The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Agenda Packet 10-27-1980AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL October 27, 1980 - 7:30 P.M. NOTE: Board of Appeals Meets at 6:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve Grimsmo Council Members: Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Phil White. Meeting to be taped. Citizens Comments - 1. Public Hearing on Variance for Proposed Two 18 -Unit Apartment Buildings and a Conditional Use Permit - Lot 5, Blof k 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace - Terry Mick and Ery Radunz. r �� p0"- !4.C, 2. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Construct a Garage Greater in Size than 1,000 Square Feet in an R-1 Zone and Simple Subdivision for Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 b 5 of The Barbur Addition - Chuck Stumpf. KN•J P,0.4..Yf• ykat►� �" `� 3. Public Hearing - Cons iderat L06,,Of a riM Yace Request - Dave Siecker * W FLA.C. 4. Consideration of a Rezoning Re u�-Los 9 6 10, Block 4, Lower Monti- cello - Vic Hellman. 5. Consideration of Rezoning Lot 1, of Proposed Riverwood Estates - Kermit Lindberg. 6. Consideration of Approval of Parking for Sam Peraro's Downtown Complex South- east of the Intersection of State Hwy. 25 6 County Road 75 in Monticello ,M,tr ` P 7. Consideration of Approval of Request for a Permit for a Banner on West Broadway - Monticello Chapter American Field Service. 8. Consideration of Option Agreement with David Kranz for extension of Lease of Portion of Senior Citizens Center. 9. Consideration of Cf versV h 9" Manual Accounting System to Computer Processing. 10. Consideration of the Final Plat for the Brothers. 11. Consideration of Award of Contract on Storm Water Ponding Improvement Pro- ject - West River Street. 12. Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Accepting Grant Offer from the State of Minnesota for Step III Construction Funds of $829,860. 13. Consideration of Establishing Special Meeting for the Canvassing Board on November 5th or 6th, 1980. 14. Consideration of Authorizing City Administrator to Work with Joint Fire Board in Proposing Fire Contracts with Townships of Silver Creek and Otsego. 15. Approval of Bills - October 1980. 16. Approval of Minutes - 9/22/80 and 10/6/80 Regular Meetings. Unfinished Business - New Business - City Council - 10/21/80 AGENDA SUPPLEMENT Public Hearing on Variances for Proposed Two 18 -Unit Apartment Buildings and a Conditional Use Permit - Lot 5, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace - Terry Mick 6 Ery Radunz. PURPOSE: Terry Mick and Ery Radunz, as partners in this project, are applying for a conditional use permit to develop two 18 -unit apartment buildings on Lot 5, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace. In addition to the conditional use permit, which is necessary for any apartment project over 12 units, the applicants are also asking variances on the following: A. Lot Size - According to Monticello Ordinance, Lot area for this develop- ment should be 95,000 square feet, whereas, 81,600 square feet is being proposed, and as a result, the land requirement is 14% short of what it should be. Square Footage Requirement - Efficiency Unit - The efficiency unit proposed in each complex is 360 square feet, whereas, the ordinance requires efficiency units to be 500 square feet. However, it should be pointed out that the square footage of the one -bedroom and two- bedroom apartments exceed the square footage requirements. In addition to the efficiency unit in each one of the 18 units, there is also planned 12 two-bedroom units and 5 one -bedroom units. C. Variance from the ordinance provision which requires that an R-3 Zone, which the particular parcel in question is zoned as, have n rear parking lot setback of 15'. Applicant's propose a rear parking lot setback of 5', since the rear yard setback abuts up against the Burlington Northern railroad tracks. The railroad tracks itself have aright-of—way of 80', so as a result, this is an additional buffer between the R-3 zone and the R-2 zone to the north. It should be pointed out that all the other criteria of the zoning ordinance and building code have been reviewed by our Building Inspector and meet the City's zoning ordinance, including the requirement that two parking spaces be available for each unit, and one of these two spaces be enclosed within a garage. While the public hearing for the variances are set before the Council, there was a public hearing before the Planning Commission for the Conditional Use. Request, and no objections were heard at the meeting. Mr. Roy Louring, owner of the property in question, did indicate that he was in favor of the project since it would be non -subsidized and there was a need for this type of housing in Monticello. However, enclosed for your reference are comments on the two hearings, none of which was received prior to the Planning Commission meeting, relative to the conditional use request itself, and also the variances. This letter is from Mr. 6 Mrs. Lyle Klatt, and they have no objections with the conditional use, but they do object to the variance apparently from the minimum lot size, and also from the rear yard setback requirements. (For your information, relative to the cotmnents by Mr. 6 Mrs. Lyle Klatt, no approval was given the Assembly of God Church to have :he R-1 home turned into a school, and Loren Klein has contacted the Assembly of God Church in order that they may submit a proper application and have this considered.) City Council - 10/27/80 At their meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the Conditional Use for the apartment complex, along with the three variances indicated. Reason for the approval of the variances was in the case of the rear parking lot setback, this abutted up against the Burlington Northern Railroad Tracks, and in effect, there was an additional 80' buffer between the property which is zoned R-9 and the property to the north of the railroad tracks which is zoned R-2. The variance for the square footage requirement of the efficiency apartment was approved in light of the fact that all the remaining units more than exceeded the minimum requirements. Additionally, the variance on the square footage requirement for the total land area was approved in light of the fact that additional land costs might discourage conventional financing, and this is one of the few conventially financed apartment projects to be pro- posed in Monticello in quite a while. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of conditional use permit and variances for the rear yard setback, minimum requirements of efficiency unit, and minimum lot size.* REFERENCES: October 14, 1480 Planning Commission Minutes, enclosed plat plan depicting the area, and also a site plan is available at City Nall. Letter from Mr. 6 Mrs. Lyle Blatt in opposition to two of the variances. �IN 0' �1. Le A 1 bh * Note: 4/5's vote of Council is required for approval. - 2 - City Council - 10/27/80 '\. 2. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Construct a Garage Greater in Size than 1,000 Square Feet in an R-1 Zone and Simple Subdivision for Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 b 5 of the Barbur Addition - Chuck Stumpf. PURPOSE: Chuck Stumpf, who owns the above -referenced lots, is proposing a simple subdivision of these lots. Mr. Stumpf would like to take the southerly 80' of these five lots and create one new lot which would be 353' by 80'. This would then leave Lots 1 thru 5 167' wide and 72�' in depth. The existing City maps do not show the Barbur Addition as such, but indicate that at one time it did exist within the Township. Before any final approval could be given to a simple subdivision of this property, it would have to be contingent upon providing specific and accurate surveys which would be recognized by the County Recorder's office. Also part of this request is a variance to build a 40' x 75' garage in approximately the center of this property. The reason a variance would be required is that any time a garage of over 1,000 square feet is built in an R-1 zone, it requires a variance, and this garage would be approximately 3,000 square feet. Mr. Stumpf is proposing this garage as a facility to get his semi trucks and a few personal vehicles enclosed, rather than allow them to set outside in the weather. Currently, Mr. Stumpf does park his semis in the same location in which he is proposing to build this garage, and he just feels that if lie were able, to enclose his vehicles within a building, it would be better on the vehicles by exposing them less to the weather, especially during the winter months. At the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Frank Auringer had a question on the type of building that was proposed, and Mr. Stumpf indicated the building would be a colored steel building. Mr. Stumpf further indicated that it would be essentially for cold storage and for such items as a tractor, a semi trailer, mowers, etc. Based on this information, Mr. Auringer had no objections to this proposal. When notice of the hearing went out to other individuals, there was some concern expressed whether this would be for expansion of the salvage yard business, but as long as it was for the intent indicated, they would have no objections. At their last meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the variance request and the Simple subdivision based upon specific and accurate surveys which would be recognized by the County Recorder's Office. Mr. Stumpf indicated that he would be obtaining these if this were approved by the City of Monticello. - 3 - City Council - 10/27/80 POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of variance request to construct a garage larger than 1,000 square feet, or 40' x 75'; and the request for the simple subdivision as indicated.* Any action should be contingent upon receiving specific and accurate surveys which would be recognized by the County Recorder's office. REFERENCES: October 14, 1980 Planning Commission Minutes, map depicting the area and plat plan also enclosed. *Note: 4/5's vote of Council is required for approval. - 4 - City Council - 10/27/80 3. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Variance Request - Dave Sieckert. PURPOSE: To consider the request by Dave Sieckert, who is proposing to buy the Cary Corrow home which is just directly to the west of the Silver Fox Inn, and proposes to use the existing barn as an informal meeting place. Mr. Sieckert feels that he would like to have a place where people may go without feeling pressure to join or pay dues to any organization, society, etc. He feels that he has a desire to become involved in this way in urdur tliat he may be able to casually show youth that he is concerned for them. His intention would be to remodel the barn to include facilities for a lounge, kitchen and bathrooms, as well as space for a ping pong table, badminton, basketball or volleyball, whatever space would allow. However, in order that Mr. Sieckert might develop this plan of his, it is necessary that he would have to have a variance from the required hardsurfacing and curbing of the parking lot. For a community center or private club , such as he is proposing, the required number of parking spaces would be ten (10). Mr. Sieckert feels that he has room for more parking spaces than that; however, for the reasons which he has outlined in his letter requesting this variance, he would like to have the hardsurfacing and curb- ing requirement for this property become a permanent variance. Although Mr. Sieckert did say, and has stated in his letter, that this variance would become immediately void should the objectives for the barn and its use ever be changed. There was some concern expressed by the Planning Commission members of the possible future change in scope of Mr. Sieckert's plans. Specifically, there was concern relative to the serving of food and if any fee would be charged for this. Mr. Sieckert indicated that he may have vending machines such as pop machine, but his intentions would not be to make a profit and sell food. There was some concern expressed that the number of vending machines should be limited and additionally, the conditions expressed in the September 29, 1980 letter from Dave Sieckert would have to be adhered to. Since the real question before the Planning Commission was only one of hardsurfaced requirements, the Planning Commission unanimously approved a variance request contingent upon the scope of the proposed community room being consistent with the September 29, 1980 letter by Dave Sieckert. A two-year provision was attached to this since this would give the City some further control if the scope of the project changed in addition to the regular enforcement procedures of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Sieckert felt he could live with the.. variance as it was recommended by the Planning Commission. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of variance request. If approved. the Council may want to attach a stipulation that it is approved for a set number of years with any additional conditions they may feel is warranted.