City Council Agenda Packet 05-26-1981AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, May 26, 1981 - 7:30 P.M.
mayor: Arve Grimsmo
Council Members; Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Phil White
Meeting to be taped,
Citizens Comments:
1.
Consideration of Rezoning Lot 5 Except the Easterly 20 feet
of Block 16, Lower Monticello, from R-1 to P.-2 and a Vari-
ance from the Minimum Lot Size - Richard a Delores Guille.
2.
Consideration of Rezoning a Portion of Country Club Manor
from B-3 (Highway Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Resi-
dential) - Marvin George Builders.
3.
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned
Residential Unit Development - Marvin George Builders.
4.
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit Request for a
Residential Planned Unit - Linn Street Manor Townhouse Project.
5.
Consideration of a Variance to Construct a Billboard - Blocher
Outdoor Advertising.
6.
Consideration of a Simple Subdivision Request - John Sandberg.
7.
Consideration of a Resolution Approving the Annexation of a
120 Acre Parcel Owned by Kent Kjellharg.
B.
Consideration of obtaining Easement for Improvement Project on
West River Street.
9.
Consideration of Approval for Plans and Specifications on
Cedar Street Storm Sewer Improvement from Burlington Northern
Railroad Tracks to East 7th Street.
10.
Consideration of a Resolution to Call for a Public Nearing
Increasing the Amount of Industrial Revenue Bond for the Scot -
wood Motel Project from $750,000 to $1,250,000.
11.
Consideration of Approval of Contract Between the City of
Monticello and Gwen Bateman for Dog Patrol Service.
141
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, May 26, 1981 - 7:30 P.M.
(continued)
12. Review of the Audit for Year Ending December 31, 1980.
13. Consideration of Widening West 7th Street Between Hwy 25
and Cedar Street.
14. Consideration of Appointment of Library Board.
15. Consideration of Approval of Intoxicating Liquor, Non -
Intoxicating Malt Liquor, Club Liquor, and Set -Up Licenses.
16. Consideration of a Variance for a Certificate of Occupancy -
Reinert Hillside Aparlm-i3O.a.
17. Approval of Bills - May 1981.
18. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of may 11, 1981.
Special Meeting Held May 4, 1981 at 7:00 P.M.
Special Meeting Hold May 8, 1981 at 5:00 P.M.
Unfiniahod Puniness
New Business
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
r AGEITDA SUPPLEMENT
v
1. Consideration of Rezoninq Lot 5 Except the Easterly 20 feet
of Block 16, Lower Monticello, from R-1 to R-2 and a Variance
from the Minimum Lot Size - Richard and Delores Guille.
PURPOSE: To consider a request to rezone the above parcel on
Fast River Street across from Ellison Park, from R.-1 to R
This request would allow the Guilles to rent out their base-
ment for an apartment.
In an R-1 zone a duplex is not allowed. A duplex is allowed
in a R-2 zone provided there is at least 5,000 square feet per
unit or a total of 10,000 square feet. The particular lot in
question has 9,787 square feet and as a result a variance is
also being requested for the minimum lot size.
For your information, the Guilles presently live in the upper
level of this dwelling and a relative of Mrs. Guille's resides*M
in the lower level of the dwelling. According to our ordinance
in an R-1 zone, a dwelling can only be used for members of the
same family. however, the Guilles are considering selling the
property and would like to advertise it as a duplex.
This is the second time this item has appeared on the City
Council's agenda. on December 11, 1978, the City Council denied
a request to rezone this parcel from R-1 to R-2 as a result of
the opposition from the neighbors.
At the last Planning Commission meeting, opposition was expressed
by the neighbor to the immediate cast, Bill Sandberg. Additionally,
a petition was presented by Mr. Bill Sandberg in which several
people in the neighborhood also expressed their opposition to
the rezoning and variance. At the meeting the Planning Commission
recommended denial of the rezoning and variance request. (Since
the request indicated both the rezoning and a variance request,
the matter was recommended to the, City Council for final action).
POSSIBLE ACT1011: Consideration of a motion to approve or deny
the rezoning request from R-1 to R-2 along with the variance
from the minimum lot size requirement.•
REFERENCES: The minutes from the Planning Commission of Rsy 12,
1981, previously sent out and a map depicting the location of
the property, and a petition signed by neighbors in opposition
of this roquest.
•NOTE: Rezoning request and a variance roquost
requires 4/5's vote of Council for approval
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
,I 2. Consideration of Rezoning a Portion of Country Club Manor from
`l B-3 (Highway Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) -
Marvin Georqe Builders.
PURPOSE: To consider a rezoning request from Marvin George to
rezone Outlot A of Country Club Manor from B-3 to R-3. This
rezoning is to allow for the development of a townhouse project
which is the subject of the next agenda item.
The area itself which is approximately 16 acres had, at one
time, been zoned R-1, but later zoned to B-3 upon the request
of the previous owner of this land, Howard Gillham. some of you
may recall that when Marvin George originally plotted Country
Club Manor, he requested residential zoning for this same area
as he now is requesting R-3 zoning, but was denied. There was
an indication at that time that possibly this could be considered,
once Country Club Manor was more fully developed.
As you are aware, Country Club Manor is far from being fully de-
veloped at this time, but Marvin George is requesting that the
area be zoned to R-3 rather than to single family of R-1.
Although the particular area in question has jockied back and
forth between single family and commercial zoning, there is
quite a bit of merit in the present zoning request to medium
density residential zoning. Medium density zoning will provide
a buffer between the freeway and th R-1 zoning and further more,
r� it appears quite unlikely oven thou ecommended, that the commercial
zone should run all the way from Hwy 25 to the Country Club on
West County Road 39.
At the Planning Commission's public hearing on this item, there
was opposition expressed by two abutting property owners, Phyllis
Ruff and Timothy Genung. Mr. Genung felt there was enough low
income houses in the community and Mrs. Ruff was concerned that
there may he pressure on the salvage yard to he removed once the
area is more densely populated. After the hearing was concluded
the Planning Commission unanimously recommended rezoning the
property from B-3 to R-3.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of a motion to rezone Outlot A of
Country Club Manor from B-3 to R-3.•
REFF.RENCRs. The Planning Cotmniosion minutes of May 12, 1981,
previously sent out and a map depicting the location of thn
proposed rezoning.
•ucm Rezoning request requires 4/5'0
vote of Council for approval
Council Agenda - 5/26/61
t_ 3. Consideration of a Conditional Use .Pernit for a Planned
Residential Unit Development - Marvin Georqe Builders.
PURPOSE: To consider a request by Marvin George Builders for a
conditional use permit for a planned unit development. This
planned unit development is proposed on the parcel indicated in
the previous agenda item. It would be for the development of
26 four unit townhouses.
Enclosed for your reference if, a proposed layout of the planned
unit development. It should be pointed out that approval of this
conditional use permit would only be approval of the general con-
cept stage. Prior to any development occurring, it would be
necessary for approval on a stage by stage basis. For example,
if the general concept plan was approved it would be necessary to
receive approval for each development phase prior to any con-
struction occurring.
At the public hearing on this matter, which was held in con-
juction with the rezoning request, there was opposition from two
surrounding neighbors. Timothy Genung and Phyllis Ruff expressed
concern in opposition to the conditional use permit request. At
the conclusion of the public hearing on this item the Planning
Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval for the con-
ditional use permit for the planned unit development.
POSSTAI.R ACTION: Consideration of a motion to grant a conditional
use permit for a residential planned unit development for outiot A
of Country Club Manor.•
RF.FRRENCE: Map depicting the location of the conditional use and
a layout map showing the proposed development stage.
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit Request for a Residential
Planned Unit - Linn Street Manor Townhouse Proiect.
PURPOSE: To consider the general concept stage of a planned unit
development proposed by Ralph Munsterteiger. This development in
proposed for coven, four -unit townhouses that would bo immediately
east of Ridgemont Apartments.
According to our ordinance, a residential planned unit development
in allowed as a conditional ueo in a R-3 zone, the zoning of the
parcel proposed for thin devolopment. Furthermore, the general
concept stage was subject to a public hearing at the Planning
Commission's last meeting. It should be pointed out that there
was no testimony at the hearing itself.
•NOTE: All conditional use permits require
4/5's vote of Council for approval
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
According to our ordinance, the general concept plan is approved
by the council, and approval for each stage of the development
would be required by the city. At the development stage plan it
would be necessary for the developer to coordinate his plan with
the city planner, city engineer, and city staff to review such
things as sewer and water main -sizing, location of the proposed
interceptor storm sewer which could possibly cross a portion of
the property, and relationship of this development to proposed
collector road that is an extension of West 7th Street. For your
information, enclosed is a map showing the location of the area
proposed for a PTJr), a proposed lay out of the PUD area itself, and
a map showing the possible routes of the extension of West 7th
Street. Previously, the council in considering this collector
road had indicated a preference for alternate Route #2 or alternate
Route 43.
At the Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the conditional use permit.
POSSIBLE. ACTION: Consideration of a motion to approve or deny
the request for a conditional use permit for a residential planned
unit development.`
REFERENCES: Enclosed maps showing the location of the area
proposed for a PUD, proposed PUD layout, and a map showing the
,f possible routes of the extension of west 7th Street.
