City Council Agenda Packet 08-12-1985AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, August 12, 1985 - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blontgen
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Special Meeting Hold July 29,
end August 7, 1985, and Regular Meeting Held July 22, 1985.
3. Citizen's Comments/Petitions, Requests, Complaints.
Old Business
a.
Consideration of Pursuing Acquisition of the Assembly
of God Church Building.
5.
Consideration of Change Order - Interceptor Sower.
Now
Business
6.
Conoidoration of Adopting a Resolution Granting Preliminary
Approve.1 to a Proposal for the Sale of Industrial Revenue
Bonds, Applicant - Viet Construction,
7.
Conoidoration of Acquisition of Various Public works Equipment.
B.
Consideration Of Authorizing Annexation Study (No Supplement Attached).
9• Consideration of Granting a 3.2 Boor License, Off -Salo - Applicant -
River Road Plaza.
10. Adjourn.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
July 29, 1985 - 6:30 P.M.
Members Present: Mayor Grimsmo, Council Members Jack Mxwell,
Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen, and Bill Fair.
Members Absent: None
Also in Attnedance: City Administrator Eidem, John Uban representing
Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, and John Badalich representing
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates.
1. Call to Order.
2. Annexation Study Proposal - DSU & OSM
Mayor Grimsmo explained that the sole agenda item was to discuss
the proposal submitted by DSU and OSM for preparing an annexation
study. He asked that Eidem provide a brief background on
the question.
Eidem explained in May that a meeting was hold with the Mayor,
the Town Board Chair, the County Zoning Administrator, Mr.
Uban, Mr. Badalich, Mr. Wolfsteller and himself to discuss
the existing conditions in the Orderly Annexation Area, and
whether or not some annexation would be appropriate. Eidem
noted that the not results of the rather lengthy conversation
woo that without an in-depth study a firm conclusion could
not be made with respect to annexation. Eidem noted that
at the conclusion of that May meeting, he roqueated Mr. Dahlgron
and Mr. Uban prepare a cost proposal for the preparation of
the annexation study. That proposal was than presented to
the City Council at their regularly scheduled meeting of July
22. This than led up to this special meeting where the Council
may discuss the proposal in-depth with the consultants. At
that point. Eidom turned the discussion over to John Uban
of Dahlgron. Shardlow and Uban to roviow the proposal.
John Uban provided a general explanation of the proposal noting
that the 13 items highlighted in the proposal coincided with
the crucial criteria as laid out in Minnesota Statutes regulating
annoxation. He noted that in order to go boforo the Minnesota
Municipal Board, those 13 areas needed to be discussed and
explored at length in order to prosnot an in-depth coca to.
the Board. Mr. Uban cited an example of a North Dakota Community
that approached annexation unouccossfullly simply because
they had not proparod in a thorough enough fashion to state
their case. It io his contention that if one is going to
prusuo annexation the data and all other related elements
C naad to be firmly established in order to state ones case
afficiontly, and in the long run the performance of such a
study is more cost effoctivo than going through the process
and being unsuccessful in the attempt to annex.
9
Special Council Minutes - July 29, 1985
Uban vent on to note that the cost estimate was based on the
total project, but such cost could be substantially reduced
provided a large amount of data could be supplied by City
Staff. Uban noted that consultant hours could be substantially
reduced by avoiding duplication of effort.
Mayor Grimsmo provided a brief background of the Orderly Annexation
Area and the joint Planning Board that has regulated growth.
He noted that the Towship has been extremely cooperative in
directing urban type development into the City and the OAA
as it was originally disigned. He agreed that due to the
rapid development over the last 10-11 years it is time to
evaluate the growth patterns and the effect of services within
the area. Mr. Badalich representing OSM discussed their portion
of the Annexation Study and emphasized that the engineering
firm would concentrate on the physical improvements required
to provide services. He noted that the water study that was
done previously for the City provided substantial data with
respect to those types of public improvements, but the City
needed to study, sanitary sever, storm sever, traffic patterns
and streets, and make physical planning decisions. He also
noted that a good deal of the information would already be
on hand based on earlier public facility studies.
Council Mombor Bill Fair asked whether or not the entire Orderly
Annexation area would be studied. Mr. Badalich responded
that the proposal addressed only the OAA and not the entire
Township. Going a stop further Eidem asked how the scope
of the study was originally determined. He asked whether
or not some kind of datormination had boon made to direct
the study inside of a boundary line that was established in
1974. He wantod to know if it was accurate to nay that this
boundary lino Is effective and we will study only the area
inside of it. Badalich and Uban both indicated that the City
primarily had to arbitrarily and artificially select an area
suitable for study. Since this lino was dotorminod in 1974
by the City and the Township, that would be the appropriate
area to research.
Council Mombor Fran Fair asked the question that if the City
does annex, than is a now Orderly Annexation area created
on the now porimoter of the City. Eidom explained that a
now OAA to an option, but because the CIty ham extra torritorial
development powers,
an OAA would not as required. Whether or not ouan an area
would bo:otabliashod would have to be done jointly through
l the an
nogotiation process.
0
Special Council Minutes - July E9, 1985
A question was raised with respect to the development proposal
being constructed by the Osowski Orchard/Flea Market. Eidem
indicated that a very small portion of the Osowski's property
currently lay withing the OAA, but that their recreational
proposal encompasses all 440 acres of their property. Eidem
noted that Osowskis had expressed an interest in having their
entire parcel annexed even though it goes beyond the lines
of the OAA. Council Member Bill Fair asked how much the cost
of the proposal might increase in order to look at all of
Osowski's property. John Uban indicated that it might increase
approximately 108. Council Member Blonigen indicated that
it was his preference the City study what currently exists
and that if greater study is required for the penefit of Osowski'a
development they would have to assume financial responsibility
for that portion of the study. Council Member Bill Fair agreed
that the approximate 400 acres of Osowski's property lying
outside of the OAA should be excluded from the study, and
that when the development project is at a significant stage
then the Osowskis can petition for annexation and would assume
financial reposibility for that portion of the study.
Both Uban and Badalich indicated that in the course of the
study if a major physical feature lying outside of the OAA
presented itself as a significant issue, the study of that
feature would have to be included to ensure thoroughness of
the results.
The Mayor asked if there were other concerns about the study.
He indicated that the proposed 4-6 month term seemed reasonable,
and that he favored engaging the consultants to do the work.
He noted that he felt confident Staff could do- the lion'a
share of the work, but saw no reason to create additional
burdens on the Staff. Council Member Bill Fair indicated
that it was his preference to postpone a final decision authorizing
the otudy until after the City mooto with the Township Representatives
in Spacial Session on August 7. He indicated that there may
be certain areae or issues that the Township would like addressed
in the study, and those matters could be inserted after the
Spacial Meeting. There was general concurrence on postponing
action amongst all Council Members.
The Mayor acknowledged Stewart Hoglund, a member of the Monticello
Town Board, who was sitting in the audience during this mooting.
The Mayor asked if Mr. Hoglund had any commanto or any specific.
concerns that the Council should be alort to. Mr. Hoglund
responds that he tonda to favor annexation in the highly developing
areas so long as the process does remain orderly. Mr. Hoglund's
concernwas that the unregulated development of sower and
soptic Oyetama could eventually jeopardize the ground water
quality.
O
Special Council Minutes - July 29, 1985
Mr. Hoglund indicated that in order to protect ground water
the City might have better control in terms of extending sanitary
sewer.
7. Adjourn.
Thomas A. Eiddm
City Administrator
I-
MINUTES
MM REGULAR MEETING - MINTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
N, July 22, 1985 - 7:30 F.M.
Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Dan
Blonigen.
Members Absent: Jack Maxwell
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, secconded by Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the special meeting held July
B and the regular meeting hold July 8, 1985.
a. Consideration of a Proposal to do an Annexation Study.
After a recent joint meeting of City Officials along with the
township or Chairman and County Zoning Administrator to discuss
the future of the Orderly Annexation area, City requested its
r. consulting planning firm to present a proposal on the coat and
�A requirements to prepare a study and review of the Orderly Annexation
area as to whether the City should in the future pursue annexation
of a portion or all of this area.
The Council briefly reviewed a proposal submitted by Dahlgron,
Shardlow, and Uban•, Inc. which outlined 13 points that they felt
the City should review in order to successfully analyze the pros
and cons of annexation. The planners felt that these 13 arose
will be required by the Minnesota Municipal Board if annexation '
issues aro over brought before them. The Initial estimated coot
of the planner and consulting engineer to prepare a report on
orderly annexation was estimated at between $22-26,000.00 for
the planner and $20-23,000.00 for the engineering services.
Additional expenses above those estimates would be incurred to publish
copies of the report and for attendance at meetings that would
be required as part of the study.
