Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 05-09-1977I AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL May 9. 1977 — 7:30 P.M. 9 Mayor: C. 0. Johnson Councilmen: Dan Blonigen, Arve Grimsmo, Stanley Hall, Gene Walters. /Meeting to be taped. ✓Citizens comments. %/1. Public Hearing - Variance for Sideyard Setback.- Ernie Hartwig. L�. Public Hearing on a Sideyard Variance Requested by Ed Lane. j. Consideration of Building Permit for a Duplex - Bud Kline. `/h. Consideration of Sanitary Sewer Extension to Oakwood Industrial Park and Along County Road #117 to Highway 25, Water Main Exten- sions, Street Improvement and Storm Sewer. 1. Street Improvement Project. �/6. Consideration of Operation of Information Center. ✓l. Consideration of Amending Ordinance Section 8-3--2 Relative to / Permitted Trees to be Planted in a New Subdivision. Consideration of Interior Decorator - City Hall. �9 Approval of minutes - April 25, 1977. X10. Unfinished business. 11. Now business - May 18, 1977 jloard of Review Meeting Ll 1 AGENDA SUPPLEMENT Igenda Item 1. Public Hearing - Variance for Sideyard Setback.— Ernie Hartwig. Ernie Hartwig is requesting a variance to build a house 7 feet, 3 inches from the property line on the west side of Lot 11, Block 5, River Terrace. This is an Rr2 zone and requires a 10 foot setback. At their April 26, 1977 meeting, the Monticello Plannin Commission recommended the variance be granted provided the house already under construction) was at least 7 feet 9 inches from the property line and that it be denied if it was less than 6 feet 9 inches. This motion was made with the understanding that the structure was either 6 feet 9 inches or 7 feet 9 inches from the property line since it was not surveyed and two conflicting stakes put the setbacks at the aforementioned distances from the property line. A subsequent survey has indicated the house is 7 feet n / 3 inches from the property line. The abutting property owner to the west, Mike Rajals, has indicated he would not object to the granting of the variance. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of variance. REFERENCES: Enclosed map depicting area. Agenda Ltma 2. Public Hearing on a Sidevard Variance Requested by Ed Lane. Mr. Ed Lane is requesting a sideyard variance to build a double garage within 5 feet of his property line on Lot 1, Block 42, Upper Monticello. Current zoning ordinances for an R-2 district require a 10 foot sideyard setback. Mr. Lane's property abutte 3rd Street to the south and a portion of Chestnut to the west. This portion of Chestnut is not currently used as a public street. The Planning Commission, at their lest meeting on Apri1 26, 1977, reviewed Mr. Lane's request and recommended that the 5 foot variance be approved since the proposed location of the garage would be abutting the unused portion of Chestnut and should not cause any conflictwith neighboring property own ere. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approving or denying the 5 foot aidcyard variance. REFERENCES: Map depicting property location and sketch showing proposed location of garage. Agenda Ttem 3. Consideration of Building Permit for a Duplex — Bud Kline. At their last meeting, tho Planning Commission recommended approval of a building permit for Mr. Bud Kline relative to a duplex to be built on Lots 8 and 9 of Block 10, Upper Monticello. ® Additionally, the Planning Commission recommended that the $1500 minimum landscaping requirement be waived and the ordinance be amended that not only single family residences be exempt from its provisions but that two family residences should also be exempt. Reasoning behind recommendation was that Planning Commission felt the landscaping requirement was too stringent and felt it was intended for larger residential + developments along with commercial and industrial developments. �4�� ) This item was taken up at the council's last meeting and a dis- y J cession was held as to the possibility of requiring only $750 in landscaping but this was not acted upon since the applicant Q� was not present. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of Building Permit and landscaping '�` VVV^/O requirements. �` $ `"�_ REFERENCES: Plan available at city hall; ordinances relative to landscaping. Agenda Item 4. Consideration of Sanitary Sewer Extension to Oakwood Industrial Park and Along County Road #117 to Highway 25. Water Main Exten- sions. Street Imnrovement and Storm Sewer. At our last meeting John Badalich presented a feasibility report relative to the above improvements. It was decided to table any action until petitioners had a chance to give further consid- S� oration to the project.. One item that should probably be discussed is the establishment (,!•' of an assessment policy on corner lots. Currently corner lots are not assessed on both aides, however, when an extension runs post the unassessed side, the cost of this footage is assessed against the entire project. Some consideration may be given to \0 placing the portion of the costs on one aide of a corner parcol on ad valorem. OThe water main extensions for Oakwood Industrial Park serves as oo� a good illustration of-this point. In 1976 the per foot assesa- 1r� Ment is estimated at $10.83 and in 1977 the estimated assessment O� Op is approximately double or $20 per foot. Part of the reason for the large increase io inflation and the / \j fact that the 1976 watermain prices were very favorable. How- ever, a reason for part of the increase is that twenty-six per cent of the 1977 project is not assessed since it servos corner parcels and the cost is then prorated to the parcels that can be served. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of ordering improvement contingent upon approval from MPCA of sewer extensions. REFFRENCF.S: Preliminary Report handed out at last meeting. -2- Agenda Item 5. Street Improvement Project. ing, City hn nstructed J Eb prepare tsometpreliminaryy costsronoa completehstreet 1improve- sures mp ove- 6 +ment project to use as a comparison against alternative measures LQ of upgrading city streets. +lam Vlit"�RUSMUS: �POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of Street Improvement Program. John Badalich's report to be presented at meeting. Agenda Item 6. Consideration of Operation of Information Center. At our last meeting, it was council consensus to have the senior citizens center operate the information center for the summer of 1977. The city administrator was instructed to work out a salary arrangement with the senior citizen center director and report back to the council at the next meeting. I have talked to Karen Hanson along with council members Stan Hall and Arve Crimsmo and the following schedule was recommended: Monday -Thursday 11 AM - 5 PM Friday 11 AM - 8 PM Saturday 10 AM - 5 PM Sunday 2 PM - 5 PM This schedule would result in the information center being open 43 hours a week. Hourly wage was recommended to be the minimum rate per hour ($2.10) with half the Wage going directly to the individual and the other half being credited to the senior citizen center. This fund would then build up for future purposes by the senior citizen center. An authorization to with- hold the 50% portion would be required to be signed to comply with the minimum wage laws. It should be pointed out that a log will be kept to keep track of names, time visited information center, and their address. This will be reviewed after 2-3 weeks to determine if there should be any change in the schedule. I will contact the Chamber of Comnerco and determine 1f they would be interested in funding a portion of the operation costs Vy and will have more dotail on this at Monday's meeting. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of schodulo indicated and salary of $2.10 an hour. Agenda Item 7. Consideration of Amending Ordinance Section 8-3-2 Relative to Permitted Trees to be Planted in a New Subdivision. Fhclosed, you will find a proposed amended ordinance relative to prohibiting tho planting of elm trees within the City of Monticello. —3— This ordinance would amend the present ordinance which spells out what type-- of trees arc allowed to be planted in r.cw --ub- divisions. The amendment would change the ordinance to listing only prohibited trees and would be applicable to arty area of the city, not just new subdivisions. You will note that oak trees are not listed among the prohibited species since in talking with the Department of Agriculture officials, they felt no reason to exclude oak trees since oak wilt is not a common disease in this area. They did suggest that all species of elm trees be prohibited because of being subject to Dutch Elm Disease. Previously mentioned, was the possibility of prohibiting planting of conifers on boulevard corners. This was not included in the proposed ordinance, since this has not been a problem and the city could remove any trees that were a problem since it is on public land. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of Ordinance Amendment. REFERENCES: Present Ordinance Section 8-3-2. Proposed Ordinance Section 8-3-2. Agenda Item 8. Consideration of Interior Decorator - City Hall. Enclosed, please find a list of possible furnishings for the new city hall. Please note this is merely a list of possible items, however, I believe it is very realistic, if not "bare �j bones". Obviously there will be items to be purchased that will be C V - in addition to the list, however, as can be seen from the sheet I even if $3830 were spent for accessories (lamps, pictures, etc. Oln' and miscellaneous items, the furnishings would be only $10,000. The City Council may want to consider hiring an interior decorator to coordinate the furnishings and interior colors for the city hall. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of hiring an interior decorator. REFERENCES: List of possible furnishings. -4- ITEM Council Planning Commission Member Chairs Chairs — Council Chambers for Citizens & Staff Lounge Seating Chairs Information Bulletin Board Desks Credenzas Draperie s POSSIBLE ITEEMS FOR rFaUSHiNG OF CITY HALL ESTIMATED ESTIMATED PRICE QUANTITY $200 7 40 12• 90 100 350 250 6 1 4 3 Sub Total Accessories & Miscellaneous Total `These would be similar to black chairs in present council chamber giving city totelof 30 such chairs; folding theirs could be used for larger audiences. ESTIMATED TOTAL PRICE $1400 L.80 540 100 1400 750 1500 $6170 3830 $1QD00 File --'AiEber Liddy i �1 March 23, 1977 MEMORANDUM Re: Monticello City Hall Commission No. 7616 From: Charles D. Liddy, Jr. THE ARCHITECTURAL ALLIANCE The following is a list of possible items to be considered for the`urnisninu of the Monticello City Hall. The budget that the city wishes to set fir the furnishings, and the serviceability of existing furnishings will determine whether any or all items are considered. This list is intended to help ir.- �teFior design firms make proposals for their services to the City Council. Stackable chairs for the Council Chamber: approximately 100 chairs. Chairs for members of the City Council and Planning Commission tnat will use the Council table: 5 to 7 chairs. 3. Table and chairs for staff members in the Council Chamber: table and chairs for 4 people. Table should have pencil and paper drawers for Cy`G each person. 4. Seating in the lobby to serve as a waiting area: approximateiy 6 �•• sofa places. .J 5. Kiosk for the lobby area to be used for public notices and infer- Dj mation: possibility exist; that this could be included under the $1,000 graphics allowance already in the contract. 6. Desks, chairs, and desk accessories for the general office area: ')a approximately 4 or 5 persons. x7. Two -drawer file cabinets to go under the service counter in the general office area: 7 cabinets. X 8. Conference room table and chairs: should acconirodate aparc•xir•a:ely 10-12 people. 