either end
of Chelsea Road. He felt it was better to do the reconstruction before development takes
places rather than after it takes place. Clint Herbst said while no rezoning application is in
7
8
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
place the property owner of the property to south has requested that work on an EA W be
initiated.
Mike Benedetto reiterated that the IDC does not deny the fact that improvements have to take
place but felt it should be slowed and take place at the time rezoning occurs. Clint Herbst said
time was a big issues as far as completing the work.
Brad Barger, 301 Chelsea Road asked if the Chelsea Road was deteriorating and in need of
reconstruction why wasn't the City proposing to reconstruct all of the road. Brad Barger felt
the only reason the project was being done was to accommodate a big box store that was
coming. He emphasized that the present condition of the road would not drive away any
potential business. He was also concerned about putting something that is commercial next to
industrial properties. Mr. Barger stated the assessments for this project would be easier to
handle for the raw land since it could be included in development cost for the land. For
existing businesses the assessment imposed a real hardship. He also questioned why existing
business did not have the option to have their assessments deferred.
Bret Weiss stated there is limited area that could be developed for this project. He noted there
is some benefit to the existing properties which they will realize at the time the property is
sold. The deferment ofthe assessment for the Monticello Industrial Park would allow them
adequate time to develop the area. If the property is rezoned as commercial property, the
owner would pay an additional $.50/square foot for the interchange project.
Brad Barger stated the reason they moved to this location is because it is an industrial park.
Commercial development will create additional traffic and other issues not typically found in
an industrial park. He felt the rezoning should take place before the improvements are
installed. Brian Stumpf questioned if the issue for the property owners is a big box store
coming in. Brad Barger said if there is no rezoning there is no need to improve Chelsea
Road. Brad Barger indicated that at a previous meeting the Council had discussed some roads
that they felt were safety issues. He felt the City would be better off using their funds to
improve the roads with safety issues rather than Chelsea Road. He did not believe that any of
the business owners along Chelsea Road believed Chelsea Road was in need of improvement.
Bret Weiss said Monticello Industrial Park made a $5,000,000 contribution with the
understanding that this improvement would be done. Bret Weiss felt the Council had made a
commitment to the developer. Susie W ojchouski asked if the south side was included in the
agreement with Monticello Industrial Park.
Brad Barger said the assessment is too steep. Since 100% of the cost is not being assessed,
taxpayers are picking up the balance of the cost. For that reason he thought the money would
be better spent on roads with safety issues because in that case the taxpayers would derive
some benefit. Brad Barger also commented that the property owner was getting hit twice
once with the assessment and again by the increased market value.
Bret Weiss said according to the agreement the property north of Chelsea Road would be
zoned B-4. If the City doesn't approve the rezoning the City would abate the assessment.
Brad Barger requested that in the future when agreements are made with a property owner
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
that has a significant impact on other property owners, the impacted property owners should
be notified early on of the situation. In this case the property owners were blindsided.
Bill Tapper 212 Chelsea Road reiterated the comments made by Brad Barger. He felt the
assessment agreement put the carl before the horse. The application and public hearing for
rezoning should be done before the improvement. He felt the road improvements were
premature. He went on to state that the engineering costs for the project were not
competitive. He stated the commitment date the Council was talking about is not in the
agreement. He felt the City fulfilled its obligation by taking the road to the point it is at now.
It is difficult to recognize any benefit to their property at this time. Bill Tapper asked if the
$.50/square foot the City would receive if the property is rezoned would go to reduce the cost
for this project or whether it would end up in the general coffers of the City. He questioned
why the City is putting in the pond and existing business owners have to pay the cost for
draining another's property. He questioned the need for storm sewer pipe when ditches are in
place that could be utilized.
Mary Barger, 301 Chelsea Road spoke representing WSI and Mike Pudge!. She read a letter
from the property owner who stated the assessment for this project would hurt the expansion
of existing businesses in the industrial park. His firm had made plans to expand into the area
where the City was proposing to acquire an easement for ponding. He questioned the purpose
of having an 8' pathway in an industrial park. If the improvements are for the benefit of
property that is developing, the assessments should be placed on that property. He felt there
is no need for curb and gutter in an industrial park. He wondered what traffic studies had
been done. He indicated that at the time the Fallon A venue overpass was justified then the
City should consider improvements to Chelsea Road.
Mary Barger stated the rezoning is driving the improvement project for Chelsea Road. She
stated that existing business have all made contributions to the City. She felt the rezoning
should go through the public hearing process as all other rezonings do. She stated that she did
not feel storm sewer was necessary for this area.
Bret Weiss informed those present that the Fallon Avenue overpass is required by the Federal
Transportation Board. The Fallon Avenue overpass has to be completed within a certain time
frame of the interchange being completed.
Patty Haiby, Twin City Die Casting, agreed with comments from other property owners but
wanted to address the issue of rezoning. When the firm came to Monticello they made a
significant investment in their location. They are concerned that commercial property going
in around them could result non-compatible uses. They are not opposed to commercial
development as long as it something that is supportive of industry such as hotels or
restaurants. She added that they do have plans to expand their facility within a couple of
years so they could be impacted by any development. Susie Wojchouski asked if they were
opposed to commercial development on the north side of the street. Patty Haiby stated they
were concerned about the volume and mix of traffic that commercial development could put
on the road. She indicated a concern of incompatibility stating that the die cast business
generates certain amount of noise and odor that might be offensive to a commercial operation.
9
10
Council Minutes: 2/12/07
Don Tomann, UMC, 500 Chelsea Road echoed the sentiments of the previous speakers. He
felt the issue comes down to the long term commitment they made as business owners.
There is confusion among the property owners by what is being proposed. He stated that Bret
Weiss commented about the commitment the developer had made but UMC has also made a
commitment that brings tax revenue and jobs to the City. He would like to suggest, in
addition to the comments already made, that the Council look at working on the root cause of
this issue which he felt was surprise and lack of trust. When discussions with the developer
were being done in 2005 the property owners should have been notified. The industrial
community would support certain commercial activity such as hotels, restaurants, as right
now businesses have to go outside the City for these facilities. Don Tomann said the
developer has a lot of influence in what is going on. As business owner they too want a voice
in what is happening. He felt the improvements and rezoning issues are tied together. If the
property owners had been notified of the discussion when they happened, things would have
been above board instead of things being pushed because of deadlines. He stated the rezoning
would impact the decision ofUMC as far as further expansion. UMC came to Monticello
because they believed the land was industrial. He felt trust was betrayed because the property
owners were surprised with the rezoning. Brian Stumpf concurred that special agreements
should be something the City should look at in the future. He said it bothers him that people
feel they should be the ones to determine what should be allowed in their backyard. Don
Tomann stated a community cannot survive without industry and the City should look at what
supports industry.
Bill Tapper said the reason given for not building Fallon A venue was because the
infrastructure was not needed yet. He asked why that same logic was not applied to Chelsea
Road. He said this was not like the City's industrial park that didn't have any roads in at all.
In this case there is a road in place. He didn't believe the big box store could be built any
faster than the time it would take for the street project to be done.
Mayor Herbst closed the public hearing. Tom Perrault asked for clarification on the
$.50/square foot fee. Was it going towards the interchange project or to offset the cost of the
Chelsea Road project? Clint Herbst said it would apply to the interchange projects and
Chelsea Road is a part of those projects. Clint Herbst felt until the application for rezoning
was received, any discussion of that was a moot point. He didn't know ifit was going to any
good to hold off on this project. Just because you receive bids doesn't mean you are going
ahead. Brian Stumpf felt the goal was to keep the assessments at a reasonable rate. Brian
Stumpf didn't want to see a pathway go in this area and felt the street lighting should go in
with the City being reimbursed from the franchise fee.
Clint Herbst asked if the use ofthe plastic pipe was reflected in the assessment rates. Bret
Weiss said it was not. Clint Herbst felt curb and gutter was needed in the area and that the
City should proceed with the project.
The speed limit on School Boulevard and how it compares to that on Chelsea Road was
brought up. Bret Weiss reported that traffic studies had been done on School Boulevard. The
recommendation was that the area of School Boulevard west of Edmonson A venue be
reduced to 35 mph.
Council Minutes: 2/12107
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ORDER THE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE
PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF
CHELSEA ROAD FROM CSAH 18 TO WEST OF FALLON AVENUE, INCLUDING THE
INTERSECTION REALIGNMENT AND FURTHER EVALUATE PONDING. SUSIE
WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION BUT WITH A QUESTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Susie Wojchouski asked about ordering the project. Bret Weiss said you have to order the
project in order to assess it.
9. Approve pavment of bills for Februarv.
Tom Perrault had question about the invoice from Wright County for sand/salt. John Simola
stated the invoice did not cover the entire season.
TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS. SUSIE
WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. Adjourn.
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Recording Secretary
11
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
SA. Consideration of approvinl! new hires and departures for MCC. (IO)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Council is asked to ratifY the hiring and departures of employees that have occurred
recently at the MCC. It is recommended that the Council officially ratifY the hiring/departure
of all new employees including part-time and seasonal workers.
B. AL TERNA TIVE ACTIONS:
I. RatifY the hiring/departures of the employees as identified on the attached list.
C. SUPPORTING DATA:
List of new employees.
-
Name
Tyler Feldstein
Alexander Swart
Title
Slide Attendant
Life Guard
NEW EMPLOYEES
Department
MCC
MCC
TERMINATING EMPLOYEES
Name
Ray Theiler
Reason
voluntary
employee councillist.xls: 2/22/2007
Department
MCC
Hire Date Class
2/6/07 PT
2/9/07 PT
Last Day Class
2/1/07 PT
Council Agenda: 2/26/007
5B. Consideration ofwaivinl! statutory liability limits for City insurance renewals. (10)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The purpose ofthis item is to have the Council formally adopt whether it wants to waive or
not waive its monetary limits on tort liability as part of their insurance coverage.
Our annual insurance coverages are renewable in March of each year, and as part of the
renewal process, the City Council must formally indicate whether they want to waive
monetary limits established by state statute. By state statute, statutory tort limits exist that
limit the City's liability to $300,000 on any claim per individual and $1,000,000 from all
claimants for one incident. In addition to the basic $1,000,000 coverage limit, the City has in
the past, purchased an umbrella policy adding another $1,000,000 worth of coverage. Even
though the City carries in effect, $2,000,000 worth ofliability coverage, it has been the past
decision of the City Council to not waive its monetary limits on tort liability thus still
. normally limiting our liability to $300,000 per person. If the Council did not take this
position, an individual could seek damages above the $300,000 limit in any lawsuit.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. The Council should formally indicate that the City of Monticello does not waive the
monetary limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statute 466.04.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator that the City Council should utilize the tort
limits established by state statute and do not waive your monetary limits.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy ofliability insurance application form.
"-..;;
. " _ ' - ',", . , "'- I"~"~ ',-, ';..i,',:,;_", "r_-"'":,',::',_,,:,, _ -;:~,- '('_:'--'-"';:::;';::':"~:,;.-,"r~;1Fl-:_:,:',~,:.'::':;_:: ': r-;.
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST ''''<i</',,::, ;:',
i "., ";,:,<,"', ,F,:/':';;jjl::"'::b':4,;Mi.,,::~."', !',,, ,
, ,UABILlTYCOVERAGE ~,VI(A1VERFORM"{!cnt '<"
, .: , .. . . ". "<': .... (':(:''''':~!'i >ir'/,":r,;;:ji;<1:<~:}'~;::'!'):>';:i':;V:;;f,:~i",,"
Cities obtaining liability coverage from the League of Mirinesota Cities lrisurance Jcrust must Decid
.. .',' " .'. ", - - , ", "-. - ,- ,- -' - ",,- c' .' ,,' ,,' -' _'- -',<,'_)",;', ' , _.' - ""\'"> '.' ':,-,,' ",,: ",,-.'/ ;"''-',i!~;o''-,\,: _' , ","'~I, :",',-'
whether or not to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchase ,'0
decision to waive or not to waive the staiutorY limits has the following effeds::,":/':({".'\i(
. ,'. . '" ....: '.'.. ",< ,'I ':> ,:','<';:!::<:;iil;::\',:,:\ll;;:}~)k:
. If the city does not waive the statutory tort limits. an individual claimant woOld be able to recover n
;, '-, \ -'- --,', "'" -' '-,', -",',;!,-'-','-"-'."-"- --', .,'., ',,,,--,-,,,,,,-'--'-~. ',,',:, "i~-.,,-,..~,,_C';;i"'~J.,..,.q.;
more than $300,000,on any claim to which t~e statulpryto!\l!mits app/y-:The tqt9! >v,hicr,alJ ,~a~
would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tor( iimits"iipply,j.Vould b'
. , , " " - -, 'j -, -" . . , 1', - :; -- '_ "','" --. , ,~"''- , _ .. ' ,', ',_':1 ,__) ;, ' .' -,.., _': _ _ "... ~:' : ,_ '"'',,''' <. " _'"", _ __ _, ,,',,_ _ "_" ',_ ',-,\~
limited to $1,000.000. These statutorY tort limits would .apply [egard/ess of \iihether or not. e'
I . purchases the optional excess"liability coverage.' \\l\/ ..,'::.'i/ ,:..!. ,;\ i.,' 1;-:' ...
,,,' i'" ,!:',;. ' "";,,,':', : ,\"",' .,::, <i,'i'<):\<!c" i',; \i~:; >;:!;:?';:~)~f,':'
. 'If the city. waives the statUtory tori limits anddoas r!6t'p'urchase 'excess iiajjlliiicove~ s
.." '.'::" <""''-'(' -',." ..;, -, -- '.' ","" "'-,,'. y-".'.. ,,-:. 'C'.', :" ,:'" ':", '" ,.-: _ '.' ',' ,", ','c,' , ',;:-::" --,"c'___;. -". '--'_"'~ "" ,. ---'-"1 ,",' "1.(''''1'''''_''
I ,.~~. . ~ -. ,
claimant co~Jd potentially recover up to ,$1 ,000.,090, ~~ a ~!ngl'1. pcc,:\lrrlinc~, : Jr7 ~9t9' ~'Yp,
", claimants would be able to recover'for a single occurrence to which th to .
'. -" ',"' ."'. <';1' ,I " " I. " '1'0
,',,!Iso ~e 11~lte~ \9.,$1.000,00,0". regardle~s, of the 'nql:Jlber,9f"7Iah'T]9!1t "
\ :-'~\ ':':r::~C:,~:;';l~~?:_ ";'>'::.~~?}~' r;,F?:;:',p':>.i":~. -: '-;, ,:,' ~:.:-,:.:'~;3.r~:.)\,:,'):-~,: -'1/" '.:'~-)? .:;-t<i~-i',L: \~':~,"::i;':'}id'::L::~:_ -:::~:i'~t~f~';\T,L:'~:5,
-' " _ _ .
, " "If the city waives the statutory tort limits and purchases 'excess flabilijy, verage,! a s
,'~':,,'f,; v'' )'-'; -. ___,C""_ ..../ '-: :,':','- "-- - "',." -~':~" --":-"'-_:~.: _, .:.' ,'" ,',' \, ..'....:,,,,!'-,..":. '!~::-:.:"~ii;_:~o>..:, ~-:'..,~:.-,_~'~i..~:f.;-,';;
'"c;,I,-"""(';__ ,__ 'I'~, ,"_
GOilld potentially recover an al1Jount up to the 'limit of the coverage p~rcha~ed:'c4'h~:
,::CI~i0'1~Qt~"'9Ulq ,be able to'rec6~er. for'~~ingle ~C9d~~~c~'i61:whi~~,1b~:iJ,~i~1~~)g;
, ' al.~?b~ hmlt':',d t(j the amo~nt 9f~9verage R~rch.?ls79, '~.~,garq!\l.~~ ?,f tb.' ,
~ilAit:ru::l;it~~l~~f~:::t;fl~~~~.
"~",!'-"""".(-"-"j"i ':'-"",~..::;":' '!" -,' >-,,,-.~., ,_': "--,,C-, "-',,;"'i" -"-"";r'~~",,,~~-",,,,,,,-,;~-,,,,:-,,,:-,,,,,,,",,"",
turn this fOf[1') to LMCIT before the effective date of the coverage:' F. ' .
"'_r''-'" '^ ,"'_c" " 111.;',,"1"'.< '(.:':,-'.- '1'-"_" "',", , ""_ "-'.'.', 'i'~-~:':-" ";' . _-, ,,-__:_ ,. ';>.!"" ;"__' .'!'_ ,_ '""''''~'',;.. ;!. -N,'I:"'- ',_ """."I,;"~":'''1
ftJ' iI/ou may fll,~O wish to disC\lss,\hesE! is.s.ues ;yith Y9Urclty'~ttorn:7y:.':r
i;i}"';/j~ ;;; )\:'i ~i' fi:;':j}~.::,::':~ it; r>:.-\.;:',-: - ~\'\ ,:':;" ""!r\'-~ ':'{;-' 1;::~""!;:~;'~<:;' ~.'_' :-'::-:_' ';[.: ;, :,: :!: ;-. -.,Yi(, i ,i',,!l i;,t-",;r /(~Ii,:';:,fd~\.~)~.;'
r_ ::;:':W~~;:i,"~~4.;;.,
~;t ". ' ::.::~ ':::::~. :<,;~,):~:';.\~-.q\~t:::'r::~:~~:;:.<': ~::~:';;:,:i.:,:;; :~:::'~::,,\';\:.?t.::i;~,;:.':;:J~~t;';:;'~:i:itf4;,~~ ;f)jj;/J:-
accepts liability coverage Ilml .
ieiS IJlsurance Tr~dt (LMCIT),\ 'A".i? <it
. . :;,;;~~i~"';:1L(:,:~j'~;;;i,;}i\~;;,,;:!,:,;)\!";!~t;J~';;,;:',. .'
iTh,~ ,~i)~ qOE~ N,?1" W.AIY~ t~~:~9,~~~arx,!jM,i)~, ??r::~r,l~ip,~l\to
: ,,:,,~~;(JlM!f~~{~~f~if.;:~',;:/'i::~')i:;;W*~;,::;}l::~~,;:&{\~~;I:,::l~;';'\I,': ;:'.,
", he .cIty WAIVES th~ monetary i1mlts'b~ .tort liability estabilshe
""" ::~,~t~:~EiT[i~t~:~(~r~Jj (Iit'cci'v~r~' ebb"" '.,
ell' "
.'{'.