It was the general consensus of the Council to have a special
mooting on Monday. July 29, at 0:30 P.M. to review with the City
Planner and City Engineer the proposal aubmittod and to review
the 13 items listed in the proposal before actually authorizing
the study to be commenced.
F�
C•>uncll Minutes - July 22, 1965
5. Development Plan for a Planned Unit Development - John Kornovich
I Mr. Lionel Kull and Mr. St evo Upgren, partnere in the proposed
PUD development to be called Wastcello apartments presented to
the Council their development stage and final stage of their
planned unit development a onsisting of four, twelve unit apartment
buildings to be located on West County Road 39. The City Staff
along with the Planning Commission have been reviewing this proposal
for a number of months and the developers have made changes as
required and recommended by the City Staff.
City Engineer, John Badali ch, noted two concerns in regards to
thu final plat that he recommended be Initiated prior to final
recording. First item suggested was that the easement shown
on the plat for a portion of County Road 39 be dedicated as a
public street to clear up the actual property lino descriptions.
In addition, Mr. Badalich noted that there was a,conflict in
surveys of this parcel which abuts property owned by the City
of Monticello Maintenance Garage and Northern States Power -a
facility. Duo to an adjus tment made by the County Surveyor a
few years ago where a section line starting point was relocated,
there becomes a small Oliver of land on the East sido of their
property approximately 13 ft. wide at the North end and 4 ft.
wide at tho South end which overlaps a survey the City had on
f� its property in 1978. It was recommended by the Engineer that
JY ; the small sliver of land noted, be deeded over to the City as
part of a platting process to eliminate the discrepancy and the
City in turn would deed over a portion of this sliver to Northern
States Power Company. Tho developers were aware of the discrepancy
and agreed to amend their final plat to initiate the corrections
noted.
The motion woo made by Dlo nlgon, seconded by Fran Fair, and asked
to be carried approve the dovolopmont stage of the Planned unit
Development as presented contingent upon the two corrections
being made regarding County Road 39 dedication and through dooding
of the small sliver of lend on the East and to the City of Monticello.
G. Consideration of Furnace Replacement at the Monticello Library.
During the past several winters. the now Public Library has numerous
problems with its air to air heat pump system which have failed
to operate at very low temperatures. It has boon recommended
by the Public Works Director and the Building Inspector that
a now goo furnace be Installed to supplement the existing air
to air haat pump systems at an ostimatod cost of approximately
$4,000.00. The present sy atom will continuo to be used for cooling
but the high maintenance and operating deficiencies in the winter
make the air to air system Impractical for heating purposes.
ME
O
Council Minutes - July 22, 1985
1 Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair and asked
to be carried to authorize the City Staff to obtain quotes from at
least two suppliers and installers of gas furnaces and to make
111 a changeover in the furnace system not to exceed $4,000.00.
7. Consideration of Approving Cable Communications Budget.
Recently the SWC4 Cable Communications Commission approved its
1986 operating budget of $37,250.00. The budget is financed
from initial contributions of the Cities involved in the commission
and the three percent franchise fees that will be received from
Wright Cable. The joint powers agreement for the commission
requires each City to approve the budget annually.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair and asked
to be carried to approve the 1986 budget for the Sherburne/Wright
County Cable Commission as submitted.
B. Consideration of Bills for the Month of July.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Blonigen and asked
to be carried to approve the bills for the month of July as prose..tod.
_3_
O
9. Adjourn.
Rick WolfstoLlor
Assistant Administrator
_3_
O
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
August 7, 1985 - 7:00 P.M.
A special joint meeting of the Monticello City Council and Monticello
Township Board officials was duly called to order by the Mayor ac
7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Mayor Arve Grimsmo, Council Members Fran Fair,
Bill Fair, Dan Blonigen, and Jack Maxwell. Also present were
members of the Monticello Township Board consisting of Chairman
Franklin Denn, Stuart Hoglund, Jerry Stokes and Charles
Holthaus. In addition, County Zoning Administrator Tom
Salkowski and County Board Member LeRoy Engstrom were in
attendance. Also present were City Administrator, Tom Eidem and
Finance Director, Rick Wolfsteller and Building Inspector, Gary
Anderson.
The purpose of this special joint meeting was to discuss with the
Monticello Township Board Members the status of the orderly
annexation area surrounding the City of Monticello and the
possibility of conducting a study by the consulting city planner
and city engineer regarding whether any or all of the OAA area
should be considered for annexation by the City of Monticello.
Originally, discussion by the City Council had previously
taken place regarding possible annexation of a portion of the
orderly annexation area located near the Monti Club hill due to
possible expansion of the City's water system to include a -ater
tower near the Monti Club. The City Administrator, Eidem, briefly
gave a background history concerning the OAA area and possible
need by the City to annex a portion or all of the OAA area
because of the anticipated water tower location. Mr. Eidem
noted that the City's consulting planner and City's consulting
engineering firm have presented a proposal to the City Council
for a study of the OAA area as to whether the criteria would be
met for the area to be considered urban in nature and suitable
for annexation in the City limits. Mr. Eidem noted that the
purpose of the meeting was to receive input by township board
members regarding the study.
Mr. Tom Salkowski, County Zoning Administrator, presented a map
of the Orderly Annexation Area and noted that in reviewing the
building permits issued for residential developments within the
lost 31 years, 99 home permits and 3 mobil home permits ware
issued for the entire township with 50 of these residential
permits and 1 mobilo home permit being located in the OAA area.
C
t
C
Special Council Minutes - August 7, 1985
Approximately 50% of the residential development is occurring in
the OAA area of the township. Mr. Salkowski noted that since the
inception of the Orderly Annexation Area approximately 10 years
ago, only one new residential subdivision (Tyler East) has been
approved in the OAA area with the remainder of the residential
development primarily taking place in previously platted sub-
divisions.
General concerns expressed by Council Member Blonigen and Council
Member Fran Fair were in regard to the City's past and future
input into the development that will occur in the OAA area next
to the City limits. These concerns were generally related to
City input for approval of subdivision plats as to lot sizes, etc.
in order to make the lots more suitable for City utilities if and
when they should ever become part of the City limits. In the past,
it appears that all of these divisions have quite large lots which
will make them very hard to serve with sewer and water utilities, etc.
Township Chairman Denn and Zoning Administrator Salkowski indicated
that the City's input in future residential subdivisions would not
be a problem and that the County and Township officials would look
favorable upon requiring subdivisions to have either smaller lots
or plat the parcels showing larger lots with an overlay indicating
how the property can be subdivided in the future for addition
building lots when and if it should become part of the City.
Township Board Member Stuart Hoglund questioned who would end up
paying for the cost of sewer and water extensions to serve the
far away plate within the OAA area if the parcels were annexed into
the City as he felt the cost would be prohibitive. It was
noted by Mayor Grimsmo that even if part of the OAA area were
annexed into the City, it wouldn't automatically mean that sewer
and water would be extended unless petitioned for by the property
owners.
The Township Chairman Dann noted that in his opinion the com-
prehenaive plan of the OAA area needed to be looked at for changes
as most of the property is currently zoned residential and he felt
that during the lost 10 years major residential developments have
not occurred and the property should possibly be rezoned to
agricultural. By designating the areae closer to the City as
residential, and leaving the arena further away from the City as
agricultural, the Township, County and OAA Board would have more author-
ity to direct development near to the City limits where it
belongs.
9
C
Special Council Minutes — August 7, 1985
City Administrator Eidem suggested that possibly the comprehensive
plan should be reviewed in light of Mr. Dena's comments and that
maybe residential areas next to the City limits in the OAA area
should be immediately annexed into the City to provide for
residential development and the remaining agricultural zoning
areas could remain in the township with the OAA actually being
desolved at this time. The OAA Board in this case would no longer
be needed as both parties would have agreed to what areas should
remain agricultural and what areas should be developed as
residential.
Although the discussion basically centered on how the City and
Township could cooperate and regulate future subdivision plats
within the OAA area, the basic reason for the joint meeting was
to not only discuss planning input in the OAA, but to also
discuss whether the City should continue to pursue annexation
of a part or all of the OAA area. City Administrator Eidem
noted that land use planning is essential but other concerns
of the City is the population growth in the OAA area and what
strain this growth will be putting on City services and
resulting expenses of the City. Mr. Eidem noted that in his
opinion when the UAA Area and Township population, in genesal.
starts . to exceed the population of the City, the
services are being strained and result in more expense for the
City for maintenance of its basic utilities such as streets and
public services such as libraries, fire protection, city parks.
etc. Mr. Eidem recommended that if the study is completed by
the city planner and city engineer, the study should show
whether or not the OAA area is growing rapidly enough to be
considered urban which at that point should be possibly annexed
into the City. If the population growth to occurring in the
OAA area and a study shows that the population of the township
in causing increasing burdans for the City of Monticello
residences, possibly annexation of the area into the City should
be considered.
