EDA Agenda 11-17-1998
.
.
.
AGENDA
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Tuesday, November 17,1998 - 7:00 p.m.
City Hall
MEMBERS: Chair Ron Hoglund, Vice Chair Barb Schwientek, Assistant Treasurer Ken Maus,
Clint Herbst, Roger Carlson, Bill Demeules, and Darrin Lahr.
ST AFF:
Treasurer Rick Wolfsteller, Executive Director Ollie Koropchak, and Recording
Secretary Nancy Whalen.
1. Call to order.
2. Consideration to approve the August 11, 1998 EDA minutes.
3. Consideration of adding agenda items.
4. Consideration to review for approval/disapproval the DMRF application for 219-225 West
Broadway.
5.
Consideration to review for approval/disapproval the DMRF application for 124 West
Broadway.
6. Consideration to ratify the execution ofa Partial Release of Mortgage and Consent to
Easement for the property described as the East 161.00 feet of Lot 5, Block 3, alP,
according to the recorded plat thereof.
7. Consideration of executive director's report.
8. Other business.
9. Adjournment.
.
.
.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Tuesday, August 11, 1998 - 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Chair Ron Hoglund, Vice Chair Barb Schwientek, Assistant Treasurer Ken
Maus, Clint Herbst, Roger Carlson, Bill Demeules, and Darrin Lahr
Guest:
Staff:
Mayor Bill Fair
Executive Director Ollie Koropchak, Recording Secretary Nancy Whalen.
1. Call to Order.
Chair Ron Hoglund called the EDA meeting to order at 7 p.m.
2. Consideration to approve the June 23. 1998 EDA minutes.
3.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BILL DEMEULES AND SECONDED BY BARB
SCHWIENTEK TO TABLE THE APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 23, 1998 EDA
MINUTES. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of adding agenda items.
Executive Director Ollie Koropchak requested adding discussion on the upcoming
budget under item 10.
4. Consideration of request for a 30-dav extension for DMRF No. 101. (Kathv Froslie)
Ollie Koropchak reviewed a letter from Kathy Froslie requesting a 30 day extension for
DMRF No.1 01. She stated that DA T had recommended extending the loan until August
28 for planned improvements. A letter was sent to Pam Campbell from Oertel Architects
regarding Ms. Froslie's outstanding bill. Rita Ulrich stated that she spoke to Kathy and
that she did intend to pay the architect. Ms. Schwientek stated that she did not feel it was
the function of the EDA to act as bill collectors.
Ms. Koropchak asked for clarification regarding the one time only extension. Members
felt that only one extension should be granted.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DARRlN LAHR AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO GRANT A 37-DA Y EXTENSION TO THE JULY 21, 1998 NON-
PERFORMANCE PROVISION FOR DMRF NO. 101. EXTENSION GRANTED TO
AUGUST 28, 1998 FOR COMPLETION OF FRONT SIDE (SOUTH SIDE) FACADE
IMPROVEMENTS PER RECOMMENDATION OF DAT. Motioncarried
unanimously.
1
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 8/11/98
5.
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR AN APPROXIMATE 5-MONTH
EXTENSION FOR DMRF NO. 102. (STEVE JOHNSON)
Ms. Koropchak gave background regarding the requested extension. She felt that Item 6
should also be considered with Item 5. Members were asked to go over the DMRF
guidelines. It was the feeling ofDAT that Mr. Johnson had invested money to the front
facade and that $2000 should be disbursed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BARB SCHWIENTEK AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO FIRST GRANT AN APPROXIMATE 5-MONTH EXTENSION OF THE
JUL Y 21, 1998 NON-PERFORMANCE PROVISION FOR DMRF 102. EXTENSION
GRANTED TO DECEMBER 31, 1998 FOR COMPLETION OF THE FRONT, SIDE,
AND REAR FACADE IMPROVEMENTS. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Consideration to approve disbursement ofDMRF No. 102 prior to completion of front
facade improvements.
Ms. Schwientek objected to the disbursement of monies before the project was
completed. However, to encourage completion of improvements, the EDA was willing to
disburse dollars in an expedite manner as along as DMRF Guidelines were met.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BARB SCHWIENTEK AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO APPROVE DISBURSEMENT OF DMRF NO. 102 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $2,500 FOR THE FRONT FACADE IMPROVEMENTS UPON REMOVAL OF
THE BLACK ADHESIVE. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Koropchak will write letters to Kathy Froslie and Steve Johnson regarding the
motions made by the EDA on August 11, 1998.
7. Consideration to discuss awarding a certificate to applicants participating in DMRF
program and its criteria.
Ms. Koropchak introduced this item and stated that the EDA had two things that they had
to consider:
1. Whether or not the EDA is interested in presenting a certificate to applicants
participating in the Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund program.
2. If a certificate is to be presented, the criteria that should be used.
Discussion was held among committee members and an agreement was reached that the
EDA would not be involved. Members agreed to recommend to the MCP that they
consider presenting certificates to applicants participating in the DMRF.
EDA Commissioners noted that the Mayor has the discretion to recognize the businesses.
2
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 8/11/98
8.
Consideration to review the draft cOPV of the Facade Improvement Funding Procedure
and its puroose.
Rita Ulrich handed out the DAT suggestions. She went over the following points:
I. Print the brochure so that it can be used to promote the program as well as provide
information on the process to prospective applicants.
2. The brochure should begin with the purpose of the program.
3. Note in the brochure that interior rehabilitation loans are also available.
4. The current program ends in December 1998. It may be continued beyond at the
discretion of the EDA and City Council.
5. Include a map highlighting the qualifying area.
6. Include schedule ofDAT and EDA meetings.
7. Include information on how DA T and EDA make their decisions on applications.
8.
Include a check list of steps on the application process.
It was stated that the brochure would hopefully attract interest in the program. Ms.
Koropchak stated that most business owners don't know what to do with their building.
Mr. Maus felt that the Design Committee could pick two or three businesses and show
them sketches of what their building could look like.
Ms. Koropchak stated that the EDA had approved seven grants for a total of about
$35,000 and disbursed funds to two applicants. With disbursal of the seven grants, the
EDA has approximately $165,000 remaining. The EDA needs to discuss carrying the
balance over into 1999.
After committee discussion, it was recommended that the City's building official and
DA T explore identified building for original exterior materials and estimate the cost for
revitalization and DA T report back to the EDA at the next meeting.
It was felt that Rita should go ahead with the brochure with MCP covering the cost. The
final language of the procedure brochure would be approved by Chair Ron Hoglund and
Ms. Koropchak before printing.
3
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 8/11/98
9.
Consideration of Executive Director's Report.
Ms. Koropchak discussed the disbursement of $6,814.13 to Dan and Andrea Olson for
facade improvement to 207 West 3rd Street. Also, Rita Ulrich stated that she has not met
with Mr. Ruff regarding improvements to his building.
10. Other business.
Ms. Koropchak stated that the City is working on next year's budget. The EDA members
must decide whether or not they want to move forward with the program. Clint Herbst
requested confirmation that the money would still be available in 1999.
Ms. Koropchak will check balloon payment for GMEF No. 006 due May 1, 1998.
II. Adiournment.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BILL DEMEULES AND SECONDED BY DARRIN
LAHR TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:15 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Ollie Koropchek, Executive Director
4
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17,1998
4. Consideration to review for approval/disapproval the DMRF application for 219-225 West
Broadway.
A. Reference and Background:
The DMRF application is from Dorothy Topel, property owner of the building occupied
by Antiques of Monticello and Barbara Lee Dance Studio. Mr. Topel will inform the
EDA of his revitalization improvements. Enclosed are the October 14 and 28 DAT
minutes and DAT's approval pending the receipt of artwork and estimates. Two estimates
for the lights and window were requested. The application is on the November 12 DAT
agenda. Please consider the following when reviewing this application.
Purpose
Does the proposed project seek to promote the revitalization of downtown Monticello?
1. Enhances storefronts and facades in accordance with the design guidelines in the Plan.
Yes No
2. Encourages the rehabilitation of building interiors to bring them into compliance with
local codes and ordinances. Yes No
3. Encourages building rehabilitation to provide space suitable for the proposed use. Yes
No
4. Provides funding to close the "gap" between financing needed to undertake the project
and the amount raised by equity and private loans. Yes _ No _
5. Provides economic incentives to locate businesses in the downtown. Yes No
Target Area Preference given to Blocks 35,36,51, and 52, Original Plat.
This proposed project lies within the preferred area. Location Block 51.
Facade Grants
Matching grant of $2,500 for eligible improvements to the front facade and signage.
Request $1,313.42 Projected cost of improvements $2,626.84 No lighting est. Equity
$1,313.42
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17,1998
Criteria to meet:
1. Do the improvements meet the applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances?
Yes No
2. Does the amount of the grant match the amount of the private investment up to the
stated limit? Yes No
Matching grant of up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to the rear facade.
Request $377.28 Projected Costs ofImprovements $754.56 No identification sign
estimates, includes exterior shed Equity $377.28
1. Do the improvements meet the applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances?
Yes No
2. Does the amount of the grant match the amount of the private investment up to the
stated limit? Y es No
Matching grant of up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to the side facade.
Request $377.28 Projected Costs of Improvements $754.67 Equity $377.28
1. Do the improvements meet the applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances?
Yes No
2. Does the amount of the grant match the amount of the private investment up to the
stated limit? Yes No
Fee Reimbursement
Reimbursement of City fees in an amount equivalent of 10% of the total cost of the
improvements up to a maximum of$500.
2
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17,1998
Request ?
Projected costs of city fees?