. .'.~;
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
sc. Consideration of aDDrovinl!: temDorarv liauor license for Monticello Lions Club for
Riverfest Celebration. (JO)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Monticello Lions Club is re~uesting a temporary liquor license covering activities at the
Riverfest Celebration on July 14 -JulyI5th.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. Approve a temporary liquor license for the Monticello Lions Club for the Riverfest
Celebration on July 14-15, 2007.
2. Do not approve license.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council approve the temporary license for the Monticello Lions
Club.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
5D. Consideration of approvinl!: monthlv renewal of pawn shop license for Wait's Pawn
Shop. (JO)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In January the Council approved renewing the pawn shop license for Walt's Pawn Shop,
1219 State Highway 25 on a monthly basis which is in keeping with the recommendation of
the Wright County Sheriffs Department. The intent was that a monthly renewal would
allow the City to monitor more closely any non-compliance to the City's pawn shop
ordinance.
The Council is being asked at this time to approve the renewal of the pawn shop license for
another month while City staff and legal counsel does further investigation on some
probable violations of the pawn shop ordinance.
B. AL TERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the renewal of the pawn shop license for Walt's Pawn Shop for another
month.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends approving the renewal of the pawn shop license for another month.
The renewal is in keeping with the recommendation of the Wright County Sheriff's
Department. By formally renewing the license each month the City is officially indicating
the license is not automatically being renewed on a monthly basis but is being considered
formally by the Council each month. If at some point the Council should consider action to
revoke or suspend the pawn shop license, the monthly renewal would demonstrate the
Council's concerns about non-compliance of the ordinance and their efforts to address it.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
City Council Agenda - 02/26/07
5E. Consideration to aoorove a resolution callin!!: for a oublic hearin!!: bv the City Council
on the orooosed adootion of the modification to the Redevelooment Plan for Central
Monticello Redevelooment Proiect No.1 and the orooosed establishment of TIF
District No. 1-38 therein and the adootion of the TIF Plan therefor. Aoolicant: WRE.
LLC dba Walker In-Store (O.K.)
A. Reference and Back!!:round:
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello requests the City
Council approve a resolution calling for a public hearing date of April 23, 2007. The public
hearing is associated with the modification of the Redevelopment Plan of the Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I and establishment ofTIF District No. 1-38 and the TIP Plan.
TIF District No. 1-38, an Economic Development District, is being created to assist in the
write-down ofland and infrastructure costs and trunk fees associated with the land sale to
WRE, LLC dba Walker In-Store. The company markets, sells, and assembles indoor store
displays. They plan to construct a 10,240 sq ft office/warehouse facility in the city-owned
industrial park known as the Monticello Business Center. The proposed project will bring 11
existing and new full-time permanent jobs to Monticello at an average wage level of$18.81 per
hour excluding benefits. The agreed upon site: Lot 2, Block 1, Otter Creek Crossing 3'd
Addition. The company and HRA executed the Preliminary Development Agreement and the
company submitted the required deposit of $1 0,000.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve a resolution calling for a public hearing by the city council on the
proposed adoption of the modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1 and the proposed establishment ofTIF
District No. 1-38 therein and the adoption of the TIF Plan therefor.
2. A motion to deny adoption of the resolution calling for a public hearing ................
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The City Administrator and HRA Executive Director recommend alternative no. I.
1
City Council Agenda - 02/26/07
D. SUDDortinl! Data:
Resolution for adoption, TIF map, and schedule of events.
2
CITY OF MONTICELLO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT NO.1 AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-38 THEREIN AND THE ADOPTION OF A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
Adopted:
BE IT RESOL YED by the City Council (the "Council") for the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), as
follows:
Section 1. Public Hearin!!. This Council shall meet on April 23, 2007, at approximately 7:00 P.M., to
hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification"), the proposed
establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-38, (an economic development district), and the
proposed adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIP Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan
Modification and the TIP Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"), all pursuant to and in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799,
inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated
areas within the City; and
Section 2. Notice of Public Hearin!!:. Filin!! of Plans. City staff is authorized and directed to work with
Ehlers & Associates, Inc., to prepare the Plans and to forward documents to the appropriate taxingjurisdictions
including Wright County and Independent School District No. 882. The City Administratoris authorized and
directed to cause notice of the hearing, together with an appropriate map as required by law, to be published at
least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10, nor more than 30, days prior to April 23,
2007, and to place a copy of the Plans on file in the City Administrator's office at City Hall and to make such
copy available for inspection by the public.
Dated: February 26, 2007
Clint Herbst, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jeff 0 'Neill, City Administrator
~
~
.
,
i
E
j
8
I
I
~
,
o
0.... 0< ;U n -]
QO il'll
~ ..;l . ..;lE-- 1 II
. ..;l 0 ..;l0
....
i, f;I;lZ f;I;l"-l ~II
UE-- Uf;I;l
....U ....Z ~
E-- E--f;I;l E--Z
U Z~ Z....
.... 00 0:;;
~ :;;~ :;;;;.;
E--
"-l ..;lE-< ~E--
....
~ <Z OZ
~ ~f;I;l >o;J
Z E--:;; E--O
.... Z~ ....U
U f;I;lO UE--
Z U..;l ==
< f;I;l ~
Z >- ....
.... f;I;l ~
~ ~ ~
E-- f;I;l
Z ~
f;I;l
:;;
f;I;l
~
U
Z
....
~
<
E--
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-38
(an economic development district)
AND THE AWARDING OF A BUSINESS SUBSIDY
September 25, 2006 City Council approves final plat.
February 7, 2007 HRA requests that the City COWlcil call for a public hearing on the proposed
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project
No.1 and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-38.
HRA calls for public hearing on Business Subsidy Agreement.
February 26,2007 City COWlcil calls for public hearing on the proposed Modification to the Redevelopment
Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1 and the proposed establishment
of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-38.
February 28, 2007 Project information (property identification numbers and legal descriptions, detailed
project description, maps, but/for statement, list of sources and uses of funds, and
estimated fiscal impacts of the project public improvements and on fire and police
protection) for drafting necessary documentation sent to Ehlers & Associates. Ehlers &
Associates confirms with the City whether building permits have been issued on the
property to be included in TIP District No. 1-38.
March 23, 2007 FiscaVeconomic implications received by School Board Clerk and COWlty Auditor (at
least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers & Associates faxed and mailed on March
20, 2007.}
March 29, 2007 Date of publication of HRA hearing notice for granting a business subsidy and land sale
(at least 10 days but not more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Monticello Times
publication deadline, March 26, 2007 - Ehlers & Associates e-mailed notice to
newspaper on March 23, 2007.}
April 2, 2007 EWers & Associates conducts internal review of Plans.
April 3, 2007 Planning Commission reviews Plans.
Aprilll, 2007 HRA considers the Plans, adopts a resolution approving the Plans.
Aprilll,2007 HRA holds public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on Business Subsidy Agreement, approves
Development Agreement and approves land sale.
April 12, 2007 Date of publication of hearing notice and map for a Modification to the Redevelopment
Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I and the establishment of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1-38 (at least 10 days but not more than 30 days prior to
hearing). [Monticello Times publication deadline, April 9, 2007 - Ehlers & Associates e-
mailed notice and map to newspaper on April 6, 2007.]
April 23, 2007 City Council holds public hearing at 7:00 P.M. on a Modification to the Redevelopment
Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1 and the establishment of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1-38 and passes resolution approving the. [Ehlers &
Associates e-mailed Council packet information to the City on Apri13, 2007.]
April 23, 2007 City Council authorizes conveyance of the parcel to the HRA.
, 2007 City authorizes Ehlers to request certification of the TIF District.
, 2007 Ehlers & Associates files Plans with the MN Department of Revenue and the Office of
the State Auditor, and requests certification of the TIF District with Wright County.
** The County Board, by law, has 45 days to review the plan to detennine if any county roads will be impacted by the development.
Please be aware that the County Board could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads.
An action under subdivision I, paragraph (a), contesting the validity of a detennination by an authority under section 469.175, subdivision
3, must be commenced within the later of:
(I) 180 days after the municipality's approval under section 469.175, subdivision 3; or
(2) 90 days after the request for certification of the district is filed with the county auditor under section 469.177, subdivision!.
.
EHLERS
......SSOCI...T!llfllC
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
5F. Consideration of reauest to Authorize Preparation of an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet Relatinl!: to Proposed Development of a Mills Fleet Farm Store. (JO)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
City staff has received a request from Mills Fleet Farm to prepare an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet relating to the proposed development of a store at a 30 acres site east
of Fallon Avenue and west of the UMC development. As you may know, an EAW is
required for any retail project pertaining to the construction of more than 200,000 square feet
of commercial use. Attached is a scope of services relating to the EA W prepared by WSB
which includes a cost estimate of$ I 7,300. Mills Fleet Farm has provided a check to the City
in an amount equal to the cost of the study. Please note that the City via a letter from NAC
dated January 19, 2007 has informed the applicant of various land use considerations that
must be addressed prior to development. The letter notes that processing of the EA W does
not presume approval of the project and that a number of planning approvals are needed in
order for the project to be completed.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. Motion to authorize preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet relating to
proposed development of a Mills Fleet Farm Store.
Under this option the City Engineer will collect information accordingly and begin the EA W
process. Data collected in conjunction with the EA W could be of great use to the City
Council when evaluating the merits of associated land use considerations that will be
necessary in order for the project to move forward. Since Mills Fleet Farm is funding the
study, there is no risk to the City in obtaining this information.
2. Motion to deny authorization to prepare an Environmental Assessment Worksheet relating to
proposed development of a Mills Fleet Farm Store.
Council could take the view that preparation of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet is
premature. The comprehensive plan and rezoning decisions need to be considered prior to
completion of the EA W.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator recommends Alternative #1. The EA W is a fact finding document
that quantifies impacts thus providing information that could be very useful in determining
whether or not subsequent rezoning is advisable.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Scope of Services submitted by WSB
Zoning Applications Letter Listing Necessary Zoning Approvals
Letter of Application from Mills Fleet Farm.
-
.;..-- .
MILLS PROPERTIES, INC.
512 Laurel Street P.O. Box 5055 Brainerd, MN 56401
218-829-3521
February 8, 2007
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Mr. O'Neill:
Per the attached January 26, 2007 letter from Andrea Moffatt of WSB and
Associates, please find enclosed a check in the amount of $17,300.00 to
authorize WSB to proceed with the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the
proposed Mills Fleet Farm in Monticello.
If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call.
Sincerely,
ebh
enclosure
r
"O'""iW'~l .'$,Qi~UU"Qc CO")$"U,"l.""$" 1,"4:.,
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com
January 19, 2007
Mr. Ronald Obeidzinski, Vice President
Mills Fleet Farm
512 Laurel Street
Brainerd, MN 56401
RE:
FILE NO:
Monticello - Zoning Applications for Mills Fleet Farm
191.07 -07.02
Dear Mr. Obeidzinski:
It was a pleasure meeting with you last week in relation to your interest in the development of
a Mills Fleet Farm facility along Chelsea Road in Monticello. The City asked me, as its
consulting City Planner, to forward an outline of the application process that you will need to
follow as you work toward the required City zoning approvals for such a facility. It is my
understanding that your engineering consultant, Bruce Buxton of Widseth Smith Nolting has
a copy of the City's Development Guide which describes the calendar and submission
requirements for the various applications.
The specific approvals that you will need are as follows:
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Industrial to Commercial Retail.
2. Rezoning from 1-1A, Light Industrial to B-4, Regional Business District.
3. Preliminary Plat to subdivide the gas/convenience parcel from the larger retail
parcel.
4. Conditional Use Permit for Outside Storage and Display for the main store.
5. Conditional Use Permit for a Motor Fuel Station/Convenience store.
6. Conditional Use Permit for a Car Wash.
7. Conditional Use Permit for Comprehensive Sign Plan.
As we discussed, the project will also require an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) which would be prepared by the City's engineering staff and consultants. We have
asked the engineering firm (WSB) to prepare an estimate of the cost of that study and
forward it to you.
It appears that based upon the preliminary materials you had provided to the City that the
pylon sign for the main store falls within the City's requirements if the fuel station sign is
modified to a monument-style design with a maximum height reduced from the proposed 30
feet to 18 feet. We would need to evaluate the entire sign package to be sure, but it appears
that with this modification, the sign proposals would meet the City's requirements. Without
this modification, you would need to seek a variance to the sign regulations.
r
Mr. Ronald Obeidzinski
Page Two
At the meeting, we discussed the screening wall that surrounds the storage area. It appears
to staff that with the materials and landscaping shown in the concept package, this structure
would meet the City's ordinance allowances.
At this time, there do not appear to be any other variances or other approvals that would be
necessary to process this request. If you wish, you may apply for all of these applications
concurrently.
Because the City of Monticello has an active development environment, there are several
projects underway that have allowed the City to receive comments from the public, and your
proposed project is no exception. As a part of these interactions, the City has heard
anecdotally from some of the industrial property owners along Chelsea Road about concems
over the location of the Fleet Farm facility on the proposed property. We do not have a
measure of the depth of these concerns, but we wanted you to be aware of them as you
proceed through the formal process of changing the land use designations on the subject
site.
We raise these comments at this time as we would offer the option of pursuing the
Comprehensive Plan amendment and Rezoning on an approval track prior to the remainder
of the more specific applications. The materials that you have already prepared would serve
adequately to support. If these land use applications were ultimately approved, you would
then be free to proceed with the remainder of the application paCkage without concem that
the basics of the land use would be challenged. Nonetheless, as we mention above, you are
welcome to pursue the entire package of applications at once if you prefer. Staff will provide
whatever support is necessary to ensure that the process runs as smoothly as possible.
I hope that you find this information helpful. If you have any questions at any time, please do
not hesitate to contact myself or Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator at your convenience. Thank
you for your interest in the City of Monticello.
Cordially,
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
~~
Stephen W. Grittman, AICP
Principal
cc: Jeff O'Neill
Bruce Buxton
Charlie Pfeffer
--
A
WSB
Infrastructure I Engineering I Planning I Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
Memorandum
To:
Ronald Obeidzinski, Mills Fleet Farm
Bruce Buxton, Widseth Smith Nolting
From:
Andrea Moffatt, WSB & Associates}'
January 26, 2007
Date:
Re:
Proposed Mills Fleet Farm EA W, Monticello
Attached, please find the scope of work for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W)
for the proposed Mills Fleet Farm in Monticello. The City has requested that we send a copy of
the scope to you for your information_ The City can authorize us to proceed with the EA W
development as soon as they receive a deposit from you for this work. If you have questions,
please feel free to contact the City or call me at (763)287-7196.
Attachments
c. Jeff O'Neill, City of Monticello
Bret Weiss, WSB
Minneapolis I S1. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
W-l-JJ"">M"'J{'.II";;Lk""'.M,,,,,,,,,'li"'Mf."M/J_IJI2.>Oi'm'.~
'...
WSB
& Associates, Inc.
Infrastructure I Engineering I Planning. Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis. MN 55416
lei: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
January 26, 2007
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite I
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Scope of Services to Prepare an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
for Proposed Mills Fleet Farm
Dear Mr. O'Neill:
Please find outlined below a Scope of Services to prepare an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EA W) for the proposed Mills Fleet Farm development. An EA W is required for this project pursuant to
MN Rules 4410.4300 Subpart 14 pertaining to the construction of more than 200,000 square feet of a
commercial use.
Task 1 - Collect Background Information
Background information associated with the development ofthis site will be collected from a variety of
sources including the City, Minnesota Historical Society, Pollution Control Agency, the Department of
Natural Resources, the County, and the Soil and Water Conservation District. This information will be
reviewed and analyzed to address the environmental concerns of the project.
Task 2 - IdentifY Past Land Use and Existing Cover Types
Information from the City, agencies, and the developer will be reviewed to determine past land uses
within the site that may present environmental concerns such as soil contamination. Any environmental
impacts will be discussed within the EA W. The existing and proposed cover types will be determined
based on a field visit, aerial photography, information from the developer, and the proposed development
plans.
Task 3 - Ecological Review of Site
As part of this task, a site visit to the project area will be conducted. The purpose of this site visit will be
to evaluate the impact of the project on fish and wildlife habitat. This field review will be discussed in
the EA Wand the impact of the development on these resources will be evaluated.
Task 4 - Evaluate Project Impact on Water Quantity and Quality
As part of this task, the water quantity and quality information for the site will be analyzed. This will
include analysis of existing and proposed discharge rates, volumes, and anticipated impact on water
quality. This analysis will be discussed in the EA W.
Task 5 - Address Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures
The EA W will address erosion and sedimentation control measures to be taken during and after
construction of the project. The amount of soil to be moved or excavated will also be discussed within
theEAW.
Minneapolis I St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
W _,l"Ji..\(",.",.,,,,~ Lh,.,',M""",dhI1'R _ ill "'2117. 1'0.".1.'<'
W"AIPdiIMa"/<"'illg j)()o'Mo"'i{X"I"IL~ - 012207. ."".doc
Mr. Jeff O'Neill
January 26, 2007
Page 2 of2
Task 6 - Evaluate Project Impact on Water Use and Wastewater
As part of this task, the impact of the development on municipal wastewater and water use will be
evaluated. This evaluation will be discussed in the EA W.
Task 7 - Evaluate Impact on Traffic, Noise, and Air Quality
The impact of the development on traffic, noise, and air quality will be evaluated and discussed in the
EA W. This will include an analysis of regional traffic impacts, impacts on major intersections, and
discussion of potential mitigating measures. Additional traffic counts for the area will also be completed.
