Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 09-13-1982AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL September 13, 1982 - 7:30 P.N. Mayor: Arve Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus, Phil White. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of the Minutes of August 23, 1982. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions/Requests,Complaints. Old Business 4. Representative of Residents Affected by the west Bridge lift Station Failure (May 27th, 1982). 5. Consideration of a Recommendation from the Monticello Planning Com- mission Relating to a Proposal for a Manufactured Housing Planned Unit Development. (Meadow Oak, Mr. Jim Boyle). G. Consideration of a Recommendation from the Monticello Planning Com- mission Relating to a Proposal for a Planned Unit Development. (Victoria Square, Mike Rehrer). 7. Consideration of a Recommendation from the Monticello Planning Com- mission Relating to an Ordinance Amendment Eetabliahing Architectural Control in R-1, R-2 and R-3 zones, and Adding Certain Dafinitiona. 8. Consideration of Appointment to and Establishing a Salary for the Position of Wastewater Plant Laboratory Analyst. Now Ruainoss 9. Presentation of the Preliminary 1903 Municipal Budgats General Comments by L'idem. C10. Adjourn. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL August 23, 1982 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Arve Grilnsmo, Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen, Phil White. Members Absent: Yen Maus. 2. Approval of the Minutes for the Meeting Beld on Auqust 9th, 1982. A motion was made by White, seconded by Fair to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held on August 9th, 19eZ. Voting in favor were Fair, White, Blonigen with Grimsmo abstaining due to his ab- sence from that meeting. 4. Consideration of an Appointment of Additional Election Judqes. A motion was made by Fair, seconded by White and unanimously carried to appoint the following people as additional election judges for the upcoming primary and general election for 1982: Adolino Pierce, Mrs. Keith Kjellberg, and Merilee Sonju. 5. Consideration of an Application for a Travelinq Show Permit. Mr. Roger Iledtko, co-chairman of the St. Henry's Catholic Parish Fall Festival, requested a permit to allow the church to operate small carnival rides during their fall festival. According to city ordinances, carnival and traveling allows are allowed provided complete liability insurance is provided and a $100 Ix:r day fee is paid. The $100 fee can be waived for non- profit organizations at the descrotion of the Council. A motion was made by White, seconded by Fair and unanimously carried to approve the issuance of a one day carnival allow permit for the St. Henry's Catholic Fall Festival provided that a proper certificate of insurance for liability is submitted. In addition, a motion wan made. by H1:ite, seconded by Fair and unanimoualy carried to waive the $100 fee. requirement bocaune of the non profit status of the charitable organization. G. Consideration of Possible Contract 11enegotiation with Corrow Sanitation. Recently, an inquiry was made by Corrow Sanitation on the possibility of renegotiating futuru years onto the present garbage contract that the City of Monticello has with Corrow CSanitation. Council Minutes - 8/23/82 The current contract will expire August 1, 1983, but it appears that it may be in the best interest of InLh Corrow Sanitation and the City of Monticello to have discussions in regard to the possible extensions of the contract at the present time. It was the consensus of the City Council that the City Staff contact Corrow Sanitation for the purpose of possible contract extensions and renegotiation of the pricing. 7. Consideration of Charlge Orders 050, 051, 052 and 053 with the Paul A. laurence Comoanv on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Project. The following change orders were reviewed with City Council by the Public Works Director and City Engineer regarding the Wastewater Treatment Plant Construction Project. Change Order 050 would amount to a $2,699.00 credit for the de- letion of a variable flow/return activated sludge. Change Order 051 would amount to an additional $5,818.00 for additional maintenance equipment and special spark resistant tools Change urder n52 amounts to an additional cost of $1661.00 fur the relocation of piping for the blower airline in the equali- zation tank. Change Order 053 amounted to an additional $1096.00 for ad- ditional fittings necessary to connect the transfer pumps in iho equalization Lanka. A motion was made by White, seconded by 8lonigon and unanimous- ly carried to approve change order-: numlwre So through 53 with the Paul A. Laurence Company on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Construction Project for an additional amount of $5,29G.00. 