Non-Performance
The approved DMRF becomes null and void if funds are not drawn or disbursed within
270 days from date of ED A approval. August 17,1999
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve DMRF No. 109 in the amount of $ for front facade
and signage, rear facade, and side facade improvements and $ for fee
reimbursement at 219-225 West Broadway. Terms and conditions as determined.
2. A motion to deny approval ofDMRF in the amount of for front facade
and signage, for rear facade, and for side facade
improvements, and for fee reimbursement at 219-225West Broadway.
3. A motion to table any action.
c.
Recommendation:
Does the EDA see the painting of the building as a revitalization or replacement of storm
damage? The Topels were unable to match the paint with the siding therefore the need to
repaint the entire building. Recommendation is to approve the request for matching grant
and reimbursement fee with disbursal offunds subject to completed improvement review
and approval by DAT and evidence of payment.
D. Supporting Data:
Copy ofthe application from Dorothy Topel and DAT recommendation and minutes.
3
..
.
.
..
I.
DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO REVITALIZATION FUND
Monticello Economic Development Authority - 271-3208
250 East Broadway, POBox 1147
Monticello, :MN 55362
FUND APPLICATION
I. Basic Information:
Name of ApplicantlProperty Owner Do R.oT}i'f /1. T{; Pi L.-
Address of ApplicantIProperty Owner 2- '2\" tv, 8 R ()!/lJ[l!J (/ .p () .13&
I
Telephone Number of ApplicantlProperty Owner 1(11l- t..L1C;~7--~t'J
I
Social Security of ApplicantIProperty Owner~! '1 h.-l / f:~ c; h c ,
Tax ID# of ApplicantlProperty Owner ~I\. 0....
C ./ ,-
::).:./J
II.
Nature of Revitalization Fund Request:
Street Address of Revitalization Property 2-/7- 1--7-:; IU. /;t.!..t>l1tlt{/1J ~I
PID Number of Revitalization Property I S-.("- () I {) ~ 0)/O&()
Legal Description of Revitalization Property - Block
5/
Lot(s) (pY I
I
Revitalization Property is currently:
Occupied L Unoccupied
Prospective Occupant
Ifapplicable. Name of Occupant (Business) or Prospective Occupant (Business)
If applicable, brief description of the nature of the business of the occupant:
1
~ /1
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
ID. Type of Revitalization Fund Request:
A. Facade Grants
1. Front Facade and SiiJ1aie Grant (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
,ff:,JJG..e/d /"ni /J 9 /7;f-AlJ-€ ~~; I~
I1tilt'o if CY Y(G It_4(3 f: /IE (}/ 5!~;J JCj E,
2. Rear Facade Grant (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advistory Team (OAT).
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
!?c. i}6C6lJJI///:;; ~:40J fjE
3. Side Facade Grant (if applicable) (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
2
,-\~d-
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
J( t l/~ ~(JI2..J ;//1'/ r;;; ;::::4~,J /) f,
B. Rehabilitation Loan (Maximum amount is the lesser of25% of total cost of the
improvements or $20,000)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
AlA.
C. Fee Reimbursement (Reimbursement of City fees in an amount equivalent of
10% of the total cost of the improvements up to a maximum of $500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of City Fees $
IV. Lender Information:
Name of Participating Lender
Contact Person
Telephone number
3
l.-\ /3
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
Ifwe certifY that all information provided in this application is true and correct to the best of
my/our knowledge and Ifwe agree to apply for and receive all applicable building permits prior to
the start of work and to comply with all building inspection requirements.
& .
,
rp .. -
S, arur~~Own&
F~ /3 --f1
Date
4
q/~
~ ",
"
"~'i. ",r
.... . ',~
1'1.J . ~",..'
. .,~ "J,~
'.:.. ,.....\. . il:, '-nI:::' M~,""I~""""-"."",- '-'~""'I~'"'h~'j.
. ",..-~"'J t .
.
_ ~~_ ,~~:~'~~'~.'~'~..:..,J__~j~~..,_,~ _.~_..~,~.~ J~,,~d ___
};~ (~ji__~~_-:~:=~='=~~_'=.'. ..um. .__ _'," :'12" c ."L C ,um
. ... . ..-&t#4~-~~ii(--i1uJiij~O.l!Jtj~e~r------u.--n
V . , : -'~. : I, _. ''''{" It I ) AAJiWui-lf2~
~~~_ - ,,~._ ___ -----------:..------~_._~~.._~~~."' .._. .~". _..._~.~'.=v~~---~-I----.-. .-~-~~.~ .--:..::.~----- ---- _ --
__._.__ .._,______ ~___~,~~'_, ~_L . ".:~.."'~~~I,.~...~_..u.~~~~~._~~.__~~:'~_.~,~__~:~~._.___~~_._~~_.____1J{~__,_.__. ,.___.._~~~~_,.,~_,~~~~~~_,~~~_~~___.~__..~~~~~__ ~"^~~ __..~_:~~~~.~/i.~~
_~,~~__. .," .
___.u_ -)(~;~'4~rdflwJ--~---~)~jL;;u.[;j;jc4b-oj~ U ,:
- - .. --------- ---- _u __ ----u.Li4L-tc~6f)LlD':'tii.f!4- . --. .-
.-..--.-'" -- -~- -A --=--- ------ __,____...u...... UH_.H..........___ .._.__. __._________.____________..__.__._____ ..
.&Ij!! /-,. 'K~lhaiiur-~-r-do:~ ~-~~~);/d1MA.d!j~
- -- --, - .cw //UYlZ.. ~ --Y..-/UfuJ-1(Lfj'ulAi/.. ~ _ __: __'_.-__ __ __ ____ _ _ ___ _ __
. -<
...
'..
,."
. .,'. . ,.
.; ;.
.f".,.
.------.-
.. ;;#f:~~.M.~ei~"'d--
,. .~
- .,.-.-. .......-.,'-.'... - ".,,,.. '. ... .',._.~..~_._~..,..........'-,_..
"r.. ~ ...,,"
....._.~~....,~~.~ ~~._.
"
. ..
.. ^'~' ,~"._'~"~.._~,~_..._. _ .,.~",. W.~'.',. .~~_.~ _.~~~___~._~~_...~ ~._..' .._..._.._~_.~..'__~ _.._~_..;---~'~.-~.~u..~ ..,.~". 'm'......._~'A..,"~.,'~,.
..u_,.,_:.:"~~}. "',",. ."._H_........
'.",
"
_______...___._,____....___ .__._____..............._________,__~~~~~_~_~__,,~~_~...,~'.___.,._..,'_.. ~ .'..~' ..".~.,,~'_,'~~'~,.~,,"'~ ~..~. ~. ,M'.."'.'.~~~.~..~'~__ '.,.~ _~,.~~~_".~~.u.,_._.~~_
._ ..,~__~".~.,.'..~.,. _~__'~.._____ _.___._. ~._
. I ,'.
... ___~ .___~_,,_...,~., ,_,._, ~". .,_..._ .,_~,._._,.,,_ ..,~....__ ...__..___ _......__~,_.._...__,__.~__,_,_..__, ____._____~,_._,__.__ __._, ..,_ ____ .._.,.___ ___._, __ _.__..__..._.__'__.__.
._ ._,____...__ _______ ..__.__..___~._ _._____ ,_._.__ .._..._. . - - _..._ _u_
.. .'...... ,~'....
~,
~ '.
..... , ."
1" :
....;... <~. .I :: "'~.f" "..~."
__.._.?_~~,.".....~,..._,.:..lL, ,.,_,___.""',.. ..., _ _ ..:.~" .._.,.___.,._,_".no~..__...~__.._....~_.__.. ,_..____.._
:
, .
._...~'_"~'.~"_'_'_"~_." _.,'."_,.,~.._~~_..,,.__~~.~,~.,.__..____,_ '~__._~....___,~_ ~.~_...._._ ,_.._,_ ___~. ...__ .,_,__ ____._~"... _ '~~. ..., ~.._.._ ~_._ _~,_.",...WJ'."__'_~___
,','.' ,.._.." _ , . ....~~,~.,..,_..... _, "'~_, ,__,., ... _, .",. . ,_ .
'., '". ",~,~
#I . ~. . .' ..
.. ""'....~ .~~.', ..,,~-'.. ..-,'-" .",.. '-',~-'" 'J.",.' "~""~'" ."" ..~ "'.". '...," ,.'~'.,-. - ~"..,-- ".~-'"~'-',"---.-~....--'-.------.-.---.- ~--~--------.-.-'r"-- .-...- .,,-
~--.---------'---..
",'.
, .
, "\
, ,~, -
. ,. ." -....' .-.-....'...-.-..- '." '..,',-",. '~,-. ...,.'," .,,&'..,.-'~' .~,&,~,... ~..- ~..~-.--~-"..~~....I..-,,-,-.---- .~~.~.. '-.,.,,~..- ~.".. .,,-~-~::~'.~ :'" ~~.:.;..~:.-
--~,. ....:;..~"~~""1_~,~:::__-.~-~~-'~--~,~'---~-- - - "-"'''-,'---'---''-~ .-"..-,--
5
..u.._q~
.
.
I
ESTIMATE
INQUIRY NO. -45;: I ! I';'
DATE Oct. 13, 1998
TERMS !., down and !.,
upon r.ampl E'!t.; an
RANDY S. SALO
10687 Bolton Ave. NW
MontIcello. MN 55362
FAX: 612-878-2142
612-878-2142
TO Antiques of Monticl110
Monticella.MN "J53fi?
Dorothy
WE ARE PLEASED TO QUOTE ON YOUR INQUIRY AS FOLLOWS:
QUANTITY , OESeRIPTION AMOUNT
.
24" X 26' sign, paint as per art
$875.00
$120.00
$ 15.28
UV clear
Tax on material
Take down existing sign and disposal of
existing sign
I
$350.00
_ I I" "0
$200.00
Installation
d'st'<"$~ \
Artwork is the property of SIGNS PLUS.