These counts are necessary to obtain accurate information for the area with the new CSAH 18 interchange
in place. Additionally, past traffic analysis for the area anticipated the proposed site to develop as
industrial rather than commercial. This proposed change in land use needs to be evaluated in the EA W.
Task 8 - Identify Impact on Public Infrastructure
As part of the EA W, any new or expanded public services that will be required as part of the project will
be identified. This would include sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer as well as road
improvements.
Task 9 - Evaluation of Cumulative Impacts
As part of this task, the cumulative impacts of the project on the surrounding area will be evaluated. This
will take into account recent past projects and any projected future projects.
Task JO-Submit EAW and Respond to Comments
The EA W will be provided to City Staff and City Council for review. Once authorization from the City
has been received, WSB will distribute the EA W to the required agencies and EQB Monitor for the 30-
day review. WSB will follow-up with the EA W review process and respond to comments generated by
the public review process. Following completion of the review process, we will present the findings of
the EA W to the Council and provide a recommendation relative to the need for an Enviromnental Impact
Statement (EIS). This task includes one meeting with the City Council.
The cost estimate to prepare the EAW as outlined above is estimated not to exceed $17,300. A sample
schedule is attached and can be further refined if authorization to proceed is given. Please call me at
(763) 287-7196 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
~~cu 7Y7&~
Andrea Moffatt
Enviromnental Scientist
Attachments
c. Bruce Buxton, Widseth Smith Nolting
Ronald Obeidzinski, Mills Fleet Farm
SAMPLE EA W TIMELINE FOR MILLS FLEET FARM, MONTICELLO
TASK PROPOSED TIMELINE #1
Data Collection and EA W Development Month 1 - 2 (Month 3 iflarge project)
Kick off meeting with City Staff and developer Month I
Data received from developer Month I
City Council Authorizes Submittal ofEA W to Month 3
Review Agencies
Submit EA W to EQB Monitor Month 3
EA W Comment Period Month 3 - 4
Respond to Comments Month 4
City Council Determines need for EIS Month 4 or 5
Decision Noticed in EQB Monitor Month 4 or 5
City 0/ Monticello
EnvironmentalAssessment Worksheet/or Mills Fleet Farm
pprOXlmate
Billing Rate
TOTAL
135
$17,300
.
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
5G. Acce t the Feasibili Re ort and Set the Public Hearin~ Date for the 2007 Street
Reconstruction Project (City of Monticello Proiect No. 2007-01C} (WSB)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Included in your packet is a Feasibility Report addressing the reconstruction of the
remaining streets in Area 3 of the City's Overall Street Reconstruction Program. These
streets include: River Street from Craig Lane to CSAH 75, Craig Lane, Kenneth Lane,
Hillcrest Road, Hillcrest Circle, Hilltop Drive, and Matthew Circle. This area is
commonly referred to as the Hillcrest neighborhood. Several neighborhood meetings
with the residents in this area were conducted and this report incorporates their comments
for the preliminary design. Also included in the report, is the analysis of the possible
reconstruction of River Street from CSAH 75 west to the City ball fields.
IJillcrestNei2hborhood
The debate among those participating in the neighborhood meetings was in regard to the
need for concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer, and sidewalk. Some individuals simply
did not want their street to be an urban-style street and wanted to maintain the existing
width. Others felt that installation of sidewalk would invade their already small yards or
take down large, established trees. It was discussed that while it is the City's preference
to utilize urban section design for new and reconstructed streets, the City is willing to
explore other options for this area. This applies to the streets (River Street, Hilltop Drive,
and Hillcrest Road) that currently do not have curb and gutter.
As a result, this report includes a design that includes maintaining the existing drainage
patterns by keeping some of the existing ditches in place, minimizing impacts to the
properties by reducing the standard street width, and finding a location for the sidewalk
that would minimize the impact to existing trees and yards. The following summarized
the proposed improvements in the Hillcrest neighborhood:
Street Imnrovements:
The proposed street widths from face-of-curb to face-of-curb are as follows:
River Street (Craig Lane to CSAH 75): 28 feet wide
Hillcrest Road: 26 feet wide
Hilltop Drive: 26 feet wide
The above widths are the minimum street widths to provide for emergency vehicle
access, maintaining on-street parking on one side of the street, and maintaining traffic
flow. The City's standard minimum street width is 30 feet for low volume traffic;
however, to minimize impacts to properties and better fit the existing conditions, a
reduced street width is proposed. Curb and gutter is proposed on both sides of the
roadway along River Street from Craig Lane to the City compost site, with options to
extend curb or construct gravel shoulders along the remaining segment of River Street to
CSAH 75. The remaining roadways that have curb and gutter (Craig Lane, Kenneth
Lane, Hillcrest Circle, and Matthew Circle) are proposed to be improved to their existing
C:lD:>rulllenlS<md SetJillgS'd~gro1SiJrgeFilornf SettiJIgs',TeRlpO/'rlry ["'emet FifeslOLKJIAGN lTM-Ac~ptFMSRpISeI Publiclkllnng.l)2260l.doc
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
width. All the streets are proposed to be reconstructed, with the exception of Kenneth
Lane, which is proposed to be milled, settled areas corrected and overlayed.
Public Works has indicated that they prefer to use a minimum 28-foot street width instead
of the proposed 26- foot wide street for Hillcrest Road, since this is a standard that was
applied to other reconstructed streets in the area on past projects and they are concerned
about a precedent being set. While, it is preferable to use the current standard width, a
26-foot street width is proposed based on the following criteria:
.
Fits the existing conditions of the neighborhood with minimal widening and
minimal impacts as requested by residents
Emergency vehicles can access Hillcrest Road from 2 entrances from River Street
Would not create a problem regarding setting a precedent for new street.
construction to utilize this non-standard street width, as this project would be
considered more of a retro-fit
Parking would be allowed on only side of the roadway, maintaining adequate
access. No parking signs would be installed sparingly to preserve the residential
character of the roadway.
This width has worked in other cities
The current width is 22 to 24 feet wide, so the widening is minimal
.
.
.
.
.
The City Administrator supports the proposed 26-foot wide street width due to input from
the residents and to better fit the existing conditions.
Drainal!e Improvements:
In general, the existing ditches system is proposed to remain in place to maintain the
existing drainage patterns while providing infiltration, water quality, and treatment, as
well as reducing the storm sewer cost. In most cases, the proposed curb would
accommodate runoff from the street and would outlet to the ditch system. Curb and
gutter is proposed as opposed to utilizing a gravel shoulder to contain sand accumulation
within the street instead of filling up the adjacent ditches and to protect the pavement
edge. There are some areas where standing water occurs during springtime that has
created an issue for residents as well as a maintenance issue for Public Works. These
ditches are proposed to be filled in with drainage directed to storm sewer systems in the
streets. In addition, deep ditches on the east end of River Street where the sidewalk is
proposed, as described below, are proposed to be filled in to accommodate constructing a
sidewalk with a 5-foot boulevard.
Sidewalk Construction:
A sidewalk is proposed on to extend on the south side of River Street from the existing
sidewalk at Craig Lane west to the County park trail entrance. City staff discussed not
continuing the sidewalk to the end of River Street at CSAH 75 since there is not a
connection at that point, and given the amount of traffic on the west end of River Street,
residents could utilize the roadway until the sidewalk begins at the trail entrance. A
pedestrian crossing at CSAH 75 has been evaluated at Prairie Road with the federal
funding application; however, the funding was not granted. The City would need to
evaluate the funding for the crossing to consider if the crossing project is feasible.
C,'.,[)ocumem9al1li &mngs'diJ.....gmssillger'Wca1 SeuJIIgSITemporary l,*met FIIe.'OLKJ\.4GN rI'M-koeptF=RplSel Publidlearillg-Q22(j()7.doc
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
Utility Improvements;
A segment of sanitary sewer along Craig Lane is planned to be replaced based on City
inspection tapes. Adjustments to sanitary manholes, including replacing old castings, as
well as adjustments to valves and hydrants are proposed.
River Street West (CSAH 75 to City Ball Fields)
A property owner along River Street West requested the City evaluate improving the
roadway. This segment of roadway does not necessarily need to be reconstructed at this
time given its condition. This street was originally proposed to be improved at a later
date and was proposed to be milled and overlayed; however, the pavement is thin and has
several settlements and cracks which would not make milling feasible since the cracked
areas would come up to the surface within a short period of time. Therefore, ifthe
roadway is improved, we would recommend it be reconstructed. A segment of
watermain and sanitary sewer would need to be extended to the end of the roadway if
reconstructed.
The City had widened the roadway 2-4 feet in the past to accommodate pedestrian access
to the City ball fields as part of the 1995 federally-funded bike path project. The current
on-road pathway has served a purpose, but does not adequately accommodate the current
use. An 8-foot bituminous trail is proposed along the north side of the roadway as there
is significant pedestrian traffic to the City ball fields and would accommodate pedestrian
use from the XceI Energy training facility. The pathway would extend to where the
existing pathway along CSAH 75 terminates at River Street. At a minimum, the Council
should consider constructing the pathway to address increased pedestrian needs.
We have contacted the business owners along West River Street, from CSAH 75 to 1-94,
and are in the process of scheduling meetings with them prior to the public hearing to
discuss the need for the proposed improvements at this time as well as the proposed
assessments.
C:\lAA:-lImell~ r:mJ Se'l/lIgsld""'''.gross'nge~al Setling,llTernportllJ' lllleNu!1 Fi/es;Ql.K3IAGN I1M-AcrepJFeasRpz&t PublicHearl"lf-J)1260~drJC
The total length of the streets proposed to be reconstructed is 1.7 miles, of which 1.4
miles are within the Hillcrest neighborhood, and River Street West, from CSAH 75 to the
ball fields, is 0.3 miles.
Residents requested providing an off-street parking area at Hillcrest Park. We have
estimated the cost to be approximately $10,000 to construct a gravel parking lot and
approximately $35,000 to construct a paved parking lot with curb and gutter. The park's
department has indicated that they do not have funds budgeted this year for these
improvements. The Council could consider allocating funds for this improvement along
with the proposed street reconstruction project.
The total estimated project cost ranges from $2,082,700 to $2,098,300 for streets within
the Hillcrest neighborhood and $470,380 for River Street West from CSAH 75 to the ball
fields, which includes a 10% contingency and 22% indirect costs. The project is
proposed to be funded through assessments to benefited properties, City contributions,
assessed at 50% ofthe street reconstruction rate since this roadway is to be milled and
overlayed. The proposed assessment per single-family lot on Kenneth Lane is $1,434.
Non-residential lots are proposed to be assessed at $80/per front foot which includes the
sidewalk assessment. Sidewalk is proposed to be assessed at $246 per single-family
residential lot which is 25% of the total sidewalk cost based on the City's policy to fund
the remaining 75%.
Non-residential lots along River Street west ofCSAH 75 are proposed to be assessed at
$83.42 per front foot which does not include an assessment for the pathway. The Council
should consider if the pathway should be assessed since it could be considered a regional
benefit. An assessment for the sanitary sewer and watermain extension is proposed to the
vacant lot at the west end of River Street on the south side to provide service to that
property.
Below is a summary of the project costs:
2007 Street Reconstruction Program
Hillcrest Neighborhood - Option 1 (Rural)
ASSESSMENTS I CITY FUNDS ! TOTAL
Surface $372,000 $1,215,600 $1,587,600
...n.._._____n......_._.____._._..n...._............
Storm - $475,800 $475,800
--------------------------
Sanitary - $19,300 $19,300
TOTAL $372,000 j $1,710,700 $2,082,700*
,
* The rural option includes utilizing a "flat" curb to protect the pavement edge. Utilizing
gravel shoulders instead, would reduce the total cost by approximately $15,000.
2007 Street Reconstruction Program
Hillcrest Neighborhood - Option 2 (Urban)
,
ASSESSMENTS , CITY FUNDS , TOTAL
;
Surface $372,000 $1,231,200 $1,603,200
._._m_.....,_...._.........._.._.._._m.._......_..__...........___'._n.......
Storm - $475,800 $475,800
.__..........._.__......n...._____................_.........._____........
Sanitary - $19,300 $19,300
TOTAL $372,000 , $1,726,300 $2,098,300
I ,
c-'lJocumelllS anti Seltings'da.......gro.s#ngerlWc/f{ SelliJlgs',Temponrry I1l1emel FiksIOLKJ'AGN aM_ AcceptFeasRp/!kr Puhllrlkaring-Ol1607.doc
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
utility trunk funds, excess State aid funds and annual street improvement funds. The
residential assessment for street reconstruction is proposed at a rate of $3,300 per single-
family residential lot with access to streets proposed for reconstruction. This is 10%
above the 2006 rate to account for the annual construction cost index, inflation, and to
further increase long-term funding of the program. Kenneth Lane is proposed to be
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
River Street (CSAH 75 to City Ball Fields)
Sanitary Sewer
$7,940
$11,320
$177,500
CITY FUNDS TOTAL
$182,170 $340,410
$35,630 $35,630
$34,020 $34,020
$20,980 $28,920
$20,080 $31,400
$292,800 $470,380
Surface
ASSESSMENTS
$158,240
Pathway
Storm Sewer
Water Main
TOTAL
The above costs include using concrete pipe for the storm sewer. Plastic pipe could be utilized
as an alternative, as this was used in last year's street reconstruction project. The cost savings is
estimated at $90,000.
It should be noted that the original cost estimate presented to the Council last fall in order to
evaluate funding of the program was $3,330,000. This cost included constructing the roadways
in the Hillcrest neighborhood to a 32-foot width with curb and gutter, filling in the ditches and
constructed an extensive storm sewer system with additional ponding area. The cost also
included constructing West River Street, from CSAH 75 to the ball fields as a rural section. The
estimated cost has been reduced significantly with the currently proposed design by reducing
street widths, utilizing the ditch system and reducing the size and amount of storm sewer pipe.
Below is a summary of the proposed City funding of the project:
Total Project Cost $2,568,680 *
Less City Street Funds $562,000
Subtotal = $2,006,680
Less Assessments $549,500
Subtotal = $1,457,180
Less State Aid Funds (from Cedar/Dundas Project) $420,000
Subtotal = $1,037,180
Less Trunk Utility Funds (Storm, Water, Sewer) $550,880
TOTAL Remaining Cost = $486,300 **
* Includes the urban section option for River Street from CSAH 75 to the compost site.
** This cost could be back-charged from future State Aid funds to fund this project.
C~urnmIJ'andSeIIUlgs'oJaWl,grfJ>Smger'LocaI SeIlUlgr',Temporory !memel Fi!es',OLK3IAGN ITM- AcceplFe4$RpISeI ftlbIIcHearing-021607.doc
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Accept the feasibility report and order the public hearing for March 12,2007.
2. Do not accept the feasibility report.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator that the City Council proceed with
this next phase of the Street Reconstruction Program. It is imperative that these
improvements be completed as the streets are continuing to deteriorate and are in need of
repair. General feedback from the residents was that the streets should be reconstructed.
In addition, it appears that bid prices from contractors have been very competitive this
year due to the reduction of residential development projects. By holding off on these
improvements, costs could increase, putting additional burden on City funds and potential
resident assessments.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Feasibility Report
C'.J:)ocumenl<and SeIWlgid<J.....grossi'W'~'.Lnc~1 Sea/1tg~l,remp<Jrory '"_I FilesIO!..K3',AGN rrM.AcceptFeas/1prSet PublicHea"ng-0126()7.dor:
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
5H. A rove Final Pa ment and Acce t 1m rovement for Extension of7'h Street from
St. Henrv's Church to CSAH 18 and Construction of Hi2hIand Wav from 7' Street
to CSAH 75 (Citv of Monticello Proiect No. 2004-02C) (WSB)
C:LDocumenualld Seltings'da......gross/nger'Lor:a1 SeuiI1g~ITemporary 1M!me! FiltslOLKJiAGN lTM-ApprowFlnall'tlymeill-O]1607doc
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The 7th Street and Highland Way Extension Project included extending 7'h Street from St.
Henry's Church to CSAH 18 and constructing Highland Way from 7th Street to CSAH
75. This project was associated with the CSAH 18/1-94 Interchange Project and the Ryan
development project (Union Crossings). 7th Street is identified as a collector route
relieving traffic on CSAH 75 in the Monticello Transportation Plan. A traffic signal was
also constructed with the project at the intersection ofCSAH 75 and Highland Way.
Utility improvements were constructed to serve the adjacent benefiting properties.
Construction commenced in 2005 with street and utilities. The final lift of pavement was
placed in 2006.
The Council is being requested to accept the project as complete and approve final
payment to Arcon Construction Co., Inc. in the amount of$148,114.43. The following
paperwork is still required for final payment to be released:
I. Satisfactory showing that the contractor has complied with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding state income tax.
2. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the contractor by
reasons of the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured.
3. Consent of Surety to Final Payment certification from the contractor's surety.
4. Two-year maintenance bond. It should be noted that the maintenance bond will
start and extend two years from the date of final acceptance of the project by the
City Council.
5. Submittal of the televising tape for the recently lined sanitary sewer.
The final payment request included in the packet represents the final quantities completed
on the contract and the release of the retainage on the contract.
All punchlist items assembled for this project have been completed and WSB &
Associates, Inc. is indicating the project is complete and ready for final payment in
accordance with the contract and City of Monticello Engineering and Construction
Standards.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Accept the improvements and approve the final payment of$148,114.43 to Arcon
Construction Co., Inc. contingent upon receipt of the final paperwork.
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
C.lllo<:_nLl' atidSelringsida..."gm...illgeriLor:al Si!1!M8~I,TempoFtuy 1ll1emel Filu'OLKJL4GN !TM-Appro""FinalPaymelll_02160~doc
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator that the City Council accepts the
improvements for 7th Street and Highland Way Street and Utility Improvements, City
Project No. 2004-02C, and authorizes final payment to Arcon Construction Co., Inc. in
the amount of$148,114.43.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Construction Pay Voucher No.8 (Final)
Letter from WSB & Associates, Inc.
..
WSB
& Associates, Inc.