6. Consideration of Attendonco at Llw lnaque of Minnesota Cities Regional Meotings. Council Members were advised that the lnaque of Minnesota Cities will be holding its regional meetings of which Monticello is a l:art of on Wednesday, September lot, at the Crow River Country Club in Hutchinson, Minnesota. it wan noted by Council consensus that tho City Staff should participate at the regional meeting representing the City of Monticello, but that none of tho Council Members would he attending. (;D Council Minutes - 8/23/62 9. Consideration of Applying for Amendments to the EPA/PCA Waste- water Treatment Plant Grant Program. Recently, John Badalich, City Engineer, informed the Council that additional monies may be available from the EPA/PCA Grant Program for the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant Project. Mr. Jerry Corriek, Project Engineer on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Construction, reviewed with the Council three grant amend- ments applications proposed. The first grant amendment requested an extension of the grant budget period to July 31st, 1983, based upon the anticipated time required for resolution of the June 29th, 1961 contract claim and subsequent law suit file filed against the City of Monticello by the contractor, Paul A. Laurence Company. The second grant amendment proposed requested an additional $26,'-411.00 to cover the cost of the legal fees and engineering fees associated with the above mentioned law suit filed by the contractor. The third grant amendment proposal would request additional construction funds valued 5232,Sn0 for vnrinue construction items and equipment. Part of the total $232,500 consisted of spare equipment and parts that would be necesnary to have in inventory at the Treatment Plant totalling $39,900.00. A second part of the total included approximately $7500 for additional security fencing around the entire plant area. Approximately $113,000 out of the $232,500 was tentatively ear marked for a proposed personnel services and storage building addition at the Treatment Plant. The additional structure would contain lab equipment storage and storage for small parts along with a shower, lavatory and lunch/ meeting rooms. Concerns wore expressed by the Council whether such an elaborate facility is actually necessary at the prouent time considering there are currently only three or four amployaou at the location. It wan noted that the City does currently own a hone next to the plant that could be used for Storage or meeting facilities and felt that the $113,000 expenditure for thio additional Wilding could l.e eliminated at thio time. An a result, a motion woo made by White, seconded by Fair and unanimously carried to authorize the City Engineer to apply for a grant amendment for the extension of the budget period to July 31, 1903 and to apply for the additional (undo for legal coats associated with defending the law suit in the amount of $26,411.00. 9 T Council Minutes . 8/23/82 Also, a motion was made by White, seconded by Fair. and unani- mously carried to authorize the City Engineer to apply for a grant amendment for additional construction fund contingencies in the amount of $119,500.00 per OSM's letter dated August 17, 1982. The construction cost summary prepared by the engineer included $113,000 for the personnel storage and office building which will be eliminated from the grant request. 10. Consideration of Installinq Additional Water Line on Hart Blvd. John Simola, Public Works Director, requested authorization from the Council to proceed with the installation of approximately 230 feet of water main extension along Hart Blvd. by the Waste- water Treatment Plant. The additional 230 feet would add an additional hydrant location for safety purposes at the plant and would be installed using salvaged G inch water main pipe that the City has on hand. The total cost was estimated at approximately $1750.00 for labor by Hayes Contractor's with an additional $500 in fittings and parts. It was noted by the project engineer, Jerry Carrick of OSM, that possibly the City could apply for funding of this project as part of the Wastewater Treatment plant with a grant amend- ment. A motion was made Fair, seconded by White and unanimously / carried to approve the installation of the 230 feet of water lino along Hart Blvd. at an estimated cost of $2300 and authorized the City Engineer to apply for a grant amendment in this amount as part of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Construction Project. 11. Approval of Bills for Month of August. A motion was made by White, seconded by Blonigen and unanimous- ly carried to approve the bilis for the month of August as pre- acnted, (See Exhibit 8/23/82 N1). Mooting Adjourned. /I L, W o Rick Wolfato r Assistant Administrator - 4 - Council Agenda - 9/13/82 AGENDA SUPPLEME14T 2. Approval of the Minutes for the Meeting Held on August 23, 1982. Representative of Residents Affected by the west Bridoe Lift Station Failure (May 27th, 1982). The residents affected by the failure of the lift station have become very dissatisfied with the handling of their claim to this point. I have received numerous calls with various re- quests that the City, if it cannot speed up the insurance company, pay the claim in advance and then expect the insur- ance claim when it canes. I have noted to the Person who suggested this that if the City is found not liable in this case, then we would be forced to require all of the money be refunded. It seems