* REFERENCES: Letter dated September 29, 1980 from Dave Sieckert, plat plan of property and building plan for first floor of barn in which he proposes to develop lounge, and the Planning Commission Minutes of October 14, 1980. *Note: 4/5'a vote of Council is required for approval. - 5 - C City Council - 10/27/80 4. Consideration of a Rezoning Request - Lots 9 b 10, Block 4, Lower Monti- cello - Vic Hellman. PURPOSE: To consider rezoning request by Vic Hellman for the above Lots to have the property rezoned from R-1 (single family) to R-2 (single and two-family residential). This request is being made so that the now unoccupied single family home directly across the street to the cast from the Monticello Laundromat on East Broadway can be converted to a duplex. It should be pointed out that the adjacent property to the west, or the Laundromat, is currently zoned as B-4, and Mr. Hellman contends that changing the R-1 zoning to R-2 zoning would provide an adequate buffer area between the commercial and R-1 zoning and would be conducive to a duplex. As you might be aware, the existing dwelling has been vacant for some time and has been maintained in somewhat less than desirable conditions. Mr. Hellman indicatcsthat by granting a rezoning of this type, he would be able to improve the interior of the property so it would be brought up to the current building code, and the exterior would be scraped and painted. At their last meeting, at which this item was subject to a public hearing, there was no opposition, and because of this factor and along with the fact that the rezoning probably would initiate improvement of the property, it was unanimously recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of rezoning request of Lots 9 b 10, Block 4, Lower Monticello from R-1 to R-2.+ REFERENCES: Map depicting the area and October 14, 1980 Plannning Commission Minutes. *Note: 4/5's vote of Council is required for approval. MAM City Council - 10/27/80 5. Consideration of Rezoning Lot 1, Block 2, of Proposed Rivervood Estates - Kermit Lindberg. PURPOSE: To consider a rezoning request filed by Kermit Lindberg to rezone Lot 1, Block 2 of the proposed Rivervood Estates plat, from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to B-3 (Highway Business). Kermit Lindberg would like to rezone the above lot in question, which exists between Dino's Other World and the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant, feeling it is more suited to commercial business than it is to single family residential. Since the zoning was consistent with the parcels to the east and the west of this property and the only other adjoining property would be the Lindberg residence itself to the north, the Planning Commission, at their last meeting, unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of rezoning Lot 1, Block 2, proposed Rivervood Estates Plat, from R-1 to B-3, contingent upon approval of the final plat.* (For your information, the Council will be considering the approval of the final plat most likely at their November 10, 1980 meeting). REFERENCES: Map depicting the area and a plat plan of Rivervood Estates shoving location of proposed rezoning, and Planning Commission Minutes of October 14, 1980. *Note: 4/5'9 vote of Council is required for approval. - 7 - City Council - 10/27/80 6. Consideration of Approval of Parking for Sam Peraro's Downtown Complex Southeast of the Intersection of State Hwy. 25 and County Rd. 75 in Monticello. PURPOSE: To consider the necessary parking requirements for Mr. Peraro's building based on a 7,958 sq.ft. building that would include a pizza place. Initially, approval was given by the City Council at their August 25, 1980 meeting, but this was based on an 8,400 sq.ft. office/retail complex, and since a pizza place, which would be construed as a restaurant, requires more spaces than office or retail space, it is necessary to receive approval by the City Council. According to Mr. Peraro, he was under the assumption that the approval given to him by the City Council at the August 25, 1980 meeting did not restrict him to including a pizza establishment. According to Mr. Peraro, his plans were always to include a pizza establishment in this complex. It should be pointed out that all the data that was submitted to the City or the Minutes, etc., has no inclusion in the complex or any part thereof for a pizza establishment. For your information, listed below is a breakdown of the square footage that Mr. Peraro intends for the complex: Restaurant - 1,862 sq. ft. Office Area - 4,226 sq. ft. Bathrooms 6 Mechanical - 940 sq. ft. Uncommitted Area - 930 sq. ft. TOTAL 7,958 sq. ft. Based on the above and utilizing the City of Monticello's ordinance relative to parking, 63 spaces would be required, and 8 are now provided, or a net requirement of 55 spaces. This proposal is similar to the proposal by the Monticello Theatre, in that the pizza place, or restaurant portion, would only be open in the evening hours, or after 5:00 P.M., and as a result, requirements at any one time are less than the 55 indicated above. Of the total of 63 gross spaces required, 30 would be considered a daytime use, or for office area, and with the 8 provided, there would be a net requirement of 22. Evening space would require a gross area of 33 spaces, less the 8 provided, or a net requirement of 25 spacco. It should be pointed out that this was based on the uncommitted area, which is quite small, of 930 eq. ft. as an office complex. This item was referred to the City of Monticello's Business 6 Industrial Development Committee on parking, consisting of Bud Schrupp, Lloyd Lund, John Poirier and Morn Flicker. At their meeting, the Committee recommended that the City Council approve the revised plans, based on the following: - 8 - City Council — 10/27/80 A. Although the total requirement is in excess of the original plans approved by the City Council at their August 25, 1980 meeting, the actual needs at any one time, that is, the 22 spaces needed during the day and the 25 spaces needed during the evening, is less at any one time than the 32 spaces previously required based on office/retail complex. B. Surveys have shown that during the day, there are approximately 50 eoemuters that park in the same block, and with. the establishment of the commuter parking lot, these spaces will be available for the office use. C. Surveys taken on Thursday evenings September 11, 1980 and October 16, 1980, indicate that there are 50 available spaces in the evening since the commuters are already out and the requirement of the restaurant would only be 25 spaces. For your information, the municipal parking lot next to the liquor store has been full both of these evenings, but the municipal parking lot between Security Federal and the Fire Hall shows 50 spaces available. D. Any approval by the City Council, however, should be contingent upon legal agreement with Mr. Peraro indicating that he would not open up the pizza establishment until after 5:00 P.M. E. The fact that a large part of the proposed office area, or 3,096 sq.ft. of the total office area of 4,226 sq.ft., was to be utilized by Fingerhut, and since Fingerhut is already in the downtown location, to a great extent parking is already being provided for Fingerhut. It should be pointed out, however, that the present space that Fingerhut has is smaller than that planned in the Peraro complex. The parking committee also discussed the possibility of Mr. Peraro getting a written agreement from Security Federal which would allow the pizza establishment to use the spaces that are currently used by Security Federal which is a daytime use. Mr. Peraro indicated lie had talked to Security Federal and they had a verbal agreement, but he indicated he thought it would be quite unlikely that Security Federal would give him a written agreement due to concerns about future expansion and liability. Mr. Peraro indicated he was agreeable to providing the City with a legal agreement indicating that he would not open up the pizza place until after 5:00 P.M. Mr. Pararo anid there would be no problem with thio since his franchise from Pizza Factory would not allow him to serve noon lunches or be open before 5:00 P.M. For your information, 1 have written Mr. Peraro and indicated that presently, unless the City Council approves this item at their meeting, a certificate of occupancy would not be issued for the pizza portion of the establishment until approval was forthcoming from the City Council. POSSIBLE: ACTION: Consideration of approval of parking for Sam Peraro's proposed office/retail/restaurant complex southeast of Elie intersection of Highway 25 and County Road 75 in Monticello. Any motion for approval should include the stipulation that a legal, binding agreement be provided _9 City Council - 10/27/80 to the City of Monticello that prohibits the restaurant portion from open- ing up prior to 5:00 P.M. Additionally, this agreement should also include any changes in the space should also be approved by the City Council of Monticello, since part of the reasoning for the recommendation from the parking committee was the fact that Fingerhut is going to use a great share of the office area, or 3,096 sq. ft. NOTE: After this item was reviewed by Parking Committee and written up, Mr. Peraro called back and indicated that the franchise called for an opening at 4:00 P.H. rather than 5:00 P.M. as he once indicated. However, the commuters will be moved out anyway, and the only conflict to some extent would be the retail stores stay open until 5:00 P.M. Mr. Peraro indicated that although he would like to open at 4:00 P.M., the peak for his business would not occur until approximately 5:30 - 6:00 P.M. - 10 - City Council - 10/27/80 7. Consideration of Approval of Request for a Permit for a Banner on West Broadway - Monticello Chapter American Field Service. PURPOSE: To consider a request by the Monticello Chapter of the American Field Service to hang a banner on West Broadway from the light in front of Seitz Hardware to the Flower Shop. This banner would advertise a spaghetti supper. This banner would be displayed from approximately November 6 thru 13, 1980, as indicated in the letter enclosed from Darlene Anderson, AFS representative. It should be pointed out that the AFS was previously granted a permit to hang a banner for the period from May 16 thru May 22, 1980. Technically, according to the ord inance, it is necessary to have 180 days lapse before an organization is granted a similar permit, but as you can see, although the period of time is less than 180 days, it is very close to that requirement. POSSIBLE ACTION: Co naideration of approval of request from the American Field Service to place a banner across West Broadway for the period from November 6 thru 13, 1980. REFERENCES: October 20, 1980 letter from the AFS. 1 V Q City Council - 10/27/80 8. Consideration of Option Agreement with David Kranz for Extension of Lease of Portion of Senior Citizens Center. PURPOSE: To consider an option agreement proposed by Dave Kranz to extend the lease agreement for the 1,200 square feet of area that he occupies in the Senior Citizens Center. According to the agreement, a copy of which is enclosed, Mr. Kranz proposes the following: A. Existing lease remain in force in all aspects (current lease runs from December 1, 1977 through December 1, 1982 and calls for monthly payments of $235 - it should be noted that credit was given for Lite improvements Dave put into the Senior Citizens Center, which totalled $7,688.08.) B. Upon expiration of the existing lease, an option to continue the lease for an additional three years from December 1, 1982 to December 1, 1985 at the monthly rent of $250 for the first year, $275 for the second year and $300 for the third year. C. An additional option for two one-year renewals from December 1, 1985 to December 1, 1986 at $325 per month, and from December 1, 1986 to December 1, 1987 at $350 per month. D. At any time, Mr. Kranz may terminate the lease or renewal thereof by six -months written notice to the City if possession of the property which he is purchasing becomes available. It should be pointed out that Mr. Kranz is considering the purchase of the Harry Swanberg residence on a life -estate basis, and the reason for requesting the option agreement is to at least assure Mr. Kranz of a business establishment in the interim. As indicated in the option agree- ment, Mr. Kranz, if he does exercise the option, has to pmy the City of Monticello $250. In reviewing this matter. I did talk to Karen Hanson, Senior Citizens Center Director, and asked her about her comments on this proposal. She indicated that while there are no immediate needs she could foresee for additional space, that she can see in the future a need,specifi- cally for the birthday dinners, when there is a lot of people at the Senior Citizcno Center. She indicated that she might feel that the City should pursue the possibility of one-year options after the present lease expires December 1, 1982. - 12 - C. City Council - 10/27/80 In reviewing this matter, I feel that the City of Monticello could agree to something like the following: A. Two-year renewal of the lease from December 1, 1982 to December 1, 1984 at $300 per month. B. One-year renewals for the period from 12/1/84 thru 12/1/87 at a monthly rental cost not to exceed $350 for the first year, $400 for the second year, and $450 for the third year. C. After June i, 1984, City of Monticello may terminate the lease or any renewal thereof by six -months written notice to Mr. Kranz. In this fashion, the City of Monticello protects itself by not commiting the property in question beyond December 1, 1984. However, on the other hand, it does allow Mr. Kranz to know that he has a place for his busi- ness at least until December 1, 1984. Additionally, you will note that I recommend an increase in the monthly rent since proposal contained in Mr. Kranz's agreement would only increase their rent at 12/1/82 $15.00, and in checking with other properties in Monticello, it is not unreason- able to ask for $3.00 per square foot, or $300 per month, The alternatives to this agreement, of course, are endless and would include, of course, either accepting the proposal by Mr. Kranz or my recommendations, but also could include variations including periods of time and the monthly rental amount, along with a notice to terminate the agreement. 