Any unauthorized use of this artwork
will result in a $200.00 fee to purchase
the artwork.
Customer will supply all necessary permits.
PLEASE PAY FROM THIS INVOICE. TOTAL
CREDIT TERMS: Balance is due and payable upon receipt. 16/,{)~,
A monthly finance charge of 1.50/0 (180/0 A.P.RJ, ~i~h .en minimum. f?7.J"'---
of $ .50 is charged on all past due accounts. tZA--fLJWLfL J 3f-1f- ~._
You Are A Valued CUTHANK\;OU<eFORYOUR BUSINESS!! You W1th p'easif~~-~ \\Jt
.
TO FrerJ /""OF/
..a95~d~
- I
I
I
!:iJ~ tff~ &: ~ ~<.
1 018 HWY. 55 EAST
BUFFALO, MN 55313
(612) 682.2788
SUBJECT .ESfUy-,qk ClYJ K@P,.Q(7Jn7 !DATE 10- 19-~
FOLD_ lr/I t!./e'lfr 7/1955 In 5/qgLIOH.Qry
S /ore ,p.on rI- 4) , ~ dt7~ (02-1'7 t.JP~ I- J3r oqcl v~iJ
( ,(9~~))~.2 ?J) (
CfI/96S i Il'?sI>>JIe;hev? ~/9S~
/ 0'
-n; X ... ..7 ...~
__.~Q~- r?O
.
SIGNt8
"-_.. --=-2=' ~ 7' .
...~-/~-~~
II'M Nu P~i IIR2
AVAILABLE FROM BUSINESS ENVELOPE MANUFACTURERS, INC' DEER PARK, NY. . ANAHEIM, CAllP
.
. .f\
A/
.
------
Auto _ Residential. Commercial Glass
BUFFALO GLASS & LOCK, 'NC.
1016 HWY. 55 E.
BUFFALO. MN 55313
682.2788
customer's
Order No.
Sold To
Add ress
Date
Phone:
Shi To
Add resS
SO~D BY
. 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
---
TAX
TOTAL ~\---
All claims and returned goodS MUST be accompanied by this bill;'
0040601
~cy{fW
Rec'd By
GSD-204-3
PRINTED IN U,S,A.
.
", ",
.::-.::
v\A
.OCT-27-9S e4:16 PM GLASS HUT
.
;"
.
.
'-
\
\
';12 295 3154
.1
I
"
~
SALES & SERVICE 1219 HWY. 2$ SOUTH
SINCE 1 976 MONTICE~.LO. MN 55362
DEAN & TAMMY PHONE (612)295'3152
RASMUSSEN,Ownol! GLASS HUT EMEMENCr ((12) 676.2445
of MonUullo FM. 295.3154
1soo.450'315,
Al.Ito Glass · Commercial. ResIdential
Windows & Doors · New or Replacement
Insulated Glass · Plexlglas$ . Mirrors
Tub Enclosures · Wardrobe Doors. Storm$ and Screens
Retail · Repair · Replacement ,_
Accounts not paid in ful/ln 30 days 81'9 sub/;;ct 10 a fif/anCe ch8r~9 of Qi'J:\..7;.
, .5% pSf month. Annual pef'i;Ont;;Jg9 fillg of 78%. $, 50 minimum :)11<1'9<' NO. -L!!... ~ <.:.;'~
:~:,:,"..~t!2i ~~'" ~ J 0 ! I = -1-. "
Address
Policy II'" _
-~'-' i "p-;;y- .,-'~
..... .-.... ~--,.-
. 'DOOR: 2/4 rMA'Ke . :OONE -BY i QUOTE
~__. ~THER-pA~_'" iMOOEl. l'-~- -- --
aUANTlTY .,. .0ESCRIPTrON.__ r;'AiCE.. . AMO.~
V., 1/. (J/!dt;;_..; _ {~I?AA.-I'" "__'_ lj ~)L__
~/M.~ ~f'~~ +_ ~ ~._.
.. -~-i ....--r[i ~
-d~ +=ffL
-- ~ ~~: ".;Z /..i...~-:--=t-----= )9+~
- I
-,,_. , --~l r"'---
- --t---~ r.'''--
, I
no '---.-~___ __1.._..___ ~........_
! I
I :
-----1----- !.-.-
-------=-l= L
'TOTAL lf5t '11
AUTO
I
___I
...-~---~.._7'......,..
fJ!;(..Ink (y~1U I
(YOU! [,.l'-~i}u:.h {s. d/Jjnuia.hd.
AU claims and returned goods MUST be BCCC"lPMiOd by this bill.
Insulated Warranty (on seal fclill.lre only). Labor addilion<ll.
- Years Made By:_. __ Ref:
\
.'''',''
P.12l1
"
'-q!\
.
A.E. MICHAELS DECORATING
118 EAST BROADWAY
P.C). BOX 17(,
MONTICELLO~ MN 55302
c.l,:::"."~?95-:31il30
CUST :295-3572
TIME: 13:45 DATE: 11/10/98
~:;OLD TO:
PFlID ON ACCT
EiHIP TO:
IN\,.IOICE:
PAGE 1
1 3C)7b8
.JON'S PAINTING
JON LAUDEFH
303f... 90TH 8T NE
MONTICELLO~ MN 55362
J"ON' S P~~J:NT I !\IC,
TOPEL
0012100
PHlt.: 295-357;':~
COMMENT: TOPEL
SELL: 1 SHIP: 1
CLERI~ .~AR
SH:l111iZ1/98
f:)MOUNT
cny I . CATALOB
DFmE~, I '"'
I DTY I QTY I PRICE
I BID I DHIPI
_________________________________________________________________________________ I
ITEM
DE~'3Cf~ I PT I OI'J
---------~---------------~-~--~--~-----~--_._._-~.~-------,-------_._--------~--~---_._._-_._~----------".
.
PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT
----~--~----------~-----_._---------------------~-------_._--~------------~------~-_._----_.__._-
9f... lilt
I
I
I
I CHECf{
I
I
I CHECf< :H
I
I
I
I
I
NON-Tf~X sua I
96.4~ TAXABLE SUBI
M I N!\IESDTn f;ALE I
DEPor; 1 T I
1351 TOTALI
I
TENDEHI
I
I
I
0.01211
0.1{)llll
rl1.li)OI
Ill. 1ZliLt I
~}(~. 'I', I
I
9(,.'1'~1
I
- -- _.....~......._-..~. - -- --_..---..~._--_._.__............................--- --.---- -~~~..~-- .---- - - ---........ ~ ~
THANI< YOU ~ PLEASE COME (.)m) I N ~
.
l-\~\
.
1/ I
,h o-vu ' ,
/
( ()7l S (P 0>>lJ- j f)~1l
~{05- :357:J~
"-.
B JJ ~ CY\ P cuVnf~ 0 cni/w{) A f\+" 0 ~{(!~
J cm4~d o-n ~ ~o 0 Bloc 1< iJ .iJwi-
(jJ raqJ wa .
KeJ~ J~Jvmof~ 60v p~i~ t.~b~v,
1..J50,ocy ,
~Y\ cv1JJ;mo--{! to (0 ./Ah'l/.M~ oJictJujJ ~
~o,~) ( 51c~OJlJ~ ~cI.udJ1AQ) llo .00
CUl d c*' ~ fYVI fYlR.- C CYm ~ ai1J) + Jvn e x. ~ tel ;
)) rn M.ht J' . C 0-/ Ct1 + v- JJIYI
J.) J Coa:-f~ 0f1 011 1A' f JJl J~01 d O\Y\) ,
3) f)c/ev-)(Y) SheA lP I.,~
LiAbor iakoi 1.360. 00 ~I ~/
YVlcJe,vicJ7 C05+ - ~ ~~)
)
P CWiif) CQulk J~e /'vi i '5 c- 5 tt p P I, Q'5 ___
· fa be ~~p of J~J 1cJ +0 /i.-[. m,'c~,cuf s
Deto(cttvVn.~ (6/{)) RQs-3030) 'A\,1r-
T Iwvnkb)9 em t~
.
.
.
,~' {.J " c
Design Advisory Team Review
Date October 14,1998
Team Members Present
Susie Wojchouski, Gail Cole, Rita Ulrich, Pam Campbell
Team Members Absent
Ron Hoglund
Ex-Officio Members Present
Ollie Koropchak, Fred Patch
Applicant Present
Fred Topol
Property Owner Dorothy Topol
Building Address 219 - 225 West Broadway
Sketch of Proposed Facade Improvements:
See attached narrative
Improvements in conformance with the Design Guidelines:
Front: Sign on the building between the gabled roofs "Antiques of Monticello"
Appropriate lighting under gables
Paint to highlight architectural details
Window replacement
Side: Paint
Rear: Paint to highlight architectural details on building
Paint on storage shed to match main building
Identification sign
Improvements in non-conformance with the Design Guidelines:
Design Advisory Team Recommendation: To approve, provided the application is modified to
reflect the changes discussed and cost estimates for the work are included.
Comments:
H/\'3
.
.
.
Front
The existing sign "Monti Mini Mall" will be removed and a new sign will be placed on the
front of the building between the two small gables. Sign measurements are approximately 2' x 26'.
The new sign will say "Antiques of Monticello" and will be made of wood and painted. Under the
two gables will be lights to brighten the sidewalk and entries. The entire building will be painted.
The base color is a shade of pale green. Accent color for the trim is a beige. and architectural details
will be highlighted with a brick red and teal green. The cracked window in the front will be replaced.
Side
The west side of the building will be painted.