Although the Council Members present were not ready to mate a
decision in pursuing the annexation study, the item was directed
to be placed on a futura council agenda for additional con-
sideration. The Joint meeting was adjourned.
Rick Wolfstallery
Assistant Administrator
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
4. Consideration of Pursuing the Apposition of the Assembly of
God Church Building for the Purpose of Relocating the Monticello
Senior Citizens Center. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Well over a year ago initial conversations were held with
respect to the possibility of the City acquiring the vacated
Assembly of God Church on 4th Street for the possible relocation
of the Senior Center. The asking price at that time was so
high and the impetus to relocate was not present, so the proposal
was not looked at in depth. Several months ago businesses
in the block where the Senior Center currently is, expressed
interest in expanding their physical facilities inquired as
to the availability of the Senior Center property. Assuming
that commercial expansion in that block would be far more
valuable to the City than the Senior Center, we revived inquiries
with respect to the Church building on 4th Street. As you
know, the asking price originally was $250,000.00 and as discussions
proceeded their current asking price became 5200,000.00. An
appraisal done in 1979 by Jack Maxwell was provided that indicated
the building was worth only 5128,000.00 if sold for an alternate
use. Consequently, the City took the position that 5200,000.00
was out of the question.
In conversations I had with Pastor Norby, he indicated that
the church was having an appraisal done, and I indicated I
would appreciate receiving a copy of that. with a copy not
forthcoming, we engaged St. Cloud Appraisal to do an appraisal
of the Church, the existing Senior Center and the existing
Piro Hall. I have ackad John Simola and Gary Anderson to
prepare rough estimates with respect to the cost for converting
the Church building to a unable, Senior Center. The now appraisal
also contains certain estimates of that sort in its text.
Since our initial discussions, the commercial enterprise that
wan interested in the existing Senior Cantor has soloctod
a now Oita and is now only interested in the Senior Cantor
at come time down the road if and when the City alacto to
make a move. Tharp is no urgency nor necessity for commercial
space at this time. Consequently, the City In not faced with
any dira need to relocate the Senior Cantor. If the acquisition of
the Church building woro reasonable and the timo opportune,
than 1 would say it would be bonoficial to pursue it. At
this point, I do not coo tho asking price as being reasonable
or beneficial to the City since there is no urgency to relocate.
Creating more vacant buildingo that the City owns in not entirely
dooirablo.
RA
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
What I would like to achieve at this meeting is a Bpecific
direction on how staff should proceed. Does the City Council
wish for us to continue negotiating in an effort to acquire
one piece of property and perhaps sell the other piece of
property. The other alternative is to simply put the matter
back in the file cabinet and wait until a bonifled proposal
comes to pass that is beneficial to all the parties concerned.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Direct Staff to pursue negotiations for the acquisition
of the Assembly of God Church.
2. Direct Staff to close the file on this matter until such
time as concrete proposals for development in the downtown
come forward.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the overall coot and the type of fiscal constraints
we will be looking at in the near future Staff recommends
that the file be closed on this matter until such time as
a concrete proposal is in the offering. Staff will continue
to investigate alternate uses for the existing Fire Hall,
but we do prefer to put to rest all negotiations and potential
( for acquiring the Assembly of God Church.
Y D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of certain pages from the appraisals for the Son for Center
and the Assembly of God Church; copy of the renovation estimates
done by City Staff.
Mal
un xrnnson,'w
9uanf.Jrr
MIA. Mo, nL9
PHONE (612) 2534488
July 9, 1985
Mr. Tom Eidem
City Administrator
City Hall
Monticello, MN 55362
ST. CLOUD APPRAISAL. INC.
REAL ESTATE APPRAISALS
SUITE 101. ROOSEVELT OFFICE PARK
606 SOUTH 25th AVENUE
ST. CLOUD. MR 56301
IRe: Senior Citizen's Center, Cedar Street, Monticello, MN
IDear Mr. Eidem:
At your request I have completed an appraisal of the captioned pro-
�L party. As a result of my investigations I have estimated the Market
Value of the subject, in fee simple and as of June 24, 1985, to be:
SIXTY-EICHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
($68,000)
The data and methods used to arrive at this estimate are contained
in the attached report.
Regarding the fee for this appraisal, your attention is invited to
Item #9 in the Limiting Conditions and Assumptions.
If you have questions or if I may be of further assistance, please
feel free to call.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve you ir this matter.
Sincerely,
AV , .s
ociat Appraiser
MAtcmh
W-
E
i
0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE: $68,000
ALLOCATED AS: LAND: $11,000
IMPROVEMENTS: $57,000
INDICATIONS OF VALUE REACHED:
BY COST APPROACH: $69,000
BY MARKET COMPARISON APPFZOACH: $68,000
BY INCOME APPROACH: $65,000
SITE-
IMPROVEMENTS:
ITE:IMPROVEMENTS:
ZONING:
HIGHEST AND BEST USE:
DATE OF APPRAISAL:
RIGHTS APPRAISED:
ii
A 50' x 132' commercial lot, 6,600
square feet of land.
A 3,600 square foot one-story
masonry building used for a Senior
Citizen's Activity Center.
B-4, Regional Business
Commercial -Retail
June 24, 1985, which is also the
date I viewed the property.
Fee Simple Interests in Real Estate
Only
(T
I( RECONCILIATION AND FINAL CONCLUSION
IThe
three indications of value reached
thus far are:
Cost Approach:
$69,000
I
Market Comparison Approach:
$68,000
Income Approach:
$65,000
IThe
three estimates are in fairly close
agreement and are mutually -
supportive. The approaches center around a
suggested probable sale
Iprice,
per earlier definition of Market Value,
of $68,000.
I therefore concluded that the Market
Value of the subject, in
fee
'
simple and as of June 24, 1985, is:
SIXTY-EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
($68,000)
I
/i
ALLOCATED AS:
LAND:
$11,000
IMPROVEMENTS:
57,000
fTOTAL:
I
$68,000
I.
c
�t
34
M A
ST. CLOUD APPRAISAL, INC.
REAL ESTATE APPRAISALS
SURE 101. ROOSEVELT OFFICE PARK
606 SOUTH 25th AVENUE
2 ®
ST. CLOUD. MR 5630,
KU Jo -mon, M
t+wrso,m
A—Rrs
wee �
PHONE (612) 2534488
July 9, 1985
Mr. Tom Eidem
City Administrator
City hall
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Former Assembly of God Church, Monticello, MN
' Dear Mr. Eidem: '
At your request I have viewed and appraised the captioned property. I
As a result of my investigation I have estimated its Market Value,
in its as is condition, in fee simple, and as of June 24, 1985, to be:
I ONE IIUNDRED AND SIXTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($165,000)
I The data and methods used to arrive at this estimate are contained
in the attached report.
I Regarding the fee for this appraisal, your attention is invited to
Item 49 in the Limiting Conditions and Assumptions.
I£ you have questions or if I may be of further assistance, please
Ifeel free to call.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve you in this matter.
ISincerely,
IAlnRES
C1A to Appraiser
Or
Ii MA: cmh 6
C I'
I
I�
K;
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE:
$165,000
ALLOCATED AS: LAND:
$ 40,000
IMPROVEMENTS:
$125,000
INDICATIONS OF VALUE REACHED:
BY COST APPROACH:
$165,000
BY MARKET COMPARISON APPROACH:
Not Applied
BY INCOME APPROACH:
Not Applied
DATE OF APPRAISAL:
June 24, 1985, which is also the
date I physically inspected the
property.
�-
RIGHTS APPRAISED:
Fee Simple Interests in Real Estate
Only
SITE:
56,135 square feet of R-2 land, or
about 1.30 acres, more -or -less.
BUILDINGS:
A former church building with a
classroom wing addition, all one-
story, with a full basement;
total gross main floor area of 5,864
square feet.
ZONING:
R-2, Single and Two -Family Residen-
tial
HIGHEST AND BEST USE:
Institutional Use, such as Dunsi-
Governmental, Church, or Day -Care.
PROPERTY -TAX STATUS:
Presently tax-exempt as a House of
Worship.
fi
I
COST -TO -CURE ESTIMATES
i caution you that the estimates used in this analysis are for app-
raisal purposes only, and you should seek professional estimates of
costs to replace and repair these items.
My figures are bait -park estimates only, obtained from national
cost manuals, and adjusted to the local labor market.
The following items are estimated to need installation, updating,
or replacement in the subject to bring the property up to a modern, func-
tional and versatile building standard. After estimating the cost -to -
cure the building with these improvements, I will deduct the total cost
estimate from the depreciated improvement value, add in land, and the
net result should be an estimate of Market va lue for the subject in its
.as is" condition.
Total floor area for calculations is 11,728 square feet.