1 have reviewed my recommendations with Mr. Kranz, and while he was receptive to the changes made, he indicated a preference for hie original proposal. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of option agreement for Mr. Kranz to extend the current lease for a portion of the Senior Citizens Center he utilizes as a printing place. Any motion should include the following: A. Monthly rental fee. B. Periods of renewal. C. Termination rights of both Mr. Kranz and the City. REFERENCES: Option agreement proposed by Mr. Kranz, and copy of current lease agreement City has along with leasehold improvements. - 13 - City Council - 10/27/80 9. Consideration of Conversion of Manual Accounting System to Computer Processing. PURPOSE: To consider converting the City of Monticello's present manual accounting system to computer processing. Since I started with the City of Monticello approximately six years ago, I have looked into various systems of computer processing for the City's accounting system. This effort has been intensified by myself in the last eighteen months to review various alternatives available for converting our present accounting and financial reporting system. Proposals have been received from three firms, and I am recommending that the City of Monticello accept the proposal by Gruys, Johnson & Associates of Buffalo, Minnesota to have our accounting and financial reports processed by their computer at an estimated cost of $375 to 400 per month. Proposals received were as follows: Cruys, Johnson b Associates - $375 to 400 per month Tabulating Service Bureau of St. Paul - $400 to 420 per month Delano Computer Service of Delano, MN. - $550 per month it should be pointed out that the proposals are estimated because they are based on the City's quantity estimates of the number of checks written, �- receipts, general ledger items, etc. Actual cost will be. dependent upon the volume of items processed. It should be noted that the City budgeted $4,800 for computer processing in 1981. My objectives in reviewing various methods and alternatives for processing the City of Monticello's accounting and financial information were as follows: A. Better service to public at reasonable cost. B. Better management reports. C. Timely reporting system. D. Minimum staff to accomplish objectives. Among the alternatives I reviewed are the following: A. Retain current system. B. Service bureau to do complete processing. C. Service bureau with a terminal or unit in our office which would be attached to the main computer in the office of the firm doing the processing. D. Time-sharing. E. Acquisition of the City's own computer. - 14 - City Council - 10/27/80 My reasoning for going with a computer service bureau was primarily due to the estimated acquisition cost for both the hardware, which is the equipment itself, and the software, which is the programming necessary for the equipment, which would run in the area of $30,000 for the City of Monticello. Additionally, with the improvements constantly being made in the computer processing field, the cost, which is unusual in these dais of inflation, is even coming down, and by having a computer service bureau doing our processing, the City does not gamble on getting a computer that may be outdated in two to three years. Additionally, the City will have a better handle if and when it does choose to acquire its own computer. It is not unlike improvements made in hand-held calculators which at one time cost in the area of SIN each, and now they can be purchased for $10 to $12 with the same capabilities and even in some cases, more capabilities. My reasoning for recommending the particular firm of Cruys, Johnson to do the computer processing is based on the following: A. Their proposal not only includes basic accounting reports, but also included financial reports on a monthly basis, which proposals by the other firms did not include. B. Familiarity with our system - since Cruys, Johnson 6 Associates have worked with the City of Monticello for over 20 years, they obviously have a familiarity with the City of Monticello's accounting system. C. Location - of the firms that I was able to obtain a proposal from, Cruys, Johnson is the closest to the City of Monticello, and actually even tine an office in the City of Monticello, and this will allow for a faster turn -around time. That is, once the City of Monticello has given Cruys, Johnson our basic information, the turn -around time is estimated to be two to three working days. D. Cost - As yon can see, the cost s were relatively close on a monthly basis; however, Cruys, Johnson 6 Associates was the lowest. Because of the closeness of the quotations, this was not a major factor in my decision making process for the recommendation to the City Council. 1 definitely feel with the system as proposed by Cruys, Johnson b Associates the City will be able to meet the objectives indicated above. While not immediately reducing any pmsunnel load, it will reduce the manpower require- ments of the City of Monticello by not requiring the necessity of hiring additional people for the office in the neat one to two years. Because of the additional workload of a growing community, it would appear that a position would have to be created that would gradually be increased to a fulltime position within two years. City Council - 10/27/80 The proposals received were based on doing the accounting records, and as indicated above, Cruys, Johnson would also do financial reporting reports based on information obtained from the accounting records. These proposals do not include automating our utility billing process for sewer and water bills. One of the reasons why I preferred Gruys, Johnson 6 Associates is they would have the capabilities, as would Tabulating Service Bureau of St. Paul, of also automating our utility billing system. However, because of the proposed change in automating our accounting system, I think it would be advisable, as many other cities have done, to take conver- sion of the City's records over in stages. I would estimate that if the City were to eventually add utility billing to the automatic processing system, it would cost approximately $1,000 per year. Bob Carlson, with Cruys, Johnson b Associates, will be at Monday night's meeting to review the proposal and answer any questions that the Council may have. Additionally, should you have any questions in the meantime about our system and the background that I have obtained and accummulated over the years, please contact me at your convenience. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of the conversion of the City of Monticello's manual accounting and financial system to computer processing and acceptance of the proposal of Cruys, Johnson b Associates. - 16 - City Council - 10/27/80 10. Consideration of the Final Plat for the Brothers. PURPOSE: To consider the final plat proposed by Quintin Lanners for the Brothers subdivision plat which is situated just south of The Meadows subdivision and vest of Balboul Estates. This Plat consists of 8 lots that are zoned R-2 and range in size from 10,175 sq.ft. to 29,100 sq.ft., and 1 lot zoned as R-3, which is 66,555 sq. ft. As you may recall, this plat was previously approved for R-2 zoning which would allow double bungalows to be built on each of these lots. Mr. Lanners had previously indicated that he would be contributing cash in lieu of the park dedication. At the July 28, 1980 meeting at which the preliminary plat was approved, Mr. John Badalich did express some concern for the possible drainage problems in this area. He did indicate to the Council that serious con- sideration should be given to additional storm sever outlets for the area as a ponding problem may result. Our engineer has reviewed the final plat for this project and has indicated that it is in compliance with the City of Monticello ordinances, and a copy of his September 22, 1980 letter is enclosed . POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of final plat. REFERENCES: Copy of final plat is available at the City Hall, and September 22, 1980 letter from John Badalich is enclosed. - 17 - City Council - 10/27/80 11. Consideration of Award of Contract on Storm Water Ponding Improvement Project - West River Street. PURPOSE: At the City Council's October 6, 1980 meeting, John Badalich, our City Engineer, was authorized to obtain quotations on culverts for Lots 2, 3, 4 6 5 of Block 1, Ritze Manor, and also a quotation on a 24" culvert to be placed on Hilltop Drive to allow for drainage. In addition to these culverts, also discussed at the Council Meeting was the concern that Rick Wolfsteller brought to the Council relative to a culvert under his driveway on Otter Creek Road. John Badalich will also have a quotation on what the installation costs for this culvert would be. Estimated cost of the improvements to the West River Street area were indicated to be approximately $6,247, and since this amount does not exceed $10,000, formal bids are not required. However, it is necessary to obtain at least two quotations. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of awarding contract on storm water ponding improvement project for West River Street, and also culvert improvement to the Rick Wolfsteller residence on Otter Creek Road. V.5 /I - 18 - C' City Council - 10/21/80 12. Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Accepting Grant Offer from the State of Minnesota for Step III Construction Funds of $829,860. PURPOSE: To consider the conveyance of a grant offer from the State of Minnesota for 15% of the total estimated eligible project costs of $5,532,400, relative to the construction and improvement of our waste- water treatment facility. Enclosed is a resolution that requires approval by the City Council for formal acceptance of the grant offer. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of adoption of enclosed resolution accepting grant offer from the State of Minnesota in the amount of $829,860 for the State of Minnesota's 15% share of the total estimated project cost of $5,532,400 for the improvement of the Wastewater Treatment facility. REFERENCES: Copy of enclosed resolution. - 19 - City Council - 10/21/80 13. Consideration of Establishing Special Meeting for the Canvassing Board on November 5th or 6th, 1980. According to State Statutes, it is necessary for the City Council to meet as a canvassing board to declare the results of the election as they appear upon the face of the election returns made by the election judges. This must be done within two days after the election - either November 5th, a Wednesday, or November 6th, a Thursday. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of setting special meeting on November 5th or 6th, 1980 to serve as the canvassing board for the City Election of November 4, 1980. - ku - C Council Agenda - 10/27/80 14. Consideration of Authorizing City Administrator to Work With Joint Fire Board in Proposing Fire Contracts with Townships of Silver Creek and Otsego. PURPOSE: To consider having the City Administrator work with the Joint Fire Board, which consists of Lee Trunnell, representing Fire Department, Rick Wolfsteller, representing City of Monticello, and Gahart Decker, representing Township of Monticello, to prepare a proposal for the fire contracts with Otsego and Silver Creek Townships that are up for renewal the lot of January, 1981. liistorical!y, the fire contracts with Townships have been based on a standby charge plus an hourly rate for each hour or portion thereof. For example, the current three-year contracts with the Townships of Silver Creek and Otsego call for a standby chnrge of $300, plus an hourly rate for the first hour of $300, $100 for the second hour, and $75.00 for each additional hour. In reviewing this method, I think there are certain inequities in charging on a per call basis. In some respects, it is comparable to paying a fire insurance premium only if there is a fire. For example, in 1979, the City of Monticello provided fire protection service to the Township of Otsego for the standby charge of $300, and since there were no fires in Otsego Township during that year, this was the only source of income from Otsego. At the some time, the reverse can also sometimes be true. A township may have several fires, and in effect, be paying more than its fair share or proportionate coat of fire protection sery ice . More and more, cities are booing their charges to townships for fire contracting service on a method that attempts to be more equitable One particular method that many cities are going to is what has been called the. "KOPP" formula, named after the City Manager of Mound who devised this formula some time ago. This formula attempts to average the percent of usage of a fire department with percent of assessed value protected. By working with this formula and modifying it for what 1 think would be an equitable situation in the City of Monticello, it appears that the City may be shortchanged in the fire contracts it has with Townships. However. 