S. Consideration of a variance to Construct a Billboard - Blocher
Outdoor Advartisinq.
PURPOSE: To consider a request by Blocher Outdoor Advertising
Company to Construct a billboard on Lot 12, Block 2, Louring Bill -
side Terrace.
According to Monticello City Ordinances, off -premise signs are
prohibited. Any off -premise signs that currently exist are allowed
to stay until such time as a building permit is approved on the
same parcel of land.
The reason for the request, according to Blocher Outdoor Adver-
tising Company, is that he presently has two signs that he will
have to remove. Thin action comes as a result of being notified
by the property owners of Thomas Park that the two existing bill-
uoards which are legally grandfathered in, will have to be removed.
'NOTE: All variance requests and conditional
use permits require 4/5'a vote of
Council for approval.
t - 4 -
Council Agenda - 5/26/61
��- It should he pointed out that it was the intent of the city not
to require removal of the existing signs, because over a period
of time, develorment would take care of this situation. This
appears to be the case in question at this time since two signs
would be removed in Thomas Park. To grant a request for an
entirely new site would be somewhat inconsistent with the past
position that the City Council has taken in this regard. However,there
could be some feeling that the city would still be ahead be-
cause two signs are being removed and only one sign is being put up.
Any such approval should be contingent upon removal of the first
two signs.
At their last meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously
to deny the variance. This action was based on the previous stands
taken by the City of Monticello in respect to off -premise signs.
In accordance with the ordinance, a timely appeal has been filed
by Blocher outdoor Advertising Company from the decision of the
Planning Cor.mission.
POSSIBLE. ACTION: In consideration of approval or denial of a
variance to construct an off -premise sign on Lot 12, Block 2 of
Lauring Hillside Terrace.•
REFF.RF.NCFS: Planning Commission minutes of May 12, 1981, pre-
viously sent out and a map depicting the area where tho two signs
are proposed for removal and the area for which the new sign would
he installed. A letter dated April 7 , 1981, from Blocher Outdoor
Advertising Company.
6. Consideration of a Simple Subdivision Request - John Sandberq.
PURPOSE: John Sandberg, representing the owner of Lot 6, Block 1
of Sandberg Riverside addition, is requesting a simple subdivision.
This subdivision would reduce the size of Lot 6 from 18,000 square
feet to 12,000 square feet. This additional 6,000 square foot would
be added to Lot 5 of Block 1, Sandberg Riverside addition.
It should be pointed out that although reduced in size lot. Lot 6
of Block 1 would still moot the city's minimum lot size standard
in an R-1 sono of 12,000 square foot. Additionally, tho not back
for the existing house on Lot 6 would still be greater than 10 foot
from the aide yard lot line.
*14071:: Variance request requires 4/5'0
veto of Council for approval
- 5 -
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
If this simple subdivision were to be approved it should be con-
tingent upon the granting of easements along a newly created
property line and a vacation of the existing easements along the
present lot line. These items should be at the expense of the
owners of the property involved and proof of these recordings
and easements should be brought into the city. Mr. Sandberg
has agreed to these provisions.
At their last meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously recom-
mended to approve this subdivision request.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of simple subdivison
request contingent upon granting and recording of new easements
and vacation of existing easements at the expense of the property
owners involved.
REFERENCES: Planning Commission minutes of May 12, 1981, pre-
viously sent out and a map depicting location of the simple sub-
division request.
�. Consideration Of a Resolution ApprovinQ the Annexation of a 120 Acre
Parcel Owned by Kent Kjellberq.
PURPOSE: To consider a petition for annexation filed by Kent
Kjellberg to annex a 120 acre parcel to the City of Monticello.
Enclosed please find a map depicting the 120 acre parcel that Mr. Kent
Kjellberg purchased from another property owner. This 120 acre parcel
exists just south of the property owned by John Lundsten and is bounded
on the west by Hwy 25 and the east by property owner Francis Klein.
Thin parcel in in the orderly annexation area. An part of the orderly
annexation area, the city itself cannot initiate annexation pro-
ceedings in the area, but can adopt a resolution in support after a
petition has been filed with the city. This orderly annexation
agreement whereby the city cannot initiate annexations is effective
until Septomher 19, 1984. so, the only type of annexation that can
take place in the OA area in a result of a petition requested.
In order to have an annexation occur in the orderly annexation area,
a resolution is required either by the City of Monticello or the
Township of Monticello. If no resolution supporting the annexation
is filed by either one of these bodies, the State of Minnesota's
Municipal Board can In petitioned directly for a resolution in support
of such an annexation. In any case, a hearing is required to he hold
by the Minnesota State Municipal Hoard to determine whether the
property is suitable for annexation.
t - 6 -
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
The board may approve an annexation if it finds that municipal
government of the area'is necessary in order to protect the public
health, safety and welfare, and if annexation is in the best interest
of the municipality and the territory to be annexed: or if land is,
or is about to become suburban or urban in character. Generally
speaking, this phrase refers to land in close proximity to the city,
of limited size, suburban in character, and with a community of
interest with the city so as to be reasonably adaptable to the
maintenance of city government.
One possible use of the property would be for the location of the
Rivercrest Christian School. Apparently, the board of directors of
the school, which is currently situated on East 4th Street, are
interested in a parcel of land which would be situated on the north-
east section of the parcel proposed to be annexed. This area will
be relatively close to city services of sewer and water. however,
there are no other definite proposals at this time for the rest of
the 124 acres. it has been indicated according to Jim Metcalf,
Kent Kjellberg's attorney, that it would be developed for commercial
or light industrial development.
I would recommend that the City of Monticello proceed very cautiously
on any further annexations. Recently, the City of Monticello annexed
over 400 acres and this area is still undeveloped. Additionally,
there are quite a few areas within the City of Monticello that are
y/ zoned as light industrial and commercial that hOAe yet to be developed.
If the City Council of Monticello feels that thin Area should be
seriously considered for annexation, it may want to request the
petitioner to submit more definitive plans including a preliminary
plat of the area proposed to be annexed. Additionally, the City
Council may want to consider a deposit similiar to a subdivision
deposit for the annexation procedure. When the City of Monticello
gets involved with annexation procedures, there is cost involved with
engineering fees, legal fees, ate. Although it is merely a hall park
estimate, approximato cost to the city, not including city staff
time, would be $2,000.00.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of a motion to adopt a resolution
approving the annexation of 120 acres just south of the current
city limits owned by Kent Kjallberg. (If there is no support for
thin item no motion would tw necessary)
RTFFREIICFS: A letter of transmittal from Jim Motcalf along with
petition request.
C -7
Council Agenda - 5/20/81
S. Consideration of Obtaining Easement for Improvement Project on
West River Street.
PURPOSE: Tooc` n�ider obtaining an easement to extend sewer and
water to West River Street. This easement is necessary in order
that tiSP's training facility and other property owners along West
River Street could be serviced with sewer and water. Additionally,
a petition fi cd by NSP w0 requiraSa portion of West River Street
to be paved.
As you may recallIthe council has held up orderinu plans and
specifications on this project until such time as an easement
could be obtained.
Mel Wolters b indicated t� he would be willing to rant the
City of Monticello the entire easement based on the following
conditions:
Z
Award of $5,000.00 for easement rights (previously, the City
---�
of Monticello had obtained a 12 foot casement from Mel Wolters
and this casement would involve obtaining an additional 10 feet).
Deferring the asscasments to that portion of the Meadows Sub-
divison which would be served as a result of the extension of
sewer and water to NSP. Mel Wolters had previously petitioned
to serve a portion of Marvin Elwood Road in the Meadows Sub-
division piot,out as a result of the petition by NSP, it would
be necessary to serve the, entire length of the Marvin Elwood
Road. Request of the deferral is one year including interest.
Initially, L_ 2-- ... _ ____11, the city was negotiating with both
Edgar Klucas and Mol Wolters to obtain a 15 foot easement from
each party or a total of 30 feet. Although Mel Wolters isi9 vin9
us the entire 30 feet now, he is still concerned about the effect
that the improvement wail have on i79ar Klucas. He indicated that
he L,2 willing to give the City of Monticello the easement if Edgar
is treated fairly. 1 would recommend that the City of Monticello
consicTer the following:
Deferral of assessments with interest to Edgar Klucas until
such time as any portion of his land is plotted or required to
have sewer and water service according to Monticello City or-
dinances. The principal amount plus the accrued interoat
would run for an additional ten years at the time this happens.
It should be pointed out that currently Edgar Klucas's property
has green acro status. Basically, thin means that all assessments
are doferrod with intareat. Once the property is no longer under
green acre status, all payments on assessments plus accrued interest
have to be paid up. For examplo, if the improvemont wore aaaessod
over ton years and the property lost it's green acro status after
four years, payment would have to made on the four yearn principal
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
and interest and the property would have six years remaining. As
Ca result of this provision, the city is only granting Edgar Klucas
the entire ten years once the property develops as opposed to under
the green acre provision.