Rear
The front color scheme will be carried through to the rear. The rear customer entry will
match the front. The wood sided shed in the rear will be painted in the same colors to tie the two
buildings together visually. The DAT felt since the wood sided shed sits so close to the main building
it must be treated as part of the rear facade. An identification sign will hang over the rear door to
highlight the entry.
~/\q
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO DESIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, October 14,1998 - 9:00 am
Monticello City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Pam Campbell, Gail Cole, Rita Ulrich, Susie Wojchouski
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ron Hoglund
OTHERS PRESENT: Ollie Koropchak, Fred Patch, Fred Topel
1. Call to Order.
PAM CAMPBELL CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER.
2. Approval of the minutes of the reaular meetina held September 30. 1998.
SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY GAIL COLE, TO APPROVE
THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 30,1998. MOTION
CARRIED.
. 3. Consideration of addina items.
Ollie Koropchak gave an update on disbursement of DMRF funds for 112 East Broadway.
Item 5 was moved up on the agenda for consideration before #4.
<0 Review of plans for facade imorovements on 219 West Broadwav (Antiques of Monticello).
Fred Topel presented plans for front, side and rear facade improvements for the building at
124 West Broadway. He and his wife are starting a new business called Antiques of
Monticello in part of the building. The other portion of the building is occupied by the
Barbara Lee Dance Studio. The front facade treatment will consist of changing the paint
colors using a four color scheme, a new sign, and replacing one window. A new sign,
measuring 26' x 2' will be centered on the top of the building. DAT members asked him to
consider using lighting under the gabled entrances for safety and to make the entrances for
each business more visible and prominent, if it can be done economically. Susie
Wojchouski pointed out that the metal roof flashing is exposed and needs to be tucked in.
Improvements on the side (west facing) will be new paint. DA T members discussed
possible improvements on the rear facade and recommended a sign at the entrance and
painting the shed, in addition to new paint on the main building. DAT members felt that the
12' x 14' accessory building closest to the 225 back entrance should be included in the grant
because it is so close to the building that it is visually a part of the building and has a
significant impact on the appearance of the rear facade.
.
RITA URLlCH MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY GAIL COLE, TO RECOMMENDED
APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR 219 WEST BROADWAY, PENDING
1 '-"\ -A (
.
.
.
<J \O"t 'M \.~
\e-\~-<\st
COMPLETION OF THE APPLICATION INCORPORATING THE OAT
RECOMMENDATIONS, ARTWORK, AND COST ESTIMATES AND WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE REAR ACCESSORY BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE 225
ENTRANCE BE INCLUDED IN THE GRANT APPLICATION BASED ON THE FINDING
THAT ITS PROXIMITY MAKES IT VISUALLY A PART OF THE REAR FACADE. MOTION
CARRIED.
5. Review of plans for facade improvements on 124 West Broadwav (Carlson Waaonlit).
Pam Campbell and Susie Wojchouski gave an update on their research to come up with
economical treatments to improve the look of the facade of 124 West Broadway. They plan
to have a meeting with the property owner and the tenant before the next DA T meeting to
discuss various improvement options.
GAIL COLE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY RITA ULRICH, TO TABLE THIS ITEM
UNTIL THE NEXT OAT MEETING, PENDING FURTHER MEETINGS WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNER AND THE AVAILABILITY OF DRAWINGS AND ESTIMATES.
MOTION CARRIED.
6. Discussion on proposina additional members for the OAT.
Pam Campbell reported that she had spoken with Mike Cyr about becoming a member of
the Design Advisory Team. He expressed interest and was going to arrange a meeting with
Pam and Rita to learn more about OAT. We have not spoken with Andra Olsen yet.
7. Discussion on differences between sian auidelines in the comprehensive plan and the sian
ordinance and interpretation of the CGD ordinance reaardina OAT's role in approvina
sianaae.
Rita Ulrich explained that she wanted this on the agenda because there s~ems to be some
confusion over OAT's authority regarding sign in the CCD and because there also appears
to be a need eliminate the inconsistencies regarding sign regulations in the comprehensive
plan and the sign ordinance. Members agreed that variances are often required for signs
that are within the design guidelines of the comprehensive plan, presenting delays and
more work for everyone involved. Fred Patch said he thought that the sign ordinance
needed to be, and could be, simplified. One possibility is to allow any building a sign
allowance of ten percent of the front facade. Fred Patch asked the OAT for a
recommendation regarding the proposed signage for the dentist office in the Goeman
building. The directional sign is over the size limits in the ordinance, and thus has to be
treated as a variance. Members said they would look at it before the next meeting.
8. Adiourn.
RITA ULRICH MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY PAM CAMPBELL, TO ADJOURN.
MOTION CARRIED.
2
vt/\ ~
Y"'\.. - "- '("fo..& h -. 9 12...
'.J""fiJr , -.. ~
(:) t,,''t ":l ~ · ~ Q:....q.. ~
. 4) Review of plans for facade improvements on 219-225 West Broadwav (Antiaues of
lJ Monticello).
Rita Ulrich said that she had talked with Dorothy Topel and Mrs. Topel had asked that the
OAT look at the drawing of the sign they propose to use on the building. The sign colors
would be compatible with the paint on the building. Members agreed that the sign was
appropriate and attractive. Ollie Koropchak noted that the Topels still needed to submit
some estimates for the project to complete their application.
7. Consideration to nominate Mike Cvr to the Desian Advisory Team.
Rita Ulrich noted that the MCP Board of Directors was meeting that evening and if OAT
could make a recommendation now, then Mike's nomination wouldn't have to wait until the
MCP Board meets again in late November.
GAIL COLE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY RON HOGLUND, TO NOMINATE MIKE
CYR TO THE DESIGN ADVISORY TEAM, BECAUSE HE WOULD BRING VALUABLE
SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE AS A BUILDER TO THE OAT. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSL Y.
Pam Campbell noted that she had spoken with Andre Olson about serving on the OAT and
Andra had declined due to other commitments at this time.
.
At this point, Ron Hoglund left the meeting.
8. Discussion on differences between sian auidelines in the comprehensive plan and the sian
ordinance and interpretation of the CCD ordinance reaardina OAT's role in aporoving
sianaae.
Rita Ulrich explained that she wanted this item on the agenda because there are
inconsistencies between the design guidelines in the comprehensive plan and the sign
ordinance, and because there was still some confusion over OAT's role in approving
signage on publicly funded projects. Variances are still needed for overhanging and
projecting signs and awnings despite the fact they are encouraged in the design guidelines.
Another problem is that overhanging signs along Broadway (Highway 75) and Highway 25
need approval from the county.
.
There was also a question on the status of the OAT decision on Cub Food signs. The signs
probably should have required a variance, but were approved by OAT as part of the design
of the total project. A change in the CCD ordinance could clarify this. Steve Grittman
suggested that section 14B-6[H]2b be amended to add an exclusion for proposals receiving
direct financial assistance from the city as defined in section 14B-7[C]4 of the ordinance.
This would mean that signs are considered as part of the total project and are subject to
OAT approval, and OAT approval is final. Members agreed with this suggestion. It was
also suggested that methods of lighting be added to the plans that should be submitted to
OAT for approval under section 14B-7[A], since lighting can have a dramatic impact on the
appearance of a building or site. There was also discussion on the merits of revising the
sign ordinance to incorporate changes required by the design guidelines versus writing a
sign ordinance just for the CCD. Fred Patch noted that he would not have time to work on
2
L\/\1
_~c;-;~~= ~~ .
." -.."._~ --
--- u... -~~==:':nm__
- .'~~'~'.,-.~__~I~~.'~.."-~..,_..,,...~~ n L\.' SI
__ ._,....,____ _______ _____._._... _____ ___., , _ n.__'.._____ """---..--'-l '7l" --~ '"
S;~ .u_ -
._ __\ :~i.-==.__ _=_-==~_._m~-~'i~~~c.:~~l} -- .... ...
~___________,."_ -:_.,._~..__.::n \ ,~\ ~ ..~ ':), _
_d_ 1 t..'\tl-~
-..-.. -
,
_ _?_~_"J. .. t) "0
o __ .. a... _Un ___.__._.___/____n____n____~--\-----...------.--...--.,..-.--,....-
....._________\\ ~ J to \ ~ -----.---------.----
___m- -.- - ---m-l\\;-:;'\-u- ---------- ----- ..
._. -. ...-...... ..-------___.____...... _'-_ __=\. _____~m.___._____.__._.... .. m
- .....~.~~:~::~~,~~~-S..~;-~~~~~=-~==--.....----.....=............ . .....
n._.::,' ~ \ ~ " ",..
---;,.. ,,- .n.----.-----.----n-----f\------S-.---'-\-- C;V--------
--..- ~~._.._,_.__._-_._,.__._._,----- ..
-,,--.--_. --...-.-....-.- _. --\-
.---- -.-.---- /-q---.....-~~----
-=========~~=-~-=~=-=~~=-~~~_::==~-~-~-~ ...
____________________________.. S \ - r"'\ C' \ I C" t _ o~ ,--t- ___n__.._____.______.._
._____._ ___,,_~__ .. I -:> '"'\ ,,;;. ~ - ,
'_'n n__n____n_ ______n__________._,_.._.---~-- ~-~'--~ '\ ~~.=.ii-...----...--------~-----.
. ,... ..~_~._~._.,_..~_'.' .., ___ r..__...__......______2 ' \ -- ~
..._____.__.__.___.___...u..___ _
_n_______~___._\" ~ "'- """--
..,.., ,~~,....~~,~,~~~.,~,.,~-".",
-mils ~...~~~~_-...=~~~~mt~
.---------
--" -
~.
........._"--'--~--".._-
_ ____ n______,_ \' __ \ ____-, _ . () -,"'c.- ^ -_ .... n'-----S)--~ -. 'I ~- ^ -.-"- .