Infrastructure I Engineering I Planning. Construction
February 20, 2007
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite I
Monticello,MN 55362
Re: Construction Pay Voucher No.8 (Final)
7th Street Extension (St. Henry's Church to CSAH 18) and
Highland Way (7th Street to CSAH 75)
Street, Utilities, and Appurtenant Work
City of Monticello Project No. 2004-02C
WSB Project No. 1627-02
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
Please find enclosed the final Construction Pay Voucher No.8 for the above-referenced project
in the amount of$148,114.43. We recommend final payment subject to receipt of the following
items:
I. Satisfactory showing that the contractor has complied with the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding state income tax (IC134 forms).
2. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the contractor by reasons of
the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured (lien waivers).
3. Consent of Surety to Final Payment certification from the contractor's surety.
4. Two-year maintenance bond.
5. Televising tape of recently lined sanitary sewer.
Please make payment in this amount to Arcon Construction Co., Inc. at your earliest
convenience. Thank you,
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc,
.g1~. t ~!>~
Shibani K. Bisson, PE
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc:
Rick Wolfsteller, City of Monticello
Pat Diedrich, Arcon Construction Co., Inc.
Minneapolis I St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
K:LIIJ62?-02iAdmin''cUNI/roC/ionAdm,n\LTR vas FNL C7Y-i1mu_O]](J()7.drw.;
srb
I
.....
WSH
~-
Ownef~ City or MolJtleello
5011 Walnut It
Monticello, MN 553G2-1147
ForPa~~;9MnOO6to1nO~T
Contrlctor: Arcc>n Constnlctlon Company, lne.
43248 ""'11'-911 Road
Hani&, MN GG03Z
PlIY VOlllIDer
MONT - 7th StlHIg1ll8l1d Way Street and UUllty ImprllVamli,"\$
CHent Contract No.:
PreJeo! No,: 011121-ll2
CUent preJect No.:
1/3012007
011111;
Request No.: 8 & FINAL
.,
~lnraJ Contract Amount $1,766,754.93
2 Conlra<;\ ChanDee - Addition $0.00
3 Conlracl Chang". Deductlon SO.OO
4 Revised Con!rllcl Ameunt . $1,756,754.93
5 Value Completed III Ollie $1,m,B39.67
6 Material on Hand $0.00
7 Amount EtImlld $1,797,S39.&7
8 Less Retainaglfl SO.OO
9 Subtolal $1.797,839.67
10 Less Amount Paid Previously $1,649,725.24
11 liqUidated Damages $0.00
12 AMOUNT DUE THIs PAY VOUCHER NO.8 & FINAL $14S,114.043 .
I HEREBY CER'J'lFY THAT A FINAL EXAMINA'J'lON HAS BEEN MADE OF THE ABOVE NOTED CON1AACT, THAT
THE CONTRACT liAS BEEN COMPlETED, THAT THE EN'J'lRE AMOUNT OF WORK SHOWN IN THE f:'INAL
VOUCHeR HAS BEEN F'ERFORMEO AND THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE \NORK PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE
. WITH, AND PURSUANT TO. THe TERMS OF THE CONTRACT IS AS SHoWN IN THIS FINAL VOUCHER.
ReCDmmend~ for Approval by: Construcllon Observer.
WSIU~..
~l fj~>~
I t:rfJr~
Apprcved by ontnu:lor: Appravlld by OWner.
Anlo o' ellY Of Montlctllo
5 -y /~_ ;t/l'fln
Specl1led Contract Completion Date: Dale:
81301200!l .
Comment
. ,
.,'
loiS
01627-02" Pay Voucher 8
Monday, February 19,2007
Item Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity to Current Amount to
No. Quantity Date Quantity Date
49 2503.602 8"X6" PVC WYE EACH $105.00 2 3 0 $315.00
50 2503.602 10"X6" PVC WYE EACH $170.00 6 6 0 $1,020.00
51 2503.603 6" PVC PIPE SEWER - SDR 26 UN FT $19.10 190 286 0 $5.462.60
52 2503.603 10" PVC PIPE SEWER - SDR 26 UN FT $36.11 555 524 0 $19,969.64
53 2503.603 10" PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 35 UN FT $25.07 1360 1321 0 $33,117.47
54 2503.603 6" PVC PIPE SEWER - SDR 35 UNFT $21.42 924 1482 0 $31,744.44
55 2503.603 SANITARY SEWER INSPECTION (TELEVISING) UN FT $1.40 2605 3321 0 $4,657.80
56 2506.602 CONST 46" DIA SAN SEWER MANHOLE EACH $126.00 202.8 250.92 0 $31,615.92
57 2506.602 CASTING ASSEMBLY (SANITARY) EACH $700.00 13 17 8 $11,900.00
Totals For Section Schedule B - Sanitary Sewer Improvements: $140,452.87
Schedule C ~ Water Main Improvements
56 2104.509 REMOVE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY EACH $600.00 1 1 0 $600.00
59 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN (12") EACH $650.00 3 2 0 $1,300.00
60 2504.602 RELOCATE HYDRANT AND VALVE EACH $700.00 2 2 0 $1,400.00
61 2504.602 8" GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH $1,145.00 23 22 0 $25,190.00
62 2504.602 12" GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH $1,796.00 9 10 0 $17,960.00
63 2504.602 HYDRANT ASSEMBLY EACH $2,505.00 16 20 0 $50,100.00
64 2504.603 6" WATER MAIN-DUCT IRON CL 52 UN FT $21.33 532 592.5 0 $12,636.03
65 2504.603 8" WATER MAIN-DUCT IRON CL 52 UN FT $19.14 4599 4421 137 $67,270.54
66 2504.603 12" WATER MAIN-DUCTILE IRON CLASS 50 UNFT $24.76 3523 3555 0 $66,021.60
67 2504.604 POLYSTYRENE INSULATION SQYD $16,00 100 26 0 $504.00
68 2504.608 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS POUND $2.45 15300 15750 0 $36,587.50
Totals For Section Schedule C - Water Main Improvements: $323,571.67
Schedule 0 . Storm Sewer Improvements
69 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) UN FT $7.20 1237 1062 0 $7,790.40
70 2104.509 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN EACH $240.00 11 12 0 $2,860.00
71 2104.523 SALVAGE CASTING EACH $24.00 12 12 0 $288,00
72 2104.523 SALVAGE CONCRETE APRON EACH $60.00 1 2 0 $120,00
73 2104.523 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL CATCH BASIN EACH $600.00 1 1 1 $600.00
74 2501.511 15" CP PIPE CULVERT UNFT $14.63 100 0 0 $0.00
75 2501.511 16" CP PIPE CULVERT UNFT $16.88 160 0 0 $0.00
76 2501,511 30" CP PIPE CULVERT UN FT $27,88 120 0 0 $0,00
77 2501.515 15" RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARD EACH $644.00 1 1 0 $644.00
78 2501.515 18" RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARD EACH $730.00 1 1 0 $730.00
79 2501.515 48" RC APRON WITH T. G. AND SHEET PILED END SECTION EACH $3,875.00 1 1 0 $3,675.00
80 2501.513 INSTALL CONCRETE APRON EACH $800.00 1 1 0 $600.00
81 2501.602 REMOVE BULKHEAD EACH $60.00 1 0 0 $0.00
82 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V UNFT $24.49 1190 1198.5 86 $29,351.27
83 2503.541 18" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UNFT $26.09 391 392.5 0 $10,240.33
84 2503.541 21" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UNFT $28.44 126 126 0 $3,640.32
65 2503.541 24" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UN FT $30.34 246 246 0 $7,463.64
66 2503.541 24" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS IV UN FT $37.60 99 105.5 0 $3,966.60
67 2503.541 24" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V UN FT $37.09 99 99 0 $3,671.91
68 2503.541 27" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UN FT $41.15 105 105 0 $4,320.75
69 2503.541 30" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UN FT $47.16 63 65 0 $3,065.40
90 2503.541 30" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS IV UN FT $52.31 45 45 0 $2,353.95
91 2503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III UN FT $55.53 445 523 0 $29,042.19
92 2503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS IV UN FT $63,65 625 626 0 $39,972.20
93 2503.541 36" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V UNFT $95.74 76 0 0 $0.00
94 2503.541 42" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS III LIN FT $76.91 449 449 0 $34,532.59
30f5
01627-02 - Pay Voucher 8
Monday, February 19,2007
Project Payment Status
Owner: City of Monticello
Client Project No.: 2004-02C
Client Contract No.:
Project No.: 01627-02
Contractor: Arcon Construction Company, Inc.
C Ch
ontract anaes
No. IType I Date I Description Amount
Change Order Totals: $0.00
Pavment Summa/'\(
No. From Date To Date Payment Total Payment Retainage Per Payment Total Retainage Completed
1 9/1/2005 9/30/2005 $311,274.36 $311,274.36 $16,382.86 $16,382.86 $327,657.22
2 10/1/2005 10/31/2005 $546,584.37 $857,858.73 $28,767.60 $45,150.46 $903,009.19
3 11/1/2005 11/30/2005 $151,508.37 $1,009,367.10 $7,974.12 $53,124.58 $1,062,491.68
4 12/1/2005 4/30/2006 $438,967.25 $1,448,334.35 $23,103.54 $76,228.12 $1,524,562.47
5 5/1/2006 5/31/2006 $78,640.70 $1,526,975.05 $4,138.99 $80,367.11 $1,607,342.16
6 6/1/2006 6/29/2006 $97,481.52 $1,624,456.57 $5,130.60 $85,497.71 $1,709,954.28
7 6/30/2006 8/31/2006 $25,268.67 $1,649,725.24 $1,329.93 $86,827.64 $1,736,552.88
8 & FINAL 9/1/2006 1/30/2007 $148,114.43 $1,797,839.67 ($86,827.64) $0.00 $1,797,839.67
Payment Totals: $1,797,839.67 $0.00 $1,797,839.67
Proiect Summary
Material On Hand:
Total Payment to Date:
Total Retainage:
Total Amount Earned:
$0.00
$1,797,839.67 Original Contract:
$0.00 Contract Changes:
$1,797,839.67 Revised Contract:
$1,756,754.93
$0.00
$1,756,754.93
50f5
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
51. Approve Chanl!:e Order No.1 for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Prol!:ram Street.
Storm Sewer. and Appurtenant Work (Citv of Monticello Proiect No. 2005-01C)
(WSB)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 2005-01 C, was the first project
in Area 3 of the City's Overall Street Reconstruction Program. It included River Street
and Sandy Lane from Chestnut Street to Otter Creek Road, Willow Street, and Oak Lane.
The improvements included bituminous pavement reclamation, widening of streets,
concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer and utility repair work. The project also included
significant changes in grade in order to get the elevation of the wider street to match the
boulevards and effectively remove the ditches to maintain proper drainage onto the street.
Due to the significant changes in grades, the boulevard restoration phase of this project
became a more extensive effort than what was originally intended resulting in a changed
condition from what was originally bid. The areas required to be re-established with sod
became more extensive and required much more prep work for the sod placement. As a
result of the contract closeout process, a unit price adjustment of $1.48 per square yard is
being proposed with this change order to account for the additional time and equipment
spent for the sod prep work.
A review of all quantities and cost for the work completed on the site indicates that the
project is $9,164.84 under the current contract amount. Approval ofthe change order as
proposed will result in a final construction cost of $834,063.86, which is $3,770.36 over
the original contract amount. Contract protocol requires that the change order be
approved and the contract amount be adjusted accordingly. However, the actual cost of
the project will be less than the revised contract amount as previously discussed.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve Change Order No.1 in the amount of$12,935.20 for Knife River
Corporation (formerly Buffalo Bituminous, Inc.).
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator that Change Order No. I in the
amount of$12,935.20 be approved for payment.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Change Order No. I
Letter from WSB & Associates, Inc.
C:'.I>tx:ume/llSand s.,,,,-ngsitunm,gmss;ngerlLo<al SeUi1lg<IT~rury fn~m41 FIIe,IOLKJ',AGN /TM-AppI'O\ll!CO#I.022W7.doc
Infrastructure I Engineering I Planning I Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
& Associates, Inc.
February 22, 2007
Mr. Rick W olfsteller
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite I
Monticello, MN 55362
Attn: Dawn Grossinger, Deputy City Clerk
Re: Change Order No. I
2005 Street Reconstruction Program
Street, Storm Sewer, and Appurtenant Work
City of Monticello Project No, 2005-0 I C
WSB Project No. 1494-04
Dear Mr. W olfsteller:
Please find enclosed Change Order No. I (in triplicate) for the above-referenced project for your
review and approval. The increase to the contract amount is $12,935.20, resulting in a new
contract total of$843,228.70. This change order amount will be included with the next
construction pay voucher processed. We hereby recommend that the City of Monticello approve
Change Order No.1 for Knife River Corporation (formerly Buffalo Bituminous, Inc.).
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact me at 763-287-
7193.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
~B ~-!f?
Kevin B. Kawlewski, PE
Senior Project Manager
Enclosures
cc: Greg Hicks, Knife River Corporation
srb
Minneapolis I St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
F:IWPW!MJ494_/J4ILTR co }.r _(r.'I.lkr..{l22107,J~~
CHANGE ORDER NO.1
2005 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
STREET, STORM SEWER, AND APPURTENANT WORK
CITY PROJECT NO. 2005-01C
CITY OF MONTICEllO, MN
WSB PROJECT NO. 1494-04
JANUARY 2, 2007
OWNER:
CITY OF MONTICEllO
505 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 1
MONTICEllO, MN 55362
CONTRACTOR:
BUFFALO BITUMINOUS, INC.
P.O. BOX 337
BUFFALO, MN 55313
YOU ARE DIRECTED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION:
CONTRACT QUANTITIES ARE MODIFIED AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED DETAIL.
IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS CHANGE ORDER INCLUDES ALL ADDITIONAL COSTS AND TIME EXTENSIONS WHICH ARE IN ANY WAY. SHAPE, OR
FORM ASSOCIATED WITH THE WORK ELEMENTS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE:
CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE:
PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: NIA
CONTRACT PRICE PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER:
NET CONTRACT INCREASE WITH THIS CHANGE ORDER:
CONTRACT PRICE WITH ALL APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS:
$830,293.50 ORIGINAL CONTRACT TIME: 71112006
$0.00 NET CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: NIA
$830.293.50 CONTRACT TIME PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER: 71112006
$12,935.20 NET INCREASE WITH CHANGE ORDER: NIA
$843,228.70 CONTRACT TIME WITH APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS 7/112006
RECOr[ND~ B~ I{JJ
KEVIN B. KAWLEWSKI, PE. SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER
DATE
DATE
WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEER
BUFFALO BITUMINOUS, INC.
CONTRACTOR
APPROVED BY:
CITY ENGINEER
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
F:IWP\NJN\1494..0411494-Q4 Change Order 1.x/sCD-1
-
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
5J. Approve Final Pavment and Accept Improvements for 2005 Street Reconstruction
Proeram Street. Storm Sewer. and ApPurtenant Work (City of Monticello Proiect
No. 2005-01C) (WSB)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 2005-0IC, was the first project
in Area 3 of the City's Overall Street Reconstruction Program. It included River Street
and Sandy Lane from Chestnut Street to Otter Creek Road, Willow Street, and Oak Lane.
The improvements included bituminous pavement reclamation, widening of streets,
concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer, and utility repair work.
All punch list items and restoration work on the project were completed in the summer of
2006. WSB & Associates, Inc. is indicating the project is complete and ready for final
payment in accordance with the contract and City of Monticello Engineering and
Construction Standards.
The Council is being requested to accept the project as complete and approve final
payment to Knife River Corporation (formerly Buffalo Bituminous, Inc.) in the amount
of $71 ,318.03. The final payment request included in the Council's packet represents
final quantities of work and release of all remaining retainage on the contract. WSB &
Associates, Jnc has received the final paperwork required by the contract including:
I. Satisfactory showing that the contractor has complied with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding state income tax.
2. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the contractor by
reasons of the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured.
3. Consent of Surety to Final Payment certification from the contractor's surety.
4. Two-year maintenance bond.
The maintenance period will be in effect from January 3,2007 until January 3, 2009.
The final payment request included in the packet represents the final quantities completed
on the contract and the release of the retainage on the contract.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. Accept the improvements and approve the final payment of$71,318.03 to Knife
River Corporation (formerly Buffalo Bituminous, Inc.).
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
C:'DtxU1t/tcnlSand Seta"gswwngrossinger1h:Jcal SeJlingslTemporory f'lImwt FilesiOLl(J',AGN lTM-ApproveFiIlDiP4ynrem_022706.do<;
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator that the City Council accept the
improvements for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 2005-01 C,
and authorize final payment to Knife River Corporation (formerly Buffalo Bituminous,
Jnc.) in the amount of$71,318.03.
I
.
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Construction Pay Voucher No.5 (Final)
Letter from WSB & Associates, Inc.
C: IDocuments and Serting>Id"",,"IP""'Singer.wcal Seltlng$',Tempo/'IJry [nremer File.s'.OOO'AGN ITM-ApproveFlmllpaymenl-(J22706.d()C
...
WSB
& Associates, lnc.
Infrastructure I Engineering I Planning' Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
February 20, 2007
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street
Suite I
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Construction Pay Voucher No.5 (Final), Change Order No. I,
and Final Project Documents
2005 Street Reconstruction Program
Street, Storm Sewer, and Appurtenant Work
City of Monticello Project No, 2005-01C
WSB Project No, 1494-04
Minneapolis I St. Cloud r",WPW1N\U94-1J4'.L1'RCO I VOJ FNL cu J C1T.lu"cc"()22007.w-FnIDoc.r,Joc
Equal Opportunity Employer
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
Please find enclosed the final Construction Pay Voucher No.5 (in triplicate) for the above-
referenced project in the amount of$71,318.03 and Change Order No, I (in triplicate) in the
amount of$12,935.20. Pay Voucher No.5 does include payment for Change Order No, I. Also
enclosed is the following documentation required for processing final payment for the above-
referenced project:
1. Satisfactory showing that the contractor has complied with the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding state income tax (IC134 forms).
2. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the contractor by reasons of
the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured (lien waivers).
3. Consent of Surety to Final Payment certification from the contractor's surety.
4, Two-year maintenance bond.
We recommend that you make final payment in the amount of$71,318.03 to Knife River
Corporation (formerly Buffalo Bituminous, Inc.) at your earliest convenience.
The maintenance period will be in effect from January 3, 2007 until January 3, 2009.
01494-04 - Pay Voucher 5
Thursday, January 11,2007
..
WSB
Owner: City of Monticello
505 Walnut St
Monticello, MN 55362-1147
For Period: 11/1/2005 to 1/3/2007
Contractor: Buffalo Bituminous, Inc.
2852 County Road 12 North
Buffalo, MN 55313
Pay Voucher
2005 Street Reconstruction Program
Client Contract No.:
Project No.: 01494-04
Client Project No.:
Request No.: 5 & FINAL
Date: 1/3/2007
& Assocl4les. Inc.
Proiect Summary
1 Original Contract Amount $830,293.50
2 Contract Changes - Addition $12,935.20
3 Contract Changes - Deduction $0.00
4 Revised Contract Amount $843,228.70
5 Value Completed to Date $834,063.86
6 Material on Hand $0.00
7 Amount Earned $834,063.86
8 Less Retainage $0.00
9 Subtotal $834,063.86
10 Less Amount Paid Previously $762,745.83
11 Liquidated Damages $0.00
12 AMOUNT DUE THIS PAY VOUCHER NO.5 & FINAL $71,318.03
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT A FINAL EXAMINATION HAS BEEN MADE OF THE ABOVE NOTED CONTRACT, THAT
THE CONTRACT HAS BEEN COMPLETED, THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF WORK SHOWN IN THE FINAL
VOUCHER HAS BEEN PERFORMED AND THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE WORK PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH, AND PURSUANT TO, THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT IS AS SHOWN IN THIS FINAL VOUCHER.
Recommended for Approval by:
WSB & AssociatiJ1
tIS.
Construction Observer:
Approved by Owner:
City of Monticello
Specified Contract Completion Date:
7/1/2006
Date:
Comment:
lof4
01494-04 - Pay Voucher 5
Thursday, January 11,2007
Item Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity to Current Amount to
No. Quantity Date Quantity Date
47 2104.501 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (SANITARY) UNFT $5.25 90 110 0 $577.50
48 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V UN FT $60.00 90 110 0 $6,600.00
49 2503.603 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER UN FT $11.00 90 120 120 $1,320.00
50 2503.603 4" PVC PIPE SEWER - SCHEDULE 40 UN FT $38.00 200 167.6 86.6 $6,368.80
51 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING MANHOLE EACH $2,100.00 1 1 0 $2,100.00
Totals For Section SCHEDULE C - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS: $16,966.30
SCHEDULE D - WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS
52 2104.501 REMOVE WATER SERVICE PIPE UN FT $4.20 575 106 0 $445.20
53 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER SERVICE EACH $370.00 12 2 0 $740.00
54 2504.602 RELOCATE HYDRANT EACH $1,300.00 4 1 0 $1,300.00
55 2504.602 ADJUST GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH $735.00 9 0 0 $0.00
56 2504.602 1" CORPORATION STOP EACH $32.00 12 2 0 $64.00
57 2504 .603 LOWER 8" WATERMAIN UN FT $55.00 75 16 0 $880.00
58 2504.603 1" TYPE K COPPER PIPE UN FT $38.00 575 219.94 69.94 $8,357.72
59 2504.604 4" POLYSTYRENE INSULATION SQYD $16.00 1500 192.5 0 $3,080.00
Totals For Section SCHEDULE 0 - WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS: $14,866.92
ALTERNATE NO, 3 - STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (CP PIPE)
73 2501.515 12" CP PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARD EACH $425.00 1 0 0 $0.00
74 2501.515 15" CP PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARD EACH $450.00 1 2 0 $900.00
75 2501.515 27" CP APRON WITH T. G. AND SHEET PILED END SECTION EACH $2,950.00 1 0 0 $0.00
76 2501.515 30" CP APRON WITH T. G. AND SHEET PILED END SECTION EACH $3,075.00 1 2 0 $6,150.00
77 2503.511 12" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $26.50 930 1526 0 $40.439.00
78 2503.511 15" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $27.50 914 905.5 0 $24,901.25
79 2503.511 18" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $29.50 1050 1024 0 $30,208.00
80 2503.511 21" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $32.00 332 3 0 $96.00
81 2503.511 24" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $35.00 470 479 0 $16,765.00
82 2503.511 27" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $41.50 298 0 0 $0.00
83 2503.511 3D" CP PIPE SEWER UN FT $43.50 257 405 0 $17,617.50
Tolals For Section ALTERNATE NO.3 - STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (CP PIPE): $137,076.75
Change Order 1
84 12575.5051S0DDING TYPE SALT RESISTANT SQYDI $1.481 87401 87401 8740 $12,935.20
Totals For Change Order 1: $12,935.20
Project Totals: $834,063.86
3 of 4
Council Agenda: 2/26/07
5K. Consideration of adoptine: a resolution to Wrie:ht County supportine: authorization of
speed zone studv on CSAH 18 between School Boulevard and CSAH 75. (BW)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Wright County Highway Department (WCHD) would like to request that MnlDOT
perform a speed zone study on 9.43 miles ofCSAH 18, from CSAH 75 in Monticello to
CSAH 22 (Naber Avenue) in the City ofSt. Michael. However, while seeking approval
from the Wright County Board of Commissioners to request this speed zone study, the
Board denied approval pending input from the affected cities along this corridor of CSAH
18. As such the City of Monticello received the attached letter from the WCHD dated
February 12, 2007, outlining their position behind requesting the speed zone study and
seeking support from the City in the form of a resolution.
Staff reviewed the letter and discussed the pros and cons of performing the speed zone
study as requested. It was the consensus of staff that it makes sense to perform a speed
zone study on the newly constructed portion of CSAH 18 between School Boulevard and
CSAH 75 as requested. This portion of CSAH 18 includes the roundabout at Meadow Oak
Avenue. On the other hand, staff felt it would not make sense to perform a speed zone
study on CSAH 18 east ofFenning Avenue to the southeast city limits as requested. The
reason for this is that this portion of CSAH 18 is currently posted at 45 mph, however the
WCHD letter suggests that the posted speed limit would likely increase to 50 mph should
the speed zone study be performed. It is staff's opinion that this would not benefit the City.
The Council must decide which portions of CSAH 18 to include in the speed zone study, if
any. Once these limits are defined by Council the resolution can be revised as required.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to adopt a resolution to Wright County supporting authorization of a speed zone
study on CSAH 18 from School Boulevard to CSAH 75.
2. Motion to adopt a resolution to Wright County supporting authorization of a speed zone
study on CSAH 18 as identified in the attached WCHD letter and draft resolution.
3. Motion to adopt a resolution to Wright County supporting authorization of a speed zone
study on CSAH 18 based on other limits as identified by the City Council.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation ofthe City Administrator and the City Engineer that the City
Council approve Alternative Action #1. .
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Letter from Wright County Highway Department dated February 12,2007.
vt-1TY Ok
O()~
t~~
\- !
." -dY
7as6
"IMPROVING SAfETY THROUGH SOUND
ENGINEERING DECISIONS"
WRIGHT COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
Wright County Public Works Building
1901 Highway 25 North
Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
Jet. T.R. 25 and C.R. 138
Telephone: (763) 682-7383
FAX: (763) 682-7313
WAYNE A. FINGALSON. P.E.
Highway Engineer
(763) 682-7388
VIRGIL G. HAWKINS. P.E.
Assistant Highway Engineer
(763) 682-7387
RICHARD E. MARQUETTE
Right of Way Agent
(763) 682-7386
February 12,2007
Jeff O'Neill
City Administrator
City of Monticello
505 Walnut St., Suite I
Monticello, MN. 55362
RE: Speed Zoning - CSAH 18
From CSAH 75, in the City of Monticello, to CSAH 22 (Naber Ave), in the City of St.
Michael, approximately 9.43 miles in length.
Dear Mr. O'Neill:
The Wright County Highway Department would like to have the above mentioned road speed
zoned by MnlDOT, however, prior to us doing that, the County' Board ofComrriissioners has
asked for any input that you may have. When doing a speed zone study, MiVDoT prefers to
speed zone an entire segment of roadway. This is preferable for record keeping purposes, one
study for an entire roadway, rather than many small ones. It also provides them with a better
understanding for proper transitions in speed zoning the entire road.
Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
Minnesota Statute, 169.14, governs speed limits in Minnesota. Speed laws are created for the
protection of the public and the curbing of unreasonable behavior. To effectively enforce a law,
the public must believe that the law is reasonable. The statutory speed limit on County
Highways is 55 mph. Whenever this statutory speed limit is not the correct value, the
Commissioner of Transportation may authorize the posting of other regulatory speed limits. This
is determined by having Mn/DOT conduct a thorough engineering and traffic investigation.
We are requesting a speed zone study be conducted on CSAH 18 for the following reasons:
· To determine the reasonable and safe speed on the newly constructed 4-lane
section and new roundabout area, from CSAH 75 to School Blvd. in the City of
Monticello.
· To determine the reasonable and safe speed of the segment of roadway from
Fenning Ave. to CSAH 37. This segment has not been studied since it was re-
constructed in 1999. The last authorization for this roadway was prior to
widening shoulders, straightening curves, etc. Anytime there is a change in
roadway design, use, surrounding environment, etc., a new speed zone study
should be conducted.
-
CSAH 18
From about 0.052 miles southeast of Oak Ridge Circle,
at the southeast City Limits of Monticello, to CSAH 75,
approximately 1.632 miles in length.
RESOLUTION TO WRIGHT COUNTY IN SUPPORT OF THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE
COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION TO PERFORM AN ENGINEERING AND
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE THE REASONABLE AND SAFE SPEED
LIMIT ON THE FOLLOWING WRIGHT COUNTY HIGHWAYS:
WHEREAS, per MN Statute 169.14, the authority to determine the safe and reasonable speed on a
County Highway resides with the Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation, and;
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of all parties to have reasonable and safe speeds posted on County
Highways and City Streets, and;
WHEREAS, the accepted method to determine the reasonable and safe speed is through an engineering
and traffic investigation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Monticello hereby approves this
resolution to Wright County in support of the authorization of the Minnesota Commissioner of
Transportation to perform an engineering and traffic investigation to determine the reasonable and safe
speed limit at the above referenced location.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Monticello agrees to support
the conclusions of the study, and the implementation of such conclusions.
-
Council Meeting - 02/2612007
5L. Consideration of approvinl!: 2007 Parks Department Tree Prol!:ram (S.N)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Parks Department is requesting authorization to provide a tree planting and care
workshop for the city of Monticello residents and following the workshop offer trees to
residents at a reduced cost to provide more trees within the City of Monticello.
In April 1999 a similar tree program was offered to the public and was a success.
This new program will allow the residents to gain the basic knowledge needed for a
successful planting and continued maintenance of the tree{s) purchased. Planting of trees
will benefit the city by increasing home value, air quality, wildlife habitat, water quality,
aesthetics, and the overall view of the city.
The city will provide trees that residents can purchase at a cost of$15 per tree with the
limit of2 trees. The cost to the city is on average $30 per tree (I to 2 inch diameter).
There will be a limited variety of species to choose from (see enclosed list). They will
range in height from 4 to 10 feet. The Parks Department will hold the workshop, order
the trees and distribute the trees to the public. In order for the resident to take advantage
of this tree offer they must attend the workshop or stop by the Publics works building to
receive the proper tree care infonnation and fill out the fonn. The workshop will provide
infonnation on types of trees being offered and how to plant and care for them. After the
workshop residents will have the opportunity to discuss their lot and tree care with parks
department staff. Those wishing to purchase trees will need to fill out a fonn and prepay
for their trees at the conclusion of the workshop. Those that are not able to make the
workshop will have the option to come to the public works building and get the required
planting infonnation and fill out the tree order fonn there. An order for trees will be
placed based upon the total ordered following the workshop and the cities needs for the
spring planting. This program does not include the larger tree's proposed for planting
this year such as those at the block 35 parking lot and those along the retaining wall on
Chelsea road west near ottercreek. There is a total of $ I I ,000 budgeted for tree planting
this spring, $5000 for the spring planting program and $6000 for the cities needs.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. The first alternative would be to approve the tree program and authorize the
reduced cost trees for residents.
2. The second alternative action would be to not approve the tree program.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommendation of the Public Works Director, Parks Superintendent and Parks
Commission that the city council authorize the tree program and the reduced cost trees to
residents.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the tree order form and ad to be placed in city news letter.
Property Owner's Information
LOCATION FOR TREE PICKUP
(see map on back of sheet)
MONTICELLO
The trees will need to be picked up at the Monticello Public Works Building at 909 Golf
Course Road (West County Road 39) on Saturday Apri12Sth, 2007 anytime from
9:00a.m. to noon. If someone else is picking them up for you please send this order sheet
along. If the trees are not picked up on Saturday they will be donated to the City Parks.
Thank You.
Monticello Parks Department
Name
Ordered the following trees:
Backuo Tree Order
Common Hackberry. .................. Burr Oak
American Linden. .... ............ ...... Redmond Linden
Patmore Ash........... ................. Marshall Ash
Norway Maple.......................... Autumn Blaze Maple
Vanguard Elm.............,... .......... Skyline Honeylocust
Amur Maple............................. Showy Mountain Ash
***Gopher State Number: I-SOO-252-1166
It is Minnesota State Law to call before you plant your trees. There are many cables and
wires buried underground and one call to Gopher State will ensure that all utilities
involved will be notified such as gas, electric, telephone, cable T. V. etc. There is no
charge for this service.
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite I, Monticello, MN 55362-8831' (763) 295-27 [ I' Fax: (763) 295-4404
Office of Pub[ic Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello. MN 55362. (763) 295-3170' Fax: (763) 27[-3272
Tree Care Workshop
The City of Monticello Parks Department will be providing a workshop for the residents
and business owners to learn more about tree care and offer the opportunity to purchase
two trees at a cost of $15 per tree. There will be a variety of trees to choose from.
In order to take advantage of this tree offer, residents are required to attend the tree
planting and care workshop. The workshop will be held on March 17, 2007, at 10 a.m.,
in the Monticello City Hall Council Chambers.
The workshop will provide information on the types of trees being offered and how to
plant and care for them. At the conclusion of the seminar residents will have the
opportunity to discuss with a tree specialist their property and ask questions to help
determine where and what types of trees would be the best for their situation.
Residents must order and pre-pay for their trees at the conclusion of the workshop. The
trees will be distributed on a first-come first-serve basis.
Trees will be available for pickup in the Public Works parking lot at 909 Golf Course
Road on Saturday April 28, 2007, from 9a.m. to noon. If you have any questions
regarding this program, please call 271-3276.
Spring maintenance tips for
trees
'"
7G~
,\if arch
.It..,....... May
~:,oJ ..
~ n
.~ll '
NI
W April
~~~
i
'yV ir,cer pruning
Remove sun protectors from tree [run~:i
Stak~ tree planring locations
Finish pruning trees by chi: 15th
Scarr planting trees when the fi05[ is out
Celebrate Arbor Day. April 23'
Pbnr crees
Finish planting bun: root trees be for::
buds break op~"
\VJrer weekly as nc-ed-:-d
Do not pr'.l:lr: riees
-
Council Agenda: 2/26/;07
7. Continued Public Hearinl!. on adoption of revenue stabilization al!.reement with Xcel
Enerl!.V. (JO)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the previous meeting of the City Council, the Council tabled this item pending additional
review of the analysis completed by Sherburne County, pending discussions with State
Senator Amy Koch and for the purpose of monitoring the process oflegislation requesting an
increase in the tax rate necessary to offset the decrease in market value proposed for utility
facilities. Subsequent to the meeting on the 12th the following has occurred.
. An administrative law judge ruled in favor of amending the rules governing market value
which will result in a drop in value ofXcel facilities in the amount of27% thus lowering tax
capacity accordingly. If the current tax capacity rate is applied against the lowered tax
capacity, revenue drops approximately $604,000 per year (9.3% oflevy).
. I believe that the Governor must approve the application of the new rule, but it is virtually
automatic. It was reported by an executive finance officer that the Governor's budget may be
revised to take into account the effect of this ruling on counties, cities and school districts. It
is not known if equalization aid will be forthcoming.
. On 2/20/07 a Senate hearing was held on legislation intended to make host cities whole by
offsetting the market value drop with an increase in property tax rates applied to utility
company property. The cities of Redwing, Becker and Monticello testified. Xcel and other
utility companies testified also. Based on their testimony Xcel will fight the tax rate increase
based on the promise that they will spread the market value reduction related savings they are
getting across the user base in the form of electric rate reductions. The Senate Committee
clearly and somewhat forcefully stated the view that host communities make sacrifices by
having coal and nuclear facilities in their back yards. The monetary benefit originally
promised, as part of this arrangement should not be allowed to erode. The tax bill was moved
forward with an increase in tax rates for utilities.
. As part ofthe testimony, the City of Redwing noted that they signed the stabilization
agreement under duress noting that they had no choice. They stood to lose 1.3 million dollars
via reduction in tax capacity once the market value dropped. In a sense Redwing is playing
the game by accepting the stabilization agreement but at the same time fighting for tax rate
changes noting that in 10 years it goes away and the city is left at the bad end of a broken
deal.
. Coalition of Utility Communities lobbyists noted that the Senate hearing went well and felt
there would be good support in the Senate. However they noted that the House may not be as
receptive and there will be representatives from other areas that may like the idea of reduced
electric rates even if it means that host cities will suffer. Bill sponsor, Senator Murphy from
the Red Wing area expressed appreciation for Monticello attendance but noted the legislation
has a ways to go.