Reasoning for my recommendation for this deferral is that any
difference relative to assessments deferred and assessments collected
would have to be picked up on ad valorem taxes. NSP, the petitioner
for the improvement on West River Street, would pick up over 80 per
cent of the ad valorem taxes. As a result, the developer in this
case would be picking up the majority of this cost. Additionally,
there may be some consideration for assessing the cost of obtaininq
the easement, $5,000.00, entirely to NSP since they were the petitioner
for the improvement. Normally, this cost would be spread among the
property owners benefited.
One additional item that I have enclosed is a letter from Bill .".) i5
Seefeldt to express his continued support for this improvement 0141 y�
project. � It
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of authorization to obtain ease-
ment from Mel Wolters for $5,000.00 and deferral of one year S
assessments on those lots affected by the second phase of the
improvement project. Additionally, any motion should indicate
whether the City would be willing to defer the assessments to
Edgar Klucas under the conditions stated above. (It should be
pointed out that the actual assessment roll is adopted at an
assessment hearing after the project is completed, but in order
to obtain the easement from Mel Wolters there should be an indi-
cation in the minutes of the policy the city will adopt).
REFERENCES: A copy of the letter from Flectro Industries.
9. Consideration of Approval for Plana and Specifications on Cedar Street
Storm Sewer Improvement from Burlinqton Northern Railroad Tracks to,
East 7th S tract.
PURPOSE: To consider ordering the above improvement and approving
pinns and specifications that were ordered by the City Council at
the March 23, 1981 meeting.
As you may recall at the Mnreh 23, 1991 meeting, two elements
initially proposed for this project wore eliminated. Ono clement
called for the paving of Cedar Street. This clement was eliminated
due to the fact that sanitary sewer is not in this portion of Cedar
Street. The other clement that was eliminated was an extension of
a storm sewer pipe to service the V.F.W. Club. This element was
eliminated duo to the improvements made by the V.P.W. Club with
the drainage swail. Thio drainage swail given the V.F.W. Club the
necessary positive drainage to got the water to the catch basins
proposed on this Cedar Street Storm Sower project.
- 9 -
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
Development in the Lauring Hillside area along with the proposed
Scotwood Motel has increased the water run off in this area. You
may recall that Wilbur Eck who lives just adjacent to Burlington
Northern Railroad was concerned relative to the cost of the
improvement project. However, in the letter dated April 21, 1981
and enclosed, you will find that he is in favor of this improve-
ment project.
Total cost of the project is estimated to be $120,492.00. It
should be noted that since the improvement project was not peti-
tioned for, a 4/5's vote of the council is necessary to order the
improvement project.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Two separate motions are necessary. One motion
would be to order the improvement project which requires a 4/5's
vote. The other motion which does not require a 4/5's vote would
be approval of the plans and specifications for the improvement
project.
REFERENCES; John Badalich will be bringing the plans and specifi-
cations with him on Tuesday night to review them with the council.
A letter from Wilbur Eck relative to the improvement project.
10. Consideration of a Resolution to Call for a Public Hearinq Increasing
the Amount of Industrial Revenue Bond for the Scotwood Motel Project
Cfrom $750,000 to $1,250,000.00.
PURPOSE: To consider a request by the developers of the SCOtWOod
Motel, Thrifty Scot Motels, Inc., to hold a hearing on the con-
sideration of increasing the amount of Industrial Revenue bonds
from $750,000.00 to $1,250,000.00.
Reason for the increase resulted from an addition of 12 rocens to
the 36 unit project making the total complex 48 unite. Additionally,
an inflation factor has taken place since initial approval of the
revenue bonds in early 1980.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of adoption of a resolution calling
for a public hearing on June 22, 1981, for the increase in Induatrial
Revenue bonds to $1,250,000.00 for a Scotwood Motel. -
REFERENCES: May 14, 1981 letter and a copy of the proposed resolution.
*NOTE: A resolution requires 4/5'a
vote of Council for approval
- 10 -
L
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
11. Consideration of Approval of Contract Between the City of Monticello
and Gwen Bateman for Doq Patrol Service.
PURPOSE: To consider a proposed contract with Gwen Bateman for dog
patrol service which covers a period from June 1, 1981 thru May 31,1983.
Gwen Bateman's current contract expires May 31, 1981. Currently, the
contract calls for an hourly fee of $6.75 per hour and a per mile
charge of 250. Enclosed for your reference is a copy of the pro-
posed contract for the next two years which has the following
changes from the existing contract:
Increase in fee is recommended to go to $7.50 per hour effective
June 1, 1981, and to increase to $8.25 per hour effective on
June 1, 1982. This would result in an 11 percent increase in the
first year and a 10 percent increase the following year. These
increases are commensurate with the past increases granted to the
city employees both union and nonunion.
A provision has been added, Item 10, where Gwen Bateman is
authorized to pick up injured animals and if the owner cannot
be found to have the animal euthanized if it is beyond treatment.
It should be pointed out that there is no increase recommended in
the per mile fee since the 250 per mile is still 50 per mile more
than qranted to other city employees. I havo talked with Gwen
Bateman relative to my recommendations and she found them to be
acceptable.
For your information, Pts. Bateman earned $3,350.00 in 1978,
$4,155.00 in 1979, and earnings of 1980 were $5,053.00.
Overall, I think Gwen Bateman's performance has been good. There
have been a few times when 140. Bateman could not be reached, but
this is only natural unlean we contract for 24 hour around tho
clock service. Mo. Bateman does have a pager on her and I feel
this han been quite ouceesaful in providing dog catching services
in light of tho fact that she is only part time.
Ms. Bateman will be at Tuesday night's meeting to answer any
additional questiono the Council may have.
POSSIBLE: ACTION: Consideration of approval for proposed dog
contract with Ms. Bateman.
RrFF.Rr.NCES: Enclosed copy of proposed doc3 contract.
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
q 12. Review of the Audit for Year Ending December 31, 1980.
PURPOSE.: To review the audit report prepared by the firm of
Gruys, Johnson, and Associates for the year ended December 31, 1980.
A copy of this report waz sent with the agenda supplement for the
May 11, 1981 meeting.
Rick Borden will be at Tuesday night's meeting to review the audit
with the council. however, should you have any questions in the
meantime, please feel free to conta ct Rick Wolfsteller or myself.
It should be pointed out that Rick Wolfsteller, Assistant Adminis-
trator, prepared a lot of the work papers and provided the auditing
fim with most of the financial information required for the audit.
POSSIBLE ACTION: After presentation and review of the audit report
by the council, consideration of a motion to accept the audit re-
port as presented.
REFERENCE: A copy of the audit report previously handed out.
13. Consideration of 47ideninq West 7th Street Between Hwy 25 and ,j, �I►4�
Cedar Street. V
PURPOSE: To consider request of the council to review the possi-
bility of widening 7th Street in the area indicated.
Enclosed please find a report from John Simola in which he in-
dicates the widening of 7th street estimated to he $11,310.00.
It should be noted that this includes widening 7th Street to make
yy(py
it the same width as touring Lane or 40 fact. This figure does
not include the cost of a retaining wall for the cemetery on 1 I{J
Hwy 25 and JohnBadalich will have a figure an this coat at
Tuesday night's meeting
in this regard. /j y
At this time. I recommend that the City of Monticello consider this
improvement project for 1982. This project was not budgeted for �Y
in 1981. Obviously, we could got the money from the reserves that
the City of Monticello is expected to have at the end of 1981.
Currently, the city•a expected reserve at the and of 1981 is
approximately $350,000.00. This figure already has been reduced
from the city's direct share of the now library which is $250,000.
However, there are some improvements that are coming up that the
city will be considering and that is the purchase of Lindberg
property for approximately $100,000.00 to $120,000.00 and a
tank truck for the fire department of approximately $40,000.00.
- 12 -
C
I
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
Additionally, John Simola, our public works director, feels that
it is more important for the city to establish a regular seal -
coating program, the cost of which in 1981 is expected to be
$27,000.00. Additionally, the $350,000.00 reserve does not
include the city's share of the cost of the treatment plant in
1982 or approximately ;150,000.00. It should be pointed out
that the city's share is already taken into effect in projecting
the figure for 1981 that will be incurred for its share of the
treatment plant. With these types of improvements facing the
city, it may be wiser to include this type of project in our
1982 budget, plus there remains a possibility that a certain
(IJV portion of this project could be assessed to the property owners
on the south side of Perkins and the proposed Scotwood Motel.
1 Regardless of whether the improvement goes in or not, the city
^ ►u should still require Perkins to remove the poles that exist in
11Yrljdj� the right-of-way.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of widening 7th Street from Hwy 25
to Cedar Street.
REFERENCES: Enclosed report frau John Simola.
14, Consideration of Appointment of Library Board.
PURPOSE: Accordiny Lu Lhc recently enacted ordinance, the mayor
must appoint five members to serve on the library board with the
approval of the City Council.
According to the ordinance, two members would hold office until
December 31, 1981, two members would hold offices until December 31,
1982, and one member is to hold office until Doeembor 31, 1983.
Annually, thereafter , appointment shall be made for the tens of
three years. An you recall, we further indicated that no more than
one member of the City Council, nor, more than one member who to a
non-residont could serve on the board itself.