~ I -\.- ~ _n ------ --~-\--~-~
+-\~
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17,1998
5. Consideration to review for approval/disapproval the DMRF application for 124 West
Broadway.
A. Reference and Background:
The DMRF application is from Larson Properties II, property owner of the building
occupied by Carlson Wagonlit and two other tenants. Mr. Larson, tenant Grace Pederson,
and DAT have worked cooperatively to develop a facade design improvement which is
both compatible with design guidelines and economically feasible. Enclosed are the
October 14 and 28 DAT minutes and suggested improvements. DAT will again review
the building design on November 12 for suggestions on design and for approval of the
design guidelines. Being at a NAHRO Conference, I was unable to attend the DA T
meeting, therefore, further information and a completed application will be presented at
the EDA meeting. Please consider the following when reviewing this application.
Purpose
Does the proposed project seek to promote the revitalization of downtown Monticello?
1. Enhances storefronts and facades in accordance with the design guidelines in the Plan.
Yes No
2. Encourages the rehabilitation of building interiors to bring them into compliance with
local codes and ordinances. Yes No
3. Encourages building rehabilitation to provide space suitable for the proposed use. Yes
No
4. Provides funding to close the "gap" between financing needed to undertake the project
and the amount raised by equity and private loans. Yes _ No _
5. Provides economic incentives to locate businesses in the downtown. Yes No
Target Area Preference given to Blocks 35,36,51, and 52, Original Plat.
This proposed project lies within the preferred area. Location Block 35.
Facade Grants
Matching grant of $2,500 for eligible improvements to the front facade and signage.
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17, 1998
Request
Projected cost of improvements
Equity
Criteria to meet:
1. Do the improvements meet the applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances?
Yes No
2. Does the amount of the grant match the amount ofthe private investment up to the
stated limit? Yes No
Matching grant of up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to the rear facade.
Request
Projected Costs ofImprovements
Equity
1. Do the improvements meet the applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances?
Yes No
2. Does the amount of the grant match the amount of the private investment up to the
stated limit? Yes No
Matching grant of up to $2,500 for eligible improvements to the side facade.
Request
Projected Costs of Improvements
Equity
1. Do the improvements meet the applicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances?
Yes No
2. Does the amount of the grant match the amount of the private investment up to the
stated limit? Yes No
Fee Reimbursement
Reimbursement of City fees in an amount equivalent of 10% of the total cost of the
improvements up to a maximum of$500.
Request
Projected costs of city fees
2
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17,1998
Non-Performance
The approved DMRF becomes null and void if funds are not drawn or disbursed within
270 days from date of ED A approval. August 17, 1999
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve DMRF No. 110 in the amount of $ for front facade
and signage, $ rear facade, and $ side facade
improvements and $ for fee reimbursement at 124 West Broadway.
Terms and conditions as determined.
2. A motion to deny approval ofDMRF in the amount of$ for front
facade and signage, $ for rear facade, and $ for side facade
improvements, and $ for fee reimbursement at 124 West Broadway.
3. A motion to table any action.
. C. Recommendation:
No recommendation is given without a completed application.
D. Supporting Data:
Copy of the incomplete application from Brad Larson and DAT minutes to date.
.
3
> .
- ,
j
.
.
.
II.
DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO REVITALIZATION FUND
Monticello Economic Develop~ent Authority - 271-3208
250 East Broadway, POBox 1147
Monticello, :MN 55362
FUND APPLICATION
Social Security of ApplicantIPropertv Owner
'11- 11~F/57J
Tax ID# of ApplicantJProperty Owner (( I S-S-..- 0 I 0 - 0"3 rf) lj a
~ ---
Nature of Revitalization Fund Request:
Street Address of Revitalization Property (-z... <1 iJ . (J v... J (.L/ 0\.- 7
PID Number of Revitalization Property (C, S"-.$-~ 01 0 - () ~~ 9 V
Legal Description of Revitalization Property - Block
L -f- e c. r.9 -t. . ~/lI
-r- & GV'V\.. '7 '""'ir d!. ~ k 0 ""-'
Revitalization Property is currently: b
Occupied L Unoccupi41d
~5
. t.o-{-
"t.,€tLV
Prospective Occupant
~6fIV)
j-
()J ~ '&..... r; 4:;-
If applicable, Name of Occupant (Business) or Prospective Occupant (Business) /
C 0. ~..l-v1 '/vi'''~ I "5"-t-1M -e. .. ~. d 1.,; C e..-ls ~ ITV' .J..ve..-(
If applicable, brief description of the nature of the business of the occupant:
-rv.v~( A~~
1
~/\
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
Ifwe certifY that all information provided in this application is true and correct to the best of
my/our knowledge and I1we agree to apply for and receive all applicable building permits prior to
the start of work and to comply with all bull. inspection requirements.
4/1 ~flf~
/ Date I
.
4
~ --?-
.
.
.
October 14, 1998
The Design Advisory Team's mission is to work with property owners to improve the
appearance of downtown building facades. It then makes a recommendation to the Economic
Development Authority whether the project meets the design guidelines and is eligible for matching
grants and rehabilitation loans. The purpose of the funds is to help restore the integrity of historic
buildings on Broadway.
The building under consideration is a difficult one to assess. Many remodeling projects have
drastically changed the facade over the years. While we understand the property owner is reluctant
to undertake an extensive rehabilitation project, we have a few simple and economical suggestions
to improve the look of the entire structure. While an awning over Carlson Wagonlit Travel will be
an improvement, just a few more dollars to treat the whole facade would be even better. We fear
that the awning done in isolation will visually cut the building in half - a building divided by many lines
already.
1. We consider the wooden window hoods on the upper floor to be an important element of
the building. Repair to the easternmost hood is necessary to prevent further deterioration.
Weatherproofing all three would help them withstand snow, rain and sun.
2. We would recommend painting all of the dark brown wooden trim and cedar shakes a
color just a shade or two darker than the existing stucco color. This would diminish the "Swiss
Alpine" look while bringing attention to the height of the building, and the awnings and signage of
the tenants.
3. A third window on the second story will balance the row of windows on the upper facade.
(Already in progress.)
4. The Carlson Wagonlit Travel sign/awning could be complemented by three matching
awnings over the windows on the second floor. This would tie the building together in both texture
and color.
5. The top of the building needs to have some sort of definition. Ideas would include a
cornice cap or rain cap in a contrasting or complementary color.
As you can see, the Design Advisory Team's recommendations treat the entire building, not
just one piece of it. We believe these improvements to be the best alternatives given the need for
economical solutions.
6/3
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING ~ MONTICELLO DESIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, September 30,1998 - 9:00 am
Monticello City Hall
Members Present: Pam Campbell, Gail Cole, Ron Hoglund, Rita Ulrich, Susie Wojchouski
Members Absent: None.
Others Present: Ollie Koropchak, Grace Pederson
1. Call to Order.
Pam Campbell Called the meeting to order.
2. Approval of the minutes of the reaular meetina held Auaust 26. 1998 and the special
meetina held September 2. 1998.
SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MADE A MOTION, AND PAM CAMPBELL SECONDED, TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD AUGUST 26, 1998.
MOTION CARRIED. RON HOGLUND MADE A MOTION, AND SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI
SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD
SEPTEMBER 2, 1998. MOTION CARRIED.
3. Consideration of adding items.
No items were added.
@ Review of plans for facade improvements on 124 West Broadwav (Carlson Waaonlit).
Grace Pederson explained that she is planning to put up a new, backlit awning on the front
of the Country Travel Store (Carlson Wagonlit Travel) with the company name and logo on
it. She is required, as a franchise, to have a new sign up and is past the deadline, but
would like to work with the DA T to improve the facade, even though it will cost her more to
install an awning than to simply put up a standard corporate sign. She also asked for
suggestions on improvements for the back entrance to the store.
OAT members expressed concern that there were a number of problems with the existing
front facade and asked if Ms. Pederson would be open to suggestions for additional
improvements. She said that she was, but pointed out that the building owner, Mr. Brad
Larson, had indicated that he would not be interested in removing either the stucco or the
existing shake awning. He believes the original brick under the stucco is too deteriorated to
restore and that removing the awning would present problems. DA T members said their
may be ways to improve the look of the building without spending a lot of money and
offered to look in to it. Susie Wojchouski pointed out that the window hoods on the second
floor were rotting away and needed to be replaced. Rita Ulrich expressed concern over the
imbalance in the upper level, with one window completely covered by stucco and the other
two being of different sizes. Pam Campbell pointed out that the design guidelines
1~A
.
.
.
discourage the use of backlit awnings, but since the corporation is being flexible in allowing
an awning sign instead of the standard sign, she felt it was a workable compromise. Rita
Ulrich said that she felt that the OAT needed to consider how the entire facade looks when
reviewing an application. OAT members said they would try to come up with low cost
suggestions for the front facade.
RITA ULRICH MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING SINCE MORE
INFORMATION WAS NEEDED. RON HOGLUND SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED.
5. Discussion on oroposina additional members for the OAT.
Rita Ulrich said that she had a couple possible candidates in mind if OAT members wished
to pursue adding additional members. The OAT is allowed to have up to seven members.
Pam Campbell said that it would be good to add people who bring additional skills to the
team. Ulrich suggested Mike Cyr and Andra Olson. Cyr has development and construction
background and Olson has restoration experience. Members agreed that both would be
excellent additions to the OAT. Ulrich will ask each of them if they would be interested in
serving on the OAT and report back at the next meeting.
6. Discussion on differences between sian auidelines in the comprehensive olan and the sian
ordinance and interoretation of the CCD ordinance reaardina OAT's role in aoprovina
sianaae.