that the main concern comes from those residents who did not have available funds to do the necessary work to their property beyond ordinary clean up. They are waiting for the insurance company money to come through so that they can do the necessary work to their basements. Throughout the course of this matter, I have not been included in the communication from the insurance company which, of course caused a certain amount of communication problems and confusion. I have spoken this morning (Friday) with D. Degner of the Homo Insurance Company to got a full explanation of the status of the claim. Basically, the result of the Homo In- surance Company investigation is that the City is not liable in any way for the lift station failure, and thus not liable to reimburse residents for their in:onvenience and damage property. She informed me that she wrote letters of inquiry to three companiea involved with lift station construction and the electric box installation. She said that one of the three companies has already notified her and presented their evidence showing why they are not liable. Olson Electric has not yet contacted her, nor has Powartronics. She noted that if anyone had responsibility at all, it would be Power- tronics, oince they ware the manufacturern of the breaker box and should have known that the box might not be able to handle a straps load. She did go on to note, however, that thia is a very flimsy claim and that Powertronica probably could defend themselves very wall in thio rano. At any rata, we should be receiving tho final notice of finding by early next weak from the insurance company and that will be that the City is not liable. Council Agenda - 9/13/82 The residents who will be attending the meeting, I anticipate, will be very dissatisfied with the findings and may elect to bring a class action suit against the City. Ms. Degner noted that the size of the claim is such that if they do bring suit, it will likely go to circuit court and thus.the insurance company attorneys would represent the City. She also noted that there is a substantial legal history of persons bring- ing suit against a City for sewer failure and all cases finding in the favor of the City unless there was gross neg- ligenee quite evident. In my conversat ions with the residents in the area, I have spoken primarily with Sue Thimmnesh and re- lated to her that the findings were not coming in as favor- able. I will be contacting her again this afternoon to tell her exactly what I have found out as of today. While there is a possibility that the residents will be understanding, I doubt it. I suspect their ire will be raised and that they will be asking for some satisfaction. It seems to me that our only recourse is to rely on the findings of the insurance company that the City was not negligent in their behavior and that ultimately we aro not liable for damage done to those porsmes houses. This simply reiterates the finAinns of John Simola at the time of the occurrence. He stated in hie original memo that in his opinion the City was not negligent and thus not liable. As a final note, it might be effective if any of you know some of the people involved to perhaps, speak with them prior to the meeting and toll them what you aro aware of at this time. If it does nothing oleo, it might keep the anger from getting out of hand. 1 - A Council Agenda - 9/13/82 Prefix to Items 5, 6 and 7. (TALL - The three Planning Commission items on your agenda are presented as recommendations from the Planning Commission. Your consideration at this time is not in the form of a public hearing on these matters. If, in fact, you wish to have additional hearing time dedicated to the matters, either singly or wholly, the matters should be referred back to the Planning Commission with a directive that additional public hearings should be held, and a reason for that request be stippliad. Each of these items as they :o. staid have had their hearings and are accompanied by recommendations from the Planning Commission for Council decision. The following information, prepared by Loren Klein, summarizes the results of the public hearing held on August 31st, 1982. - 2 - Council Agenda - 9/13/82 5. Consideration of a Recommendation from the Monticello Planning Com- mission Relating to a Proposal for a Manufactured Housing Planned Unit Development. (Meadow Oak, Mr. Jim Boyle) (LDK). At the special meeting of the Planning Commission on August 31, 1982, Mr. Jim Boyle and associate, Dick Knutson, of McCombs and Knutson as well as other representatives for both individuals were at the Planning Commission to discuss Mr. Boyle's Planned Unit Development on the southeasterly 177 acres of his approximately 600 acres of land in Monticello. At the meetinq, the representatives of the owner discussed the following items which they are concerning themselves with. 1. It is their intent to retain as many trees as possible and only remove those which would be necessary for the place- ment of a home or to place streets, etc. 2. It is the developer's intent to incorporate a series of trails throughout the development to give the residents of the subdivision an opportunity to have access to the park's system without having to cross other people's lands. 