One item that may be discuo3ed since the city Is in the middle of
the library project is whether this board would actually work with
tho architects In the interior design of the building. Ono other
option would be to have the board hes advisory to the council in
this respect, or the council itself, work with the architect
relative to the interior design. Items yot to be selected would be
carpeting, shelving, furnishings and fixtures.
- 13 -
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of appointment of the library
,�- board by the mayor with a motion to approve by the council. The
appointment of the members should indicate wich members would
serve what terns. Also, there should be some sort of indication
of what role, if any, the library board would play relative to
the interior design of the new library.
NOTE: Mayor's recommendations are as follows:
Loren Klein (3 years) Mrs. Pat Schwarz (2 years)
Dr. Donald Maus �2 years) Dr. Joel Erickson (1 year)
Erwin Kallin (1 year)
15. Consideration of Approval of Intoxicatinq Liquor, Non -Intoxicating
Dalt Liquor, Club Liquor and Set -Up Licenses.
PURPOSE: To consider for approval the following licenses that
y1, expire June 30, 1981:
A. Non-Intoxicatinq On -Sale Malt Liquor License (Fee 400)
Friends Cafe i tp
�i Monticello Rod s Gun Club
04 �,dV Pizza Factory
V '
B. Intoxicatinq On -Sail Liquor License (Fee $1Q00)
11� Munticullu Liquors, Inc.
Silver Fox Motel
Wayside Inn
Q Joyner's Lane
- 14 -
C. Non-Intoxicatinq Off -Sale Malt Liquor License (Fee $30)
Monticello Liquors, Inc.
a. W
Ernie's Bait Shop
N
Wayne's Red Owl
Maus Focdo
(�
River Terrace Trailer Park Store
t \11
Tom Thumb Superette
I
Wayside Inn
holiday Station
\�
V\
D. Set -t%1 License (Feo $200)
Monticello Club
/Country
R. Club 1.lconae
Amer i Log ion Club
V.P.W. c
- 14 -
Council Agenda - 5/26/81
Last year we increased the fee for set-up licenses and club licenses from
$100.00 to $200.00. For your information, the maximum fee for a set-up
license is $300.00 and a maximum fee according to membership would be
$300.00 for the V.F.W. Club and $500.00 for the American Legion Club. In
1980 we also increased license fee for non -intoxicating off -sale malt
liquor.
I would recommend that we consider increasing the fee for the non -intoxi-
cating on -sale malt liquor license from $100.00 to $200.00 and for the
intoxicating on -sale liquor license from $2,500.00 to $3,000.00. Recom-
mendation is based on the fact that there fees have not increased since
1975. Additionally, in the future it may be well for the council to
consider increases in the appropriate fees more frequently.
For your information, out of 510 cities reporting for the year ending
June 30, 1980, 159 cities had a fee in excess of $2,500.00 or the City
of Monticello's current fee. As this is the latest statistic available,
there may be sane of the cities that were under Monticello who have
increased their fees. There is no like study done for the other types
of licenses.
In the past I have contacted the Wright County Sheriff's Department on
any particular problems that the sheriff's department may have with
any of the license holders indicated above. During the past year there
has been no problem of any kind brought to my attention regarding any
/ violation.
16. Consideration of a variance for a Certificate of Occupancy - Reinort'e
Hillside Apartments.
PURPOSE: To consider allowing occupancy of one townhouse unit for
security purposes.
While this development is not fully completed, the developer would
like to have a carotaker occupy one unit for security reasons. Sea
Loren Klein's memo enclosed.
According to Loren, the townhouse that occupancy is being requested
for, menta building and fire codes.
POSSIBIR ACTION: Conoidoration of approval of Certificate of occu-
pancy.
REFHRF.HCES: Memo from Loren Klein.
L - 15-
C
CITIZENS -PETITION
W0 S- - I
0
° c
0 0 16 ° 5
0 0 10
0
WE, The Undersigned Citizens and Property Owners of the City of
Monticello, County of Wright, State of 1•linnesota-, hereby allow our sig-
natures on this Petition to represent,"in lieu of a personal appearance„
our united disappr'6vdl of any change in zoning concerning an application
for Rezoning Lot rive (5),'except the easterly twenty (20) feet of Block,
Sixteen (16), Lower Monticello, from an R-1,to an R-2 Zone.
The rezoning request should be denied for the following reasons:
1. The nature and character of the neighborhood is si_nglc
family only.
2. We have relied on than cliarnut,eristic in purcha::ini, our
property and nah'I.ng ir,lrI'll rct.toni:I t_heretn.
3. There arou,ld t,c i tcrca::e.l i r.,' iic r.,. the• .,rca.
4. 'fi:erc t:ouLd be ioaduqt! ttc ol•i-::cr,:,• Isar, irr;.
5. 1 chnn;:c in :inning, t•:uuld oli:Jimit• ::tric•t I;nv,:rtt„nlal
control. uvcr the situation.
6. it trould ho :I violation til• '-Inti'.icello's rnr:aril::n ivi� flan
its ndopi-Qi! ::uvcral year::
i .
It: would - •rere I y damapo otic prupurt:y vnlucs--m.my of ul`ri ch t
ru•c ri%::-frt.rrtt property.
8.0 ldhcn ilia bu!Ldin?, peri:_!t to add on to the house was i:.sucd
° do mon`tio'n Val, mindc' 'ot �pr:utt:iug. i change of 'zoning .
Co [ l
o
fhmcrn--t:c relied on representations that it would be a,
.'single family dwelling.
9. The property is not up to Uniform Building Code Requirements_
for a duplex.
• o
We respectfully request for the above reasons that the Planning
and "olli ir, C,nami.suioa ,lc.np t he `rJ�i,:,-;:t' to Clic ::onini; to It -2.
Niv,II: ADDRESS
--7
r/ 100 F— g ut_r E4. ttiLaniz« I l�
4--�
6.
_ 7
8.
9.
10. /
Il.
I
q
,
,
.. r •'� �r \� yptilt7G ��EST
•�, ,• ham.- • .� �.° .. '1• '•w..: r r �,
. +r �°�. J; rte`'`.,` " ' �� w �' !."~:� : mss'. +f •,�' �`^ � ^• `��'Ir- t o
�„ . ��+.ta,� y5 t f: J„ •.. Y.a�,•i•�•.�rl • ar�'ri ;�� y'1 ••' . ,. `'� . lfJf[� • J' .,� � �,
�. 1y, F ti•�� ' � ,,{Y r'1 hV .+..•yy •,� `I..� ' t2 y+���jjk .' wi o •r .
° '1 `p ,' .• 'r • I'' �"ti•��1e mow ~•1.`••x`•1•.
r �.t
1 � "r � � . • y ivvvMYYY _ i • < .
°: ,ri �`j�^}.1 •, .. Vial, ,`,
I
ti rF
PEµMTT �� S r
40
C4ND1& REMIJOG_--
'1
Marvin GOO go Manoc ffiG„WAY
Country Club I
t
1
t4
1
THE BASE PRICE OF YOUR
TOWNHOME IS AND INCLUDES:
• I096'square feet of finished living space
• City water, sewer, streets and natural gas
• Underground utilities
• Landscaped and sodded yard
• Double garage
• Thermo pane glider windows
• Large walk-in closet
• Vanity in master bedroom
• Ceramic tile around tub area
* Flooring allowance
• Lighting allowance
• Oak cabinets and vanity
• Formica counter tops
• Large deck off eating area
• Garbage disposal and dishwasher
• Exterior brick trim
• Formal dining room • 1/4 roughed -in bath in lower level
yr
• Wrought iron railings
• Laundry tub and stand pipe
• R-38 insulation in ceiling
• R-19 styro walls
• Vent for dryer
• Hookup electric or gas for range
• Ventiess range hood
• Asphalt drives
ALT
W
Z
A*,o
Co /0
6c
sa
10
0
cs
ryyi
ORR
T ��J. .1�� /Jl •n�!• ,.%.� ��..,: JI(,y'i r;r, r tIF
I. / •. '� r ' r � r ,- fir'`• � ! •' ?,:
r � - // ,r .,.. !i, r - ';,t. ,. . i r ~ r+�•,: ate,. r � ' �l ...
1.
A 411
/`�i �r� �.r * "tl \•, �p/Jti Phi. �- Y � - Y? '1
- / Conditional Use Prrmit
Ralph Munaturtcig.r
•,� •
Townhouses
41 f
•,5.,',,IJr• I-/ - • - �..
db `.
- t � ;• • `�. :law. • .,'� �`• •��� :4� ^ .r..
.tet. • • -t r... �, ,�.., :. ' � . '- � .,.,.. .. -
Y :jt �r'v <. ;~. `..' '•• a' • t I �l � t.i i,, .�twy, .f" •• �t,•,
n ' • ,r. •a_. 'fir• 1
t e
t N0. 94�y a
fit' Q��M at, 8t�;ti -_-
t -
go
��i z'• fir.:
L HER .Outdoor Adv0rtising Company, Inc.
_ ..•..... , T,1 ,N I;,
April 7, 1981
Mr. Loren Klein
Building Inspector
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Mr. Klein:
Blocher Outdoor Advertising loaf their lease hold on
the Marcarlund Property, legal description being
Lots 1 through 1.1, Block 1, 'Phomas Park, Wright County,
+1N. The signs arc on Lots fl9 and 0111.