PAM CAMPBELL MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY GAIL COLE, TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
MOTION CARRIED.
At this time, members went to look at the building at 124 West Broadway to discuss ideas
with Ms. Pederson for possible improvements. Suggestions include removing, or at a
minimum, repainting the brown boards that crisscross the stucco; placing awnings in
complementary colors over the doors of the adjacent businesses; painting the existing
shingle awning to match either the building or the new awning.
7. Adiourn.
GAIL COLE MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN, SECONDED BY PAM CAMPBELL.
MOTION CARRIED.
6/0
2
.
.
,
<J \0 "t 'fV\ '-~
\e-\~-~~
COMPLETION OF THE APPLICATION INCORPORATING THE OAT
RECOMMENDATIONS, ARTWORK, AND COST ESTIMATES AND WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE REAR ACCESSORY BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE 225
ENTRANCE BE INCLUDED IN THE GRANT APPLICATION BASED ON THE FINDING
THAT ITS PROXIMITY MAKES IT VISUALLY A PART OF THE REAR FACADE. MOTION
CARRIED.
@ Review of plans for facade improvements on 124 West Broadwav (Carlson Waaonlit).
Pam Campbell and Susie Wojchouski gave an update on their research to come up with
economical treatments to improve the look of the facade of 124 West Broadway. They plan
to have a meeting with the property owner and the tenant before the next OAT meeting to
discuss various improvement options.
GAIL COLE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY RITA ULRICH, TO TABLE THIS ITEM
UNTIL THE NEXT OAT MEETING, PENDING FURTHER MEETINGS WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNER AND THE AVAILABILITY OF DRAWINGS AND ESTIMATES.
MOTION CARRIED.
6. Discussion on "roposinG additional members for the OAT.
Pam Campbell reported that she had spoken with Mike Cyr about becoming a member of
the Design Advisory Team. He expressed interest and was going to arrange a meeting with
Pam and Rita to learn more about OAT. We have not spoken with Andra Olsen yet.
7. Discussion on differences between sian auidelines in the comprehensive plan and the sian
ordinance and interpretation of the CCD ordinance reaardina OAT's role in aooroving
sianaae.
Rita Ulrich explained that she wanted this on the agenda because there s~ems to be some
confusion over OAT's authority regarding sign in the CCO and because there also appears
to be a need eliminate the inconsistencies regarding sign regulations in the comprehensive
plan and the sign ordinance. Members agreed that variances are often required for signs
that are within the design guidelines of the comprehensive plan, presenting delays and
more work for everyone involved. Fred Patch said he thought that the sign ordinance
needed to be, and could be, simplified. One possibility is to allow any building a sign
allowance of ten percent of the front facade. Fred Patch asked the OAT for a
recommendation regarding the proposed signage for the dentist office in the Goeman
building. The directional sign is over the size limits in the ordinance, and thus has to be
treated as a variance. Members said they would look at it before the next meeting.
8. Adiourn.
RITA ULRICH MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY PAM CAMPBELL, TO ADJOURN.
MOTION CARRIED.
2 5/~
.
.
.
CO! { /.-:-.
October 14, 1998
The Design Advisory Team's mission is to work with property owners to improve the
appearance of downtown building facades. It then makes a recommendation to the Economic
Development Authority whether the project meets the design guidelines and is eligible for matching
grants and rehabilitation loans. The purpose of the funds is to help restore the integrity of historic
buildings on Broadway.
The building under consideration is a difficult one to assess. Many remodeling projects have
drastically changed the facade over the years. While we understand the property owner is reluctant
to undertake an extensive rehabilitation project, we have a few simple and economical suggestions
to improve the look of the entire structure. While an awning over Carlson Wagonlit Travel will be
an improvement, just a few more dollars to treat the whole facade would be even better. We fear
that the awning done in isolation will visually cut the building in half - a building divided by many lines
already.
1. We consider the wooden window hoods on the upper floor to be an important element of
the building. Repair to the easternmost hood is necessary immediately to prevent further
deterioration. But all three need to be repaired or replaced.
2. We would recommend painting all of the dark brown wooden trim and cedar shakes a
color just a shade or two darker than the existing stucco color. This would diminish the "Swiss
Alpine" look while bringing attention to the height of the building, and the awnings and signage of
the tenants.
3. As you can see from the photocopy of the existing building the second story looks
unbalanced due to only two of three window openings have windows. The windows are
disproportionately small. We would recommend that windows be installed to fill the window
opening. The original height will be restored and better window/wall proportions restored.
4. As you know, this application covers the entire structure and is available only once. The
original building is occupied by Carlson Wagonlit Travel and owner Grace Pederson has applied for
a matching grant for an awning over her business. Ideally the two additions on either side should be
considered at the same time. The DA T suggests the other two tenants be consulted regarding
inclusion in this rehabilitation project. We have several ideas regarding the treatment of the additions.
5. The top of the building needs to have some sort of definition. The stucco prevents any
rebuilding of the original cornice, but there may be a solution. The roof cap is not yet in place. An
economical solution is to install a roof cap that has a cornice built into it. See the attached drawing.
I believe these are available in metal or even plastic.
The stucco skin has covered the original brick but not the relief of the upper story. With paint
it is possible to give the impression of architectural elements that were lost. See attached drawing.
It is c~rtainly not a perfect solution but it restores some of the architectural detail the stucco has
covered.
As you can see, the Design Advisory Team's recommendations treat the entire building, not
just one piece of it. We believe these improvements to be the best alternatives given the need for
economical solutions.
~/\
, -,
-~ '.. .
"::. .~ ...... ~ ,., ...
......."-' ..'
'.
- -,
] .~
;4
:1
~].~
=_).1.
},:.,--,-c< J
"""",:., _,,:,J
-0:
\f
~
---
l-'\
'j
~.
\'
~
"-
('
C>
,
c...,
(\
6/~
-~
~..- -----~..............
-~<::. -"-''-z:;i
II
Ii
t
..
r"o \
~I
" :
~~
',.n_~
"
"
't
I"
(,
I,
if"
1\
:-,
i'
/'
l-
1"-
"-
,
i'",
I
I
i
I
:/
t;,
~t,
:,
<;:
,I
iJ
1:
"
,
~
r
I
f- ~
~
\' ~
("t
't'\
t> ~'
I"<'
~ ~
" ~
\'
~
~
~
r::,
C"
~:
~/~
, .>..Y:~: L;~?l4.~<';;~L
, . ,".." \,,,.. '".' ,"">':.!.' I.....,' j
. _ .",. _ ,,~._.. ~41:""1"... .'_".".'..'~..
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO DESIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, October 28,1998 - 9:00 am
Monticello City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Pam Campbell, Gail Cole, Ron Hoglund, Rita Ulrich, Susie Wojchouski
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
ALSO PRESENT: Ollie Koropchak, Fred Patch, Brad Larson, Mike Cyr, Grace Pederson,
Steve Grittman
1. Call to Order.
Pam Campbell called the meeting to order.
2. Approval of the minutes of the reaular meetina held October 14.1998.
SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED AND GAIL COLE SECONDED TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14,1998. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSL Y.
3. Consideration of adding items.
Ollie Koropchak gave an update on the Cline project, saying that she had issued a check
and sent a thank you letter for their participation in the DMRF program.
Rita Ulrich asked that consideration to nominate Mike Cyr to the DAT be added.
4. Consideration to aoorove final work at 148 West Broadwav (Loch Jewelers).
Members indicated that they had viewed the completed project and said it looked good.
RON HOGLUND MOVED AND SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED TO APPROVE THE
WORK ON THE BUILDING, AND RECOMMEND PAYMENT OF THE MATCHING GRANT,
SUBJECT TO SUBMISSION BY THE APPLICANT OF THE APPROPRIATE
DOCUMENTATION.
'0 Review of plans for facade imorovements on 124 West Broadwav (Carlson Waaonlit).
Pam Campbell explained that she and Ollie Koropchak and Susie Wojchouski had met with
Brad Larson, the building owner, to discuss possible improvements on the building. He had
asked them to get some ball park costs estimates. Rita Ulrich said that Jeff Oertel, an
architect specializing in historic and commercial architecture offered to do some pro bono
design work on the building. Members continued to discuss options for the building with
Grace Pederson and Brad Larson, who were present. It was decided that more research on
the feasibility and cost of some options was needed.
1 ~/~
e
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET I ROMY BUILDING I SUITE 20 I
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408
.
~:6121825~13
FAX: 6121824-7884
TRANSMITTAL
DATE:
TO:
COMPANY:
REGARDING:
FROM:
ATTACHED ITEMS:
NOli. 2 1<148
TAH / %'TA
/vb. tiu.-i 10 c. r-hws
C--o I D.-pol S L:.v~ s
.
COMMENTS:
.
A--r'~ED A~ A FEMf c:fr;cr-J$. .p~ -r.k l3>JILP'tJG,.
fXt,-so A -faV L..eJAM.~~'
i) THt- c.vWlu*r-y' APf~c..E tiDE: S NOT ffT Irk- (ctnu1eeetAL-
-VO,-,..J,J,"v<-lN {t,r=- FAILt J+~F \1fY'-t9>tVZ-)
.2) A vAdLIL€Y2-- GOwO/L uJll..,L t--+10t? r?/\Arvy 01N~
M(J A ~C2-1 LlC ~I() / 0(2iJvJ;0 Wov\..- 0 CL)M-E-
6L-O % lD 6rL1 f..:, IrJ A-....-- H f t:"'f4.. fl..A,..J a. Au. tJ I
I'
To-r~ 6rJ..AN0Jc. (hA-Y ~ 0Js,~~5 -ro 1bJ;T"
p..-rtc-ASTI 0,.) .