3. It is the developer's intent to use a variety of mumu manu- facturer's hones rather than stick with one home or only one or two plano for the exteriors of the homes. 4. The developer would most likely act the homes on permanent wood foundations or basements. 5. It is the developer's intent that approximately 90% of the hones would have basements. 6. The developer would like the City to consider a 5 foot side yard setback for accasnory buildings and would be willing to stay with the 10 foot side yard setback when it was living quarters that would be abutting a side yard setback line so that if a neighbor had a garage on his property which was adjacent to the property line and the other neighbor had a living roan which was adjacent to the property line, the nearest the two could be would be 15 feet. 7. The exteriors of the home would have to be finished before people could move into their hones which would include the painting, landscaping, paving, etc. 8. It would be the developer's intent that probably 50% of the homes would have garages at the time they were constructed and it would be their intent that all of the them would have a garage within 5 years. - 3 - Council Aoenda - 9/13/82 9. The developer would be willina to plat out 30 lots at a time for approval rather than expect an overall final approval on the entire project, thereby giving the City much tighter control on the development as it progresses. The Planning Commission unanimously passed a recommendation that this concept for a Planned Unit Development be approved so that the developer can prepare his preliminary plat on the same. In passing this approval, the Planning Commission left room for the Council's consideration of allowing 60 to 70 foot wide building lots of approximately 7 to 10 thousand square feet each. Also, the developer will be asking tial a bide yard zct:ach for accessory buildings be allowed to be 5 feet rather than 10 feet, that is normally required in an R-1 or R-2 zone. APPLICANT: Jim Boyle. CONSIDERATION: Consider approval or denial of this concept of a Planned Unit Development in order to allow the developer to pro- ceed with a preliminary plat for a public hearing to be held in the future. (Approval of this concept plan would in no way commit the City to accepting this project, but would only indicate to the developer that if the project is reasonable in its preliminary stages which would be the next public hearing thaL Lhey wuulu cun- sider its review). WFERENCES: The Meadow Oak's Development Plan Book which was pre- aented at a previous meeting. -4 - Council Agenda - 9/13/82 6. Consideration of a Recommendation from the Monticello Planning Com- mission Relatinq to a Proposal for a Planned Unit Development. (Victoria Square, Mike Rehrer). (L)K). At the August 31st, 1982 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of Mike Rehrer's "Victoria Square" Planned Unit Development. The Victoria Square proposal consists of three different developments all separated by public roads. Parcel A will contain approximately 29 townhouses on 2.24 acres of land. Parcel B will contain approxi- sately 52 units of office condominiums on 4.46 acres of land and Parcel C will contain slightly more than 11,000 square feet of retail space on approximately 1.78 acres of land. In the development of this Planned Unit Development complex, Mr. Rohrer is willing to give to the City a strip of land running north/south through this parcel in order that a new Cedar Street frontage road can be developed. Mr. Rohrer's proposal would be to develop this project in a Victorian style of building. In this proposed Planned Unit Development also, it will be necessary at some point to define the exact zoning line chane between the present R-1 and B-3 zones of which both are included in this project. As was the case with the previous agenda item, the only action necessary would be to approve this concept plan so that the developer could proceed to a preliminary plat stage for his next public hearing in thio process for developing a Planned Unit Development and any decisiono made in accepting this concept stage would not commit the City to any acceptance of any part or parte of this concept for final approval. APPLICANTS Mika Rohrer. CONSIDERATIONI Consider approval or denial of thin concept Otago for a Planned Unit Dovolopmont. REFERENCFS: Pleane rafer to any previously submitted documentation on thin project from the developer. 5 l Council Agenda - 9/13/82 7. Consideration of a Recommendation from the Monticello Planning Com- mission Relating_ to an Ordinance Amendment Establishing Architectural Control in R-1. R-2 and R-3 zones, and Adding Certain Definitions. (LDK). Because of a recent State law which required that all communities allow manufactured homes within residential zoning districts in which they can meet the architectural control requirements, it is necessary for Monticello to develop an ordinance of architectural controls within the residential zoning districts. (That is; R-1, R-2 and R-3 zoning districts). A work outline in enclosed in the agenda supplement which includes the recommended considerations for amending the residential district architectural controls. The Planning Commission recommended amending the definition's section of Monticello ordinances to include the definition of a mobil home and also a definition of a manufactured house. (Please see definitions enclosed in the supplement). The Planning Commission also recommended amending the zoning ordinances for R-1, R-2 and R-3 zones to include the following architectural controls. 