B. FIRE PROTECTION:
Sprinkler System Installation, wet Pipe System,
Light ltnzard Occupancy: 11,728 sq. ft. @ $3.35: $ 39,289
Smoke Detectors, Electronic: 950
' TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION ESTIMATE: $ 40,239
33
I;
y
A. PLUMBING:
Renovation of fixtures and restrooms to handicap
standards and
Witt), assist bars, elevated stools and handicap faucet
fixtures. Cost
}
source is the R.S. Means Sq. Ft. Cost, 1985:
Insta filed
Item
Cost Estimate
2 Drinking Fountains, Wall -Mounted, Low Back:
$ 1,130
7 Lavatories, With Trim, 16" x 1 ' ' Oval :
3,745
2 Service Sinks, Wall -Hung, 24" �20":
2,260
4 Urinals, China, Wali -flung:
3,500
6 Water Closets, Wail -(lung, One -Piece:
4,500
r
TOTAL PLUMBING COST ESTIMATE.:
S 15,135
B. FIRE PROTECTION:
Sprinkler System Installation, wet Pipe System,
Light ltnzard Occupancy: 11,728 sq. ft. @ $3.35: $ 39,289
Smoke Detectors, Electronic: 950
' TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION ESTIMATE: $ 40,239
33
I;
y
0
C. WINDOWS:
Replacement, Chapel Area.
Installed
Item Cost
Estimate
Wood, Casement Type, Double-Glazed, Insulated
Glass: 8 @ $635 =
$
5,080
Window-Well Repair and Basement window Repair:
4,000
TOTAL WINDOWS ESTIMATE:
$
9,080
D. HANDICAP ACCESS:
t
Power Door Installation, Glass & Aluminum,
Electronic Operation:
$
1,450
Ramps, Poured Concrete to South and East Entrances:
3,000
2-Stop Passenger Elevator, 501/minute, 1500# Capa-
city, Passenger Controlled hydraulic:*
39,100
TOTAL HANDICAP ACCESS ESTIMATE:
$
43,550
*It appears to be feasible to place the elevator in
the
old
stair shaft near the existing stairway.
E. PARKING LOT:
Paving, striping, for approximately 14,000 square
feet of asphalt with a 4" gravel base.
14,000 sq. ft. @ $0.75 -
$
10,500
P. MISCELLANEOUS REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT:
$
5,000
G. FLOOR COVPR114G REPLACEMENT:
Chapel: 320 yards of inlaid linoleum, installed,
@ $19.00 -
$
6,080
Ctkrpcto, 150 yards commercial grade, installed,
@ $15.00 -
2,250
FLOOR COVERINGS ESTIMATE:
$
8,330
34
0
SUBTOTAL, ESTIMATE COST -TO -CURE:
PLUMBING: $ 15, 135
FIRE PROTECTION: 40,239
WI NDOWS: 9,080
HANDICAP ACCESS: 43,550
PARKING LOT: 10,500
MISCELLANEOUS: 5,000
FLOOR COVERING: 8,330
SUBTOTAL: $131,834
Adjust for Location, using the Median St. Cloud
and Minneapolis Cost Factors: x .97
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST -TO -CURE: $127,879
SUMMARY, COST APPROACH
IMPROVEMENT VALUE ESTIMATE, BEFORE COST -TO -CURE: $253,325
LESS COST -TO -CURE ESTIMATE: -127,879
TOTAL: $125,446
ADD ESTIMATED LAND VALUE: 40,000
TOTAL: $165,446
Estimated Market Value of the subject, in its "as is" condition,
and as of June 24, 1985, say, $165,000
35 9
y
m
Council Agenda - August 12, 1955
5. Consideration of Change Order ql For Project 85-1 Interceptor Sever. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
During the middle of June of this year the LaTour Construction Co.
began work on that portion of the Interceptor Sewer paralleling and
crossing Highway 25. with several wells installed as deep
as possible through the sand into the clay layers, thousands
of gallons of water were removed from the construction area.
An excavation was made to begin the placement of the Interceptor
Sewer and check out the affect of the ground water in the wells.
The excavation was made in excess of 20 ft. deep to an approximate
depth as shown on the plans. The trench was dry at this depth,
and the project appeared to be a simple one. Instruments
were set up to determine the actual elevation at which to
set the Interceptor Sewer. At this point it was determined
that the actual elevation was three feet below the trench
bottom as excavated. This was due to a error in the existing
surface elevation shown on the plan. The contractor therefore
had to excavate an additional three feat and encountered water
almost immediately.
It was at this point that the contractor informed the engineer
and myself that the plans were in error, and that significantly
more material would have to be removed than could be originally
estimated from the plans. In addition, since the wells were
already terminated in the clay layer and were not capable
of lowering the ground water further it would be necessary
to install additional walls rather than extend the existing
walls. Rather than call a halt to the project which would
have extended the detour wall into the 4th of July holidays,
and increase the dewatering costo significantly (as th000 units
were on a rental basin), the contractor proceeded to complete
the project. Ito installed two additional walls and excavated
an additional 3,600 cubic yards of material more than originally
shown on the plans.
After the additional walla were installed and additional sumps
put in for the dowatoring, the project was completed and paved,
and Highway 25 wan oponod prior to the 4th of July holiday
weekend.
At the completion of the project, a meeting was hold at City
Hall between myself, the project engineer Chuck Lopak, and
Tad LaTour from LaTour Construction. we discussed the estimated
final coat of the project of approximately $63,000.00. This
figure was $2,013.00 lona than the contracted amount duo to
Iona quantities of rock and bituminous than originally estimated.
we also diacuanad the fact that the project was completed
on schedule, and the next bidder was at $92,960.00 or approximately
S $27,000.00 higher. Mr. LaTour indicated that if he would
f(� have known of the error in the profile shoot prior to his
bidding the job, it would have resulted moot likely in $4,500.00
increase in his bid.
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
This information was given to us at the time the error in
the profile sheet was discovered. A final cost of the additional
excavation of 3,600 cubic yards and two additional wells actually
resulted in an increased cost to the contractor of $6,384.00.
Mr. Lepair, the project engineer, estimated the excess excavation
of 3,600 yards would cost somewhere in excess of a dollar
a cubic yard, as the material had to be excavated, dozed
aside, then pushed back in the excavation, backfilled and
compacted, and then tested. This in itself would probably
coat in the area of $4,000.00 without the wells, therefore
the cost did seem correct for the work performed.
After considerable discussion, Mr. LeTour indicated that he
would be willing to settle for a change order in the amount
of $4,500.00 which would have been his actual increase in
bid if he would have known of the error in advance. Mr. LaTour
indicated that if the price of $4,500.00 was not approved,
he would present hie actual coat of $6,384.00 as a claim,
through the proper channels as outlined in the specifications.
If we ware to award the change order in the amount of $4,500.00,
the total project construction coat would be approximately
$67,500.00 or $1,687.00 more than the original contract, p
but still $25,460.00 lees than the next bidder.
It appears that Mr. LaTour's request for a change order in
the amount of $4,500.00 for this project is more than fair.
This is the amount that his bid would have been increased if
our onginoers had not made the error on the profile
sheet. Thoraroro, there is no difference in coat to the City
of Monticello for the error, and the City has received the
benefit of the $4,500.00 and the contractor has indeed performed
that and more work. In addition, the project was completed
in the timely manner. Should the contractor be awarded any
more money than the $4,500.00, that amount would be contributed
solely to the error
Mr. John Badalich has some differing opinions as to the validity
of the contractor's claim for thio change order. He has indicated
there is some validity in the roquost because of the additional
earth work required, but he fools that the additional walls
should in no way be reflected in the change order, as it was
a contractors responsibility to verify the plana and the elevations
shown as correct during the wall inatallation. Mr. Badalich
may present some additional Information regarding this itom
at Monday evoning'o mooting.
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Authorize change order #1, Project 85-1 in the amount
of $4,500.00 as outlined above.
2. Not authorize a change order and have the contractor pursue
a claim as outlined in the specifications.
3. Authorize a change order in the amount of $6,384.00 which
is the actual cost to the contractor for the additional
excavation and the two additional wells.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the recommendation of the Public works Director that
you authorize change order #1 in the amount of $4,500.00 as
outlined in alternative 01. 1 firmly believe that if the
contractor did pursue this matter through legal channels,
that he would be awarded the full amount of $6,384.00 as outlined
in alternative X3. The Courts are time and time again authorizing
payment to contractors for work performed which benefits the
owner, especially when errors are found which could have contributed
to the additional costs.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of letter from LaTour Construction and copy of change
ordar #1 from Orr-Scholon-Mayeron.