"3 ) -rrlt: -r-eA:t- CDGo{L IS t M forLTAt<Y/ ) AS l ~ -n:/-c
Jo.-.J J I/J lCJV ESI to ~ . A rJ Uf U T Ar,J r-11 AJ W '-V 0 J GO f3.2 \
A Jt:;YV-( P7AD tD.EA) TH-E itftr.....- SHvJL-O ,vcTf f2?t" / /\
100 0(L, t?r-rT . ~
~oo{::> LJ C-tL .. ~ ~-
e
.
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET I ROMY BUILDING I SUITE 20 I
MlNNEAPOUS. MN 55408
11EL:612112S~13
FAX: 612/12...."14
o
Ir: V.;'aJPO~s.
c..A,.J~tJT (b C
W fItP'€ LhJI ~
PAIN( f2€l.ESS"~
f<UAc; ,,J .
~'""' 1:\
P ~ t-Sr f1*t'Ir;:) o~
, F ~1Le - I,J "
f1.2M~
"VEEP
l.-o N (p
~Vluto
fttt-r. T0
c......ovefL
.
fklt-Jl pa::>~
JU~
Co L-o{L-
~lJJE -r~y 1fL-1-A
NOT~S
SA?-
-
e
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET I ROMY BUILDING I SUITE 201
~~LIS,~55408
.
~:612182S~13
FAJ(:6121824-7884
.
o
sA3
-
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET I ROMY BUILDING I SUITE 20 I
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408
.
~:612112'~13
fAX: 6121124-7114
.
o
0/\~
-
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET I ROMY BUlLDfNG I SlJ1TE 201
MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55408
.
TEL 612t12S-66lJ
FAX. 61 211 2"" 7g84
'P~JN\"" WI~~
~,g
c:+rA- . p. L-- /
.
,~~.!Jpj.:..;,;.. - '
,. :~ f.......
7
cW:""'i
o
o
~e.. \ G.-l L-
/'Z--G---r7
, -
R
~:...{~
.:0\'-
,
-1'
;/
L "b~( CP E- VcofL----
?~-1/ ?)~
~HF
~-~---,.__._.. ---~ -- - -. ---
O'PTi O~
A
-
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET / ROMY BUlLDING / SUITE 201
MCN'NEAPOLlS, ~fN 55408
.
TEL: 6121825-6613
fAX: 6121824--788.4
.
v {2.-e:A H
c;.-o l--O (2-
A U-&/V'T i-OLCJf2--
( Ce6J\>>\ BP--IG/L
Lot-OiL- )
.
/A~
~
,'"
c:?PTJ OI'J C2.--
A
.
.
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET I ROMY BUILDING I SUITE 201
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408
TEL: 6121825-6613
fAX: 612/824-78&4
.
. ":~~~;'
T
-;;-
\
t-
~
/
/
I I
L t?ff \;'!H-rT6E- /., Gk~~
.
/ /\~
"J
L~o0
~
-
.
OERTEL ARCHITECTS
1406 WEST LAKE STREET / ROMY BUILDING / SUITE 201
MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55408
TEL: 6121125.6613
FAX: 6121124-7114
.~-/ ~:. '~/:,.~;.~.~':>/ :i')'::;::~."~~,;;.,
!,-!~'.. .,.st- . ,,,' .'J'.
I.;' ) {:~";'~~;
, ,
:~:;~ .';:y ~~~:-/ :~. ~~~_.
. ./. ,:.j.;.-f..... _~.
.~.>,~!,;;~.:~~':. .
.'
. ,~-,; , - ':" I:::~:<~ ; ~,;~.
l~ :.\;'~, ~;~.~r~~'! ,,r':~f;
~:;~;
. ~~.~:
:~..... .
....-.
"'t~~
,t."
.'
, I;: . ' fit ~ ,";"
i~;~~' .;~~ 'I. - ~
~:'~' :.~ /.1" .. . ,: _ .", ...
i:: ' :''''1f;'f.:;,r: :>"
'.. ~;;.;\~ .', '"
,1 i.:.~' ~~'i~'~~.~~' .
.
,",
,~~~j!'" ,1-_-;, -..0.;. ',;- ,=-'
"' ...I..'Of. ,,~."'...'... f' -.:>o........~_....."t'"' .:/}~":. :'~"~~~"'~jAv"-:''''''''/.''::~lf';>~''';:'~':''.;'
. ," I
. <!," "'" ~-'
.' .;"~,
."1'.. ,".;.,.
';"1-"-:~,,-
.~ .~:" i
." - ....,+ '.
.. ;".. ;/".t',"l::r - .".~I ,'~ }__'~'~
. ;.': '::~;.~;<t
,."
o
~ ;.: .
';i.?d~ . ,,,:' ,~~,.;v"
! ~~.:;:;:./~J~_c,:
.
GA~
.
\
I
, ,
'-.
~ i ~
.~ {~ } ~ ~~/ ~~~,-
'>( l ~ ^" J ~1~ tit, , i
':t "'-- ~ 1 ,,}. ~ ~ ~ ~.
r ~ " ..:.... .-:~~
_.J \ .. ...--..-:1 ..,. --
."" \ . ; ~~. --
~
~
~ i ~~ , ~\ ~/\~
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17,1998
6. Consideration to ratifY the execution of a Partial Release of Mortgage and Consent to
Easement for the property described as the East 161.00 feet of Lot 5. Block 3. OIP.
according to the recorded plat thereof
A. Reference and background:
In October, 1998, the HRA provided TIF assistance for site improvements to the project
constructed by Blue Chip Development Corporation for lease to B&B Metal Stampings.
Lot 5 was subdivided through a PUD process separating the Vector Tool and B&B Metal
Stampings parcels. The parcels share a common driveway.
GMEF Loan No. 010 was approved for Vector Tool as a $50,000 real estate loan in
November of 1995~ therefore, the need for a partial release of mortgage. The consent to
easement relates to the common or shared driveway.
Prior to bank closing, the EDA and HRA documents were executed per review and
acceptance of Attorney Steve Bubul. The attorney suggested the EDA ratifY the
execution of the documents by the EDA Chair and Executive Director. This a
housekeeping item.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to ratifY the execution of the Partial Release of Mortgage and Consent to
Easement for the property described as the East 161. 00 feet of Lot 5, Block 3,
OIP, according to the recorded plat.
2. A motion to deny ratification of the Partial Release of Mortgage and Consent to
Easement.
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation.
Alternative No.1.
D. Supporting Data:
Copy of Partial Release.
1
~
PARTIAL RELEASE OF MORTGAGE
Mlnllr!lot. lJni[ornl Conny.ndiig DI.nb:
Errorl Dookm.rk not dtnned.
COpy
Partial Release Of Mortgage
Date:
. 19_
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the real property in
follows:
Wright County, Minnesota, legally described as
TIlC East 161.00 feet of Lot 5, Block 3. Oakwood Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thcreof.
.
(If more space is needed, continue on back)
is hercby releascd from the lien of Ule Mortgage, owned by Ule undersigned. datcd
executed by B1uc ChiD DcveloDJllCnt Companv
Monticello Economic DeveloDmcnt AuUlOritv
Numbcr 583744 (or in Book of
(Registrar of Titles) of Wright County. Minnesota.
Novembcr 21 , 1995,
as Mortgagor, to
as Mortgagee, and J1led for record Novcmber 28. 1995. as Document
Pagc ), in the Omce of the (County Rccorder)
51' A 1E OF MINNESOTA
.OUNTYOF lC)NjAI
}.
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BY~t~dfD-
By a~ \~O\~~~
Its Executive Director
~
~)'\
, 19~,
the
of
the laws of
.
.
.
EDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 17, 1998
7. Consideration of executive director's report.
a) DMRF No. 101 Froslie- Copy ofletter relating to EDA extension approval in
August and copy of disbursement check for front/sign facade.
b) DMRF No. 102 Steve Johnson - Copy ofletter relating to EDA extension and
disbursal approval in August. Removal ofthe black adhesive has not been
completed.
c) DMRF No. 104 Cline - Copy of reminder letter for disbursement and copy of
disbursement check for front/signage facade and permit.
d) DMRF No. 105 Loch - Copy of disbursement check for front/signage facade and
permit.
e) GMEF No. 006 Custom Canopy - Copy ofletter noting balloon payment due in
full and copy of check paid-in-full (principal and interest due).
f)
DAT has identified four building for exploratory assessment of work: Brad Larson,
Stella's Cafe, Proirer's, and one other.
g) FSI has requested prepayment of the UDAG loan. Prepayment is permitted
without penalty. Remaining balance is about $31,000 - $32,000. Loan term was
through December 1999.
.
.
August 13, 1998
--
MONTICELLO
Kathleen A. Froslie
7833 Aetna Avenue Northeast
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: DMRF No. 101 for 103 Pine Street.
Dear Kathy:
At a special meeting of the EDA on August 11, 1998, the commissioners considered your July 20,
1998, letter requesting a 30-day extension for DMRF No. 101. The commissioners approved
extending your funding deadline through August 28, 1998. This is consistent with the
recommendation of the Design Advisory Team.
Additionally, the EDA did determine they would approve only one extension request for each
approved funding application. In other words, DMRF No. 101 will become null and void on
August 28. Please call Rita Ulrich at 295-0999 for a final assessment of your completed facade
improvements and submit certification of payments of completed improvements to the office of
the EDA.
Kathy, we appreciate and thank you for your investment into the downtown area of Monticello.
Working together we can make a difference.