1 only base this on one particular year, that is 1979, and before 1 go further with this research, 1 would like to recommend that the City Council request the advisory board for the Joint Fire District of the City of Monticello, that is, the Joint Fire Diatrict composed of the members listed above, to review the information I would like to prusuu. to them, making any revisions, adjustments, and make a report back to the City Council of Monticello and the 1'ownship Board of Monticello. Once approval is given by tile.. governing boards of both the City and the 'township, this then could be presented to the Township boards of Silver Creek and Otsego for their consideration. - 21 - Council Agenda - 10/27/80 For your information, our current joint fire district contract with the • Township of Monticello does not terminate until 1985, so at this point, the focus will be mainly on our contracts with Otsego and Silver Creek Townships. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration to request that the Joint Fire Board review possible modifications with the City Administrator on the Fire District's contracts with the Townships of Otsego and Silver Creek. - 22- MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, October 14, 1980 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, John Bondhus, Bill Burke, Ed Schaffer. Members Absent: Dick Martie, Loren Klein. 1-A. Approval of Minutes - September 17, 1980 Meeting which was Continued to September 22, 1980. Motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by John Bondhus and unanimously carried to approve the above minutes, as presented. 1. Public 11earinR - Consideration of Rezoning - Kermit Lindberg. Mr. Kermit Lindberg, who owns Lot 1, Block 2, Riverwood Estates, is requesting rezoning of that lot from K-1 to B-3. Mr. Lindberg feels that this lot, Lot 1, which lies between Dino's Other World and the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant, is more suited to B-3 zoning than it is to R-1 zoning. Since the zoning was consistent with the parcels to the cast and vest of this property and the only other adjoining property would be the Lindberg residence itself to the north, a motion was made by John Bondhus, seconded by Ed Schaffer and unanimously carried to recommend approval of the rezoning. 2. Public HearinR - Consideration of a Conditional Use - Terry Mick and Ery Rndunz. Terry Mick and Ery Raduna, as partners in this project, are applying for a conditional use permit to develop two 18 -unit apartment buildings on Lot S, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace. Of those items to be addressed on this project would be that the required lot area for this development should be 93,000 square feet; however, only 61,600 square feet of land is available, thereby the land requirement is 14% short of what it should be. However, in the future, these two gentle- men are considering the possibility of devulopiny a total of 100 apartment units. If that were the case, upon completion of that entire development, there would be adequate land available for the square footage requirements if the entire project were taken as a whole, rather than considering each individual lot and its individual lot square footage requirements. Another item which should be considered is the square footage of the apart- ment units. Although the square footage of the one -bedroom and two-bedroom apartments exceed the square footage required per each, one efficiency unit is proposed within one of the buildings which will be approximately 28% short of what the ordinance requires. Ordi,unce requirement for in efficiency l . �� ,3, y�-� Planning Commission - 10/14/80 apartment is 500 square feet. However, in reviewing these plans with the proposed developers, the Building Inspector has determined that it would be y difficult to increase that efficiency unit to anything much larger than it is already being proposed, and not using that space for an efficiency unit would constitute a waste of expensive floor space. Another item for consideration is that Monticello Ordinances required that whenever an R-3 zone such as this zone is abuts an R-2 zone, that the rear parking lot setback should be 15'. However, in this case, the proposed parking lot is only 5' from the rear property line. One item for consideration in this request for a 5' rear property line is that the R-3 zone, although it abuts an R-2 zone, has an 80' wide buffer between the R-3 and R-2 zones, that buffer being the railroad property. Although the plan for the drainage has been submitted to OSM for their review, at the time of the meeting no comments have been returned. However, any recommendation for approval of this project would be contingent upon a recommendation from OSM, prior to the Council's consideration. The following is general information: A. There are two basic buildings. B. Each building contains 18 dwelling units and contains 15,600 sq.ft, each. C. There will be 24 two-bedroom unite of 720 sq.ft. each, and 12 one -bedroom apartment units of 600 sq.ft. each, and one efficiency unit of 360 sq.ft. D. There will be two parking spaces per unit available, and of the two parking spaces available for each unit, eighteen of these spaces will be within garages, as required by ordinance. At the public hearing portion of the agenda item, no comments were heard in opposition to the proposed project. Additionally, the present owner of the property, Roy Laurin&, indicated that he felt that since the project at this point .is proposed to be non -subsidized and that there is a need for this type of housing in Monticallo, he would strongly recommend approval by the Planning Commission. A motion was made by Bill Burke, seconded by John Bondhus and unanimously carried to approve the conditional use for the apartment complex, along with the three variances indicated above. Reason for the approval of the variances was in the case of the rear parking lot setback, this abutted up against the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks, and 'iu uffect, thero was an additional 80' buffer between the property which is zoned R-3 and the property to the north of the railroad tracks which is zoned R-2. The variance for the square fooraga requirement of the efficiency apartment was approved in light of the fact that all the remaining units more than exceeded the minimus requirements. Additionally, the variance on the square footage requirement for the total land area was approved in light of the fact that additional land costa might discourage conventional financing, and this is one of the few conventially financed apartment projects to be proposed in Munticello in quite a while. - 2 - Planning Commission - 10/14,80 3. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Rezoning Request - Vic Hellman. Vic Hellman, who is proposing to buy Lots 9 b 10, Block 4, Lower Monticello, is proposing to rezone that property from R-1 to R-2. This request is being made so that now the unoccupied single family home could be converted to a duplex. This home is located directly across the street to the east from the Mentieello Laundromat on Cast Broadway. The current zoning across the street to the west where the Laundromat is on Block 5 and extending from there into the downtown area is zoned B-4, and Mr. Hellman contends that changing the R-1 zoning to R-2 zoning would provide an adequate buffer area between the B-4 and R-1 zonings, and would be conducive to a duplex. Presently and for the past several months , the existing dwelling has been vacant and been maintained in somewhat less than desirable conditions. Possibly granting a rezoning of this type could lead to an upgrading of the property to a somewhat better standard than has been maintained in the past. Vic Hellman indicated that lie would be making improvements to the interior of the building which would include bringing the building up to code, and additionally, the exterior would be scraped and painted. Based on the fact that there was no opposition to the proposal and the fact that if the rezoning would be approved, improvements would be made to this property, a motion was made by Cd Schaffer, seconded by Bill Burke and unanimously carried to recommend approval of the rezoning request. 4. Consideration of a Variance Request -Dave Sieckert. Mr. Dave Sieckert, the applicant, is selling his homy, west of Monticello and plans to purchase Cary Corrow's home, which is directly to the west of the Silver Fox Inn. Mr. Sieckert is planning to use the barn on that property to establish an informal meeting place. lie feels that hd would like to have a place where people may go without feeling pressure to join or pay dues to any organi- sation, society, etc. Mr. Sieckert feels that lie has a desire to become involved in this way in order that he may be able to casually show youth that he has a concern for them. Ills intention wuuld be to remodel the barn to include facilities for a lounge, kitchen and bathrooms, as well a ■ space for a ping pang table, badainton, basketball or volleyball, whatever space would allow. however, in order that Mr. Sieckert might develop this plan of his, it is necessary th st he would have to have a variance from the required hardsurfacing and - 3 - Planning Commission - 10/14/30 curbing of the parking lot. For a community center or private club such as lie is proposing, the required number of parking spaces would be ten (10). Mr. Sieckert feels that he has room for more parking spaces than that; however, for the reasons which he has outlined in his letter requesting this variance, he would like to have the hardsurfacing and curb- ing requirement for this property become a permanent variance. Although Mr. Sieckert did say, and has stated in his letter, that this variance would become immediately void should the objectives for the barn and its use ever be changed. There was some concern expressed by the Planning Commission members of the possible future change in scope of Mr. Sieckert's plans. Specifically, there was concern relative to the serving of food and if any fee would be charged for this. Mr. Sieckert indicated that he may have vending machines such as pop machine, but his intentions would not be to make a profit and sell food. There was some concern expressed that the number of vending machines should be limited and additionally, the conditions expressed in the September 29, 1980 letter from Dave Sieckert would have to be adhered to. Since the real question before the Planning Commission was only one of hardsurfaced requirements, however, motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Bill Burke and unanimously carried to approve of the variance request contingent upon the scope of the proposed community room being consistent with the September 29, 1980 letter by Mr. Dave 5iockert. A two-year provision was attached to this since this would give the City some further control if the scope of the, project changed in addition to the regular enforcement procedures of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Sieckert felt that he could live with the variance as recommended. 5. Consideration of a Variance and Simple Subdivision - Chuck Stumnf. Chuck Stumpf, who owns Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 6 5, of the Barber Addition, is proposing a simple subdivision of those lots. Basically, what Mr. Stumpf would like to do is take the southerly 80' of each of those five lots and create one new lot of 353' x 80'. This would leave Lots 1 thru 5 then being, 167.5' in depth, and 724' in width. The existing City maps do not show the Barbur Addition as such, but indicate that at one time it did exist within the Township. Before any final approval could be given to a simple subdivision of this property, it would have to be contingent upon providing specific and accurate surveys which would be recognized by the County Recorder's office. Also part of this request is a variance to build a 40' x 75' garage in approximately the center u: this property. The reason a variance would be required is that any time a garage of over 1,000 square feet is built in an R-1 zone, it requires a variance, and this garage would be approximately 3,000 square feet. - 4 - Planning Commission - 10/1400 Mr. Stumpf is proposing this garage as a facility to get his semi trucks .:nd a few personal vehicles enclosed, rather than allow them to set outside in the weather. Currently, Mr. Stumpf does park his semis in the same location in which he is proposing to build this garage, and he just feels that if he were able to enclose his vehicles within a building, it would be better on the vehicles by exposing them less to the weather, especially during the winter months. When notice of this hearing was sent out, two individuals who received notices contacted the City Hall to gain information about this proposed building, and they stated that although they might come to the hearing, that if this building were going to be used to store personal vehicles, such as Mr. Stumpf is proposing, rather than to expand the junkyard business, that they would be in favor of granting this variance. A neighboring property owner, Frank Auringer, had a question on the type of building that was proposed. Mr. Chuck Stumpf indicated that the building would be a colored steel building. Mr. Stumpf also indicated that it would be for cold storage and for such items as a tractor, semi- trailer, mowers, etc. Based on this information, Mr. Auringer had no objections to the proposal. A motion was made by Bill Burke, seconded by John Bondlius and unanimously carried to approve of the variance request and the simple subdivision based upon specific and accurate surveys which would be recognited by the County Recorder's office. 