1. Minimum building widtn of 24 feet. 2. Minimum 3: 12 roof pitch with a minimum of 12 inch soffits. 3. Building anchored to a permanent concrete or treated wood foundation. 4. No metal siding permitted under 12 inches in width or with- out a 5 inch or more overlap and relief. 5. Minimum floor area of 960 square feet unless elsewhere exempted by Monticello Ordinance. 6. Meet all regulations of the Minnesota Uniform Building Code. CONSIDERATION: Consider approving or denying the recommendation to amend the ordinance with the definition of mobilo hone and manufactured houoing and also the R-1. R-2 and R-3 zones for architectural controls. REFERENCES: The encl000d work outlined which show the definition of mobile home manufactured house and also the work outlined shows the proposed architectural controls. - 6 - W 0 R K O U T L I N E for discussion purposes only MANUFACTURED HOUSING Add to existing residential district: Architectural Controls, 1. Minimum building width of 24 feet. 2. Minimum 3,12 roof pitch with minimum six (6) inch sofit. 3. Building anchored to a permanent concrete or treated wood foundation. ON'Q-1% 4. No metal siding permitted wiBasmQ W 12 inches or without a one-half (i) inch or more overlap and relief. 5. Minimum floor area of 1,000 -square feet. 6. Meet all regulations of the Minnesota Uniform Building Code. Definition of Mobile Homes A mobile home is a manufactured home that is lees than 16 feet wide over at least 30 feet of its length in the erected mode, suitable for year round occupancy and containing the same water supply, waste disposal, and electrical conveniences as immobile housing and subject to tax or registration under State law, and having no foundation other than wheels, jacks, or skirtings. Width measurement shall not take account of overhangs and other projections beyond the principal exterior walls. 0 DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURED HOUSING "Manufactured Home" means a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which in the traveling mode, is eight body feet or more in width or 40 body feet or more in length, or, when erected on side, is 760 or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein] except that the term includes any structure which meets all the re- quiremonta and with respect to which the manufacturer volun- tarily files a certification required by the City and complies with the standards established under this chapter and which meets the Manufactured Home Building Code. Council Agenda - 9/13/82 Consideration of Appointment to and Establishing a Salary for the Position of Wastewater Plant Laboratory Analyst. (TAF). Accompanying the last agenda supplement was a copy of the resume and application of Sean Hancock. Mr. Hancock was our only applicant for this position. As you are aware, the position was advertised as available within the City and denoted as promotion from within. In the first discussion about this position, salaries were discussed, and at that time the Council elected not to ad- vertise a salary so as to address that at the time the appoint- ment was made. In the original supplement I suggested a salary range in the low 20's, however, for the 1983 proposed budget, I have used a working figure of $19,800.no. I arrived at this figure by projecting the union hourly rate for 2,08U hours and then assigning an increased rate of $1,703.00 annually which is the proposed salary increase for supervisory personnel through- out the City. I have not, as of this writing, spoken with Sean to see if this salary figure is acceptable. I suggest that any action that is taken be taken in two steps: First, the salary be set to match the job description which you previously adopted and second, the appointment of the person be made. If at that time Mr. Hancock declines the appointment, then we would have Lu do ww .i L. Lhl.,9 a, .!U-, rmwyuLie Lu L'- oulavy oL.-- advertise to fill the position. It should also be noted that concerning this appointment, a starting date should be set and the salary should be effective as of that date, so that the in- come figure does not reflect purely 1983 dollars. - 7 - A Council Agenda - 9/13182 9. Presentation of the Preliminary 1983 Municipal Budget: General Comments by Eidem. I fully anticipate presenting you with the proposed 1983 budget on Monday evening. There is little for me to say here, since the presentation of the budget will be accompanied by some coaenents at that time. You will also be receiving certain written comments to assist you in reviewing the budget. I think it will be far more effective if I address you at the meeting when you have an actual budget copy in hand, rather than my continuing on now, and you not having a reference source. M -IM