C�
( LATOUR CONSTRUCTION
Rt. 1 Box 76 • Maple Lake. MN 55358.963-5993
July 30, 1985
Monticello City Hall
250 East Broadway
Monticello, M11 55362
Attn: John Simola, Director of Public Works
RE: Project 85-1 for City of Monticello
As previously discussed with Chuck Lepak, John Badalich, of OSM,
and John Simola, of City of Monticello, I am requesting a change
order for extra work completed that was in addition to the plans and
specifications on above referenced project.
Per our meeting on Friday, July 26th, I am willing to accept a
change order in the amount of 54,500.00, even though my actual
increased costs came to 916,384.00.
The reason for the change order and increased costs, above the
contract price, are two fold. Due to the plan profile being off on
pipe dopths, the pipe was laid actually from 3' to 1' deeper than
the plan showed, and amounted to an additional increase of excavation
by about 3,600 c. yda. more than plans required. Additionally, two
ciel1s had to be installed, where profilo was off 3' duo to an increase
of water table. That had to be lowored an additional 3'.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sinccerol
LaTour onotruction
C53
�1 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
2021 E. HENNEPIN AVE. - SUITE 238
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 55413
CHANGE ORDER NO. ........ 1
5...4.'500.00...... RE: ... 85'1..........
La Tour....Construction.................... Contractor
..............
RouteJl,,.Acm.16
...........................
.. Map le,.Lake.AR... 55.3SR..................
Dear sir (s)
Under your contract dated ................................................. I9.... with
The•C•ity•of Monti.cello,..MN ........................ Owner for
Sanitary Sewer and Appurtenant Work.
...............................................................
we are authorized by the owner to hereby direct you to e x c a v a to a n a d d i t i o n a l
3(O,p„C .Y.,..Of.trench,m.atertal„.to facilitate„cons.tructio,n of
.... 2V. R.C.P... due . to..pl an. zu.r.face:.gr.ad.e. hel.ng..s.howo..2..to..3..fe.et.
.....lower..Lha.n..eX.tstln.9.grp,ynd•,,;(1•rfacg,cpndi;ti;on•.••P1a•n grade used
did not reflect that sewer area and T.H. 25 ditch_ was filled.
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
and to add to (detEtlit=ICOW4 the contract, In accordance with contract and specification. the am at
Fou.r•Thousand Five„Hundred and------ ----00/100 Dollars
................
There will be an extension of ... 45........ days for completion.
The date of completion of contract was 8./.3.0. 19 8.5. and now will be ...9/d 5.. 19 85...
Amount of original contract TotalAddllions Total Deductions I Contract to Date
$65,813,00 I $4,500.00 I —0 — I $10,313.00
Approved ..:....................... 19.... Respectfully Submitted,
....................................ownar
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
e
SSOCIATESINC.
�l Approved .......................... 19....X1.64”.
........................................... Par........
'tracts Badalith.e P.,E..
s 1, 1985
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Grantinq Preliminary Approval
to a Proposal for the Sale of Industrial Revenue Bonds, Applicant -
Viet Construction (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Several weeks ago Allen Pelvit met with members of the Veit
Construction Co. to discuss a development proposal for the
block immediately north of the cemetery. Because of the severe
topographical and foundation problems of that site, it was
determined that the area would be eligible for Tax Increment
Financing under the definition of the State Law. Any site
that requires substantial soils correction is a qualifying
site. The proposal began to develop solely as a Tax Increment
project which would involve a land write-down to accommodate
for the required soils corrections. The project as originally
presented was to be a commercial site of approximately 30,000
square feet that would accommodate two or more retail centers.
As the scope of the project began to be more defined, we learned
that the building is estimated to be 33,000 square feet with
25,000 designated for grocery retail and the remaining 8,000
to be speculative for an alternate retail business. The occupant
of the proposed grocery store is to be Maue Foods who have
been developing plans for expansion and relocation. Based
on the financial feasibility done by the developers, they
sl tared their request to include the issuance of an Industrial
Re vanuo Bond. The development proposal as it currently stands
then is for a 1.5 million dollar Industrial Revenue Bond Issue
and utilizing Tax Increment financing to cure substandard
soils.
The project is a desirable project but raises several questions.
The first question has to do with the interceptor sower.
Prior to any building construction on this site, it would
be absolutely essential to install the interceptor sower across
this block. Further, in order for the development to have
sower service we would very likely have to take the interceptor
the full length to Washington Street. According to John 8imola,
if we did not extend the interceptor sower to its termination
point at Washington Street, the available linos could be soalod
and used as a holding facility occasionally being pumpod.
This strikes mo an being lose than desirable.
Another concern with this development is the construction of 6th
Stroot. The question has boon raised as to whether or not
6th Street is osoontial to the City Street network and perhaps
the City should consider vacating it in preference to commorcial
development.
C
council Agenda - August 12, 1985
I asked John Badalich and John Uban each to respond to the
notion of vacating 6th Street. (I did not ask them to prepare
a report on the concept but simply to consider the possibility
and respond to me verbally.) Both Badalich and Uban felt
that it would be extremely disadvantageous to vacate 6th Street.
With 6th Street developed,the midblock access off of 25,• '.
would be closed. Access to the block would come off of 6th Street.
If 6th Street were vacated and since 5th Street is occupied
by the railroad, the City would not have access to Cedar Street
other than 7th Street and 4th Street. This distance, considering
the development that will occur within this block as well
as the potential development on the lands cast of Cedar Street,
would create traffic congestion and severe inconvenience for
residential traffic. With the greater density and volume
anticipated for the newly constructed '25, it would be
beneficial to the residents of the community to have the 6th
Street access. I have proposed to the developers that the
full cost of construction be paid for by the use of Tax Increment.
In this way there would be no assessments against either the
City or the property owners involved.
The other major concern that has been discussed with the dovolopor
is the vacancy created at the existing Maus Foods Store.
I have stressed strongly that to justify the sale of these
bonds, wo must not be creating a vacancy at an existing site.
I have aeeumod the position that it shall be their responsibility
to fill the building that may become vacant and to create
additional jobs by doing so. The terms of a comprehensive
development agreement have yet to be agreed upon and will
need substantial negotiation before final coamitmonta aro
made. The developers aro very wall aware of my concern with
this issue.
The only other concern I have about thio IRD issue is City
Council consistency. We have in the past issued IRBa whore
there has boon an identified need for the service. Not long
ago the Council denied a request for an IRD for a metol on
the grounds that the need for a metal could not be demonstrated.
I think the came challenge could be raised with respect to
issuing an IRD for a grocary store, especially a grocery store
that is already in the community. I personally support the
concept of the project, but am concerned about inconsistent
action. I think the notion of filling the old building with
a now business and creating now jobs there addrossoa that
concern. That in why I think that is the crucial question
for this particular application.
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
Concerning action that is required at this time, Minnesota State
Law changed so that a City Council may adopt a resolution
granting preliminary approval without holding its Public Hearing
or having all of the details worked out. Since IRBs are only
issued now after an approved allocation from the State, the
new resolution process is simply granting authorization to
the applicant to request money through the State Pool. There
is no implied consent that the project will be approved at
a later date. This is simply a resolution saying that on
the face of it, the project is desirable, and the proposer
should make application for IRB allocation. If that allocation
is approved, then the City would need to acquire all of the
detail and prepare to make commitments. Also at that time,
the City will have to hold the Public Hearing under Statute.
The resolution being presented for this meeting is merely
an approval of a proposed concept, and an indication that
application should be made to the State. If the Council is
uneasy with the concept or the proposal, the resolution should
not be adopted. However, if the concept is appealing to the
Council, but there are as yet many unanswered questions, you
may still adopt tho resolution without being bound to commitments
at a later data. The time frosts involved is crucial. September 1
is the deadline for this application period, and based on
the actions of the Federal Government, we anticipate that
IRBe will become invalid for commercial uses as early as next
year. This is basically a last shot attempt to come in under
the vire while the concept is still on the legal books.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Adopt the ros+olution granting preliminary approval - This
does not bind the City to any later commitmonto; it allows
the applicant to submit an application to the State for
IRB allocations.
2. Do not adopt tho resolution - This essentially says that
you do not approve of the project and aro not willing to
make application to the State of Minnesota for IRB authority.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Unless now and unusual information is prosonted, Staff recommondo
that the resolution be adopted. I believe that it should
be entered into the record that a development agreement will
be expected and that the primary concern in this projoct is
that the existing Maus Foods Building be addressed. I think
this structure and this contingency is the pivotal point to
the projects success.
i/ D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of the raooiution for adoption.