. Counties such as Sherburne and Wright County have not adopted the stabilization agreement
nor has the City of Becker adopted it. However, this in some respect is due to their
corresponding financial situation. Monticello's situation may be more akin to Redwing than
-
Council Agenda: 2/26/;07
to other host communities. It is my understanding that Sherburne County believes that they
might be required to make abatement payments in year 3 or 4 if they adopt agreement so they
are reluctant to sign on.
· Monticello representatives left a note with Amy Koch thanking her for her support but were
not able to talk to her directly.
Council has an interesting and perhaps difficult choice with regards to determining whether or not to
support adoption of the Revenue Stabilization Agreement.
Reasons for support of agreement
· Like it or not it appears that the base tax rate used for computing the stabilization payment
will be the current rate. According to the calculations provided by EWers and Associates, the
City will be ahead financially by adopting the agreement. If the agreement is not adopted
property taxes would needed to increase overall by $604,000 in order to offset the reduction
in tax capacity.
· If adopted, Monticello would be following the Red Wing approach which is to protect itself
financially in the short term (10 years) by adopting the agreement, while at the same time
continue to fight for restructuring of tax rates.
· It is not known how long Xcel will continue to offer the agreement. Xcel participation could
be withdrawn at any time.
Reasons to table or deny support for agreement.
· There are points of clarification and other questions regarding administration of the
agreement. Xcel is not willing to review the agreement further. It is a take it or leave it
arrangement.
· Perhaps not signing the agreement contributes to the effort to lobby for the changes to the tax
rate structure. It is not known to what extent taking this chance improves the viability of the
legislation.
· It is not known at this point if signing the agreement will impact Amy Koch support for the
property tax legislation.
B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The safe play at this point from a financial standpoint is to fonow Red Wing's lead and adopt
the agreement. Then in turn fight for structural changes to the tax rate structure that would
result in reinstatement of the status quo for the short term and beyond.
Council could strategically withhold approval of the agreement pending progress on
legislation and perhaps continue to request amendments to the agreement that are of particular
importance to the City Council. This option has its risks, as it is not known at what point
Xcel might withdraw the offer. On the other hand, it might be bad form for Xcel to
---
Council Agenda: 2/26/;07
withdraw the offer during the legislative process, as doing so would play into the hands of
those who seek a change in the tax rate Structure.
c. SUPPORTING DATA:
Sherburne County Analysis.
.
. NSP retains the right to file appeals in tax court as to the Department of
Revenue value assessments
IDENTIFIED ISSUES WITH PROPOSED NSP REVENUE
STABILIZATION AGREEMENT
(i): Problems within the Contract:
. "Base year amount" is subject to future reductions (which hurts the County)
in case of plant divestitures (defined as a sale, destruction, or "substantial"
non-operation of a "material" portion of the stabilized property). The amount
by which the base year amount is to be reduced for divestitures must be
resolved through future negotiations - and the Agreement fails to set forth any
standards for determining a new base year amount due to divestitures
. Contract is void if the new rule changes are not in effect by December 31,
2008
. Utility may offset any stabilization payment by any abatement amounts owed
from previous years
. County is required to pay interest on all abatement amounts unpaid for greater
than one year
. Extraordinary investment (defined as an increase in market value over the
previous assessment year of7% or more resulting from capital investment): if
the utility property taxes exceed the base year amount as a result of
extraordinary investment, the parties must either re-negotiate or terminate the
Agreement
. Extraordinary investments are tracked and aggregated for annual comparisons:
a "tracking within a tracking"
. Extraordinary investment (and the resulting consequences to the Agreement)
are solely within the Utilities' discretion
. Utility insists that tax abatement agreements between the County and all other
future private developers are subordinate to the Utility's rights to abatement
pavement under the Agreement.
. Termination: Agreement can be terminated ifthe Minnesota property tax
system is "fundamentally" revised such as if the valuation system is
"substantially" changed or the tax classification rates are "materially"
changed. The amount or percentage of change which amounts to a "material"
change is not listed; rather, must be determined by future negotiations (note: a
bill will be or already was introduced to change tax rates!!)
· Termination: The Utility may terminate the Agreement if the County receives
"any" form of substitute "revenue" "due to" reduced utility property tax
revenues. These terms are vague and subject to multitude interpretations
· Disputes require mediation, then mandatory binding arbitration
· Utility may assign its rights and obligation under the contract even without the
County's consent.
(Ii): Problems outside the Contract:
· Agreement is complicated - will be difficult to administer
· Agreement will demand an on-going, high level of staff resources after
contract is signed for the life of the Agreement
· Agreement does not provide much security, in that the Agreement may be
terminated under a number of contingencies completely outside the County's
control
· Agreement could result in a decrease bond rating
· School districts: may endure a year oflevy spikes as a result of decreased
valuations
· Unclear: how will the Agreement impact our ability to protect market value?
· The higher the Utility's assessed value = the more like the County will pay an
abatement under the Agreement
· The political perceptions of the Agreement: how would the County Board
rationalize to other taxpayers in the County its decision to enter a contract to
protect one large taxpayer from rising taxes?
· The agreement is not favored by the DOR
· Political perception: Will state legislators view the Agreement as an attempt
by two parties to "skirt" a tax system designed to be fair and reasonable to
both taxpayers and local governmental units?
-
Council Agenda - 02/26/2007
9. Consideration of needs study for Public Works Department and authorization to
request proposals. (I.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the direction of the City Council, the Public Works Director with the assistance of City
staff developed an RFP for a Public Works Needs and Expansion Study. The study was to
include the existing facility along with the adjoining City owned parcels, as well as the
existing water reservoir site located on Chelsea Road, and a small site located near Well #4
on Dundas Road was considered for inside storage. That RFP was distributed in April of
2006 and seven proposals were received from various architectural firms from St. Cloud to
the Twin Cities in May. Although one low proposal of $11 ,01 0 was received, the majority of
the proposals were in the $18,500 to $30,500 range. There were several well written
proposals in the $20,750 to $25,000 range. A sum of $35,000 was budgeted for this study.
After a discussion considering the pros and cons of doing long term planning, the Council
voted 3 to 2 to not proceed with the Public Works Study at that time.
Since the spring of 2006, the secretarial staff and Public Works Director have relocated from
the old NSP building at 909 Golf Course Road to the conference and training room in the
building at 901 Golf Course Road. This improved the working conditions slightly with better
lighting, less noise from the heating and cooling system, and the ladies room was available
for secretarial staff without having to leave'the building. The ladies room, however, now has
become a combination restroom and filing room due to lack of space. In addition, we still
have no privacy at all when dealing with many issues, whether it be personnel issues, phone
calls, city project issues or a resident wishing to select a grave for a deceased family member.
I have included in the packet a copy of the minutes from the tour taken of the Public Works
Facility by the Mayor and Council on the evening of February 14,2005. City staff, including
the public works employees, would like the City Council to again consider distributing
requests for proposals for a public works needs and expansion study. The RFP has been
redrafted to include only two options; 1) The expansion of the existing facility, or 2) The full
relocation to an entirely new piece of property with more potential for growth. Removed
from consideration for a partial move or a complete move was the reservoir site. With a
portion of the reservoir site being considered for ponding, as well as looking at the size of
two reservoir expansions and a water treatment facility there would be little room left on the
site for relocated public works or even the water department if that should again be
considered. Instead of relocating the Public Works Facility to an existing site with other
uses, the study will include development of a new facility and site plan showing buildings
and outside space needs for 20 years and room for expansion. This will give us a footprint of
the size of property we would need to build an entirely new facility.
The old bowling alley is not considered for a relocation of Public Works as access to the
building and the height of the building for other than small equipment storage is not practical.
Even the cost to renovate the southerly one-third to one-half of the building for small
equipment storage would be expensive and possibly cost prohibitive.
The Council is being asked to consider distribution of the RFP as included in your packet
which will study the existing site and determine the size and needs for a totally new site
Council Meeting - 02/26/2006
along with the costs of both. We assume that this RFP will result in proposals slightly less
costly than those previously received. There are adequate funds in the budget to do this
study and without this type of long range planning we have no direction or light at the end of
the tunnel for the Public Works Department.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. The first alternative is to approve the RFP in your packet for distribution to the architects
and engineers who responded to the last one. The proposals will be due the 3rd of April
to be reviewed by the City Council at the April 9th meeting.
2. The second alternative is to amend the RFP as determined ,by the City Council and then
send the RFP to those architectural firms which showed interest the last time.
3. The third alternative would be not to approve the RFP or distribute it and to delay any
long term planning needs for some time in the future.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator, Public Works Director, City
Engineer, Street Superintendent, Water Superintendent, Park Superintendent, and the
secretarial staff that the City Council approve and authorize the request for proposals for
a Public Works Needs and Expansion Study and allow its distribution as outlined in
alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the RFP; Copy of the minutes from the May 8, 2006 meeting; Copy of Public
Works tour minutes from February 14, 2005.
.
~ I . , J
L .
f,.'11+J).11
MONTICELLO
.
City of Monticello
Office of Public Works
909 Golf Course Road
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
tthone: (763) 295-3170
Fax: (763) 271-3272
REQUEST
FOR
PROPOSALS
PUBLIC WORKS
NEEDS AND EXPANSION STUDY
As Approved by the Monticello City Council
~
February 26, 2007
City of Monticello, MN
Proposals Due 2 p.m.
Tuesday,
April 3, 2007
F:IADMINIWordProc\JOHNlSPECSIPW NEEDS EXP STUDY 2007 RFP.~d: 2/22/07
- PAGE 3 OF 6 -
.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR
PUBLIC WORKS NEEDS AND EXPANSION STUDY
AS APPROVED BY THE MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 26, 2007
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN
1.
PURPOSE
The City of Monticello is seeking proposals for engineering and architectural services associated with
planning and expansion and/or relocation of the Public Works Facility in Monticello, MN. Due to
residential and commercial growth, the City needs to expand its Public Works Facilityto continue to
provide adequate services for our community.
2. BACKGROUND
The City of Monti cello currently has one Public Works Facility at 901/909 Golf Course Road serving the
City. Enclosed for your information is a site plan for the existing facility and City owned parcels adjoining
.
the facility aHd a. 6~t"" pla.u. rui tI."" ""A~~t~H.s vvah,.,. I""",""! vO~. ",~lG vvl.~ch ~u""ludG", a 1dovv YUWld. vvalGI
1""",,,,,. voht,Vdl &. P WHY 110"",,,,, #J aud tI."" i'vlouG""""llo ~";"llM Shdt\....L. Abu ""udo~vd ~5 a 6~l"" !w:tp vf a lot
Ou vvl!~dl T,Ydl #41.:) IvGat""d. ill tl.!"" ~lv!fl~Gdlv Indu~tl~al Pw.h...
3. INSTRUCTIONS TO CONSULTANT
A. Questions and related correspondence should be directed to John Simola, Public Works
Director for the City of Monticello.
John E. Simola
Public Works Director
CITY OF MONTICELLO
909 Golf Course Road
Monticello, MN 55362
Phone: (763) 271-3271
Fax: (763) 271-3272
B. Proposals must be received no later than 2:00 o.m. on Tuesday. May 2. 2006 Aoril3.
2007. Twelve (12) copies of the Proposal must be delivered to the Office of Public
Works at the address noted.
C.
The Citywill promptly review the Proposals and notify Consultant Firms of any additional
action or requirements, if any.
.
2.) Structural condition and projected requirements of existing and proposed buildings:
. a. Heating/cooling/ventilation systems
b. Electrical systems, including standby power
c. Restrooms, separation from work stations
d. Lunchroom
e. Locker room
f. Private meeting room (for cemetery inquiries or interviews)
g. Conference room and training facilities
h. Office space, privacy requirements
1. Storage room for office and cleaning supplies
J. Computer stations
k. Intercom and radio systems
1. Drafting room, plan layout areas
m. File storage areas with easy access
3.) Equipment maintenance repair areas:
a. Lifts
b. Overhead crane
c. Specialized tool needs
d. Paint booth/sand blasting area
. e. Lubrication areas
f. Waste oil/anti-freezelhazardous chemicals storage
g. Oil and grease storage
h. Parts/tire storage
1. Tool storage
J. Welding area or shop
k. Equipment washing bays/parts cleaning
1. Vehicle repair bays
m. Water meter repair, test and storage areas
4.) General considerations:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
. h.
1.
Equipment storage, including movement through parlcing area and building
Carpentry/wood shop, expansion of Park Department work areas
Sign shop/storage
Cold storage
Sand/salt storage
Materials bulk storage (i.e., wood chips, bituminous, compost, Class V,
sand, etc.
Fuel (gas & diesel) storage including electronic tie to maintenance database
Employee and visitor parking areas and exterior traffic areas (including
part-time and summer workers)
Safety including OSHA requirements, fire safety requirements, etc.
F:\ADMIN\Wor<lPro~\JOHN\SPECS\PW NEEDS EXP STUDY 2007 RFP_\OPd: 2(22/07
-
- PAGE 5 OF 6 -
SITE #2
....
~..
t'~jil~
"~1li:r
..>~_.- --
.
,\I. ;'
.... II I
~ I, !
, ",..1\ \
F'. .-- ~
l\ I
, ,', h/t!;
.,,,,' ""
+/
.
,
SITE '1
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
GOLF COURSE ROAD
PROPOSED ONE ACRE BUILDING SITE
-
'~
", " '. o~ ""
'~ <""-
"'01-
,
"-
I
I
'~
1 ^',
COIJ~
~~..~
~
I~OEPENOENT '
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
.""
LOT
-, t_LOT 02F
LOT 8
OF
r
LOT 8
NO.
882
...
t......,"'"
.
.
I
OUTLOT
A c:, ",' f
~~....~ ~ I
~. ..~c;,
~
-.
4
'tI€.s"t
C~~~\014
.,.
"-
o
""
~,;,
p
,
..
..
',',T'
H
"
Ie ..,.
k :<:~ ~
- .- .._~
......
~..,.&-
, .
It.."...
LOT
c
.
'tilt
. , Q. '; " ~
i
,
.
".'L.....
.
.-
~
2
\..01':
ill-Oel'. \
, ~-~.. '
,.
:
:ri. .. ,I" '-I . '~.I :: ,-
:3 " ...
.. 2 "'w d~ '7 I . 2
l .. ....j X .. ~
.. I
I " '., \~. , ,,-" 2R
1; ..3./ '~2\ ", .:' -..~J.'
r-;"'i--,-,'" .,., I'''',. /
.. ...
;....u;
....)J,II
,..
~.....
.......... NO,-
,
..
.G
14 ~. :
ADO
.
;1
,
--il;:t.--i
'';''l~
t
.
, 4 .
. .- ,
,
.
.
:w.o...~
~......<:;J
..v.t' 1
~
. ''1,. -~';;-"~.."t.-'i\-~'\~t~:f%~{;.~
-- '''''''', "~', < ~ ~,O', '"I':::' ',' ':',:",,~,
"" " ~'ff",', . . ',,_
~ 2:. '",,., "'~i~' . ",
::;l::<: '~ .'>"
,,',' ,P
,'jf 'i\I<, .i
X "" '1"-
"
I
I
I
I
,
-El
,
I
,
I
I
. ;~l';R,r~~[~1rT~~(~~~~~-:!;/'7':< }
,-'~ .. ,. -,. ;< . .,.
~":=r'
.- ,.
.
I
Ii
.
J.
i J
~
i
,1;;1
I' ,
,- :
1 I
I
,
\
lZl
25
CO
b
~~
1
..
o
I~
~ ~ ~ ". /I.~'# .
/.. ,,' / JlJJ
~. tf J; /
n . ., _ ,.
'. "1~! ,
'~ "~~,.:'if. ~ . ~ )\.
~I . I
. ,
:: I' "l
I.. .;;
v ".
: .
J
0,
;
..
"
~
w
~o
~~
0..'"
Ww
-0",
~"''''
Ill>::>
1::"'0
"'00
3:..
g5
-Ie>
!!:
0..
. -
':'c;..
i'"
0;;;
.10
"'c<.
~ <
.... -~
.....':';
v.
- .
, <
~ -
~
olo
'~, ::
.~ ~
. .
..0.;;
, .
J;f;
~~
r
. .
ig~
"
"-"""1
--"'~'f4
,/'
/
/
"l',!-
,
I
.
I
I
i;
i
.
l""~. ".,
.
I
,
I
.
'I
.f',:. l'
C\.~ /
~l
I
,
4~
.,
. I'
Ii
~ ~ 2;
;" ~
-~~\
.:
--
-0
!
~
.
.
~
l,ti'l.r!
E ;
".......
i;it..
~~:.,..
;~~~
!:;;E'5
2:i~f;
jj~dt'
S~~;
:t...f
f~g~
iCil~~
'0..-<;
u.
.,Qu,c
.-.
.-Eo~ 0
~ 2~" ~
o
<:
.
u
'(.,
.'
,
>
',- 'J
.
.
.
Page I of2
SITE #1
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
GOLF COURSE ROAD
TOTAL ACREAGE = 6.1
http://156.99 .28. 84/servletlcom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=CustomParcel&CIient... 4n /2006
.
.
.
Page 1 of2
SITE #2
WELL #4
DUNDAS ROAD
TOTAL ACREAGE'" 3.2
http://156.99 .28.84/serv let/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceN ame=CustomParcel&Client... 417/2006
e
e
e
-
I
I
I
I Council Agenda. 5/806
equipment was not able to handle the removJ of the material. The contractor also uncovered
other buried debris such as tires. The issue ot the buried debris is something that should be
addressed in current negotiations with the property owner.
Clint Herbst questioned how such a large amJunt of material could be missed in the soil borings
and felt this issue should be pursued with MnbOT.
I
MnDOT's participation in the project was ba ed on a lump sum amount and they will not pay
anything in addition to that. Bret Weiss said ey would go back to MnDOT regarding this item
but he did not believe they would contribute ything more. Bret Weiss indicated the interchange
project is on schedule.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE~HANGE ORDER NO.2 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$424,402.50 FOR R.L. LARSON EXCA V A ING, INC. FOR THE CSAH 18/I-94
INTERCHANGE PROJECT, CITY PROJE NO. 2004-01C AND SEE IF THERE IS ANY
RECOURSE WITH MNDOT. TOM PE ULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12.
on ideration of es
Exoansion Study.