Bloch^r was granted a grandfather. Permit at these Cwo
locations. 1 would like to relinquish my rrrandfathered
signs since our, two :;ign locations are, hvi_ng removed h}
April 30, 1981 or in that time span.
Therefore, as of April 30, 1981, 1 relinquish my
grandfather rights to permit on r.ho Marc:arlund
Property.
Sincerely yours,
Del 111001cr
President.
It
1
2625 Clearwater Roar tox 865/St.Cloucl, tviinnusotfi ",301/612-253-3000
I
JAMES G. METCALF
BRADLEY V. LARSON
File No. 723. 14
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
v.o. E/o, 446
313 Weil 8—d—V
Monlicello. Mmnew to 55382
!.lay 7, 1981
TELEPHONE
18171 7954232
METRO
18171 421-3393
hir. Ccuy Wieber
City Adninistrator
City of hlonticollo
Monticello City liall
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Petition for Annexation
Dear Mr. Wieber:
I am enclosing a Petition signed by Kent Kiel lberg requesting
the annexation of the premises described in the Petition to the
City of hlontictllo.
We appeared last night before the Orderly Annexation Board and
received no canniunent from the Board or particular conment, except
that Mr. Franklin Venn indicated that he thought that the City had
to make a decision on whether the property should be annexed.
Mayor Arve Grim --m attended the meeting last evening, and I believe
he is familiar with this matter.
We would like to proceed with the annexation of this property and
request that the City adopt a resolution approving the annexation.
If you require any further information, I will be glad to supply
it tcT you at your request.
Sincerely,
Tl Y & LAIL90N
l�2-kcdam: G. hie cal f
JCd,I : chs C
Uiclosurc: Petition
cc: Kinit. lijullberg
0
0
PETI'r1 ON
IME UNDFRSiCNI,3), being the sole amier of the property hereinafter duserilxd,
uitich is located in th^ Town of Mmticelto, Wright County, Minnesota. hereby petitions
the City Council of the City of A-)nticello and the Municipal Grrmission of the State
of Minnesota to annex said premises to the City of Monticello:
1. The boundaries of said land or territory hereby sought, to he annr xcd are wi
follows:
The E:cst One -Half (Ej) of the Southwest O<uu•ter (SW ) and the North Ten (l0)
acres 01' 1110 Southwest. Quarte• (SWJ) of the Southwest. OuLrte• (SW;}) and all
that parr of the Northwest Quarter (NIVJ) of the Sout.h,vesL QULr'Ler (SISI) lying
and Ix-ing Istsl of the Monticello :aid Buffalo Road in Section 14, ' omiship 121,
ltiurge 25, Wright Ctwnty, hlinnesoLa, being 120 acres, nur•e or less.
2. That the quantity of land within the Ixxn(Lu•ies aJ■)ve-descriFxd is approxintttely
120 acres.
3. That there are no residents i-esi-cling upon said premises.
4. That there are no existing public facll it les or sr_rvices supplied to ::aid
p rryni ses .
5. That the names of all parties entitled to notice under Minnesota SL:LLUteS
Annotated Section 914.09 am as follows:
Monticello Tmitship; the Cutnty of Wright: any Board or Curmission created by
a joint pavers agree mnt betvoen the City of Monticello, the Tcxmship of
Monticello, and the County of Wright, if any, and the City of J.lonticel lo.
G The reason for requesting annexation of these premises Lo the City of itonticello
is to obtain full municipal services for the pminiscs, including, but. not limited to,
City streets. city uater, city sanitary sewer, fire protection, police pMtwtion, and
{,-r•bage collection. (Police pmLection is presently being provided by the Cotnty of
Wright, and fire protection by the City Of Monticello under n cont.ract.ual :wr:mt;(,m.nt:
with the T(atmt of %lcmticel br).
7. TIML all of the alwve-describ.A premises is within the area clesihnated :rs in
need of orderly annexation to the Village (n(av City) of tihmticello by order, of the
Municipal Curmission of the State of Minnesota, dated Stamh 8, 1972.
8. 11tat the northerly bomdary of the alxwo-ctescritrd pre.miscs nbuts the snuth'!r•ly
1<�tndary of the City of ALnitice•llo.
Dated: May 7, 1981
Kent KJOIbel{'•
SPATE OF M i ITNESUM ) \
ss . VER I F1 I ON
COU.VIY OF WillOrf )
KIM MEUlAld1G, lx, ing duly sw)rn on oath, deposes and swtes that he i:; the
aWvu-natned I4ltItioner; Umt. tie lim read the above PeLiLion and 1.11at the sank! Is true
of his owls knowledge except us to those matters t.hy'rr_in stnted in infonrut.ion and Nx Ilef,
and a4 to such rent.tr•rs he believe -4 if. to Lx! UZ�/'/ .
Kent 1(,jelll>'ng �\ \
i
b'uhseritxvl noel suvnt to bLfore: mt this _a
7th clay of May, 1981.
MOM
c
�wwns�l
61a7.�lold
. F - t
I:o;: r: I4i' , , Ct^err•. 1;�,.,: �, l;.r'
Ivw V V VVY V•, YV VYV VV V Vy
C
o
ELEC7NO NDURRIES,INC. 2150W. RIVER STREET • MONTICELLO, MN 55362 019121,295.2500
Nap 8, 1981
fir. Gory Wieber
City of Monticello
Monticello, MN 5b362
Dear Gary:
So that there is no confusion, my April letter still repro.
aunts our feelings touarda the improvement project on W. River St.
As stated beyond thoco connsnta, we are assuming the City will
make tho proper docision.
I am also assuming that if there is any chongo in the seeps
of tho project (especially in regard to stated nssoscmorto at the
April 20, 1901 meeting) we will rscoiva additinol official noti-
fication.
oti-fication.
for your information, if thou oesosamont levoi were substan-
tinl.Ly lase wo mould havo no problem uith wotnr only and road up-
grading.
Whon tho completo project is settled, I wouldnpprocioto a
lottoe 11dicat irng final aatimateil"oeoatiiunorit� Gbona dment7dace; -?
interest roto, approximate project data, and n monting uith the
engineers to establish our stubs.
Sincoroly ,
William ]. Soofoldt
W]S/mlo
Aeronenl Equipment . Hillrnom Associates . Power Electric - Elactwil . Wrl • Haat
Z,
Wilbur S. Eck
Rt.ff3 Box 280
Monticello, Minn. 55362
April 2.1, 1981
Mr. Gary Wieber, City Administrator
City Hall
Monticello, Minn. 55362
Dear Gary,
Last week when I was in to see Loren Klein on another matter,
he mentioned that there was thought being given to not going through
with the storm drain plan as discussed in last month's hearing.
I firmly believe that the project is needed as I stated at
the hearing. It is also true that 1 do not believe that I will
be able to afford the assessment. I am appreciative of your
concern with this fact.
However, if the project is not completed at the least as plan-
ed,I think there will be serious problems in the near future. Even
though you may think that you are doing me a favor now, I would
hate to have to come to you later and with complaints of damages,
etc., asking why it wasn't done right in the first place.
Sincerely,
FJ
• CERTIFICATE OF MXNUTES RELATING TO
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS
Issuer: City of Monticello, Minnocota
Governing body: City Council
Kind, date, tine and place of meeting: a regular meeting, held
on May 26, 1981, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall.
Members present:
Members absent:
Documents attached:
Minutes of said meeting (pages).:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION RELATING TO A PROJECT UNDER
THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT;
PROPOSING TO AMEND RESOLUTION NO.
BY INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS AUTHORIZED FROM ,
$750,000 TO $1,250,000; AND CALLING FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING THEREON _
1, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
recording officer of the public corporation issuing the obligations
referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the
documents attached horoto, as described above, have been carefully
compared with the original records of said corporation in my },cgril
custody, from which thoy have been transcribed; that seid docr,ner: A
are a correct and complote transcript of the minutes of a mnetincj
of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and cenyle to
copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all docu—
ments approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they
relate to said obligations; and that said meeting was duly held by
the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout
by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notica of such
meeting given as required by law.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this
day of , 1981.
Signature
(SEAL} Gary Wieber, City Clerk-Adminiatr,tor
Name and Title
RESOLUTION NO.
RE$OLUTIO:J RELATING TO A PROJECT UNDER
THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMr-NT ACT:
PROPOSING TO AMEND RESOLUTION NO.
BY INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIAL
DEVEL0PMENT REVENUE BONDS AUTHORIZED FROM
$750,000 TO $1,250,000; AND CALLING FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING THEREON _
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota (the City), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. This Council by resolution
adopted February 25, 1980, gave preliminary approval to a project
under the Municipal Industrial Development Act, on behalf of
Monticello Scotwood Partnership, a Minnesota partnership (the
Company), and approved the issuance of $750,000 revenue bonds
or notes of the City to finance the Project Ias defined in said
resolution) at a cost estimated to be approximately $892,050.