RESOLUTION 1985 #13
RESOLUTION
GRANTING PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL TO A PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
BY RAINDANCE PARTNERSHIP
UNDER THE MUNICIPAL
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
ACT AND AUTHORIZING
APPLICATION FOR BOND
ISSUANCE AUTHORITY THEREFOR
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota, as follows;
1. There has been presented to this Council a proposal
by Raindance Partuership, a Minnesota general partnership (the "Partnership")
that the City undertake and finance a project pursuant to the Minnesota
Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 674
(the "Act"), generally consisting of the acquisition, construction and
equipping of an approximately 33,000 square foot commercial and retail
building on Late 1 through 10, Block 15, south and oast of the railroad
track and Highway 25 in the City of Monticello, to be owned by the Partnership
and leased to various tenants (the "Project"). Under the proposal,
the Partnership would anter into a revenue agreement with the City upon
such terms and conditions as aro necessary to produce income and revenue
sufficient to pay when duo the principal of and'interest on up to approximately
$1,500,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds of the City to be issued
pursuant to the Act, to provide moneys for the acquisition, construction
and installation of the Project; and the City would pledgo its interest
in the revenue agreement to secure the Bonds.
2. Subject to the limitations expressed in paragraphs
six and seven below, the City hereby expresses its preliminary intention
to issue bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of up to approximately
$1,500,000 to finance the Project.
3. The City Administrator and other City officials and
the Partnership aro authorized and directed to prepare and submit an
application to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development
for an allocation of $1,500,000 of bond issuance authority for the Project
pursuant to the Act. The Partnership shall pay to the City the required
application deposit of $15,000, reproaanting one percent of the requested
allocation, and the City shall submit ouch $15,000 deposit with the
application to the Department. At ouch time as the deposit, or any
part thereof, is refunded to the City by the Department, the City shall
remit the amount no refunded to the Partnership.
4. Pursuant to the Act, thio Council shall conduct a public
hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project.
C4
RESOLUTION 1985 013
Page 2
The City Administrator, the Partnership and Holmes 6 Graven, as Bond
Counsel, are hereby authorized and directed to establish the date and
time of such hearing, to prepare and make available a draft application
to the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority for approval
of the Project and related materials, and to cause notice of the hearing
to be published as required by the Act.
5. The Partnership shall pay any and all costa incurred
by the City in connection with the Project whether or not the Project
receives necessary additional approvals, whether or not the Project
receives an allocation of bond issuance aut:tority, and whether or not
the Project is carried to completion.
6. The adoption of this Resolution does not institute
a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the Bond as
requested by the Partnorship. The City retains the right in Sts a Is
discretion to withdraw from participation, and accordingly not to issue
the Bond, or to issue the Bond in an amount less than 51,500,000, should
the City at any time prior to the issuance thereof, determine that it
is in the best interest of the City not to issue the Bond, or should
the parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the
terms and conditions of any of the documents required for the transaction.
7. All commitments of the City expressed herein are subject
to the conditions that by December 31, 1985, the City and the Developer
4 shall have agree upon mutually acceptable terms and conditions of the
'l loan agreement, the Bond, and of the other instruments and proceedings
relating to the Bond and their issuance and sale. If the events act
forth herein do not take place within the time limits sot forth above,
or any extension thereof, and the Bonds are not cold within such time,
this Resolution shall expire and be of no further effect.
Adopted this 12th day of Auguot, 1985.
Thomas A. Eidem
City Administrator
C
Arvo A. Grimamo, Mayor
D
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
7. Consideration of Acquisition of various Public Works Equipment (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Rather than bring forth these items for approval separately,
I will present them as one agenda item. Each individual item however,
can be considered on its own merit, independent of the package.
Public Works Shop and Garage
For 1985 we have budgeted for two door operators for the pole
barn on the north end of our property. These doors -are 14 x 14
and not always the easiest doors to handle. In the winter
time ,sleet and ice tend to stick to some of the troughs in
the door, making it heavy. Periodically, the doors settle
once they have been raised. In addition, once in a great
while a door is left unlocked, thereby leaving the building
unsecured. Door operators would solve all of these problems.
There are currently two doors needing operators in the pole
barn, the north door and the south door.
Refer to the financial shoot for cost at.
Water Fund
For the Water Fund we have two proposed purchases. The first
�. purchase !a an additional piece of locating equipment needed
to locato water service lines and main linos. We have had
some problems in the past making accurate locations on water
linea and service lines, especially on the older water system,
or duo to inaccuracies or omissions in our as builta. Currently
the City has a simple magnetic locator that locatoo items
within a couple foot of the surface, and an older lino tracer,
which traces out heavy shallow linea. We wish to add to our
existing equipment by purchasing a more modern fully automatic
lino trocar, ouch as the Matra -Toch Model 810. This unit
has a depth range of 13 foot with a right to loft accuracy
of 1 - 38 of depth, and a depth accuracy of plus or minus
10% in good conditions plus or minus 20% in poor conditions.
The unit actually gives a digital readout of the depth of
the individual oarvico lino and main.
This particular instrument could be vary bonafitial in locating
problems with watorsorvico linos. In regard to those which
aro shallow and require water to be loft running in the wintertime.
This unit should pinpoint th000 areas whore services aro extremely
shallow.
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
The second piece of equipment we wish to purchase for the
�,. water system '.a an alarm system to warn maintenance people
of high or ljw water pressure in the community. Currently,
our only wa':ning system consists of an alarmed resident who,-
runs
ho;runs out of water to inform us of low water pressure,
or a passerly who notices the water tower running over to inform
us of high water pressure.
Often a great deal of time passes before the proper maintenance
people are notified of the problem and can respond. During
these lags, several things happen; more of the town experiences
loss of water pressure and on occasion equipment has experienced
more damage due to running for a longer period of time in a
failed condition, or in the case of the water tower overflowing,
there is an over abundance of ice to be cleaned up in the
wintertime as well as other damago from the water itself.
To help alleviate this problem, we have proposed in the 1985
budget, an alarm system similar to that at the waste water
treatment plant, that would alort the operators of high or
low water pressure condition. This will enable them to react
much faster to an emergency situation, and possibly prevent
more extensive damage in some cases.
The system consists of a high and low water pressure sonoor
connected to an automatics dialer with a battery backup system.
The automatic dialer has a programmable message and dials up
to five phone numbers. Upon receiving tho first answer, the
recorder repeats the message such an; there is a problem with
the wator system in the City of Monticello. Usually the first
number would be Walter Mack, followed by Matt Theisen, followed
by myself, followed by the Wright County Sheriff's Department
which is monitorad 24 hours a day. The Shoriff'a Department
has a complete list of all City Employoee and Officials, and
could track down someone to answer the call.
This alarm system would integrato wall with any of the additional
updatin,3 of the water system, and more than likely would
be more economical to install at this time rather than through
a largo project. An alarm system such as this could got lost
in an enormous million dollar project and the City would have
little control over the actual typo and manufacture of equipment
supplied with a larger project.
Financial information concerning those purchases is shown
on the enclosed cost data shoot.
IN
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
Sewer Department
The first piece of equipment budgeted for and needed in the
wastewater treatment plant facility is an auxiliary heater
to be used in those areas where heat failure occurs, or in
those areas which are unheated and encounter freezing problems
in the winter. It would also aid in performing work in those unheated
areas in the winter. These specific areas are the preliminary
treatment area, the equalization complex, the sludge thickener
tank and the trickling filters.
An electric heater seems to be the most practical for these
areas. We do have power available in most of these areas,
and the waste water treatment plant has its own emergency
generator. Electric heaters would provide clean, warm heat
without the necessity to be vented, such as portable fuel
oil, kerosene, or LP heater, and without direct fire they
may be somewhat safer. We have looked into the possibility
of providing a dual voltage type of heater to be used in other
City buildings. At this time we have been unable to find one to work
on 480-3 phase, yet reduce down to 240 single phase for other
buildings in the community.
The second piece of equipment for the wastewater treatment plant
and collection system is a portable flow motor. A portable
flow motor such as the one we have budgeted for this year
isused to determine the flow in open channels such an. troughs,
or tanks in the wastewater treatment plant, or through various
open channels in manholes and lift stations throughout the
community. Flow motors aro used to check or verify the flow
from heavy industrial users or merely the flow through a given
lift station. It is also a valuable tool to determine the
flow through a segment of gravity nowor such as that line
located on Front Street, which we know is approaching an overloaded
condition. Those types of motors aro portable and have their
own battery supply and can be placed down in the manhole and
record the level of water or sowago backed up behind a V -notch
weir or motoring device.
The flow motor would be a valuable tool in monitoring our
communities collection system as wall as tho wastewater treatment
plant, and enable us to gain morn information as to the amount
of infiltration existing in our cower system today.
Financial information is enclosed on the coat data chant.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Purchaeo the above equipment.
2. Not to purchase the above equipment.
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the v ecommendation of the Public Works Director and
applicable superintendents, that the Council approve the purchase
of the above referenced equipment for the various departments.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copies of various Spec sheets and financial cost data sheet.
