The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Agenda Packet 03-26-1984AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, March 26, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting Hold on March 12, 1983. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints. Public Hearinqs 4. Public Hearing - Consideration of Application for Liquor License, Applicant - Stuart Hoglund. Old Business S. Consideration of Purchase of the Bob Saxon Property. 6. Update on Fire Barn and Pump House Project and Consideration of Proceeding with Piro House Plans. New Business 7. Consideration of a Proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. 8. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use, Applicant - Metcalf and Larson. 9. Consideration of an Amendment to the Ordinance to Allow as a Conditional Use in an R-1. Zone More Than Five Children in a Day We or Footer Caro !tome. 10. Consideration of Conditional Use request to Allow as a Conditional Use in an R-1 zone More than Five Children, Including Family's Own, in a Day Care or Foster Care Home, Applicant - Michael Dahmen. 11. Consideration of Conditional Use Request to Allow a Pet Store in a D-4 Zone, Applicant - Joel Erickson. 12. Consideration of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for Fulfillment Systems' Tax Increment Financing Plan. 13. Consideration of Raplocesent of Park Equipment, Hillcrest Park, and Consideration of Health Course for Anders Wilhe1M/Par West Park. 14. Consideration of Bills for the Month of March. 15. Adjournwsnt. MINUTES C REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL March 12, 1984 - 7,30 P.M. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen. Fran Fair, Ken Maus. umbers Absents None. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held February 27, 1984. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests and Complaints. Mr. John Sandberg was present to eommont on what he thought was a large amount of sign variance request the Council has considered over the past number of years. Mr. Sandberg noted that prosently the Planning Commission and City Council are considering ordinance amendments to facilitate multiple use buildings such as Metcalf and Larson's professional building, etc. It was his opinion that if sign ordinance variances are continually granted, maybe the City Council and Planning Commission should look at changing the sign ordinance for all businesses or otherwise eliminate variances and stick to the Ordinance as written. 4. Consideration of a Proposal to Rehabilitate Hiqhwav 29 and the Mississippi Rivar Bridqa. For the past few months, the City's Consulting Planner, Howard Dahigran, has boon working with the MN/DOT representatives and local business interest to arrive at a solution that would be agreeable to all parties regarding the proposed Highway 29 iciprove- ments. Mr. Dahlgron was present at the meeting to explain that the meetings have resulted in what he determines to be a workable solution for the planned improvements from I-94 to the Mississippi River. Mr. Dahlgran noted that two traffic engineers ware hired by his firm to review the MN/DOT plans, which initially called for four lanes of traffic from I-94 to River Street with raised ehannelization barriers and left turn lanes. Businesses located along Highway 29 from Third Street to River Street previously opposed plans for raised Islands that would eliminate left turn lanes into aid -block accesses. The Minnesota MH/DOT felt that aid -block left turn accesses would create traifle hazards and would not be the proper way to improve j� Highway 25. l Council Minutee - 3/12/84 Mr. Dahlgren summarized to the Council the solution arrived at between the MN/DOT and property owners as follows: J 1. Highway 25 would be improved from Fourth Street intersection to River Street with two lanes of traffic in both directions with a center striped median that could be used for left turn lanes from both directions. 2. Highway 25 from Fourth Street to I-94 would be constructed with four lanes of traffic with loft turn lanes at intersections with a raised concrete median barrier. 3. The proposal for a striped median from Fourth Street to River Street would only be acceptable by MN/DOT if there was only one mid -point access on each of the blocks, which would result in the Wright County State Bank and the National Bushing property sharing one common access point, and also the Northwest Medical Clinic eliminating their driveway and using one access point,which is currently an alloy. 4. The public sidewalk from Fourth Street to River Street would now be 9 feat wide instead of the originally proposed 5 foot sidewalk. Mr. Jim Weingartz of the Minnesota Department of Transportation noted that his Department felt comfortable with the plans as amended and felt that this would be a workable solution to the problems. In addition he noted that MN/DOT still plans to hopefully start con- struction on the Highway 25 improvements in -1985 with the bridge being started in 1986. lmpresentatives of the Wright County Stats Bank, National Bushing Auto Parts, and the Northwest Clinic all indicated their approval of the proposed layout and agreed to work on a solution for a common access at mid -block for their properties. In addition, Mr. McDonald, owner of the Mall property, 'also felt that elimination of a left turn lane into the Mall would be no problem provided seventh Street is accommodated with a stop light. Questions were raised as to whether MN/DOT had ever considered the possibility of installing a street light on Fourth Street, especially for additional pedestrian traffic in this location. Mr. Weingartz noted that at the present time this location does not twat MN/DOT's requirements in either traffic volume or accidents to warrant a stop light. This intersection, along with others, would be reviewed at later dates to determine when such stop lights are necessary. O&M I Council Minutes - 3/12/84 Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution requesting that MN/DOT proceed with the improvements of Trunk Highway 25 and agreeing to enter into an agreement with the State whereby the City of Monticello shall pay its share of the cost of the requested improvements - Motion was also made by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution approving the preliminary layout plans as presented for improvement of Highway 25 consisting mainly of the raised median from the railroad tracks to I-94 with the Fourth Street to River Street portion being a striped median. See Resolution 1984 $4 and 15. 