This Council is now advised by the Company that because of
current high interest rates, the limited availability of mortgage
money, and the escalating costs in the construction industry,
the estimated cost of the Project has increased and the Company
anticipates that the amount of revenue bonds or notes necessary
to finance the cost of the Project will be increased to
$1,250,000. The Company has not requested that the resolution
adopted by this Council on February 25, 1980 be amended to
reflect authorization of revenue bonds or notes in the amount
of $1,250,000.
Section 2. Public Hearinlc. Section 474.01, Subdivision
7b of the Act requires that prior to submission of an Application
to the Minnesota Commissioner of Securities requesting approval
of the Project as required by Section 474.01, Subdivision 7 of
the Act, this Council shall conduct a public hearing on the
proposal to undertake and finance the Project. Because of the
substantial lnevease in Lhe amount of bonds requested to be
issued to undertake and finance the Project, a public hearinl
on the proposal to increase the amount of bonds authorized to
undertake and finance the Project from $750,000 to $1,250,000 is
called and shall be hald on June 22, 1981, at o'clock P.M.,
at the City Hall.
Section 3. Notice. Th
cause notice of the public F�e'aring
n�,wspaper of the City, which is a
in the City, at least once not les
than thirty (30) day■ prior to the
The notice shall be in substantial
C
e City Clerk -Administrator shall
to be published in the official
newspaper of general circulation
s than fifteen (15) nor more
date fixed for the public: hearing.
ly the following form:
/a
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON INCREASING THE AUTHORIZED
• AMOUNT' -OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE •BONDS
UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT.ACT,
MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 474, AS AMENDED
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the
City of Monticello, IS,
will meet on June 22, .1981,
at o'clock P.M., at the City Hall, 250 E. Broadway, in
Monticello, Minnesota, for the purpose of conducting a public
hearing on a proposal, that the City Council amend a resolution,
adopted February 25, 1980, in which it preliminarily approved
the issuance of $750,000 industrial development revenue bonds
to finance a proposed project consisting of the acquisition of
land in the City and the construction of 1a 36 unit motel and
related improvements thereon, on behalf of Monticello Scotwood
Partnership, a Minnesota partnership (the Company). The Company
has requested an increase in the amount of bonds so authorized
to $1,250,000. The Bonds shall be limited obligations of the
City, and the bonds and interest thereon shall be payable solely
from the revenue pledged to the payment thereofr except that
C such bonds may be secured by a mortgage and other encumbrance
J on the project. No holder of any such bonds shall ever have
the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City
to pay the bonds or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment
against any property of .the City except the project should the
City even 'acquire title to it.
Draft copies of ill proceedings to date are available
c fo'i public inspection `at Eha�offic& oE' the City' Clork-AdminisiratoX'
during,°usual business hours, Monday through Friday.
All persons, interested may appear and be heard at the
time and place act forth above .
• o
'Dated: May 26,, 19811
C�
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
Gary Weiber
City Clerk-Adrgini atrator
i
! (` Section 4. Public Inspection. Draft copies of ail
proceedings held•to date are hereby ordered to be placed on
file with the City Clerk -Administrator and shall be available
for public inspection, following publication of the notice of
public hearing, during normal business hours, Monday through
Friday.
_ Adopted this 26th day of %lay, 1981.
Attest:
City Clerk -Administrator
(SEAL)
Mayor
( The motion for the adoption of• the foregoing
i resolution was duly seconded by Member k
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in
favor thercof:.
and tho following voted against the same:
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
TO Free Mlnnesala (800) 662.6002
1011 Free Other Sates (800) 3266122
1
Mi1ler & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
170 Northwestern Financial Center.7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 . (612) 831.1500
May 14, 1981
Mr. Gary Wieber, City Administrator
City of Munticello
City Hall - 250 Ease Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Ra: City of Monticello, Minnesota
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, Series 1981
(Thrifty Scot Motels, Inc. Project)
Dear Garyt
This letter is to request that you place the matter of the above—referenced
Bond Issue on the City Council agenda for Cie evening of Tuesday. May 26,
1981.
Millar 6 Schroeder Municipals, Inc. and Dorsay, Windhorst, llannatord,
Whitney and Halladay aro now acting as underwriter and Bond Counsel, re-
spr-ativoly. Whiln the Project scopes remains unchanged, Thrifty Scot Motels,
Inc. ham determined that costs of the Project now necessitate a Bond Isaue
of approximately $1,250,000 as opposed to the $750,000 previously considered
by the City Council. Bond Counsel has informed me that a new Public llearing
will be required duo to the increased principal amotmt. At the May 26th
meeting, we will request that a date for such Public Hearing be set and
subsequent consideration of a revised preliminary resolution.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
MI1.LSClIR01:DF.R MUNICIPALS, INC.
Gsoftr MMRogers, Vico President
ccs Paul R. Ekhols
Susanne VanDyk, isq.
Irving Weiser, Esq.
l/raeeuortr,l Mi—se"cM—Me- NIaMh Ullnea 1,enallrarh CaWwn •Itrnhlnrh Orvo • %I Paul Mw,wr.Ma • hylr• 11 uaaa
A�.,�, r rn MY „• Iww,M ►.r.+r(wanwrar.
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO AND GWEN BATEMAN
FOR DOG PATROL SERVICE
This agreement made this 27th day of May, 1981, by and between
Gwen Bateman, Monticello, MN., and the City of Monticello, a munici-
pal corporation located in the County of Wright, and the State of
Minnesota hereinafter referred to as City, witnesseth;
In consideration of the covenants and agreements hereinafter
set forth, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties hereto
as follows:
1. This agreement shall be effective as of the 1st of June,
1981, and shall continue in effect until the 31st of
May, 1983.
2. Gwen Bateman agrees to patrol the public streets of
Monticello in her own vehicle in accordance with a schedule
agreed upon by both parties.
3. Ms. Bateman agrees that patrolling shall be done by herself
nr competent personnel trained in the handling of animals,
and that such employees shall be approved by the City. Such
employees shall be deputized by the City with special powers
as are necessary for the apprehonsion and retention of dogs,
cats and other animals, in accordance with Monticello City
Ordinances: "i{vwuvor, iia."Datcman will not invade"the .rr.ivato-
property nor forcibly take an animal from any person without
the approval and assistance of a regular police officer of the
Cifp:
4. Ms. Bateman agrees that all animals impounded shall be kept
at the City of Monticello dog pound, and also agrees and
warrants that all animals impounded shall be kept in a com-
fortablo and humane manner for a period required by City
Ordinance.
S. At the time that any animal impounded under this contract is
reclaimed, Ms. Bateman shall collect the license fee and
boarding charges provided by City Ordinance. Ms. Bateman
shall furnish monthly reports to the City as required as to
the service or services rendered in connection with each
animal impounded.
6. In the event an animal is impounded and boarded by order of
the City Health Officer or placed under quarantine by ruling
of the state Board of Health, said animal shall be boarded '
as required by said order of ruling. In the event that any
dogs, cats or other impounded animals are unclaimed after
seven (7) days, they may be delivered to a veterinarian or
sold at her descretion.
i
7. The City shall furnish to Ms. Bateman all forms, license !
1
and pound foo receipts and license tags as opacified in the
Ordinance, and Ms. Bateman shall keep records of all animals
impounded together with a description of the same.
B. Ms. Bateman shall assume liability for all harm to animals
due to her negligence or that of its agents in not properly
caring for the same. Upon request, Ms. Bateman shall provide
to the City with proof of public, liability insurance in-
cluding comprehensive general liability, and comprehoneive
automobile liability in an amount of at least $100,000.00'
par each claimant and $300,000.00 for each occurrence.
9. Ms. Bateman agroos that during the period of this contract
oho will not, within the State of Minnesota, discriminate
against any employee or applicant for employment because
of race, color, creed, national origin or ancestry. Mo.
Bateman will not sub-contract thio cervico. This paragraph
is inoertod in the contract to comply with the provisions of
the Minnesota Statutes 181.59.
10. Ms. Bateman is authorized to pick up injured animals in
cases where the owner is unknown or cannot be located.
Ms. Bateman is authorized to have the animal euthanized
if the animal is beyond treatment.
11. The City agrees to pAy for the services of Ms. Bateman
in the performance of this contract as follows:
A. Feeding, cleaning animals and kennel and patrol service,
$7.50 per hour for period from June 1, 1981 to May 31, 1982,
and $8.2: per hour for period from June 1, 1982 to
May 31, 1983.
B. will be paid at 25e per mile for use of own vehicle
while patrolling and for trips to feed animals.
12. All payments shall be made by the City monthly upon receipt
of statement from Ms. Bateman.
13. Unclaimed dogs will be delivered to a veterinarian after the
seven day holding period.
14. Either party hereto may cancel the within contract upon thirty
(30) days written notice thereof to the other party.
Dated thin 27th day of May, 1981.
Ms. Gwen Bateman Gary Wicber, City Admintatrator
city of Monticello
rw
N
Fw:u+A+ry +ted t! Vr: aLt - Ati� 4.k+Ur* V
r C-xlSrtNw Z� STS=tr
J a
�rrrrrrr�ir�:�rrirrrrr �rirrrrrrrr�`rrrrr, r r
N
it ' L�triL�N1�1t `ems �C'A`11Mri 1JQIJr43"i
At the last meeting the council requested additional information
on widening 7th Street. widening the street from 24 feet to
C. 34 feet (adding 10 feet to the south) is estimated to cost
approximately $7,000.00 (including a 2 foot overlay).