COST DATA SHEET
TOTAL Budget
COST Over/Under
$ 954
S 46
1,545
1985
15epartment
ITEM
SUPPLIER
BUDGET
Shop & Garage
(1) 2 -Door Operators
Automatic Door
$1,000
1/2 H.P. - 14' x 14'
Monticello
Water Dept.
(2) Pipe Locator
Davis Water
1,800
Water Lines
Brooklyn Park,
(3) Alarm System
Sentry Systems
Hi & Lo Water
Hugo MN
2,500
Sewer Dept.
(4) Aux. Heater
Olson Elec.
800
With 50' Cord
Monticello
(5) Used Port.
NB Instruments
1,200
Flow Meter
Horsham, Pa.
TOTAL
S7,300
TOTAL Budget
COST Over/Under
$ 954
S 46
1,545
255
1,205
1,295
720
80
1,993
(793)
$6,417
S 883
Under
07
f�
&&METROTF.CH
A6 Underground Locator Products
.- MMOPNI,
Fully Automatic
Underground
Line Tracer
7)
L
1rt�.ILrHr. V,ur {
AUTOMATIC SUPERVISOR MODEL AS -213
The ADCOR AUTOMATIC SUPERVISOR is a solid state,
two channel. electronic device which monitors normally
open contacts from two independentsets of trouble or
alarm sensing devices on remote installations of continu-
ousdemand equipment (e.g,. pumping stations, power
dist, ibullon substahOns, financial machines, radio units.
rot'
igeralion equipment, etc.). Upon closure Of any One 01
the contacts. it will call a predetermined telephone numb./
and transmit a voice recording, stating the location of the
install enc the nature of Ih0 IrOUDIlt. if "' ceiletl
number is busy. Coos not ansiver. or it an incorrect number
is reached. Ine AUTOMATIC SUPERVISOR will hang up
and call the same number again, or up to tour different
numbers. It will continue calling the number(s), in
succession, until it is answered and acknowledged Once
the call is received, the parson receiving It can scknowl.
edge the AUTOMATIC SUPERVISOR from his telephone.
11 will then Meng up and not place any more Calls If the
other channel has been activated. the AUTOMATIC
SUPERVISOR wi11 Then recycle on that Channel until
acknowledged.
• TWO CHANNELS: Monitors any two functions or
alarm conditions (e.g. equipment failure, A.C.
power, temperature. liquid level, etC.). Also
available in tour, six, and eight channel.
• BUILT-IN A.C. MONITOR: Internal circuit moni-
tors A.0 power and trips channel one if A.0
power falls. Slide switch on unit deactivates A C.
monitor, allowing Channel One IO be used to
monitor any Conoilion via a normally open con-
tact.
• ADJUSTABLE DELAY (0.90 SECONDS): II alarm
Or trouble Condition is Cleared within the delay
time, no calls will be made.
• REPORTS: Calla UP to five telephone numbers
and reports alarm or trouble condition. Continue
to dial the numbers in succession, until one of
'hem acknowledges.
• REMOTE RESET: Any telephone equipped with
touch -Ione or type A-15 handset may be used to
hang up and completely reset the AUTOMATIC
SUPERVISOR slier the message is received,
unless the Second Channel has also been acli-
valod.
oft
dr
2
(3)
• FCC REGISTERED: Connects to telephone line through RJ -
31.X jack Installed by telephone company.
• NO SPECIAL TELEPHONE LINE: Shares the same line as
regular telephone service. Dedicated or "leased" lines are not
required. Does not interfere with regular telephone service.
• REMOTE TEST: Telephone line and AUTOMATIC SUPER.
VISOR may be remotely tested by calling and tripping the
AUTOMATIC SUPERVISOR from a telephone equipped with
a touch-tone Or a type A-15 handset. In order to utilize this
feature, the AUTOMATIC SUPERVISOR must be Connected
to a dedicated telephone line with no extensions, or to an
extension telephone used for outgoing Calls only.
• BUILT-IN STANDBY POWER; II A,C. power fails, lead -acid
batteries provide enough stand-by to attempt Calls for a full
six hours.
• ANTI -TAPE FOUL DEVICE: Simple mechanism prevents tape
from wrapping around pinch roller after prolonged Idle
period.
• SPECIFICATIONS:
Operating Temperature Range: 32' F to 160 * F (0' to 70' C)
Operating Humidity Range: 10% to 9D% Relative
Atmospheric Conditions: Non -corrosive
Voltage Requirements: 12 VAC 1115 VAC/12 VAC
transformer furnished)
Power Consumption (Idle): 40 me @ 12 VDC
Power Consumption (Running); 400 me @ 12 VDC
Battery Standby Time: 60 hours idle. 6 hours running
Housing: 19 gauge steel, with locking door. NEMA 1
(NEMA 12 available)
Dimensions; t H s 15,25" W• 4,25" D O
Weight: 11 Pounds
(3)
AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE DIALER SPECIFICATIONS
S
These aPecifiCations define an Automatic Telephone Dialer which shaft be supplied as follows: The Dialer shall
upon an atarm condition shall call up to six predetermined numbers and deliver a voice message.
Tnig message shall identify the location Of the alarm, nature of the alarm. and therequiredection to be taken,
and instrucbons for acknowledging the Dialer. The Disler must be Capable Of catling at least 6 (six) different
telephone numbers for each Channel. It the Called telephone number is busy, or does notanswer, or answers
but is not acknowledged the Telephone Dialer proceeds to call the same number andtor proceeds t0 call
different "backup" numbers. Each called party has the option to cancel all remaining catfsort0 allowthe Dialer
to continue the dialing sequence.
The called pony Communicates with the Telephone Dialer by means of a tone signal. The signal is generated
through a touch tone telephone set or acknowledgement device. The contractor shallacknowl.
edgement devices to the Owner.
An adjustabie time delay from 10 (ten) to 90 (ninety) seconds shall be provided, It the alarm condition is
corrected wthin the selected time period the Dialer shall not place any calls. When activating contact is
correeled the Dialer shall immediately terminate the dialing sequence and automatically reset the automatic
dialer t0 the first number t0 be called,
To prevent nuisance alarms the Phone Dialer snail have a time delay adjusimem which wilt delay the slarti ng Ot
the Calling Cycle Iron 10 to 90 seconds. It during this delay time. or at any time thetthe Dialer is placing calls,
the activat mg contact is restored to normal, the Telephone Dialer automatically hangs up and resets itsol! to ills
beginning number of the dialing sequence. The tripping circuits shall be desensitized with finers so that the
time response shall be me same as a telephonet pe relay(approximalely ten milliseconds). Input pulses of less
than fan milliseconOS shall be filtered out to eliminate false tripping due t0 lightning or vofloge surges.
When a tape unit is supplied the tape length and tapo speed must be coordinated so that total transmission time
shall be 6 (six) minutes per Channel. The tape units shalt be a Continuous loop type, with an automatic atop
mechanism 90 that the Phone Dialer will be automatically reset alto? acknowledgement. Tapespeold must be 1
and 1. inches par second or greater.
Telephone numbers and voice messages must be capable of being programmed on the unit without removing
any components from the Dialer. Any Dialer which under loss of battery power would cause the programmed
V,. telephone numbers 10 be 'lost' shall not be considered.
The Phone Dialer shall have a minimum vocabulary of 40 (forty) different words end the voeebulary or ability to
use up to e0 (forty) different numbers to be considered for this application.
When any channel is tripped the Dialer shall Continue the calling Cycle until acknowledged, or the alarm
condition is Corrected_ Independent memory circuits shaft beprovided for eachchannoi,The system shall have
an indicator light defining which channel is tripped. When tha Condition COrrOCts itself, Or it is least, this light
shelf automatically reset.
The Telephone Dialer shall not require a special direct Or leased telephone circuit. A regular private fine
telephone cit cull will be provided by the owner. Connection Into the telephone circuit shall be through an
industry standiercl 6 pin modular jack. The Pnome Dialer shall be furnished complete and shall have the proper
cable for connecting Into thetelaphone system modular terminal a RJ•31-% The Phone Dialer Shall provide all
the necessary power antl control switching tot the built-in Coupler with no auxiliary equipment, coupler, or
power source required, At; diet pulses and voice message Inputs to the telephone system Shall moot the
r(lquilomenis 85 published by the telephone companies, andshatl be FCC approved for use ontho telephone
network. Contactor shall furnish FCC Compliance numbers and Ringer Equivalence number to telephone
company upon request. The Telephone Dialer shall be equipped with lead/acid batteries for stand-by
operation,
A low voltage recharging circuit shall be provided to maintain the batteries in peak condition, An externally
mounted pilot fight shall indicate when the charging circuit is operational, The stand-by capacity of the Dialer,
shall be sufficient tosustain i tone) hour of continuous Celli mg or up to6(eight)houraw,th InetlyNem in stoma•
by offer comptoto power failure.