6. Discussion on Scope and Purpose of Planning Commission. John Bondhus, who had previously written a letter that was sent out to Planning Commission Members on October 3, 1980, indicated a concern with the purpose and duties of the Planning Commission. Specifically, he felt that in some evens there might be some redundancy for ruvicwing variances, etc. Ile felt an effort should be made to streamline some of these duties, and wondered if some of these matters could not be taken directly to the City Council. Administrator Wicber explained that because of legal requirements contained in the Minnesota State Statute* , it was necessary for a City to have a Board of Appeals that was separate from the governing body itself, or the City Council. However, Cary Wieber indicated that he would look into the possibility of having leu members serve on a board at appeals specifically for variance requests in order that this might be able to streamline some of the work done by the Planning Commission. Additionally, other areas were discussed on how the Planning Commission could better serve. Various members felt that the Planning Commission was already serving its assigned function, but felt that Mr. Bondhum's comments were worth considering and in the future, at the and of each agenda, a particular area would be discussed to see how it could be streamlined. For example, one possibility was discussed to take each section of the Ordinance -S- �� a� yd -5' Planning Commission - 10/14,80 and review it in detail to see if any changes should be made. A motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Bill Burke and unanimously carried to adjourn. ary W}' cr, City Kdministrator, CW/ns - 6 - - tii� E (/ r �,�/ , t �. J/ J ^'•••�j...;,, uPRtnNc£ M Ck b �,cv `.�4 . fr%,r, "f° 1 � /i%�Ii1r.r�'m!`l'• TessY ' ,`r.j �` `'� .- _ IT G ! "r. f •ltlt ` r r It ,.1,7 r7't'j i •, -,; .� , JJ. r J •, �,! ;-��/'�1"�"}� .,`s !. "'°17, •11ri� J G(j �;ib'"ly�l�l' �j, 1�~ii'�d r•I!!il(J��rr > fir-a�• `, �'–j.j�f iy t Il tt r Of OC!j ��11t, +.1"+,.�'I!',.' j:t ��,?r Z � .%j!a• a� 1/''"'+Ir' I. jt, JllJt�j 'Y I q:� u r �i,jr ��-r • �r �. E' ., r .' ``"� . �1'7 ijI!', r • ' 1 .'" t i, J 1� ;� t t -r• �• '�t . , ; ti;.'. ;1 + /, .r t+t l••Yt?n, � ',�..�--+ ' ��-;�..':.:��-;ice-� 117�`j-'•- _�� -'.='__ ` \'� w��,.-'�'t .! �l ift t rt �1 •,_!. �. �f" �n� � �I\• •! i r��.�, rl.��\ ".,..,.` "` _' IAY N0. 94 t / `"` �"`^"�—.�"..`.•�`---.....,.+,. { ...".,,fit. (` l a cA M � �r4y�h' y .� , � yir •rr" �,s\''4'. '.'••+..` '`_ --- - "- - - - `-nrr'n vc-�'r'-rVOLIL-it^)iTfTt727 `- .`�`•� - - _ µr Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be hold by the City of Monticello Planning Commission on October 14 , 1980 ) it 700 P. M. in the Monticello City 11411 to consider the following mnttero An application for a conditional use to develop two 18 -unit apartment buildings on Let 5, Block 1, Lauring Hillaide Terrace. j} Zoned R-9. y,, r.C,).Q, 7Ccsu..�.. Q.aC-(�P.-��,,-� c-°' Q�t...c.. /�.. 2C.ru..�' Co�2rx"c�•.s..�- ..,t.3 � 6.Q�v ..1 �n'4 IQ.4 u7•{,� G/lJ �H}S4� �-4. /)'i'I.CGK.hw ��.�? Let-e.+�, ,�, G,�pk�•-C-c.� �'�`'- 'u�'R' �..Q.�`�' lLe-r�-,y . --et- -<-�. �1. Lam{- _• �C� , . ;rte„zC; �To.. rim tic•. F�-.a-c e. -'.e E� �a.� i{i-�W ��;,(lt,.vs Li<V ��-�t.�c-(r GX t�..,r'.��r.-t_L?,,,.V ./`Y% .L1c-t:�R'�i'... (:L`..t,,• ' ,tJ L'tCC /ip.k.�'•a+r-C, tj,`,,^/l.Q.f.6[.d•9r..t%'`�"'«�.��,E "��/,..•n ^�i/�GiT-O'Wr,�F- j�+r.X %�Le, /ZC•-u.tC... ./�7`+...G�c� ;'�-C.r �,�f l^..�,j='Ct-a•df*.' j�It'Ots.R. t-X��L,+w .�•.�Fl/.t..L =� G�-O-�ia t-....f.t..r� C}a,t�-•�1 'f 2t�.u..,t„+ ,t.�a.:ti 7ic.-s..,�,..+ APPLSC7+tiT# tiTnrry Mick Rry Rndunz Thin matter is tentatively achadulod to he considered by City of Monticello City council on October 27 19 an . This meeting start* at 730 P. M. Written and oral testimony will be accepted on above subject and all portions ,.lesiring to be hoard on referenced subject will o heard athAAAthis meeting. Written conanento or testimony should be directed to Zao iy 1.Amiglt rpLor's office. Wren b. yUoin, Zoning IvIminiutrator 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC 11CARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City of Monticello City Council on October 27 , 19 8_O; it 700 P. M. in the Monticello City Hall to consider the following matter: Variance application as part of Conditional Use Request by Terry Mick and Erv•Radunz for construction of two 18 -Unit Apartment Buildings on Lot 5, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace. This variance request would include: .1. Variance from minimum lot size - site is 147, short -.of the minimum requirement according to City Ordinances. 2. Variance on minimum size for one efficiency apartment - / // this unit is 28% short of minimum square footage required. I. Variance from rear yard setback requirement. V/� i Property zoned R-7. W.lL �//_ _ �r ,f [( -Arm i`'o+,.+�+ w -r+. Jam' ff. �� ...�C�.SL. '•�-c-�l'. -C/J ��C� ,/La.�.p...�,'� .�R,1..' �,r,V i�'v . f•v •�o-y�,� v� Cl.c►..�(f C�+,..�`, •��n /tom..---�-f��, �}yf.�•u�, ��j/'Ji.� 7tm,•�.st� /-�+ ..CL�� .� d�'L�.y�,Qs�� .. / C t t l��,u �-.,�Q° 'd •`�V �W1...C� ' ^r-�Zin /Q(/� � X.lca.,c..i/-X�J � �A.i�-C-'1.. �T�L(� "'c"'�Q J [a • .tra.-�,�,.,.c�, �r c�c.o Cru �G �frm,..-�. •�%.�_<,� �caa �j c h..,J� •� iL•-n-ir,, C}-L.c. : zw.ct.t fj-rrj+�-•-� .�•c• /� kv� „Q,L) 0—�yf t,�,,�r iQ.�C..-c it c-r►...UC,L /hQ �..�) , APPLI ANTI Terry Mick and Ery Radune � ✓ �� This matter is tentatively scheduled to be considered l,y City of Monticello Plannina Commission an October 14 198-x. This westing starts at 7130 P. M. Written and oral testimony will be aecsyted on above subject and all persons desiring to be heard on referenced subject will hu Card at this meeting. U■ ember City Administrator 13 ( 11 VARIANCC APPLICATION Chuck Stumpf to build garage in exCsGG Of 1,000 sq. ft. 363' September 17 , 1980 CHUCK S1'UMPP PROPOSAL Create one Lot 80 feet by 363 feet consisting of the Southerly 80 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, of Block 1, Barbur's Addition to the 'Town of Monticello, Subject to Survey thereof. 247.5' 5 b n U 0 4 N N d Z fD E r o Y Cr F-� / M / 1 / / 3 yew bG�► L 2 0 i i --- -80 ---------------------- 167.5'--------------------------- M.X STREET 6 September 29, 1980 City Administrator Wieber, This letter deals with reasons why we desire a permanent variance from the required hardsurfacing and curbing of property zoned "B-3." We are in the process of selling our home located B miles west of Monticello. Our plan is to purchase Cary Corrow's home, a parcel of land just under 1 acre in size located west of the Silver Fox Inn and south of Tom Thumb. Part of this land has been rezoned to B-3 due to Corrow's efforts to sell'the barn and existing driveway. The house and property to the north of it still remain zoned residential. Zoning rules indicate hardsurfacing and curbing to be installed on commercial property. our future use of the brain and existing driveway, however, do not fit this category. My family and I desire to become active with the youth of this community. We want to use Corrow's barn to establish an informal meeting place. People may come without feeling pressure to join or pay dues to us or any organization, society, etc. As Christians we desire to become involved in this way in order to casually show kids that we care for them. The remodeled barn would include facilities for a lounge, kicchen, and bathrooms, no well as space for pini; pong, badminton, basketball, and volleybnll. Loren Klein has visited the building and indicated that it is possible to bring this structure up to safety codes. The npecific reasons for requesting this varinnce are: 1. Corrow'a present driveway in in good condition, composed of hard packed gravel with no grade. Uunr in not n problem and the pathetic value of a country driveway and parking area in a town atmosphere in important to us. 2. We cannot affurd curring and curbing. We ;u,: a unc- saleried family of five, having been employed for the pnot 11 years in Monticello as an elementary teacher. 3. This variance would be immediately void should the above objectives for the barn change. -2— Enclosed is a preliminary sketch of the main floor plan for the barn. Also a drawing of the plot with parking possibilities Is included. Please keep'in mind that a key factor to this property is its central location. Many students will walk from town without needing vehicles. We sincerely appreciate your considerations and/or suggestions. Yours Truly, l Dave Sieckert and family k, 77, i t i � � ` � , • rl 1, l � �. Fw•.... ` ""•�... �t ��( , • a.+ • .i � „�•' �f'4.�.:.. fc•. Bli� `'�I.' rra-. 't . r `?� iia,;- _ --�-:..�•(. � ' 1 r•�::. 01 VRVLpNcti P [ t a ^ : 1 I+.: 1 {M a, i t• r , ijl DBVe S1cckct 11 '; �.•• »Ir/ .� � i � �',',q `.,,,. �l,'♦I ` !. s )�/r .,a HIGHWAY w �� `. .,..... _....,r7,,�• •• #'` . NO. 94 ! ,t d '•�1 � 1 A H z t NI 0 A t 0 0 Lc�fc� -rL RE�OtYSjllQar,G octas'l 11-1 V, I to li Ciro Vic 11e 110a VL Yf Lot. 1. ZQNZtaG wig V" , 'tea to )ctober 20, 1980 l: Monticello City Council ZOM: Monticello Chapter American Field Service (AFS) Banner across Broadway at the stop lights r are requesting permission to place a banner advertising a Spaghetti Supper across roadway (from light in front of Seitz Hardware to Phyllis and Sally's shoe.) We would it the banner up the evening of November 6 or 7th and remove it the evening of November 13. )ank you for considering our request. 1. . Darlene Anderson AFS respresentative home q 295-2605 work N 295-2945 ext 252 I OPTION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of October, 1980, by and between the City of Monticello, party of the first part, hereinafter called "City", and David Kranz, part] of the second party, hereinafter called "Kranz". WHEREAS, parties to this Agreement currently have in affect a Uses Agree- ment, a copy of which is hereto attached and incorporated herein by reference, and WHEREAS, Kranz has plans to acquire other real estate in the City of Monti - collo for the expansion and re -location of his businese, the possession of which is dopondent upon death of the callers or vacancy created by the callers, and WHEREAS, Kraus wishes to purchase an option from the City to re -rant or re- lease the subject property upon the termination of the existing lease, and the City desires to sell on option to re -rent or re—lease, and the parties herein have agreed to an option price of Two Hundred fifty and no/100the Dollars ($230.00), NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as followsc 1. That the existing lease shall remain in full force and affect in el l respeetsl 2. That upon the expiration of the existing lease. Krona shall have the option to re -lease the subject premises for a period of three (7) years upon the same terms and conditions except that he shall pay therefor a monthly rant of $230.00 per month during the first year of said renewal, the sum of $273.00 per month during the second year of said renewal and the sum of $100.00 per month during the third year of said renewal) 3. Kranz shall have the option of two (2) ono -year renewals upon written notice to the Cityf Each such renewal shall likewise be under the ease terms and conditions exempt that the monthly rental paid for such occupancy shall be $323.00 during the first one-year renewal and $330.00 per mouth during the second one-year renewal► 4. Krona may terminate the lease or any renewal thereof by six (6) months' written notice to the City if the possession of the property which he is purchasing becomes available to him for the expansion and re -location of his business. In the event the option is exercised by Kranz, the $210.00 consideration paid for this option shall be applied to the first month's rant. IN TRSTIMONY WHEREOF, Both parties beretn have hereunto sat their hands the day and year horeinbeforo written. CITY OF MONTICELLO. party of the first part By David Krona, party of the second part 8 A LEASE AGREDOIT TMS ACRFFHENT, male this lsL day of Srpt •ter. 1777, by i between the City of Monticello, Party of the first. part, Lesszr. 3. David Kranz, Party of the second part, :,ossee. w1TiiJ3SSEfH, That the said party of the fir --t part, Ln cor.sid r3Lion of the rents and covenants hereinafter mentioned, do hereby renla:, I-eare andlat unto the said party of the second part, and the said party a!' the :second part do hereby hire and take from the said party of the :irat Dart, the following described premises situated i•1 the t:olnty of Wright. x.9 the Slate of Minnesota viz: The westerly thirty (30) feet of the Scnier Citizens Center, le -al description is the south 50 feet of Blocks 11 & 12, Upper Mbntica=ia, liunticello, Minnesota. TO HAVE ANU TO HOLD, The above rentea premises wlto the said David Kranz, heirs and assigns, for and during the full term of ct' months from and after the 1st day of December, 1977. AND THE SAID LESSEE agrees to pay as rent for the above mentioned premises the sum of $235.00 per month. Said lessee shall bei cre.lit , for ruty leasehold improvements against the aforementioned monthly rant tia. are approved by the City of Monticello in writing. The LESiM 1133 the eight to Le:minate this agreement upon uixty days written notic, to the lessor and lessee will not be held liable for the full term of the :ease. Any wiremaining credit due the Lessee bec;.use of Aforementioned leasehold improvements shall be forfeited. Monthly p3ymrnt, will be due in advance of each month. All utilities except sewer and water shall be paid by the lcaeee. And it is further agreed by and between the pnrtie:; as follcw;: That shots d the said lessee fail to make the above mentioned paymr,:t.: as herein specified, or to pay the rent aforesaid when due, or fail to fulfill any of the covenants herein contained then and in that case it shall Lc lawful for the said lessor to ro-enter and take possession of the nbovc rented premises, and hold and enjoy the same witlizut such re- entcrine wurking a forfeiture of the rents to be paid and the covenan.s to to Derfonmcd by the said lessee for the full term of this lease. And the said lessee also covenant and agree to and with tLe Said lessor not to assign this lease or underlet the above rented preml3es or ate., part thereof, without first obtaining the writttrl consent of the said lessor, and that said lessee will, at the expiration of the time ad herein recited, quietly yield and surrender the aforesaid premises to the said lessor, heirs and assigns, in as good condition =J repair as when lessee took them, reasonable wear and tear and damage by the elements alone excepted. And the said lessor do covenant that the said lestuc, on payinr, the rent and performing the covenants aforesaid, shall and may peaceably and quietly have, hold and enjoy the said remised prcnises fur the term aforesaid. IN TESTIMONY %IMREDF•, 1310 11 psrt,i,va hni.