If we decide to widen the street to a 40 foot width as is
Lauring Lane, it would involve more work. This would include
an additional 9 feet to the north and 7 feet to the south. The
existing roadway is not very consistent in crown so that it would
have to be straightened with base material prior to placing the
wearing course. To achieve a 6 foot shoulder to the north would
mean the installation of a retaining wall approximately 4 feet
high and 360 feet lang. The following is an estimated cost for
the street portion. Mr. John Badalich will have estimates for the
retaining wall at Tuesday night's meeting. The estimated cost of
cyclone fencing for a 4 foot fence with gate is approximately
$2,900.00.
Bituninoiis Material 400 tons @ 24.00 per ton 9600.00
2357 Tack 100 gal. @ 1.20 per gal 120.00
Class V Material 220 tons @ 6.00 per ton 1320.00
Common Excavating 150 yards @ 1.80 per yard 270.00
$11,310.00
At these estimate❑ we may have to bid this project. if the project
is approved I oold recommend we take quotes first and we may be
able to do the excavating and possibly some of the hauling and get
the street portion done for less than $10,000.00.
John Simola
L
13
TO: Gary Wieber, City Administrator ./
FRM Loren Klein, Building Official
DATE: may 1981
SUBJECT: Occupancy at Painert's Hillside Apartments
On the above mentioned date, while doing a routine building
inspection, it was brought to my attention that someone had
taken occupancy in one of the apartment units in the Reinert's
hillside Apartment complex.
Upon returning to the City Ball, I called a representative of
Reitiert's Construction of Sauk Rapids. That representative
informed me that the individual who had moved his family
into the npart.ment unit had done so because he is presently
an employee of Reinert Construction, and upon completion
of the project will become the caretaker of the apartment
complex. Also, he is now acting as a night watchman on the
project. The reason he acts as a night watchman is because
of several thefts regarding material taken from this property
at various periods of time. (These thefts can he confirmed
with the Wright County Sheriff's Department)
J
It i.s the intention of Reinert Construction Company, soon,
to come, before the council and request a temporary variance
to ally that carntaker/watchman to continue to live on the
premise, until such time when the project in completed and
aeceliurcl L:o that occupancy can he taken in all the units.
Also, 1 br.lieve at the same time the ropreaentativo of Reinert
nomen comes with that temporary variant:.- request, it is Reinert
Homes intention to present a preliminary progress schedule for
the completion of these housing units. In presetting thin
progress schedule, it would he Reinert Homes intention that
occupancy of theta apartment units could he talwn in phanos,
that in; all the apartments and one of the units at one time,
and all the apartment units in another building at another
time, haled on the completion of each phase of the project.
At the time cbn progress schedule is procented, la,inort homes
would most, likely be willing to negotiate, if possible, the
amount of work that would be requlrod, such as black -tapping
and landscaping, for taking occupancy at various phases of the
pro j ect..
Hopefully, this information will be forth coming prior to any
meeting with the council.
0
_ Cy Reinert Construction Company _
No. Hwy. 10, P.0. Box 46, Phone (6 12) 252-4993
Sauk Rapids, Minnesota 56379
May 20, 1981
Mr. Loren Kline
City of Monticello
215 South Cedar Street
Monticello, 111 55362
Dear Mr. Kline:
RG Hillside Terrace
Certificate of cxcuparry
1'he above -referenced project which consists of 36 units, 6 three hx11-oan aced
30 two bedroom, have been constructed so that there will he two phases fcr
ccrpletien. As you will notice fran the enclosed site plan, Buildings C, D
and E are expected to be substantially corpletei by June 15, 1981.
Buildings AS 8 will be conpletod by September 1, 1981.
The reason we are phasing this project is frimnrily econanieally motivated.
With tolays' high cost of construction financing it fs eraionically
advantage ous to start rent up on -o a emit is suizatantially coiplct`ti. Ano,
phasing is necessary because of the waiting list aril n::ny families dcsirin7
to move In as soon as passible. The phasing of this; project his Leen
pinnnod so that the residents' health, safety and «±l; are have Leen coti:.-Wer-
ed. The parking requirerents and all other city odes and orcliia:�es will
be strictly adlieral to in regard to any phasing.
In the interin, we have placed an onsite caretaker do ono unit prior Lo
obtaining a certificate of cccupcutcy. lee did not nuvp Ute caretaker i:1
early witli the hitention of vloluting any of Udo City's raluirolr_nts.
11CAmuver, the hove resulted btcause of the caretakers and air part.icu.lar
cirmintsLanccs. A fire destroyal the caretaker's horn: in February and LIZ_y
have been without a placo to live. The need for night u.itclmcn also war, a
consideration of ours hzcauce of the instu� cs of theft and vandalism of the
johrite. Finally, ex: needed a teq)rn-.uy location for interested tenants; to
fill rental foram.
I apologize if by Our actions ue have violated any cotes or city Ordinances.
liowewer, I would like to request that this :mtter be Lm,ought to the city
council's attention at their next regular meeting. I tnu;t ycu can :u-rarnie
this and advise UP of when the earliest tine_ is that cauK:id action could tr
taken.
'nuunk ycu in advmcc frr your attention to this nutty±r..
S Lnctr�� j•,,
taillicun Pritchard
j
IJ(aIT LVULISTRiA1. • • COMAIFROAl- • - !'Ifs'-FVtaNF.F.Rf.0 S'17:11 1I111LU1N('.S • • COMMITClAi. REA101)1"L
COUT;CIL UPDATE
May 26, 1981 Meeting
MINNESOTA CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ON MAY 13, 14, 15, 1981.
I attended the Minnesota City Management Association's annual
spring conference. One of the interesting seminars at this con-
ference involved methods in which a city could increase its
revenue or reduce its operating expense. Among the more
innovative methods mentioned was a $100.00 fine to any business
or residence that has a false alar relative to a security system.
This happens quite frequently in;ionticello in that the alarm
systems, in some cases, are tied directly to the sheriff's office
and three or four squad cars will be sent out only to find out
that the alar was accidentally set off by a forgetful employee.
Also mentioned was that since libraries received 90 per
cent of the use from 10 per cent of the people to have volunteers
operate the library if additional hours arc requested. In this
fashion those people using the services most could be trained to
operate the library during certain hours.
INCREASE OF HOURS FOR NEW LIBRARY.
Speaking of library hours, indication has been from the Great
River Regional Library that they will increase our hours from
24 hours to 34 hours. Additionally, the Great River Regional
Library System will he providing 30 hours of a library aid to
assist the librarian. In talking with our librarian, Marge Bauer,
she feels quite satiofied that these number of hours will be
sufficient, at least in the first year of operation of the new
1ihrary. Ultimately, there may he the need to increase the hours
beyond thnt, but it will be dependent upon the use the new library
receives.
MINNESOTA STAR CITY'S PROGRAM.
Monticello is participating in a Minnesota Star City's Program
sponsored by the Minnesota Department of Economic Development.
This program is designed to encourage and recognize successful
community efforts to prepare for and promote economic develop-
ment. Thin program requiros each community that wishes to par-
ticipate, to complete several elements including such items no
the creation of a local development corporation, completion of
a five year plan and strategy for economic development, creation
of an organization responsible for the oconomic efforts in a
city, preparation of a community fact booklot, and various
other items. Monticello has oeveral of the elements already
!� complated to obtain the "Star City" rating. Thru the Depart-
mont of Economic Development those cities obtaining this rating
will be promoted and exposed to various Industries that may be
looking to relocate or expand their operations.
t
COUNCIL UPDATE.
May 26, 1981 Meetinq
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SITE - John Simola.
As you may know the Hazardous Waste Management Board under
the direction of Bob Dunn and operating out of Crystal,
Minnesota, has been holding meetings in all state districts
for the primary purpose of selecting sites for hazardous
waste treatment and disposal. As representatives for the
City of Monticello, myself and Councilman Blonigen, attended
those meetings held in St. Cloud. At the first round of
meetings held in December, approximately 3,000 Minnesotans
attended and were asked to think about citing criteria. At
the second round of meetings in late January, 2,500
Minnesotans ranked the criteria they felt most important.
The last meetings were held in May and the board had com-
piled the results of the previous meetings for some
3,000 Minnesotans to discuss and comment on. The next
step will involve using those criteria to select 40 study
areas to he announced on May 28, 1981, and from there
narrow the field to 6 different counties. A voting member
from each of the.. 6 areas will join the 9 member board in
selecting the.. first 600 acre site at which construction
will start.
A
MINUTES
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
�J Monday - May 4, 1981 - 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Phil White, Dan filonigen, and Ken Maus.
Members Absent: bone
Purpose of this =special meeting was to cond-uct the :Lnnual Award of Review.
Mr. Orland Kreitlow with the Wright County Addessor's Office explained to
the council and citizens present the recent changes in state laws con-
cerning the elimination of the limited market values in determining taxes
payable in 1981. By using the market value of each property instead of
limited market value, many citizens, especially those with older homes, may
have experienced largo increases in property taxes over previous years.