9. Bulletin board, chalk board, or combination for conference race: could be freestanding for use in Council Chamber. C, Commission No. 7616 March 23 , 1977 Page 2 of 2 y f�QS KS t ?00 10. Desks, chairs, credenzas, side tables, guest chairs, etc_ for private offices for City Administrator, Mayor, and Councilmen. d SCO 11. Draperies or blinds for the private offices, conference room, and office it support room. }C 12. Graphics, wail hangings, and other art work for the entire buiIdino. x 13. Work table, file cabinets, etc. for the office support room. 14. Display case for trophies or items of historical interest for vestibule or lobby. } r� c 64.4 A T IQ -4 t lt- Wieber Liddy April 6, 1977 MEMORANDUM Re: Monticello City Hall Commission No. 7616 From: Charles D. Liddy, Jr. THE ARCHITECTURAL ALLIANCE The following is an updating of the list of possible items to be considered for the furnishing of the Monticello City Hall. The original list, submitted to Gary Wieber in a memo dated March 23, 1977, simply listed the items that could be considered, where this updating includes a range of costs for each group of items and'a range in total cost for the furnishing and installation of all the items. It should be stressed that the total costs are for the entire list of furnishings simply to give the City Council an idea of the possible scone of the furnishings effort. It will be up to the Council to determine if all, part, or none of these items are to be considered. Item No. Item Ouantity Ranqe/Piece Total Ranae / �J 1 Stackable Chairs 100 $70 - $160 $7,000 - $16,000 2. Council Member Chairs 7 $200 - $500 S1,400 - $3,500 3 Staff Table 1 $350 - S700 $350 - 5790 Staff Chairs 4 $100 - $175 5:00 - $ 00 4 Lounge Seating 1 Group $2,500 - $5.000 S2.500 - $5,000 5 Information Kiosl: 1 $200 - $500 $200 - 5500 6 General Office Desks 4 $500 - $900 52.000 - S3,600 General Office Chairs 4 $80 - $250 S3Z0 - $800 General Office Accessories 4 Groups $50 average 5200 average 7 Files for Service Counter 7 $150 - $200 $1,050 - $1,400 8 Conference Table 1 $1.000 - S1,500 :•1.0?0 - S1,500 Conference Chairs 10 $100 - $175 $1.000 - 51.750 9 Conference Room Bulletin 1 $100 - S150 $100 - 5150 Board 'I TO Private Office Desks 3 $500 - $900 51.500 - S2.700 Private Office Chairs 3 $200 - S500 S600 - S1.500 J C; Private Office Credenzas Private Office Side Chairs 3 6 $500 $100 - S700 - $115 51,500 $600 - - $2,100 51,050 Private Office Side Tables 3 $100 - $250 $300 - $750 Corrinission No.1616 Apri 1 6. 1977 Page 2'of 2' Item No,. Item. Ouanti ty Ranqe/Piec-6 -iotal Range- .I f. Blinds or drapes 13'(4' x, V $70 $1,75 SgI'O­ $2.275 : I windows ) .12 -Graphics 9 pieces, '$30, $250- S270. - S2 -j250 'l3 Work 'Room, Furnishings I room Vj000 - S1.560 51,000 - 5I,,500 ',14 DfsplayCase 1, $20P.— 5500!. $260 5500 TOTAL $424°,40-0 $50,425 The selection and layout . 0 f the. furnishings can be accomplished in a couple: of ways. -6-s�­. First, the city can hire n interior design firm to acc9npl.isi, the An Interior a , design facture r and 'wifl charge f I rm will be able 'to select furniture from any: manufacturer , epproifm6tely 10% of the total ,cost -of the fyrrilshings. 'Thu4. f61r the above total '$2.6OO`io1$5,_0O0 costs., the. interior -designers fee'icould range from + Another way -of, accomol-ishing the,design is 'to utiliz e the serwices, of an office - furnifure.s6pplier' (ec;6.Aiyion.'s Contract Vils'i-in. !General Office Products, -in- -firms' Depth f6rnishin'selection and 'layouts MarkbLtl.ng. ,etc.._ These will d6ifie g for -no feei but the client can only choose f6rnisftings, that the, par-ficular -supplier I represents.' In addition.', each supO ter vitt .1 add _ 5% to IU -16 the cost of each item to. cover- -design time,' fiendl,U4 of the order-. profit mark-up',, etc. No matter Which method 'of , accomptishing, the. Interior des I ign Is empioyeii, TAA recom. mends theJoT,lowing time schedule fblr the completion 61"'the,int6rior design process: ,A. Initial Prbsentatfon to Monticello City CouncilApril 6. 1977 . -1/2 wks. B. Award, inter'lor.Desi . gn Contract M ay'30, 1977 4 Wks. C. Complete Design TJune 27. .197.7 ais 4 Wks. 0. Domp - T'Pte Bidding 0ocurrients 'July 25, 1977 4 wks. E. Issue for Bids Aug:22, 1977 - - 3,wks,. Rece ive Bidsl sept 07,. . 2 Wk's '26'r G. Award,;Nrnishfnqs Contracts Sept. j977,.., ; 12 Wksi H.. Cdnplete Furnishings Installation Dec. 19, 1977 2 -Wks'. I Owner Occupanci, Jan. 2; 1978