• h,:, .nt • rpt thei a•.I. w.d souls the day and your n. ••olnbofor„ w,•„ •, n. In Presence f LEASEHOLD IMPROVEt-f:7TS Made by Dave Kranz At Senior Citizens Center 14. Olson - Electric $ 7.,661.00 Coast to Coast - Repair window 8.38 Dan Blonigen - Cap (insulation) on door 69.82 Lidependent Lumber - Materials 67.60 M & M Insulation - Insulation 859.00 Lindberg & Sons - Materials 16.93 0. K. Hardware - Panel welds 21,06 Big Lake Lumber - Materials (paneling) 283.26 Plywood Minnesota - Paneling 139.63 Southside Lumber - Sheetrock 157.25 Henry Doerr - Door & cement floor 1,604.98 Ready Mix - Cement sealer 32.94 D. F�rgen - Taping 300.00 Our Own Hardware - Materials 33.62 Ken Peshia - Water heater, sink, etc. 298.50 Miscellaneous Expense 8.93 Coast to Coast - Paneling adhesive, etc. 1.0.18 Ddlding permit 15.00 Labor - 134 ® 7.50 - D. Kranz 1,005.00 Larson Carpeting 70.00 $ 7.688.08 The above list represents the leasehold improvements mentioned in the September 1, 1977 lease agreement between Dave Kranz and the City of Monticello. These improvements arc hereby npproved by the City of Monticello and the louaee shall be given credit towards the monthly loose payments of $235.00 per month for these improvements. These improvements shell remain the property of the City of Monticello upon termination of the loose agreement and any other im- provements, including the counter, shall remain the property of the lessee unless agreed upon in writing by both parties. In accordance with the lease agreement and the above mentioned improvements, no lease payments are due from looseo to lessor until the thirty-third (33rd) month (August 1, 1980) at which time a payment of $66.92 shall be due and at the first of each subsuquent month in the amount of $235.00 and in accordance with 3.0050 agreement. •• Approved January 16, 1978 Gvt. I. L.osoor I _ Leosoe r-1 Cil ORR•SCHEIEN• MAYERON Et ASSOCIATES, INC. Division of Kidde Consultants, Inc. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors September 22, 1980 Mr. Gary Wieber City Administrator City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN. 55362 Re: Final Plat, The Brothers Dear Gary: The final plat of The Brothers Addition received by our office last week has been reviewed by my staff. We find that the final plat is in conformance with the ordinance; of the City of Mon- ticello. All of the lots meet or exceed the area requirements for R-2 zoning. As to public utilities, a cost estimate was prepared and discus- sed with the dovelnl,er and yourself regarding the feasibility of an extension of sewer and water on Nicholas Circle from Prairie Road. This work could be accomplished as a change order to Pro- ject 80-1, presently under construction in the area. However, certain items will have to be deleted, in that the cost of utilities for The Brothers exceeds the 258 contract limitation. We would therefore recommend approval of the final plat of The Brothers Addition. very truly yours, ORR-SCIiELEN-MAYERON ASSOCIATES, INC. ohnP. Badalich, P.E. City Engineer JPB/kmp 2021 East Honnopin Avonuo • Suito 238 Minnonpolis, Minnosola 55413 r','Ie 6121331-8660 I' LF:X:29-0948 e�"^+ 4,�'•+P"' �. GENERAL FUND - OCTOBER - 1980 AMOUNT CHECK 140. Mu. State Treasurer - PERA payment 1033.50 13497 Institute of Govt. - Fire code 4.00 13 498 Washington Local Govt. Personnel Inst. - Pamphlet 5.00 13499 MH. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 24.00 13 500 Dorn Communications - Adv. for Chamber of Comm. - Corp. Re,)t. 851.00 13 501 Corrow Sanitation - Contract 3450.00 13 502 Banker's Life Ins. - Payment for Lesley Banks 33.11 13 503 James Preusse - Cleaning City Hall 180.00 13 504 Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary 125.00 13 505 Dan Blonigen - Council salary 100.00 13506 Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary 100.00 13 507 Ken Maus - Council salary 100.00 13 508 Dr. Phil White - Council salary 100.00 13 509 YMCA - Monthly payment 208.33 13510 Wright County State Bank - Investments 50000.00 13 511 Wiight County State Bank - Investments 75000.00 13 512 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 12.00 13 513 M14. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 17.00 13514 Gwen Bateman - Animal Imp. expense 482.20 13 515 Wright County State Bank - Fed. W/H tax 2808.30 13 516 Cantu. of Revenue - State Excise tax 131.86 13 517 U. S. Postmaster - Postage 150.00 13518 McEnary, Krafft, Birch & Kilgore - Arch. fees for Library 400n.00 13 519 Hayes Contractors - 80-1 s 80-2 Imp. Project payments 73679.29 L3520 Dick Schillewaert - Sodding in Oakwood Ind. Park 2954.50 13 521 John R Joan Bondhuo - Easement fee for new treatment plant 1.00 13 522 Ind. School District #882 - Easement fee for 16000.00 13 523 Comm. of Revenue - SWT tax 1176.60 13524 Internal Revenue Service Center - Add. Soc. Sec. payment 11.80 13 525 Comm. of Personnel - Soc. Sec. Quarterly payment 2586.35 13 526 M14. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 26.00 13 527 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 14.00 13 528 Wright County Clerk of Court- 7 copies of papers 35.00 13 529 Equitable Life Ins. - Ins. payment- reimbursed 50.00 13530 National Bushing - Misc. repair parts ti 55 gal. anti-freez< 471.81 1 13 531 Century Laboratories - Hand cleaner 56.48 13 532 Monticello Printing - S/W portals 6 P. 0. box on envelopes 172.85 13 533 Brentoson Construction - Rip -rap 328.24 13534 St. Paul Recorder - Adv. for bids for Treatment Plant 197.20 13 535 Minneapolis Spokesman - Adv. for bids for Treatment Plant 197.20 13 536 Stophens Peck, Inc. - Dep. Reg. manual 19.00 13 537 Olson s Sons Electric - Repairs to lift Station 96.92 13538 Maus Foods - Misc. supplies 35.65 13539 Clearwater Enterprises - hough loader repairs 188.99 13540 Fred Pryor Seminars - Seminar for Walt Muck 125.00 13 541 Central McGowan - Cyl. rental fue 2.48 13 542 Scha rbar 6 Sons - John Decre panto 9.62 13 543 B J'a Discount - Cleaning supplies 6.25 13544 Centra Soto - Park supplies 8.99 13 545 Dahn'o Four Seasons - Coil for John Deere 51.66 13 546 Amoco Oil - Gas for Fire Dept. 19.18 13 547 Dr. Joel Erickson - Euth. dogs 148.00 13 740 Santry Systems - Service calls to repair alarm at Res. 65.00 13 549 State of MN. - Documents Division - 1980 Laws of MN. 40.00 13 550 Northwestern Doll - Fire phone 22.27 13 551 Ranker's Lifu Ins. - Group Ins. 1772.33 13552 Phillips Petro. - Goo for sewer dept. 3.09 13 553 �S GENERAL FUND "IOUNT CHECK NO. Coast to Coast - Ladder, locks, mop, paint, plug, etc. 165.61 13554 St. Cloud Hydraulics - Hough loader repair 41.80 13555 Trueman Welters - Repairs 53.54 13556 Mobil Oil - Misc. gas and oil 111.82 13557 Stokes Marine - Repairs to saws & supplies 96.61 13558 North Central Public Service - Utilities 52.56 13559 St. James Hotel - Civil Defense conference expense 85.95 13560 Monticello Office Products - Misc. supplies 190.94 13561 Fyle's Backhoe - Latrine rental & water line repair 330.00 13562 Kangas Auto Radiator Service - Hough Loader repair 67.75 13563 H & S Asphalt - Patching material for streets 49.50 13564 Monticello Times - Misc. printing 985.78 13565 Wright County Sheriff - Sept. contract payment 6378.66 13566 Pete's General Construction - Sidewalk repair - Golden Val'ey 500.00 13567 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone expense (83.39 reimb.) 655.15 13568 Gary Wicber - Mileage 23.60 13569 Poirier Drug - Film, batteries and dye 14.07 13570 John Simola - Misc. mileage 22.40 13571 American Legion Post #260 - Flags 123.70 13572 Wright County Auditor - S police fines for Sept. 686.50 13573 GoldenValleyFurn. - 12 arm chair caps & molding 34.67 13574 Maus Tire Service - 4 tires for Chr_v. van 189.90 13575 Harry's Auto Parts - Filters, thermostats, wrenches, etc. 220.54 13576 2ahl Equipment - Key for gas pump 2.02 13577 Davis Electronic Service - 4 pager repairs 76.78 13578 MN. Growth Exchange - Newsletters 7.50 13579 Municipal Finance Officers Assoc. - 1 copy of GAAFR 25.00 13580 Duro Test Corp. - Ballast 50.42 13581 Automatic Garage Door Co. - Garage door for Mtce. Bldg. 629.00 13582 Price Electric - Street expense - Mtce. Bldg. imp. 63.00 13583 Lndeponoent Lumber - Cement, Mtce. Bldg. repairs 93.40 13584 Gross Ind. Services - Laundry 171.00 13585 Barton Contracting - Class 5 for Mtce. Bldg. 45.99 13586 Kromer Co. - Nozzles for sprayers for park 56. 57 I 13587 Our --..,Hardware - Coffee maker - Mico. Bldg., supplies 99.22 , 13588 Northern States Power - Utilities 3539.81 13589 MN. Business Jouinal - Adv. in Journal - Chamber of Comm. 565.00 13590 3 M Business Products - Cop machine repair - Mtco. Bldg. 49.00 13591 Marco Business Products - Ribbons and copy paper 213.43 13592 Persians Office Products - Head act for dictaphone 3.50 13593 Gordon Link - Gas for Mtce. Bldg. 1701.00 i 13594 City of Big lake - Air tanks refilled for Fire Dept. 3.00 13595 Economic Press, Inc. - Sub. renewal 16.18 13596 Curtin Matheson Scientific - Thermometer for Plant 24.69 13597 O. K. Hardware - Sponges, paint, garbago can, etc. 20.52 13598 Revere Chemical - Ice melt 110.04 13599 Curtis Industries - Nuts and bolts 76.73 13600 MCEnary, Krafft, Birch & Kilgore - Schematic design & model for Library 2600.00 13601 Diane Jacobson - Mileage to Dep. Reg. seminar 22.40 13G02 a. GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. Gould Bros. - Repairs to Van, Ford Pickup s Chev. trucks 109.62 13603 Mid Central Fire s Safety - Drop tank liner replacement 480.00 13604 Chapin Publishing Co. - Adv, for bids WWTP 6 80-1 - 80-2 655.62 13605 Northern Oxygen - 2 cyl. oxygen 17.78 13606 Orr Schelen Mayeron - Misc. eng. fees 16194.01 13607 Foster's Ins. Agency - Ins. premiums 11986.45 13608 Wright County Treasurer - 2nd half R. E. taxes on Lots 16.52 13609 13 6 14, Hoglund Add. - recently acquired park land Rick Wolfsteller - Misc. mileage 45.72 13610 Loren Klein - Misc. mileage 226.14 13611 Earl F. Andersen - Street signs 36.40 13612 Adm. Management - Sub. renewal 15.00 13613 Monticello Trucking - Grading at Oakwood Ind. Park 1750.00 13614 Lindberg s Sons - Paint and stain for cabinets 32.59 13615 Water Products - Supplies for Water Dept. 371.26 13616 Feed Rite Controls - Supplies for Sewer Dept. 2390.16 13617 Payroll for September 14857.49 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR OCTOBER - 1980 $310,221.06 LIQUOR FUND AMOUNT CHECK OCTOBER - 1980 NO. a Commissioner of Revenue - Sales tax 2962.24 9387 Twin City wine - Liquor 686.52 9388 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 7225.93 9389 M14. State Treasurer - PERA payment 110.11 9390 Twin City Wine - Liquor 554.26 9391 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 1494.81 9392 Wright County State Bank - Fed W/H tax 4G2.80 9393 Johnson Bros. - Liquor 2227.00 9394 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 42b2.78 9395 Griggs, Cooper - Liquor 3356.31 9396 Comm. of Revenue - State W/H tax 192.20 9397 Comm. of Personnel - Fed W/H tax 336.42 9398 Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins. 200.67 9399 Foster's Ins. - Prepaid Ins. 951.75 9400 Ed Phillips S Sons - Liquor 6563.88 9430 Midwest Wine Co. - Liquor 1163.69 9431 A. J. Ogle - Beer 172.90 9432 Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse. 648.40 9433 7 Up Bottling - Misc. mdse. 222.30 9434 Dick Beverage - Beer 1429.85 9435 Grosslein Beverage - Beer 15091.91 9436 Day Distributing - Beer s Misc. mdse. 236.35 9437 Thorpe Dist. - Beer 4066.70 9438 Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse. 150.48 9439 Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Misc. mdse. 597.87 9440 Dahlheimer Dist. Co. - Beer 5754.17 9441 Klaus Foods - Misc. expense 19.97 9442 Trushenski Trucking - Freight 216.45 9443 Monticello Printing - Labels 144.20 9444 Persian'8 Office Products - Repair cash rregistur 40.00 9445 Yonak Sanitation - Contract 40.00 9446 Our Own Hardware - Store expense 30.65 9447 Northern States Power - Utilities 694.53 9448 Griggs, Cooper - Liquor 5477.35 9449 Twin City Wine - Liquor 2057.20 9450 Old Peoria Co. - Liquor 1177.29 9451 B s 0 Carpet Service - Cleaning carpet 320.00 9452 Monticello Times - Adv. s help wanted ads 314.25 9453 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 50.87 9454 II & S Asphalt Co. - Seal coat parking lot 1330.00 9455 Payroll for SeptomW r 3270.42 TOTAL. DISBURSEMENTS FOR OCTOBER $76,305.48 COUNCIL UPDATE October 27, 1980 Meeting Status of City of Monticello's Wastewater Treatment Construction Grant In talking with Jerry Corrick, with OSM, he has indicated that Paul A. Laurence Company, low bidder on the above project, has rejected Buffalo Ready Mix for the supply of the concrete on this job, and has awarded a contract to Monticello Ready Mix. Reasoning for this is that in the estimation of Paul A. Laurence, after further documentation, they feel that Buffalo Ready Mix is no longer qualified as a minority business enterprise. According to Mr. Corrick, Paul A. Laurence has substituted another minority business for other parts of their project; however, their minority business percentage has dropped to 4.4%, which is less than the City of Monticello's stated goal of 5%. However, according to Mr. Corrick, he is currently working with the Minnesota Pollution Control agency, and feels that the problem can be resolved. Minimum Mouse Size Standard As you may recall at a previous City Council Meeting, there was some discussion on a variance request by Gwen Bateman to build a house less than the City's minimum size standard of 1,000 square feet for a rambler. Since Ms. Bateman was attempting to secure a federal loan which only allowed a certain size for a family of one person, she could not obtain a loan that would allow her to meet the City of Monticello's standards. At that time, the City Council did deny the variance request applied for, but there was some discussion about the possibility of having the City of Monticello looking into allowing houses of less than 1,000 square feet in size on a scattered basis. Our Building Inspector, Loren Klein, has contacted Bob Ryan with Howard Dalilgren Associates, and enclosed please find his memorandum dated October 21, 1980 addressing the issue. Mr. Ryan indicated the following: 1. City of Monticello did make the right decision in the fact that they denied the variance, since any variance request from the City's current standard should be based on a non—economic hardship. 