With warm regards,
CITY OF MONTICELLO
O~ ~O\.v~~~~
Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
cc:
File
DAT
0-':\
Monticello City Hall, 250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147, Monticello, MN 55362-9245 . (612) 295-2711 · Fax: (612) 295-4404
Off1ce of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362 . (612) 295-3170 . Fax: (612) 271-3272
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GENERAL FUND
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICELLO. MN 55362
eaPV~1
919 i
NO. 44807
MARQUETTE BANK - MONITCELLO
P,O. BOX 729
MONITCELLO. MN 55362
DATE
CHECK NO.
AMOUNT
8/31/98
44807
$2,500.00
TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND n/100*********
PAY 10
THE
ORDER
OF
KATHLEEN ANN FROSLIE
103 PAINE STREET
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
'-
1I'0552bOIl' I:Oq l.q l.l. 5221:
? bOO 0 l. ? II'
250.46501.6602
DMRF #101 FRONT SIDE
$2,500.00
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
.
~)
August 13, 1998
--
MONTICELLO
Mr. Steve Johnson
P.O. Box 598
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: DMRF No. 102 for 121 West Broadway.
Dear Steve:
At a special meeting of the EDA on August 1 I, 1998, the commissioners considered your July 17, 1998,
letter requesting a 5-month extension for DMRF No. 102 and disbursement of funds for the front facade
improvements.
.
The commissioners approved extending your funding .deadline through December 31, 1998 for the front,
rear, and side (east) of the building. Additionally, the EDA did determine they would approve only one
extension request for each approved funding application. In other words, DMRF No. 102 will become null
and void on December 31.
Lastly, the commissioners approved disbursement of funds in the amount of $2,500 for the front facade
improvements upon removal of the black adhesive. The EDA's motion encourages completion of
improvements, indicates the EDA's willingness to disburse dollars in an expedite manner, and complies with
the DMRF Guidelines. Steve, please call Rita Ulrich at 295-0999 upon removal of the black adhesive for a
final assessment by DA T and I'll immediately disburse your check of $2,500.
The EDA appreciates and thanks you for your investment into the downtown area of Monticello. Working
together we can make a difference.
With warm regards,
CITY OF MONTICELLO
QJ~ \~n~.D~
Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
cc:
File
DAT
.
l'Q~
Monticello City Hall, 250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147, Monticello, MN 55362-9245. (612) 295-2711. Fax: (612) 295-4404
Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362. (612) 295-3170. Fax: (612) 271-3272
,I
.
.~j
~i"...;b"'J
September 28, 1998
.,..1... .., . i
, 'J/' /
"':.'/" ','.",-;,
'~ " ~". . :. ~~,.' ~/
--
MONTICELLO
Richard and Sylvia Cline
112 East Broadway
P.O. Box 505
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund No. 104
Dear Rich and Sylvia:
The front facade improvements made to your building located at 112 East Broadway arc indeed an added
value to our community and extends a message of pride. The EDA "thanks you" for your investment
.
The Design Advisory Team found the front facade improvements to be complete and consistent with the
approved design and amended signage treatment. In order for the EDA to disburse the approved funding to
you, please submit evidence ofpaymcnt for the completed front facade and signage improvements and copy
of the building permit
As a reminder, DMRF No. 104 becomes null and void if funds are not drawn or disbursed within 270 days
from date of ED A approval. DMRF No. 104 was approved by the EDA on February 17, 1998, therefore,
the approved funding becomes null and void on October 17. 1998.
Please submit the necessary evidence to take advantage of the funding approved for your facade
improvements. If you have any questions, Rich or Sylvia, please do not hesitate to call me at 271.3208.
Again, thanks for participating in the revitalization program.
Respectfully yours,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTiCELLO, MINNESOTA
O~ y,U\ ~~_Q_~~
Ollie Koropchak
Executive Director
Lc..:J
.
c: OAT
File
--'--'-M~~ii~II~City-H~11:-i50-E-.-Broad;;y,-PO B~;-114-i,~M~~t-i~~il;;:--MN-55362='9245' (612) 295~2711 . Pax: (612) 29-5~4404-~--~---
Office of Puhlic Works, 1)09 Golf Course Rd.. Monlicello. MN 55162 . (612) 295-3170 . Fax: (612) 271-3272
o
.....
.....
'"
o '"
~ ~
0",
~~~ ::l
~x ~ I-
~oo z
<"'''''' ::> '-'I"
"'Om 0 '"
'" 'U :l: C"')
N 1:0-1:: <( N iC
"'!!:l15 oVr-l:
NO::;: iC
l/") cr: iC
'-'I" < iC
::; iC
iC
-I:
-I:
iC
iC
iC
-I:
iC
iC
iC
-I:
iC
ok
iC
ok
iC
oj(
iC
-I:
co iC
'" iC
- 0
~ ~ ~
0-_
o C"')
.-l .-l
.
I~
(j
z
9
...J
UJ N
>::<0
tM~~
Oz
Ll..<5:2
O..JO:(j
<CO-'
-== a: f- --'
-= WUJW
Z<X:O
L1. WWi=
O(:)Oz
"'0
N:2
>
I-
U
.
d
Z N
l<: '"
U N
W lI'I
is '-'I"
j::l
~
ex:
:::>
o
~
~
tI:J
Z
H
Z
o
~
j::l
~
:z:
tI:J
tI:J
ex:
:z:
H
tI:J
Z
H
....:l
U
N
\D
C"')
l/")
l/")
<:
H
:>
H....:l
00>-
000
p..,
H<.<:I
:::> l/")O
O:Z:O....:l
Ul/")....:l
OOH tI:J
:::>ex:::<U
....:l OH
Pd2~ ~ H
ex:H Z
:::>HOO
00<:p..,::E:
~
00
p
o
:z:
H
~
~
f2wffiu..
~i=5!o
n: 0
~
['-
....
o
o
o
t...C
['-
..
n.J
n.J
LIl
....
....
Ci
....
Ci
o
..
~
co
rn
n.J
LIl
LIl
o
~
tI:J
~
~
H
HH
~~
~g:
I I
ex: ex:
p..,p..,
~~
HH
~~
00
co l/") C"')
l/") l/") .-l
0'1'-'1" '-'I"
..... r- 0'1
C"') C"')
N N
oVr
o
'-'I"
C"')
'-'I"
.-l
o
l/")
\D
'-'I"
o
l/")
N
,"J"
9
--'
W
()
i=
z
o
:2
u...
o
>-
f-
(3
\5-:)
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GENERAL FUND
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICEllO, MN 55362
75-1152
919-
'\
GEN CKS
NO.
45321
MARQUETTE BANK - MONITCELLO
PO BOX 729
MONITCELLO. MN 55362
DATE
11/06/1998
TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED TEN AND 00/100 DOLLARS
CHECK NO.
45321
AMOUNT
$2,610.00
PAY TO
THE
ORDER
OF
ALAN J. LOCH
LOCH JEWELERS
420 80 STREET NW
BUFFALO MN 55313
/;:';'>:'~:'\';~<~:ZZ~~~~.' B---
..................- k / 11. ' '- 1/.... '...........)
0.~.::/:>::.~:'1:-..J ._~~~~'-C~:~" ":::'.'/::/ j
1110 5 58 3 gill I: 0 g . g . . 5 2 21:
? bOO o. ? III
'ENDOR 001444 ALAN J. LOCH
11/06/1998
'50.46501.4340
FRT
CHECK 45321
FACADE-;~-IMB 2.610.00,
i
i
i -
~"{-r.-r.llll"i
-:.{.
. INVOICE D
.
TOTAL
I
2.610. oj
CITY OF MONTICEllO
.
lo~
August 13, 1998
..
MONTICELLO
Stephen P. Birkeland Jr.
and Joan M. Birkeland
Custom Canopy
219 Dundas Road
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: GMEF No. 006 - Custom Canopy
Dear Steve and Joan:
In review of the Loan Note between Stephen P. Birkeland Jr. and Joan M. Birkeland and the
Monticello Economic Development Authority, the principal balance of Greater Monticello
Enterprise Fund Loan No. 006 was due and payable in full on May 1, 1998, the date of maturity.
.
Please submit the principal balance due as of August 1, 1998, in the amount of$34,747.54 plus
daily accrued interest of$4.28. Submit to the Monticello Economic Development Authority,
Attention: Ollie Koropchak, PO Box 1147, Monticello, Minnesota 55362.
Should you have any questions, please call me at 271-3208. Thank yOll for your expedite
consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
C:J~ ~<f\ ~
Ollie Koropchak
Executive Director
cc:
Pat Dwyer, Bank of Elk River
File
.
ce'0
.1"'
Monticello City Hall, 250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147, Monticello, MN 55362-9245 . (612) 295-2711 . fax: (612) 295-4404
Office ofPuolic Works. 909 GolfTourse Rd., Monticello. MN 5:)162. (612) 295-1170. Fax: (612) 271-3272
(;U~ I UM l,;ANUPY, INL;.
u
002'1'144
.
_I. 'V:; ,',..
CUSTOM CANOPY, INC.
219 DUNDAS ROAD
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
612-295-0060
THE BANK OF ELK RIVER
ELK RIVER, MN 55330
75-383/919
0021144
NUMBER
1'I\'r.'f~'(.\0.kf\~vN G~\ ~ '\wel\~-~( -t &8\100
DATE AMOUNT
. S- \8CjB ..1Y,s;;.j,SB
TOTHE N\. ~_ ~ \
ORDER "'l.)( \1\ l <L \ \0 E \) '?\
OF
~ \,
/ \ \\' \----
"'-.,~;" I
I
~~,~-''''~'''''....
,.~': ,';":.;.~ "":~ ::1'~.'~...;" ,. '1= ,.: ',I.o;:":'-~'.;-';r..p ;~ ~..
II' 0 2 ~ ~ l. l.1I' I: 0 g ~ g 0 318 31 ~ I: 00 8 G 8 Sill
(
,
(y)
F