Public W
As directed by previous Council action, Publ Works Director, John Simola had sent out RFP's
to ten firms. Seven of the ten firms respond d back. John Simola was asking that a small group
consisting of one member of the Council, the City Administrator, the Building Official, the City
Engineer and himself be set up to narrow the eld down to 3-4 firms for the Council to interview.
Clint Herbst said ultimately the City would n~ed to put a plan in place but he didn't know if this
was the time. Brian Stumpf felt that some . g should be about the Public Works working space.
John Simola explained the how the current fi ility is set up noting the that they are hurting for
office space and work space. He felt this stu y would determine a plan that could be utilized for
the next 20-30 years. Clint Herbst felt the c ncem was more with the space needed by the Water
Department. The long term study is some . g to consider at later time but right now they should
just address the immediate needs. Brian S pf cautioned that this long term planning should not
get pushed back too far on the back burner. e felt the cost the study was a small amount for
20-30 year investment. Wayne Mayer agree it was something that should be looked at but
didn't feel now was the time.
WAYNE MAYER MOVED NOT TO PRO BED WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS EXPANSION
STUDY AT THIS TIME. GLEN POSUST A ECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
WITH BRIAN STUMPF AND TOM PE ULT VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
Tom Perrault questioned why the Council ev authorized sending out the RFP's and the time
John Simola spent preparing the RFP. John imola stated the prices received were in line with
what was budgeted. He felt the Council sho~d look closely at relocating the Water Department
as far the impact it would have on shared eq~pment and shared staff. Glen Posusta questioned
why the RFP's were needed and felt it was PJjemature. He didn't see anything wrong with the
I
I
e
e
e
NOTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2005
5:00 P.M.
PUBLIC WORKS TOUR
ATTENDEES: Wayne Mayer, Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf, Clint Herbst, John Simola, Rick
Wolftteller, Tom Moores, Roger Mack, Adam Hawkinson, Matt Theisen, Beth Green
A. The purpose of the meeting was to familiarize the City Council and the Mayor with the Public Works
Facility and the equipment and space needs.
1. John Simola began with a review of the Vehicle Replacement Policy Proposal.
2. John went over the Vehicle and Equipment List.
3.
The Council questioned why we have a log splitter. John stated that years ago we used the splitter
because we had a wood burning stove in the shop and we would split the Dutch elm diseased logs.
We no longer need the splitter because we have gone to a used oil burning furnace in the shop and
we get approximately 500 gallons of oil from residents at juok amnesty day, and the employees
bring in their used oil also.
John then went over the Proposed 2005 VehiclelEquipment Replacement or Additions List.
Matt Theisen explained the necessity of the radio meterreadingunit and how it would save his
department a tremendous amount of time because you canjust drive by the residence and the
reading will pop up on the screen rather than having to park, get out of the vehicle and physically
get the reading.
Glen Posusta inquired about the necessity of the John Deere Tractor proposed by the Parks
Department. John and Adam explained that there is limited equipment produced to maintain 5'
sidewalks which is one of the functions the new John Deere will be performing. John explained to
the group that this tractor had already been approved by the City Administratorunder the previous
Council Policy. The tractor has already been purchased and the Parks Dept is awaiting the delivery
of this new unit. This new tractor is replacing the 1980 Bolens.
The next replacement item was the John Deere skidsteer being shared between the Parks and
Street Departments. The cost allotted was $32,000 plus trade-in. Glen Posusta asked why this
amount was so high when he just purchased a skidsteer himself for $24,000. After further
discussion on this issue it was brought to Glen's attention that the skidsteer has more options and
capabilities than his skidsteer. John mentioned that we just put $5,000 into the old skidsteer
repairing the drive pumps so itis in operable condition now. John further went on to say that the
WWTP frequentIyneeds a skidsteer and loading forks so rather than trade it in, we were planning
to sell itto the WWTP for $7,000 (or trade-in value) and these funds would be used toward the
purchase of the new skidsteer.
F:IADMINIWordProC\CaUNCIL MINUTES SUMMARYlSPECIAL-MTG-WITH-COUNCIL-D214D5.wpd: 2/21107
-Page I oB-
F:\AOMINIWordPruc\COUNCIL MINUTES SUMMARy\sPECIAL-MTG_WITH_COUNCIL-021405.v.pd: 2/21107
- Page 3 00 -
e
workstations and that a reception/greeting area was needed, along with new lighting, and
improvements to the heating and ventilation system. John's office is currently shared with a file
room and this is becoming too crowded and there's no privacy for phone cans ormeetings. The
lack of adequate restroom facilities in the building was also discussed with the Council.
John inquired as to whether the Council wished to take action on what was discussed and
purchasing and equipment needs and they said that they would take action at the regular council
meeting. The council and mayor then proceeded to City Hall for their regularly scheduled Council
Meeting.
Notes Taken By:
Beth Green
Public Works Secretary
e
It
Council Agenda - 02/26/2007
10. Review of plans and specifications for repaintiDl! of the Monte Hill Water Tank and
discussion ofIol!:o for tank. (1.S.) (B.W.)
B. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As this agenda item is being written, the new water tower in the Jefferson Commons area is
being cleaned and readied for filling. Weare; therefore, busy putting together plans and
specifications for the repainting of the 800,000 gallon water tank on the Monte Club Hill. The
coatings on the inside of the tank and the paint on the outside are past their useful life. The
Water Superintendent and myself are looking forward to getting this painting project underway
and refurbishing this tank. The plans and specifications are in draft form and are included in
your packet.
It is our intention to have all of the coatings removed from the inside of the tank by sandblasting.
The submerged areas would receive a Tnemec Pota-Pox Series 20 paint in a two-coat system
while the dry portions of the interior would receive a two-coat High-Build Epoxoline Series 66
Tnemec product. This is identical to the system used on the new water tower. For the outside of
the tank it may be possible to recoat the existing paint system on the tank after chemical
cleaning, brush blasting, spot repairs and such. However, the experts indicate this is a borderline
type of repair and it may not give us a long life out of the coatings. Matt Theisen and I
remember the paint raining down from the old water tower downtown and we certainly wouldn't
want to see that happen to the tank on the Monte Hill. We, therefore, propose to remove the
paint from the outside of the tank completely by blasting and that we go with the same four coat
system used on the new water tower tank. There are two coats of High-Build Tnemec Epoxoline
66 Series with one coat of Tnemec Endurashield color and the fourth coat is a Tnemec Series 76
Endura Clear. The City names and logos would be put on in the Tnemec Endurashield Series 75
color and covered by the Tnemec 76 Endura Clear.
The contractor would be required to place containment around the tank for painting and blasting
and would have to monitor wind direction. The other method is to require the contractor to have
full containment where he is blasting and painting under negative pressure and none of the
blasting or paint would leave the containment. This type of full containment is significantly
costlier than hanging just a curtain which was done on the new tower. A good contractor
watching the wind with containment should be able to keep the blast agents and paint from
getting on the church or cars parked in the church lot or nearby homes. We are continuing to
research the need for full containment and the cost. We will probably bid full containment as an
option.
In addition to the repainting, we will be adding railing, refurbishing the existing vent, adding
other vents and doing miscellaneous repairs. The existing cathodic protection system will be
removed (it is not functional) but the openings and attachment points will be maintained for a
future installation if needed. The state of the art coatings allow us to delete the cathodic
protection at this time.
The colors for the tank will be lighter colors than the blues that were up there originally. We will
probably use black lettering for the words "Monticello" and the logos would be placed below the
name between the fins. The logos could be the City logo or a swan or both. The wall of the tank
is approximately 50' high. The distance between the fins is a little over 17 W. There was also
Council Meeting - 02/26/2006
some discussion regarding other logos such as the school logo for the Magic Team or the words
"Magic". We have done some color composites of the tank and those are included for your
review for general discussion.
If the draft plans and specifications are approved by the City Council we would move forward
with finishing the complete documents and getting the advertisement for bids out. Bids would be
returnable the 20th of March and would be presented to the City Council on the 26th of March.
Specifications call for the completion of the work by July 16,2007, so the tower and tank could
both be online for the hottest, driest part of the summer, July and August.
The estimated cost of the project is $325,000 not including coatings inspections by KLM
Engineering, Inc. We are in the process of obtaining a quote from KLM. The budget for 2007
contains $230,000. The Water Trunk Fund has a sufficient balance for this project.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve the draft plans and specifications for repainting
of the Monte Hill Water Tank including the name "Monticello" on two sides and one or
two logos on both sides as identified by the City Council with a completion date for the
project of July 16, 2007. Colors would be lighter colors and could be selected at a later
date.
2. The second alternative would be to modifY the plans and specifications for repainting of
the Monte Hill Water Tank as requested by the City Council and approve those for
completion of the project on July 16, 2007.
3. The third altemative would be not to approve plans and specifications for painting of the
Monte Hill Water Tank at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director, City Engineer and the Water
Superintendent that the City Council approve the draft plans and specifications for repainting of
the Monte Hill Water Tank including logos as outlined in alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of various renderings of the Monte Hill Water Tank with different logos; Copy of the draft
plans and specifications for the project.
.
.
.
---
'"
'.u
>--
w
:i:
:'S
'"
'"
I
l"1
If)
I
1
r . ,/---
!o
I~
; 4J~
IU
IH
I~
IZ
;0
:~~
I
'l
jd
,
,L
~
..r 0
~ -,os
lH~I3H 113HS
,9-,lS
~,
~
J
----J
-I
--~~
,
.
-,
/
I
I
0:: I ~
"-i
>-- I ,
w
:>:
<r
~ I
a
.
<::> I
,
M
. If)
.
~
01
vi
o
:>
w
--'
w
~
I
\
.;/E: 0 ,0>;
lH~I3H ll3HS
.9 ,IS
.
.
.
10
: jF
I~
IU
I~
I~
Z
:o~
I~
I
...-
'"
UJ
f--
UJ
L
<t
~
o
<=>
t
(')
If)
",I
ui
o
>
w
--'
w
,viE O-,OS
lH:J13H ll3HS
.9-.1<;
-~,
===PI
.
'0
: jF
,~
IU
,~
~
IZ
i~~
I
~
~I
'"
w
~
w
:>:
<(
~
""
a
I
M
If)
.
.
.vlE O-,OS;
lH:l13H llJHS
.9 ,I"
~,
~
~
i
.
"1
'"
~
>--
~
x
<(
~
a
C>
I
(')
If)
.
.
,
: ~F
I~
'8
I~
IZ
: o~
I ~.
1.1
, I
q
1I)
co
;;
w
-'
w
~,
-.~
I
l
../E O-,os
IH':JI3H ll3HS
.9 ,IS
t.Ct,tJttJJItl
MONTICELLO
SPECIFIC
,#i;ONS
'>..~\..
. \~t~tqf.'"
Y
PAINTING
.
Ji""ii;:'ii;iiT
i.htj;i~
5910",IASON AVENUE
:'~\;';';~;;;ifi!it:\~;~i;I'n~~~~lt'
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
City of Monticello
Office of Public Works
909 Golf Course Road
.onticello, MN 55362
February 21, 2007
Phone: (763) 295-3170
Fax: (763) 271-3272
Prepared By: John Simo/a
Public Works Director
.
.
.
Contractor's Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Compliance with Laws, Building Codes and Regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Permits and Licenses .................................................... 27
Certificate of Compliance with MN Withholding Tax .......................... 27
Superintendence and Supervision .......................................... 27
Completion Date ....................................................... 27
Failure to Complete Work .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Payment .............................................................. 28
F:'AOMINIWordPmcUOHN\sPECS\WATER TANK PAINTING _ TOWER HILl- 2007.wpd: 2f22ro7
- PAGE 3 OF 28.
.
.
.
BID FORM
FOR
WATER TANK PAINTING
AND
APPURTENANT WORK
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
To The City Council
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Ladies and Gentlemen:
1. The following bid is made for:
Painting of the 1989 Water Tank; Painting of City Logos on Tank; Miscellaneous
Railing Installation, RoofY ent Refurbishment, Installation and Appurtenant Work.
2. The Undersigned certifies that the Contract Documents listed in the Instructions to Bidders have been
carefully examined, and that the site of the work has been personally inspected. Theundersigned
declares that the amount and nature of the work to be done is understood, and that at no time will
misunderstanding of the Contract Documents be pleaded. On the basis of the Contract Documents,
the Undersigned proposed to furnish all necessary apparatus and other means of construction, do so
all the work and furnish all the materials in the manner specified, to finish the entire project within the
time hereinafter specified, and to accept as full compensation therefore the sum stated below.
3. Item I: Base Bid:
F:IADMINlWOrdProcIJOHNISPECS\WATER TANK PAINTING - TOWER HILL. 2007,wpd: 2122107
- PAGE 5 OF 28-
.
.
.
OFFICIAL ADDRESS:
DATE:
.2007
FIRM NAME:
By:
Title:
By:
Title:
F:\AOMINlWQrdProcI.JOHN\SPECS\WATER TANK PAINTING - TOWER HILL. 2007."'1Xl: 2122/07
- PAGE 7 OF 28 -
.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
FOR
WATER TANK PAINTING
AND
APPURTENANT WORK
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
1.
EXAMINATION OF PLANS. SPECIFICATIONS AND SITE OF WORK
The bidder shall examine to his satisfaction the quantities of work to be done as determined from the plans
and specifications. Quantities indicated by the Owner on drawings or elsewhere are estimated only, and
bidders must rely on their own calculations. Bidders shall be thoroughly familiar with the Contract
Documents including all General Conditions and Special Conditions.
.
Bidders shall inform themselves of the character and magnitude of work and the conditions under which
the work is to be performed concerning the site of the work, the structure of the ground, the existence of
surface and ground water, availability of drainage, the obstacles which may be encountered, means of
approach to the site, manner of delivering and handling materials, facilities of transporting equipment and
all other relevant matters pertaining to the complete execution ofthis contract. No plea ofignorance of
conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist, or of difficulties that will be encountered in the execution
of the work hereunder which result from the failure to make necessary examinations and investigations, will
be accepted as a sufficient excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Contractor to fulfill in every
detail all the requirements of this contract, or will be accepted as a basis for any claim whatsoever for extra
compensation or for an extension of time. No bidder mayrelyupon any statements or representations of
any officer, agent, or employee of the Owner with reference to the conditions of the work or the character
of the soil or other hazards which may be encountered in the course of construction.
2. BID SECURITY
Each bid shall be accompanied by a bid security in the form and amount as specified in the Advertisement
for Bids. Such bid security is a guaranty that the bidder will enter into a contract with the Owner for the
work described in the bid, and the amount of the bid security of a successful bidder shall be forfeited to the
Owner as liquidated damages in the event that such bidder fails to enter into a contract and furnish
contractor's bond.
3. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
The Contract Documents will consist of the Advertisement for Bids, Instructions to Bidders, General
Conditions, Special Conditions, Bid Form, Form of Contract, and all plans and drawings. These
documents are on file with the Owner.
.
F:\ADMINIWordProc'>JQHN\SPECs\WATER TANK PAINTlNG. TOWER HILL. 2007.y,pd: 2/22107
- PAGE 9 OF 28-
.
.
.
9.
PUBLIC OPENING OF BIDS
Bids will be opened publicly and read aloud in such place as designated at the time and the date set in the
"Advertisement". Bidders or their authorized agents are invited to be present.
10. DlSOUALIFICATION OF BIDDERS
More than one bid for the same project from an individual, firm, partnership or corporation under the same
or different names will not be considered. Evidence that any bidder is interested in more than one bid for
the same work will cause rejection of all such bids. Collusion between the bidders will be considered
sufficient cause for the rejection of all bids so affected.
Failure on the part of any bidder to carry out previous contracts satisfactorily or his lack of the experience
or equipment necessary for the satisfactory completion of the work may be deemed sufficient cause for his
disqualification.
11. EOUlPMENT
When requested by the Owner, the bidder shall furnish a complete statement of the make, size, weight
(where weight is one of the specified requirements) condition and previous length of service of all equipment
to be used in the proposed work.
12. FURNISHING OF EVIDENCE OF RESPONSIBILITY
At the City's request, the bidder shall furnish a list of work of similar nature performed with dates of
completion thereof. The bidder shall also furnish any other additional information relative to financial
responsibility and competence to do the work as may be requested by the Owner prior to acceptance of
any bid.
13. REOUlREMENTS OF CONTRACT PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BOND
The successful bidder, at the time for the execution of the contract shall furnish, and at all times maintain,
satisfactory and sufficient performance and payment bonds in full amount of the contract as required by law
with a corporate surety satisfactory to the Owner. The Form of Bonds are that required by Statute.
Personal sureties will not be approved.
14. FAILURE TO EXECUTE CONTRACTS
Failure to furnish contract bonds in a sum equal to the amount of the award, or to execute the contract
within ten (10) days, as specified, shall be just cause for the annulment ofthe award, and it shall be
understood by the bidder that in the event of the annulment of the award, the amount ofthe guaranty
deposited with the bid shall be retained by the Owner, not as a penalty, but as Liquidated Damages.
F:\ADMlNIWordProeIJOHN\SPECS\WATER TANK PAINTING. TOWER HILL. 2007.wpd: 2122lO7
-PAGE 11 OF28.
.
.
.
SCOPE OF WORK
FOR
WATER TANK PAINTING
AND
APPURTENANT WORK
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
1.
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Repainting of the 800,000 above ground steel water tank completed in 1989 including the inside and hidden
portions. The area to which the following work items apply includes the entire exterior of the tank including
the roof, vents, hatches, covers, railings, cage, ladders, pipes, decorative fins, and supports. This also
includes the entire interior of the tank.
2. RAILING APPURTENANT WORK
The existing roofrailing is proposed to be extended to encompass the vents and hatches. These items shall
be manufactured, supplied and installed as part of the Base Bid.
3.
VENT
Replace the roofventwith anew freeze proof and insect proofunitmeeting current A WW A guidelines (see
attached drawings) and install four (4) new vents as part of the Base Bid.