2. lie would not recommend allowing homes on a scattered basis of so many feet. ), lie would recommend, if the City of Monticello felt it woo in the beat interests of the community, to reduce the minimum house size standards provided certain conditions were mel. These conditions would include placing the house on a lot so that a second story addition of sufficient size to at least meet a minimum house size standard could be obtained, Council Update October 27, 1980 Page 02 or that a standard garage could be added without any variances at a later date. It should be pointed out that previously, the City of Monticello reduced the minimum house size standard from 1,200 square feet to 1,000 square feet for a one—story home. There may be some merit in pursuing the possibility of reducing the minimum house size standards, and one other possibility would be to allow for the creation of a new zoning district which would allow smaller houses. For example, currently, the City of Monticello's R-2 zoning allows for a mini- mum lot size of 10,000 square feet, and the R-1 zoning requires 12,000 square feet. This same type of theory could be applied to house size. However, it might not be well to allow smaller houses in the present dis- tricts because conditions already exist, but, for example, in the case of new subdivision plate, they could be rezoned to something like an R -IA for example, that would allow one story homes to be 900 square feet. One possible example may have been The Brothers Plat, instead of being rezoned to an R-2 to accommodate double bungalows, if the City of Monticello were to rezone it to something like an R -2A which would allow single family homes to be 900 square feet or less, the developer could have the area rezoned to this prior to any construction of homes in that area. In this manner, everybody who builds in that area would know what the minimum standards were and would not be adversely affected by a change in a reduction of the minimun house size standard. HOWARD DAHLGREN ASSOCIATES CONS V LI i NG PLACN N ERS ONC G R O V E L A N D —R—CE ,, i Ne,EAP0L�5, MINNESOTA 55+03 MEMORAIIDUM DATE: 21 October 1900 TO: Loren Klein, Building Inspector City of Monticello FROM: Robert Ryan, AICP RE: Minimum House Size Standards Section 10-3-4- (G) 1 of the Monticello Ordinance requires a minimum floor area of 1,000 square feet for a one story dwelling. As we discussed on the telephone last Friday, if someone proposes a house of less than this minimum the procedure in the past has been to apply for a variance. One alternative which has been suggested to the variance method of allowing a single story home under this minimum would be to permit a smaller home to be constructed every so often alorn,I a street. The suggested distances between Such smaller homes have been in the 3u0 to 500 foot range. Although there is sonic merit to allowing a variety of housing styles, types, and sizes wi Lhiu .i in cur opinion., a prnvi% -' such as this would likely not be upheld if contested in court. The reason being LhaL such a provision does not LreaL property owners in the same neighborhood and zoning classification equally. For example, if a Party "A" on onu lot was required to construct a 1,000 square foot minimum home and the Party "R" on the next: lot was allowed to construct an 000 square foot home because of this provision, differ,au. standards would have applied to these two parties: on adjacent 1Gtn within the same zoning district. In that case, Party "A" could reasonably sue the City with an excellent chance of succeeding. Technically, the only way a variance could be granted for a smaller houao than Lhe 1,000 square foot minimum would be if placing the 1,000 squaro foot house on tho lot created some kind of a non -economic hardship (as outlined in Section 30-23-4 of the Monticello Ordinance). However, given the small number of requonts for such variances in the past, this may be a reasonable way of handling them. C MEMORANDUM 21 October 1980 RE: Minimum House Size Standards Page Two Probably a better way of handling such situations would be to allow a reduction in the minimum house size standards provided certain conditions were met. Such conditions might include Lhings like placing the house on the lot so that a second story addition of sufficient size to at least meet the minimum house size, or a standard double car garage could be added without any variances from the Zoning Ordinance. Thin would allow homes to be built which are originally designed to accommodate future additions. Such a provision would allow a family to get into a home and then as time went along and their family grew in size and their incomes increased, they could enlarge the home to accommodate these needs. This concept has considerable merit presently in light of the costs of building. If you desire, we would be happy to investigate allowing a smaller minimum house through a conditional use kind of process. (This could be set up so that it was able to be approved administratively, although there is some advantage to having such potentially controversial decisions made by the Planning Commission and City Council.) Theru are also a few other ways such a "variance" to the minimum could be handled. Let me know if we can be of any further assistance with Lhis matter. l MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL. October G. 1980 -'7:30 P.M. Members Present: Arve Crimsmo, Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Phil White. Members Absent: None 1. Continuation of Public Hearing on Consideration of a Variance for the St. Michael and All the Angels Episcopal Church, and the Possible Adoption of Guidelines for Directional Sii;ns. A variance was previously requested by the St. Michaels & A11 the Angels Episcopal Church at the Lost Council meeting to allow an off -premise directional sign somewhere in the area of Palm St. & East Broadway, and also in the area of 4th St. & Highway 25. The Council, at the last meeting, deferred any action on this Particular item until more informa- tion could be gathered on a standard type of sign thnt could possibly be used. A recommendation was made t,o uie Council Members by Loren Klein, Building Inspector, John Simoln, Public Works Director, and Cary Wieber, City Administrator, indicating that such directiunal signs should be unifurm in size, height and color, and should be limited to advertising; such facilities as medical fnCiIitlea, governmental facilities, churches and other civic interest groups. In addition, it was recommended that each sign be purchased by the, City and installed with the organization paying the cost of the sign plus $25.00 as a permit. It was recommended by this Committee that directional signs of this naLur,: be hnndlcd on a variance basis, rather than changing the existing City Ordinances to allow all types of busiuesses to usu dirucLiunal signs. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Phil White and unanimously carried to adopt a set of guidelines for directional type sign variances as follows: A. SI a., - To be 18" x 24". B. IIEif.IIT - To be no greater than a stop sign. C. COLOR & MATIiKIAL - Signs for Iloapitals and Churches should be Blue & White,, Parks & Kacrention should be 1lrnwn & White; Ganrral Information should be Crecn & White. 0. Nl1PlBHR OF SIGNS - One per eutablinhment. E. CONTENT - Directions Only. F. TYPES OF SIGNS - For Medical Fucilitiea, Covornmental Facilitien, Churches & Othur Civic InlarCOL Croups Only. C. PEKMIT FEL: - Establishment to pay cost of sign plus $25.00 permit. Coupe it Mi notes - I0/6/80 Motion also included a variance to the St. Michael & All 'file Angels Episcopal Church to erect one directional sign per the guidelines, which , would be reviewed after five years. 2. Public Hearing on the Consideration of a Variance Request to Eliminate Continuous Curb Barrier Around the Perimeter of a Parking LUL - United Methodist Church. The United Methodist Church requested a variance to have a parking lot completed to the south of their Church without the necessary curb barrier requirement around the perimeter of their parking lot. This parking lot was proposed in conjunction with Wrighteo Products, who would utilize the parking lot during weekclays, while the United Methodist Church would use the parking lot on Sundays and for other services. The obligation of Wrighteo Products would be to pay for the completion of the parking lot and continued maintenance even though it would be situated on the Church property. The Church's request for elimination of the curb barrier was based on the fact that drainage would appear to pond behind the School and Church building if a curb was installed and would not be able to flow out into the street. A motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Illonigen and unanimously carried to approve the variance requeut for the United Methodist Church to eliminate the curb barrier around the perimeter of their new parking lot. 7, Report by Engincer on Storm Ula[cr Ponding Problemu - West River Street. Mr. Ron Nygaard, who lives at 1521 West River Street in Ritzc Manor Addi- tion, appronchad the City Council at the August 25, 1980 Council Mecting iudicnting a concern for a problem with drainage in thin area along West River Street. At the last Council Meeting, September 8, 198U, John Iladalich, City Engineer, recommended that culverts for 1-01-9 2 & 1, Block 1, Ritze Mnnor be increnved to 18" diameter, and Locu 4 & 5, Block 1, Rilze Manor, be ineronsed to 24", and also a 24" culvert be placed on Hilltop Drive to allow the drainage to run off into a creek without canning any backup Problems. The engincer'g estimate for changing these culverts and restoring the driveways wan cutimated at approzimalely $6,250. After reviewing the estimated coat, the council diaeugued whether any portion of the project would be nosessed to the benefitted property owners or whether the City would pick up th,: entire coat on ad valorom ta%eg. Although there wag concern that picking up the ontire coat J mny set a precedent in the future, a mnjority of the Council members felt Council minutes - 10/6/8U that the City had a certain responsibility in this instance in that they did allow the smaller culverts Lobo installed just recently, since this area has been developed with homes in the past five or six years. In regards to Council discussion on whether other areas within the City may also have similar problems, Public Works Director, John Simola, noted to the Council that another property owner at the intersection of River Street and Otter Creek Road has a similar problem in that the culvert is undersized and the drainage has, on a number of occasions, flowed over his driveway. It was noted that other than this particular property and the area discussed by the .engineer in Ritze Manor, no other areas or problems have been brought to the attention of the City. Motion was therefore made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair to order the improvement project to install the necessary culverts as needed to eliminate the drainage problems along West River Street with the entire cost of the improvement to be picked up by the City. Voting in favor: Phil IJhite, Fran Fair, Arve Crimsmo, Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. It was noted that quotes will be obtained for this improvement project by the City Engineer and brought to the Council for their approval. 