Concerns were ex pressed by the following individuals in regard to market
value determinations; difference between lianestead and Non -homestead Property
Tax, etc: Monticello Country Club, John Moller, Richard Carlson, Norbert Kelly,
W. Ojakangas, Aud Kline, William Everett and James Deli.
After reviewing each of the concerns expressed, a motion wan made by Dan
Alonigon, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to adopt the valuation
on City of Monticello Property as presont:ed by the Wright. Cnutny Anse ssor's
Office.
Meeting adjuurncd.
Kick`Wolfat ler
Assistant A mini.strator
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - May 8, 1981 - 5:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Fran Fahr,, Pan Blonigen, Phil white, Ken Maus
MEMBERS ABSENT: None A L
PURPOSE. To Consider a Request by the Monticello Slo-Pitch
Softball Association for a threo-two beer license
for May 9, 1981 through October 15, 1981.
Gary uiaber indicated that in consulting with the city's attorney, it
was recomended tient the City of Monticello be provided with a certi-
ficate of insurance for general liability and liquor liability by the
Softball Association. A motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by
Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve of the three -two beer
license contingent upon proof of proper insurance coverage beinq
presented by the Softball Association for general liability and
liquor liability.
Meeting Adjou/r'nejd
VV
I
('y w rer
ity A ,inistrator
C
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
1 May 11, 1981 - 7 :10 P. M.
Members Present : Arve Grimsmo, Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Y.,:!n Maus,
Phil White.
Members Absent: None
1. Report on Payer Svstem - Monticel to fire Deuartmenl.
Previously, the City Council was made aware of a problem that the
Fire Department was having with their pager system and recommended
that the Fire Department form a Comununication's Committee that could
study the problems the Fire Department was having with the pagers
and report back to the City Council.
Mr. Ted Farrnum, a member of the Fire Department's Communication
Committee, reported to the Council that Wright County is currently
in the process of moving their antenna used for sending signals from
the Court House in Buffalo, out along Bwy 25 to their new Public Works
Building. This new location at the Public Works Building should
provide better sending capabilities since it is in a higher location
and therefore, the reception of the pagers by rho firemen should be
greater. Mr. Farnum also indicated that he had consulted with other
communities inthe arca that are also using pager systems and indicated
that they are also hnving tronblc in receiving the signals. Ile in-
dicated that by purchasing new equipment such as Motorola versus the
Reach pagers that the Monticello fire Departmmd. now has would not
necessarily solve thu problem as other communiLies have Motorola
equipment and still have problems. The Department's recommendation
was that no action be taken on acquiring different equipment until
after the county makes their antenna change to r, c if this will help
In the pager's reception.
Mr. hen Trunnell, joint fire deparunont representative from the Fire
Department, indicated that a fuw of Lire fircmun louked at come used
vehicles that could be used for n new tank truck for the tiro Dopart-
ment. Mr. Trunnell indicated that most of the uned vehicles available
may not be in much letter ahapu than the city's present aquilment. and
recommended that a new vehicle be purchased for the Lank truck.
A motion was mado by Blonigen, ae COmlecl by White and unanimously
carried to authorize the Fire Department to drnw up pl.mtu and opeei-
ficat.ions for it new tank truck and report back to t.hu Qjuncil. In
addition, the Fire Dopartmcnt was authorized to approach rho lionLitnllo
Townahip Board to got their feelings on thn pmchaue of a now truck as
part of the joint fire agreement with Monticello Township and tiro City.
Council Minute:: - 5/11/81
2. Consideration of Award of Contract on Commuter Parking Lot Bitumi-
nous Surfacinq and Curbinq Bids. J
On May 11, 1981, at 2:00 P. M., bids were opened for 1,ituminoun sur-
facing and curbing at the new Commuter Parking :,ot.
Five bids were received front area black -topping firms with the low
bid coming from llardrive's Inc., of �iinnnoapolis, ii, the amount of
$26,382.80.
There was a recommendation of the Public Works Director, John Simola,
that the bid be awarded to liardrives.
Motion was made by White, secondod by Maus, and unanimously carried
to award a contract for bituminous surfacing and curbing for the
Commuter Parking Lot to liardrives Inc. of Minneapolis in the amount
of $26,382.80.
NOTE: (See Supplement 5-11-81 hl)
3. Review of First ouarter Financial Statements for Linuor Store - 1981.
The Council reviewed with the liquor store manager, Mark Irmiter,
the first quarter financial statement for 1981. Mr. Irmit.er explained
that, although sale have inereaned approximately 13 percent over the
previous first quarter of 1980, the gross profit has increased only
slightly because of a drop in the gross profit percentages. Mr. Irmiter Y 1
also indicated that historically the first quarter is not a good quarter J
for making any money, but sales nhould improve during the next three
months.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Fair and unanimously cnrried
to accept the first quarter financial stntement As presented.
NOTE: (S+x Supplement 5-11-01 02)
d. Consideration of Chnnge Ordeta 07 and d8 nn the W,'iSLe'1ALVr Treatms;nt
Plant with Paul A. laurenco Compnny.
City E::gincer, Jnhn 8odalich, reviewed with the Council Change
Orders 07 and 118 for att additional $3,500.00 and $2,500.00 reapec-
tively to cover the following changes:
- Revise floor drainage and collection system in sludge vehicle
garage and provide drainage trench uudiment trap, etc, AS detailed.
- To facilitate adequate flexibility for menthol yan collection and
dintribution. Additional vnlvco and piping ndjustmenta aro
required an (,.tailed.
J
Council Minutes - 5/11/61
Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair to approve the Change
Orders07 and NB for a total of $6,000.00 on the Wastewater
Treatment Plant contract with Paul A. Laurence Company. Voting
in favor: Maus, Fair, White, and Grimsmo. Abstaining: Blonigen.
5. Development of the Oakwood Plock.
As part of the future development and marketing of the former Oakwood
School block, it was recommended that the City Council give some direc-
tion as to what type of development they would expect to see occur on
this entire block.
The city's Consulting Planner, Howard Dahlgren 5 Associates, had pre-
viously prepared a report on the possible development of Oakwood
School block which included three different schematic phases or
schemes. Each of the three schemes proposed development of the block
into a combination retail, office, or restaurant. In addition, one of
the schemes also included the possibility of the city's new library
being incorporated into the block development plan.
Since the library is now being located in tl,o adjacent block, it was
the consensus of the Council that they would like to see the Oakwood
block developed in such a manner that it would strengthen both Pine
Street and Walnut Street corridors by placing the buildings in this
block so they would front along Loth Ilwy 25 and Walnut Street.
Motion w•as made by Maus, seconded by Whitand unanimously carried to
yo on record favoring the Consulting Planner's Concept 03, which
would be the development of the block with future buildings facing
hot)) Ilwy 25 and Walnut Street, but noting that lhuy would bu recep-
tive to a developers proposal fur other ideas.
In regard to future parking requirements for any drwelopmcnt that
would occur on this block, motion was made by Maus, secundud by White
and unanimously carried to go on record requiring that all Pnrki.ng
requirements for this block be provided on site..
An part of the future marketing of thin property, Uu: motion was made
by White, seconded by Fair and unnnirnously carried to authorizo the
City Administrator to obtain two additional appraisals of the entire
Oakwood Block including appraised values for each of the lots separately.
As part of the report previously prepared by the Consulting Plannerr;
regarding the development of Oakwood School block, a number of rentric-
tive convenantcn were diaeunued as po ssibilitieo for future devulopm,:ntr:
such an:
All structures should be of a similiar architectural style.
110 vchiclea would be allowed to enter from Pine Street. or
walnut Street.
Buildings Should be of wood, ma sonary or eoncreto face with no
prefabricated molal buildings used.
Efforts should be made to save the existing trona located on the
proporty.
- 3 -
M
Council Minutes - 5/11/81
The above restrictive design standards were discussed by the Council
and it was the general consensus of the Council to use these basic
design standards as a guideline for future develolxnent, although
each would be reviewed with a potential developer.
Although the property is currently zoned R -B (residential -business)
and future development will probably require rezoning of the property
to some type of commercial zoning, it was the consensus of the Council
that the zoning would be left as is until a developer or developers
presented their proposals.
After the two additional appraisals are obtain,md on the value of the
property, a decision will be made on how to proceed on marketing the
property for sale.
6. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Fair, seconded by White and unanimously carried to
approve the minutes of the regular meeting held April 27, 1981, as
presented.
7. Discussion of Widenino 7th Street Detw,�en Ilwy 25 and Cedar Street.
The Council discussed the possibility of widening a one block section
of 7th Street between llwy 25 and Cedar Street to match up with the
existing Lauring Lane. It was noted that with the increased traffic
potential due to the existing restaurants and apartment complex
located on iuuiiny Lanv, and Jxecause 71-h street could lx; a major .J
thorough fare in the future, motion was made by 14aus, seconded by
White and unanimously carried, to place this item on tho next ngenda
relative to cost of improving and widening this street.
Meeting ad/jo/urrnr.d.
/
Rick Wolfstovee,
Administrativo Asnistant
- 4 -