4. MISCELLANEOUS REPAIRS
Any additional areas needing welding orrepair shall be repaired at the hourlyrate shown on the Bid Form
as directed by the Owner.
5. PAINTING
PART 1- GENERAL
5.1.01 SECTION INCLUDES
A. Cleaning, surface preparation, and application of paint to steel water tank and accessories.
B.
Two (2) City Names will be required. The City Name will say the word
"MONTICELLO" and will be underlined as generally shown per Figure I - City Name
Elevation at the end of this Section.
F:\A.DMINIWordProC\JOHN\SPECSIWATER TANK PAINTING - TOWER HILL - 2007.wpd: 2/22/07
- PAGE 13 OF 28-
.
.
.
C.
Inspection: The Contractor shall notify the Owner's on-site representative not less than 24
hours prior to blasting, priming, or application of finish coat. The on-site inspector will
inspectthe blast cleaned surfaces before application of the field primer. Any areas not
sufficiently cleaned shall be re-cleaned as directed by the inspector. He will also inspect
the primed and final coat surfaces for minimum and average dry, film thickness
requirements. Any areas not meeting minimum requirements shall be repainted as directed.
Painting work will be inspected by KLM Engineering, Inc.
5.1.04 PRODUCT HANDLING
A. Delivery and Storage: Thematerial shall be delivered to the project site in the original, new
and unopened containers bearing the manufacturer's name and applicable label
information. Material shall be properly stored and protected to prevent damage to the
deterioration ofthepaintmaterial. Empty containers shall be kept attheproject site to
confirm the quantities of each type of paint used and shall be removed only after this
verification is confirmed by the Engineer.
5.1.05 SEQUENCING AND SCHEDULING
A. Working Hours and Noise Ordinance:
1.
[Please fill in this section]
PART 2 - PRODUCTS
5.2.01 PAINT MANUFACTURER
A. The paint and paint products of the Tnemec Company shall be used.
5.2.02 PAINT SYSTEM
A. Interior Wet:
1. System shall be NSF 61 approved.
2. First Coat _ Tnemec: Pota-Pox Series 20-#1255 Beige (or Series 20FC). After
surface preparation, prime coat shall consist of a brushed on stripe coat on all weld
seams and then an entire brush or spray coat shall be applied to stripe coat and
entire interior surface.
3.
Second Coat _ Tnemec: Pota-Pox Series 20 - WH02, Tank White (or Series
20FC). The second coat does not require a stripe coat on weld seams.
-PAGE150F28-
F:IAOMINIWordProc1JOHNISPECSIWATE.R TANK PAINTING- TOWER HILL -2007.wpd: 2122107
.
furnished to the Owner. Cost of the shop inspections shaH be paid by the Owner.
Contractor shaH provide adequate notice to testing company so that the proper
inspections can be made in the shop.
B.
Field Prime:
1 . Interior: The entire wet interior (water compartment surfaces) of the tank shall be
cleaned of all paint, grease, oil, rust, mill scale, and other foreign or loose material.
Cleaning shaH be done in accordance with Steel. Structures Painting council
Specifications SSPC-SP- 1 0, "Near- White Blast Cleaning". Before any primer
or paint is applied, metal surface shall be completely dry, dust free, inspected and
approved by the Engineer. A stripe coat is required on aH weld seams.
.
2. Exterior and Dry Interior: Exterior surfaces and dry interior surfaces of the tank
where the shop prime has been damaged for any reason shaH be cleaned of aH
grease, oil, rust, miH scale, and other foreign or loose materials before any primer
of coating is applied. Cleaning shaH be done in accordance with the Steel
Structures Painting Council Specifications SSPC-SP-6-85, "Commercial Blast
Cleaning". Before any primer or coating is applied, metal surfaces shaH be
completely dry, dust free, inspected and approved by the Engineer.
5.3.02 EXTERIOR SANDBLAST AND PAINTING CONTAINMENT
A. The Contractor shaH be fuHyresponsible to provide fuH containment as required of the
exterior tank abrasive blasting operation to prevent the drift of abrasive and exteriorprime
coat paint removed onto adjacent property, streets or structures. Therefore, containment
and disposal per State and Federal Regulations wiH be mandatory. The Contractormust
submit for review and approval to the Engineer and Owner a written plan outlining all the
details and equipment the Contractor plans to employ for compliance with therequirements
for full containment.
B. Recover, remove and dispose properly of all spent abrasives, dust, dirt, paint chips, spent
solvent and paint containers, etc.
C. The Contractoror subcontractor expressly agrees to obey the verbal or written direction
and instruction of the Engineer, Inspector or Owner's representative in detenniningwhen
the exterior sandblasting operation may proceed or must be suspended due to excessive
winds or drift of dust, spent abrasive and paint chips outside the area of containment.
D.
Screens used for containment shall be inspected and approved for use by the Engineer,
Inspector or Owner's representative. Wind screens used for containment shaH be solid
screens. They shall be UV -Stabilized, weather and solvent resistant. At a minimum,
screens used for abrasive and paint chips outside the areas of containment.
It
F:\ADMlNIWOn:lProcUOHN\sPECS\WATER TANI( PAINTING _ TOWER HILL -2007.v.pd: 2122107
- PAGE 17 OF 28-
-...
--
.
.
.
be installed at both the compressor air outlet aod the blasting pot compressed air inlet.
D.
Stop abrasive blast cleaoing in sufficient time to remove all dust, spent abrasive aod other
foreign matter from aod around all blasted surfaces (including rigging aod equipment) aod
to allow the atmosphere to clear before aoy coating is done. Removal of these materials
shall be by cleao brush or suitable industrial vacuum with particular attention given to
welds, pockets, poorly accessible areas or aoy overhead areas.
E.
Apply the first coat to all prepared surfaces, except that there shall remain uncoated a 3"
to 4" border of blasted steel at the end of each work day. When blast cleaning resumes
the following work day, this border shall be reblasted up to aod including 1" to 3" of the
previous primer coating.
F.
Take extra care during all blasting operations to prevent damage or abrasive impingement
upon previously applied coated areas.
G.
A prime coat shall be applied within eight (8) hours after saodblasting. When the humidity
exceeds 80%, the prime coat shall be applied within four (4) hours after saodblasting. If
conditions are questionable, the Engineer shall make the decision aod the Contractor shall
accept his interpretation as final aod binding. See Article 3.05, Workmaoship for
additional temperature aod humidity limitations.
H. A daily inspection of the separators aod compressed air supply will be required to insure
cleanliness of all compressed air supplied for abrasive blasting. This test will be performed
by a blotter test. A cleao white blotter is held no more thao 18" from the air supply, down
stream of moisture aod oil separators. The air supply is directed at the blotter for
approximately two (2) minutes. The blotter is then examined visually for signs of oil aod
moisture. A cleao blotter at test completion meaos a successful passing of the air supply
test:
1. Failure to pass the compressed airtest will be justification forrejection of abrasive
blasting performed that day. The Engineer's discretion will be final in this
determination.
5.3.04 PAINT APPLICATION
A. Wet Interior:
1.
Prime Coat: After surface preparations specified above are completed, all wet
interior surfaces (interior surfaces of the water compartment) shall receive the
primecoat. Prime coat shall be applied to provide four (4) mils minimum dry film
thickness aod ao average of not less thao five (5) mils dry film thickness. A stripe
coat shall be applied in addition to the complete prime coat.
F:\ADMIN\Won:lProc\JOHN\$PECSIWATER TANK PAINTING - TOWER HILL - 2007.y,pd: 2122107
-PAGE 190F28.
.
5.
All exterior tank surfaces shall be clear coated, one (1) to two (2) mil dry film
thickness.
D. General: Interior paint can be sprayed or brushed at the Contractor's option. Exterior
paint shall be applied by brush or roller. No sprayiog of exterior surfaces will be allowed.
The Contractor and/or his insurance company solely bears all responsibility for damage
due to paint over spray, mist or splatters. All claims of paint damage shall be promptly
resolved by the Contractor and/or his insurance company.
5.3.05 WORKMANSHIP
A. All work of this Contract shall be done in a workmanlike manner by skilled personnel
experienced in the particular type of work being performed. The coating shall be
performed using approved methods, acceptable tools and practices and shall be performed
in a manner satisfactory to the Engineer.
B.
.
.
Proceed with surface preparation and coating application only when air surface
temperatures are above 500 F, and surface temperature is at least 50 above wet bulb air
temperature reading or dew point. Coating shall not be applied in rain, snow, fog, mist or
when relative humidity exceeds 85%. No coating shall be applied when it is expected that
the relative humidity will exceed 85% or when the air temperature will drop below 400 F
within eight (8) hours after the application of the coating. If working conditions are
questionable, the Engineer shall make the decision and the Contractor shall accept his
interpretation as final and binding. The Owner intends to monitor temperature and humidity
to insure Contractor's compliance with the listed conditions. The Contractor shall record
the relative humidity, air temperature and surface temperature upon commencement and
completion of coating application for each day said work is undertaken. The daily log shall
be submitted to the Inspector for comparison with the Owner's data and verification or
compliance.
C.
Each coat shall be applied atthe specified rate and in the mannerrecommended by the
coating manufacturer and it shall be well worked into the surface to which applied. No
laps or brush marks shall show. The film thickness of the coatings will be measured and
any readings below the specified film thickness shall be corrected by applying any
additional coat( s). Where thinning is necessary, only the products of the manufacturer
furnishing the coating and for the particular purpose shall be allowed. All thinning shall be
done strictly in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, as well as with the full
knowledge and approval of the Engineer. Dry film thickness will be measured bymeans
of a Type 2, fixed probe, magnetic gage 6000 or Quantix-2200 as manufactured by the
Defelsko Corporation ofOgdensburg, New York, or equivalent. Wet mil thickness will
be accomplished by use of the ''Nordson''wet film gageor such other gage as the Engineer
might determine as being satisfactory.
- PAGE 21 OF 28-
F:\ADMIN\WtlrdProc\JOHNISPECS\WATER TANK PAINTING. TOWER HILL - 2007.wpd: 2l22J07
.
.
.
solvents and particulate matter are likely to accumulate. Said ventilation shall be sufficient
for the removal of dust, coating fumes or other volatile gases and moisture to such an
extent as to prevent any undesirable accumulation of any thereof to the hazard of the
workmen or the work.
C.
All electrical equipment, tools and ventilation fans shall be explosion-proof and/ornon
sparking and shall be maintained in good working order. Spray equipment shall be as
recommended by or acceptable to the coatings manufacturer and shall be thoroughly
cleaned before and after use with the appropriate cleaning solvents.
D.
Provide adequate explosion-prooflighting during all surface preparation and coating
operations. This lighting shall be sufficient to illuminate clearly the working area without
shadows.
E.
In the event heating devices are used, they shall be explosion-proof and of the type that do
not exhaust sooty or oily residues or any other contaminants into the tame On! y indirect
heat heating units can be used which will not cause the products of combustion to
condense.
F.
Prior to use, store all coating materials in a secure area which shall provide protection from
weather and temperatures below 600 F. The area shall be maintained in a safe, neat and
clean manner and free from fire, explosion or other hazards.
G. All work shall be performed in a safe and orderly manner, all in compliance with the
standards as prescribed by OSHA and the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry,
Division of Accident Prevention. The Contractorwill be required to comply with OSHA
Regulations 5205.1000-5205.1040 and 5067.0300 for Confined Space Entry.
Management and supervisory personnel shall be responsible for employee training and
compliance with this policy.
5.3.07 DISINFECTION
A. Upon completion ofthe coating, the inside of the tank shall be thoroughly cleaned and
disinfected by use of the chlorine applied in a concentrated solution, sprayed over the
entire surface and then washed down with clean water in accordance with the
specifications of the Minnesota Health Department and A WW A C652-02, Section 4.3:
Chlorination Method 2.
B.
The disinfected surfaces shall remain in contact with the chlorine solution for at least 30
minutes. Then all disinfected surfaces, including the inlet and outlet piping and any drain
piping, shall be washed and purged with clean water. Remove all chlorine solution and
purging water from the interior. Following this, potable water shall be admitted.
F:'lADMlNIWordProcUOHNISPECS\WATeR TANK PAINTING _ TOWER HILL - 2007.wpd: 2122J07
- PAGE 23 OF 28 -
.
.
.
have been disturbed by this operation shall be restored to a condition equal to or better
than that which existed when the project started.
5.3.1 0 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
A. All work and costs of this section shall be incidental to the project and included in the Total
Base Bid.
6. SITE CLEAN-UP
Collect waste materials daily from the work site and store in a central location approved by the Owner until
final removal at the completion of the project. Store hand tools and secure equipment at the end of each
day. Store and secure all equipment in an orderly manner, and clean the site thoroughly whenever the site
will be unattended over a weekend. Leave the site free of all waste materials, tolls, and equipment at the
end of the project.
7. PROTECTION OF NEARBY AUTOS AND BUILDINGS
The Contractor shall use painting techniques and methods as to protect buildings such as the nearby church
and residential buildings and autos from paint over spray or splatters. The Contractor shall have the
authority to erect barricades, to disseminate hand bills alerting the City Residents to the Contractor's
presence, and to bar admittance to the work area to everyone except City authorized personnel. The
Contractor must not block access the Methodist Church.
8. OWNER'S INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK
The Owner's representative will be provided free access to the work during all phases of the project. It
will be the responsibility of the project superintendent to keep the Owner's representative informed of the
progress being made at all times.
Upon substantial completion of the work, the proj ect superintendent and the Ownerwill conduct a thorough
inspection of the work.
Any items requiring additional attention will be brought to the project superintendent's attention and
remedial action will be taken on those items as needed.
The Owner will signify acceptance of the project by processing final payment. Acceptance of the proj ect
signifies thatto the best knowledge ofboth the project superintendent and the Owner, the project has been
satisfactorily completed as specified.
F:\A.DMIN\WoIdProrNOHNISPECS\WATER TANK PAINTING - TOWER HILL - 2007,wpd: 2122107
- PAGE 25 OF 28-
.
.
A.
A certificate will not be modified except upon ten (1 0) day's priorwrilten notice to the
Owner.
B. The contractual liability hazard has been insured.
11. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. BUILDING CODES AND REGULATIONS
The bidder is assumed to have made himself familiar with all Codes, State Laws, Ordinances and
Regulations which in any manner affect those engaged or employed in the work, or the materials or
equipment used in or upon the improvement, orin anyway affect the conduct ofthe work and no plea of
misunderstanding will be considered on account of the ignorance thereof. The provisions of such codes,
laws or ordinances are deemed to be a part of these specifications and the Contractor will be bound by
the provisions thereof.
The Contractor shall and also by a Surety agree to indemnify and save harmless the Owner and all ofits
officers, agents and servants against any claim or liability arising from or based on the violation of any such
law, ordinance, regulation or decrees, whether by himself or his employees.
If the Contractor shall discover any provisions in the Plans, Contract, or these Specifications or any
direction of the Owner or inspector which is contrary to orinconsistent with any such law, ordinance,
regulation or decree; he shall forthwith report its inconsistency to the Owner in writing.
12. PERMITS AND LICENSES
The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, required by others (if any) and pay all charges and
fees and give all notices necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of work.
13. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH MN WITHHOLDING TAX
Final payment will not be made until the Contractor shall have filed with the Owner evidence in the form
of an affidavit or such other evidence as may be required that all claims against him by reason of the
contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured. In case such evidence is not furnished, the Owner
may retain out of any monies due said Contractor sums sufficient to cover all lienable claims unpaid.
Before final payment is made for the work on this project, the Contractormust make a satisfactory showing
that he has complied with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Annotated 290.92 requiring the withholding
of state income taxes for wages paid the employees on this project. Receipt by the City of a certificate of
compliance from the Commission of Taxation will satisfy the requirement.
14. SUPERINTENDENCE AND SUPERVISION
. The General Contractor shall keep on his work at all times during its progress, a competent superintendent.
F:\AOMINlWordPJOOIJOHN\sPEcmWATER TANK PAINTING - TOWER HILL - 2007.v.pd: 2/22J07
- PAGE 27 OF 28-
Monticello City Council "Green Sheet" Updates
Monday, February 26, 2007
Bruce Westby
I) Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)-
A draft copy of the City's SWPPP was delivered to the MPCA meeting their deadline
date of February 15,2007. If any member(s) of the Council would like a copy to
review please let me know.
2) City Right-of-Wav Ordinance
I prepared a rough draft of the City of Monticello's proposed right-of-way ordinance
and distributed it to a small, key group of people for review and comment on January
26,2007. Next I will schedule a meeting with the same people for the purpose of
gathering and discussing everyone's review comments. After that meeting I will
incorporate all comments as appropriate and resubmit a revised draft to a larger group
for comment, after which it will be brought back to the Council for adoption. As
previously stated, before the ordinance is presented for adoption by the Council it will
be compared against the proposed franchise fee document to make sure they mesh.
3) TH 25 Improvements-
I am meeting with MnlDOT on the morning of Tuesday, February 27,2007 to discuss
miscellaneous issues and proposed improvements to TH 25 including:
. River Street intersection modifications;
. TH 25 traffic study
. Signal timing modifications to prevent traffic from backing up onto WE 1-94;
. Addition ofleft-tum lane on TH 25 to access First Minnesota Bank; and,
. Pedestrian crossings.
4) School Boulevard Speed Zoning Studv
Mn/DOT's speed zoning study on School Boulevard has been completed. The study
indicates that the speed limit should be posted at its current posted speed of 45 mph
between CSAH 18 and a point approximately 250 feet west of Fallon Avenue. From
this point to TH 25 the speed should then be posted at 35 mph. The speed limits
above are contingent on other signs being provided at specific locations along the
corridor which will require some evaluation by staff.
5) GIS Implementation-
WSB presented the process for expanding the City's GIS system to staff from various
departments on January 16, 2007. In February WSB met with staff from several
departments to document their specific GIS needs. More department meetings are
scheduled for late February and early March. After these department meetings are
complete a more detailed schedule will be developed.