4. Consideration of Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plat - Riverwood EsLatcs. Mr. Floyd Kruse and Kermit Lindberg requested approval of a preliminary subdivision plat consisting of 13 residential lots ranging in size from 12,100 square feet to 23,000 square feet, and 5 commercial lots ranging; in size from 12,600 square feet to 72,500 square feet. The proposed plat, as presented, calls for the cxtensinn of Mississippi Drive westerly to the property line of the Wastewater Treatment Plant property. This street would be duadended at the property line, and the Council discussed whether this street actually should be a cul-de-sac for maintenance purposes vs. a deadend residential street. Although the street would not be used for through traffic, it wan noted by Public Works DiiettOr, John Simola, that this dendend st rc!t could be uned as an alter Ila to [route to the Treatment Plant if necasu:uy, and Would be utilized very little by the City. It was noted that before the final plot could be presented to the Council, rezoning of lots 5, 6, 7 6 8 of Block 1 find been requested to be rezoned from B-3 to 11-1 residential, and also rezuning of Lot 1, Block 2 from R-1 to B-3 (conunercinl). Thenc rezoning issues will be reviewed by 1.111, Planning Commission on October 14th, prior to the final submission of the final plat to the Council. In addition, it Wall noted by the City I.ngincer that a grading plan had not yet been submitted for review and recommended that any approval be contingent upon nubmiusion of this final grading Plan. Motion van made by Phil White, seconded by Yen Maus and unanimously carried to approve the preliminary plat, contingent upon submission of a grnding plan and approval by City Engineer, and also reviewing the d�:Lnils un how the Mississippi Drive cxtensinn be constructed. Whether n deadend su•col. or cul-de-sac be shown on the plat. - J - COaneli Minutes - 10/6/80 5. Consideration of Allocation of Chemical Feed Equipment and Chemical Costs. As part of the requirements of the City of 1`1011ticCHO's MITES (National Pollutant Discharge Emission System Permit) Issued by the PCA, chemical feed equipment system Was authorized by the City to reduce its pollutant discharge into the Mississippi River to meet the Standards set by lila State. At the time this system was authorized, it was determined that Wrightco Products should be allocated their proportionate share since they were the primary factor in the necessity of the City of Monticello having to install this equipment. In regards to the allocation of chemical feed equipment installation costs, operating costs including chemicals, and the additional engineering fees related to Lha chemical feed equipment, a report was prepared by the City Engineer, John Badalich, in regards to his recommendations on a possible allocation of costs. The report noted that Wrightco Products and lbw City of Monticello had done sampling tests of the effluent emitted by Wrightco Products. Prior to the Council Meeting, a meeting had been held with Wrightco Products President, Jim Ridgeway, City Engineer, John Badalich, City Administrator and Public Works Director, and an agreement had been mads whereby the startup costs for the installation of the Chemical Fred Equipment would result in a 452 share being paid by Wrightco Products based on an average of all samples taken. The equipment costs along with installation, chemicals for Start up, and development, and laboratory tests during the start-np, totalled $23,071.42, plus indirect engineering costs of $9,514. Total ill $32,585.42. Of this amount, 45% would be allucaLed to Wrightco PI.OdliCtn, or $14,663. In addition to the Squill chemiCal feed equipment costs, e.te., it was determined in the meeting with Wrightco Products that approximately $16,939 for chemicals and operating ousts have been incurred by the City sinco the nctunl installation, and based on the sampling tests average, 41% of this cost would be shared by Wrightco Products, or $6,945, less a credit of $2,458 estimated aalvagc value on the equipment. Thia salvage value credit of $2,458 wao determined by taking the total salvage value times Wrightco's share of 45X. The total amount to be recommended by the Committee, and agreed to by Wrightco Products for the Chemical Feed Equipment totals $19,150, and Wrightco Products requested that this amount be payable, in five (5) install- mentS SLarting January 3, 1981, and ending on January 3, 1985. In nddition, Wrightco Products requested that the first two installments clue on January 3, 1981 and January 3, 1982 bear no interest with the remaining three payments Payable with 8% iulurest. In addition to the $19,150 cost, it is eatimnted that approximately $20,000 Per year will be spent on chemicolO and operating COOLS fur the next year and a half, until such time as the upgrading of Lila Waslewntt!lTreatment Plant is completed. Of this $20,000 annual cont, 41%, or $8,200 per year, would also be charged to Wrightco Products au their proportionate Share of the chemicals used. This ChLimuLed $8,200 yearly COOL would be adjusted according to sampling done based on Wrighlco's effluent, or BOD levels. Council Minutes - 10/6/80 Discussion by the Council concerned whether the City should charge 8% annual interest on the entire $19,150 payable in five installments, or whether the first two years could be interest free. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Phil White to approve the allocation of the initial start-up costs and annual operating costs as negotiated and agreed upon by Wrightco Products and the City, totalling $19,150 payable in five annual installments with no interest the first two installments, plus 41% of the estimated annual operating costs, subject to this agreement being approved by tiie City Attorney. .Voting in favor: Arve Grimsmo, Phil White, Fran Fair. opposed: Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen. 6. Consideration of the Adoption of a Resolution Calling; for a Referendum on the issuance of Cenernl Ohligntion Bonds to Finance the Construction of a Public Library. Merrill Birch, Architect on Lite Library project, informed the Council that the estimated cost for Lite proposed library would be approximately $500,000 including; land costs and architectural fees. The Cummitu:e for the Library Project recommended that approximately $250,000 be borrowed With the issuance of General Obligation Bonds, with Lite remaining $250,000 coming from the sale of the uaicwood Building Itlock. The Library Project Committee also reconmcnded that the City Council expend approximately $500 authorizing Lite Architect to prepare a model of the proposed library for informational meetings prior to the November 41.11 General Election. This model would be useful fur praBenLations to inform the public of Lite proposed library. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fvnn Fair and unanimously carried to adopt a r.&0luLiC— pl.,ciug the issuance of general obligatiun bonds on the Nuvembcr 4, 1980 ballot ill Lite antuunt of $250,000 fur Lite purpose of building a new public library, and also to authorize up to $600 expenditure for n scale model of cite pruposed library. (tie.; RUSOlUtian 1980 726) 7. Consideration of Approval of Agreement with the Minnesota Deunrtnn:nt of Transportation, and Approval of Plans and Specifications for a Cotmnuter Parking Lot Snuthweel of the 1-94 Interchange. The Minnesota Department of 'Transportation 11118 submitted a proposed agreement whereby the City of Monticello will be offered $6,000 to develop n 152 -space commuter parking lot. 'rhie allocation is based primarily on it gravel -based commuter parking lot proposed at the Inuer- change of 1-94, aouthweet of Highway 25. MIE Council Minutes - 10/6/80 The total cost of constructing a commuter parking lot with blacktop, etc. for approximately 220 spaces was previously estimated at $54,000 by the consulting engineer, John Badalich. It was recommended by the engineer that the entire commuter parking lot area be graded for expansion up to 220 spaces, but only Class 5 be installed on approximately half of it, or 110 spaces. The estimated cost for this portion of the project would be between $6,000 - 8,000, which would be primarily covered by the $6,000 grant from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. It. was pointed out that Lhe City docs not actually have title to the property as of this date, and it was the consensus of th'e Council that any improvements being done to the commuter parking lot this fall should not exceed the $6,000 grant until we get title to the property. Once the City is the actual owner of the property, blacktopping, etc., could be installed next spring, if desired. In regards to the drainage that would be created by the parking lot, consulting engineer, John Badalich, indicated that the State had agreed to the drainage plan whereby any water would drain through the 1-94 ditch. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to approve the agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation on the commuter parking lot and accepting the $6,000 grant, and approval of plans and specificatiuns for the development of a conanuter parking lot consiuting of 110 spaces with Class 5, and the entire area being brought up to grade, with a note that blacktopping would be considered next year When title is received from the State and County. 8. Department )lead Qunrterly Meeting. The following Department )leads were in attendance at the Council Meeting: Fire Chief — Paul Klein Wright County Sheriff's Rep. - Duddy Coy Senior CiLi2ema Director - Karen Hanson YMCA Detached Worker - Mike Melatud Public Works Director - John Simola Building In spe.ctor/Civil Defense Dir. - Loren Klein City Administrator - Cary Wicber Karen Hanson, Senior Citizens Center Director, noted that all,.- was in agreement With the Cuuncil'a recent decision to deny appropriating $1,000 to the Sherburne County Social Services Department to holp in the transportation cost of Senior Citizens attending the big Lake Nutrition Center twice weekly. Ilea' own survey indicated that only two individuals currently use t he bun services to )lig Lake regularly, and felt that the $1,000 would be hard to justify for these two indiv idua Is. Council Minutes - 10/6/80 Public Works Director, John Simola, requested that Dick SchillewnerL be paid approximately $7,000 for the sod he recently installed as partof the 1979-1 Improvement Project in Oakwood Industrial Park. His request was based on the fact that the price from Schillewaert was very favor- able, and recommended that his bill be paid as soon as possible since Mr. Schillewaert had to pay for the sod from his supplier as it was delivered. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve the payment to Dick Schillewaert in the amount of $2,954.50 for 3,110 square yards of sod installed as part of the 1979-1 Improvement Project to be assessed to Oakwood industrial Park property. Mr. Simola also recommended that the City Council require property owners on the north side of Broadway between Cedar and New Streets to shovel their sidewalks during the winter months, as many of the pedestrian's are walking in the street, creating a safety problem. IL was noted by the Council Lhat alLhough CiLy Ordinances require duwntown businesses Lo keep their sidewalks clear of snow, this provision of the Ordinance has not. really been enforced in residential areas in the past. 9. Consideration of Additional Billings from Consulting Engineer on Chemical peed Equipment Installation and Wastewater Treatment Plant Analvsis and Reports. Consulting Engineer, John Badalich, reviewed with the Council all of the costs his firm has incurred since June 1977 in regards to the City of MonLiCC-Ilo'S Wastewater Troatmont Plant efflur.nt quality analysis rind recomntondationa for interim chemical treatment. Mr. Badalich indicated that aver the post threw years, many (tours went into report. writing, meetings, and correspondence with the I'CA in regards Lo cite raissuance of thy: City's NI'DES fermi t. Tho, ultimate 5,11 kit ion ttt the reissunnce of the City's NPDES Permit to dump effluent into the Mississippi River was culminated by the fact that the CiLy had to install Lite chemical feed equipment to reduce effluent levels discharged. Mr. Badalich indicated that because many additional tests were clone by his firm because of Wrightco Products dion4ree.mcnt. with the amount they wel-0 cunlribuLinit and also the decision by Lhc CiLy not. to insLall the chemical feed equipment in the fall of 1977, additional costs were incurred by his firn, which he felt should he billable to the City of Monticello. Ile indieaLed 1_11,11. numerous correspondence Look place will] the. PCA in an effort. Lu avoid requiring the City Lu insLull thin equipment, but samplings done at Lhc plant eventually lead Ln the requirement that the chcmicsl feed equipment. be inslnlled. Ln addition Lo the additional engineering expenses in regards to the City's effluent problem and tile. Permit roissuancc, Mr. Iladalich indicated that the initial cost for thp design and preparation of plana and spocificnlionu for the chemical feed equipment amounted to over $8,000. Dl]•. Badalich also felt an additional $8,000 apptoximaloly waw incurred in ulher engineering roisted matters to the Wa8Lewaler T1'eatmenl Plant and submitted a total bill in excess of $16,000. 7 /(p Council Minutes - 10/6/80 Although the Council did not question whether the bills were legitimate j or not, concerns were expressed over the time delay in presenting the bills to actually when they were incurred. However, in an effort to resolve the issue, motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair to compromise on the engineering fees, and authorize an $8,000 payment in full for services rendered. Voting in favor: Phil White, Fran Fair, Arve Crimsmo, Ken Maus, with Dan Blonigen abstaining. Meeting adjourned. v - Rick Wolfste er, Assistant Administrator RW/ns - 8 - J