The Dialer shall have a built-in AC line monitor. This will allow the Dialer to monitor AC power or another
function if desired, The Dialer shall have the Option of beimg Called from any of the ptogtammed telephone
numbers and being remotely tested, This test shall confirm proper operation of the Dialer and the tolephone
network. An on/off/abort Switch must be accessible to facility testing anti installation.
The entire assembly shall be a standard production item of one mismufaclurar and covered by one warranty,
The entire dialing assembly shelf be provided with a l(one) year warranty after acceptance from the engineer,
or a minimum o up to 2 (two) years after shipment data, Tho representative shall Supply Installation and
Operation clots to the owner and engineer, and shat) furnish t (One) day Of factory authorited Stott -up service
and training at no additional cost to the owner. Persons or firms Supplying Start-up must ptosent the engineer,
prior to lima[ approval, a tetter from the Dialer manufacturer stating that thestert-upwis properiydone and that
nothing was done to void the manufacturer's warranty,
.'1
�J
.f r
--_ . -
PORTABLE ELECTRIC SALAMANDERS W
11,120 OTU et pde..F.ea Meyl, 6OOCFM Fyn. 340+W UOV
lylnldr IS (•'.p sae-Si,l2n Ptti Qunairm - (tirnn. Mnr
o�n+lynt hrsl end bu-I•hryM fnrreA Mlr rl I"nnn 1'nl II
h:tnA hrsitl ryfenn�dedlar (nt .mrt rrt.nr Tllhiw msrnfP'Nar)
p•+rr • P«tn•,
pfthtm•n arhtriey, rY r.
d•I nd rn.•I YM1 P1.Mf tar AllMlly12 Ir, 1• mnunlrA n 2 t �' i
ml ryn 2'hrm•tns+rnnn • lith-(IRS'fi rmastst. i'negrai.I���iIJ
[ytli nu ofn"'SePtlY air+w lith tnr fan nnl))aperyhnn r+nn.d :�
�ppyltlt hr•tlF eleWenlf P, Ilue M1lah•Itmlt lhylmyl rulnul
AmKO wllh yutute YaM nut lue nerN lon6 lYfr. I. ,fylrl>
�IrUPOranay ynttl pet npenVnrt t:m•IvfeM1 P•IMPA '�
2•Mry elrrq Yor 1 pfi M nyenllon+. Or Id ren+r.Ubl• a«+1n
kdyyrr phyq WnA unvhsra matin«ttr rnntaetnr Te ..Intl i ht.n•y
0.Ot14)Inu �r��ld poen card, turd not inriuNd >♦6', .M21, 21
t
crr r.. w
{IO 2rl 6M 2rr 2U210 {21NM $060.62 h21E
t w
tlo i l6 flla 2o'r ua2i Ttlnm id6.w quip• � 4 !}c
1 ax
— -
SEE WARRANTY INFORMATION AT OEGINN2N0 OF INDEX 1087
r•
_ I
1 } tL. f' i
— wi,
Y '
P2
(4)
c
(5)
f4b
J NB INSTRUMENTS, INC.
,� , ,,Nrti .00LI LP•
MODEL GR
e PORTABLE FLOW METER
Uw For Open Channels
0
q
C
The straightforward design and sophisticated circuitry
of the Model GR flow motor from NB Instruments
provide users of portable open channel flow metering
equipment with an instrument of exceptionally high
reliability oven under severe field conditions. A mini•
mum of mechanical components avoids problems of
friction and inertia; the primary sensing element Is
o non fouling, constant buoyancy polyurothane boat
whose vertical movement is translated into eloetrical
voltages through on arm and angular displacement
transducer. Tracking accuracy is 0,01 foot,
Analog signals aro processed in high reliability solid
state circuits and recorded on a pressuro•sonsitive
strip chart. This avoids ink blurringand possible data
loss with high humidities or manhole surcharging.
Records from GR motors are permanent. The instru•
ment contains 756 inches o1 paper; one hour of flow
O rind, No hwL-aa. Ina
0 one instrument for 8" through 48" sewer pipes
0 installed in 15 minutes with no tools
0 0.01 foot tracking accuracy
0 solid state circuits for high reliability
0 7 -day battery pack with 48-hour emergency backup
makes surveillance easy
0 3D -day strip chart recorder gives excellent resolution
0 data permanently protected even under water
0 rugged construction keeps downtime to minimum
is recorded in a full 1.000 Inch of travel regardless
of flow rate. 168t48 hours of data can be logged
before the battery pack must be recharged. Per.
cent flow depth is convened into flow volume using
standard hydraulic formulas or tables supplied by
NB,
The Modol GR mater is rugged. All external surfaces
and members are stainless steel or aluminum to resist
corrosion. The waterproof case takes repeated immer-
sions and may be hung or placed in any of several
attitudes. Moved among many locations In the field
or plant, exposed to any sort of weather, the unit will
function roliably with minimum maintenance. This
dependability, and the low surveillance required, make
the Model GR flow motor from NB the most econom•
ical instrument available when costs are calculated
on an invest mont•plus•operaton basis.
D
F
40FLOW
FEATURES
I. Can be used with standard weirs or flumes, or with
sll standard hydraulic formulas when primary measur-
ing instruments are not employed.
2. Primary sensing element is non -fouling, constant -
buoyancy polyurethane boat which rides above solids,
resists sanitary and most industrial wastes. Tracking
accuracy 0.01 foot.
NA Instruments. Inc., warrants its meters and accessories with the
exceptional batteries to be free from defects in material and w ort manthip
for 12 months from due of purchase. Any NB Instruments meter or pan
excrpt tar ha series which is found drfmiite in Ne Instrumrnti judgment
w !thin such time win at the Company's option he repaired m replaced w ith.
out charge, nr the purchase price thereof will he refunded upon return of the
NB INSTRUMENTS, INC
3. Set of 12 boat arms furnished for standard size
pipes 8" through 48". Arms for non-standard pipes
6" through 72" available on request.
4. Solid state electronics used exclusively for long
trouble-free life.
5. Strip chart recorder driven by brushless synchron•
ous AC motor has 756" paper capacity. Chart moves
at 1.000 inch/hour. Y-axis records instantaneous flow,
2.5/16" = 100% of level in pipe or discharge rate.
6• Data imprinted every two seconds on pressure -
sensitive paper with steel stylus. Inkless system en-
sures permanent, easily readable record even in high
humidities or when manhole surcharges.
7• Snap -out 12 -volt gelled electrolyte lead -acid bat-
tery pack supplies seven ampere -hours for seven days
continuous operation plus 48 hours emergency back•
up power.
S. Extra battery pack and 115 volt 60 Hz battery
charger supplied with each Model GR meter. Battery
packs have life of 200.1000 charge/discharge cycles
when properly maintained.
9• Transducer assemblies fabricated from stainless
steel and aluminum to resist corrosion.
W. 25 foot cable standard. Up to 500 foot cables
available as options.
11. Stainless steel instrument case 91/2'x91/2"x 14'.
Telescoping transducer support 44" min., 75" max.
Shorter support jacks available on request. Packed in
two rugged wooden carrying cases with battery packs.
charger. Total shipping weight 75 pounds.
12• Manual and tables furnished by NB permit use
of Model GR under various hydraulic conditions.
13. If factory service is ever needed. Instruments
are repaired, tested and shipped back within 48 hours
of receipt.
instrument to the factory. This wananty it esclutite and in lieu of all other
expressed or implied warranties %hatanner, including but not limited to
implied warranties of merchantability at amen for a particular purpose.
NB Instrument, shall not he liable fns any defects attributable to acts or
omissions of others after shipmem, ar fm any eonseNumtial or contingent
damage what%n cr.
Plea? neh c•r,�'!,!e,'t.it ~.irl�plg:
('Lei L11 Ft_� I
835 Horsham Road, Horsham, Pa. 19044
215-674.8660 • WATS Wast of the Mississippi 800523.6556 • East of the Mjssissippl 800.5235308
fA et Da 11 PAINTED IN U.S.A.
J
J.J
a
Council Agenda - August 12, 1985
9. Consideration of Granting a 3.2 Beer License, Off -Sale - Applicant -
River Road Plaza.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
River Road Plaza is the new convenience store/filling station constructed
at the intersection of County Road East and County Road 75. It is
owned by the Hoglunds but leased and operated by Ken and Jim Maus.
The Maus' have made application for a license to sell 3.2 beer off -
sale. Such a license requires council approval.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Grant the license for the sale of non -intoxicating malt liquor,
off sale.
2. Deny the request - To deny such a request should be based on a
sound rationale. Maus Foods has sold 3.2 beer off -sale for
several years, and there have been no infractions or incidents
reported to date. The applicants have an unimpeachable record.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The City Staff recommends that the Council grants the 3.2 beer off -
sale license.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
No supporting data for this item.
C