5. Consideration of Aceuirinq the Bob Saxon Proeerty as an Addition to East Bridqo Park. last fall Mr. and Kra. Saxon appeared before the Planning Commission and Council to request a variance to build a garage. At that time, the City postponed any decision on the variance request because of the proposed reconstruction of Highway 25 and the now Mississippi Bridge. The notion at that time was that the Saxon property would make an adequate replacement property for the land lost because of the bridge construction. During proliminary negotiations, Mr. Saxon had requeuted $70,000 for his property while an informal appraisal F« by the City placed the value at approximately $54,000. Because the City was aware that the State of Minnesota would reimburse the City in part for the land they would be taking, the City post- poned any decision on the acquisition of Saxon's property until it could be determined what amount the State might reimburse the City. Recently, the State of Minnesota completed an appraisal of the Saxon property at $55,000, which would likely reflect an amount the City could expect in reimbursement for acquiring this property in exchange for the park land given up for the new bridge. MN/DOT also presented an,agreament for exchange of land that the City would have to enter into to receive funds for acquisition of re- placermnt park lands. The agreement also stipulates that the band shelL in East Bridge Park would be moved or relocated by the State and ghat the City would accept liability for use of the pedestrian walkway under the now bridge. Mr. Saxon was contacted regarding MJ/DDT's appraisal of $55,000 for his,property, and an offer was made for this amount for his property. Mr. Saxon was generally agreeable to the $55,000 price for his property provided an additional $4,500 extra was included to cover his relocation Cost, to cover his cost in purchasing his new horse. In addition to the total $59,500 asking price, Mr. Saxon also wanted to have the right to salvage lose of the interior items such as carpetiny, a newly installed bathtub, and some new cabinets from the hose. Council Minutes - 3/12/84 Some concerns were expressed by Council members over offering i Mr. Saxon salvage rights to items within the home, as this would then leave the home unrentable by the City. It was noted that the house would not have to be torn down immediately for park expansion but could be developed later after the bridge is completed and the bandstand is relocated. In addition, it was felt that an offer of $59,500 should be sufficient and is con- sistent with the appraisals obtained without any salvage rights. As a result, motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus, end unanimously carried to offer Mr. Saxon $59,500 for his property for park replacement purposes provided the house is left intact suitable for rental purposes if necessary. It was noted that if the City should decide within the next 30 days not to rent the house but to tear it down, Mr. Saxon would be given an opportunity to remove items he requested. Motion was also made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to enter into an agreement with MN/DOT for the exchange of land that would provide approximately $55,000 for the City to purchase replacement property contingent upon language being inserted in the agreement that would relieve the City of any liability for design flaws or construction flaws not under the City's control. This additional wording was recommended by the City Attorney after re- viewing the agreement. 6. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use and a Variance Request to Allow Siqns in Excess of Ordinance Requirrmants, Applicant - Metcalf and Larson. At the February 27 Council meeting, tho Council recommended that the Planning Commission hold a spacial meeting to further study the Conditional Use and Variance Request application submitted by Metcalf and Larson for sign variances. The City staff, through the City Attorney's office, prepared an amendment which was adopted into an interim rule amending the City's sign ordinance addressing the conditional use requirement for multiple businesses within one building and sign area allotment. City Administrator explained to the Council that it was the staff's opinion the ordinance section regarding multiple businesses within one building had an error and should have referred only to shopping centers. The present ordinance allowed multiple businesses to only have a 5% of the gross silhouette area as sign area to be divided amongst all the occupants whereas a single occupant in a single building would be allowed 20%. The interim rule amending this ordinance section was intended to clarify the error in the ordinance without officially going through a public hearing process. HoOevar, at the special Planning Commission meeting, the interim rule was challenged by a Monticello citizen, John Sandberg, as to 4 (�p Council Minutes - 3/12/86 rits legality. As a result, the Planning Commission did not adopt the interim rule but recommended that the proper public hearing 4-. notice for an ordinance amendment be instituted to clarify this matter. It was noted by the City Administrator that a public hearing to consider an ordinance amendment for this section has been scheduled for Monday, March 26, at 6:00 P.M., and that no action is necessary by the Council at this time. 7. Meadow Oak EIS Scopinq Meetinq. The -ublic comment period on the Meadow Oak Environmental Assessment Work.i,eet closed on February 29, and the City Council, as the responsible governmental unit, is supposed to consider all comment received during the comment period and then determine the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement that is required by the Environmental Quality Board. In order to avoid having to do an Environmental Impact Statement, Mr. Dickman Knutson was present at the Council meeting and indicated that they plan to reduce the size of their project in Meadow Oaks by approximately 60 units so that they cone under the threshold for a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement. With the present sizo of the proposed Meadow Oak Devolopment, the developers have no choice but to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, but with the proposed 60 unit reduction, an EIS would no longer be mandatory. The developers would still have to again prepare a revised Environmental Assessment Workshest addressing the same issues which would again be open for public comment. At the and of the comment period, the now Environmental Assessment Worksheet on the reduced Project would tomo back to the City Council for a dotormination as to whether or not the developer must prepare an Environmental impact Statement. If, at that time, all technical data is clearly indisputable and answers all of the environmental questions, the Council may determine that an EIS is not necessary and the project may proceed. It who noted that the City Council can still require the developers to completely address any problems with storm water runoff or any contributions of runoff to Oounty Ditch 33 even without an Environmental Impact Statement being required. Councilman Maus suggested that since a major concern with the Meadow Oak development seems to be related to storm water runoff and whether the proposed ponding areae within the developnnt can actually hold all of the runoff, possibly the City should consider having a third independent engineer review the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and the development in general to see what their opinion is. Its felt that if a third independent party substantiates - 5 - cD Council Minutes - 3/12/84 the present claim that the development would not contribute any water to County Ditch 33, this should satisfy the City Council and Township residents concerned over this issue. Township resident Gene Bauer indicated to the Council that he would feel better if the present 18 inch culvert leading into County Ditch 33 from Meadow Oak Development was removed, as then he would know that Meadow Oaks runoff could not enter County Ditch 33. Mr. Bauer also had concerns over the accuracy -of the engineering studios done on the Meadow Oak Development, as he feels the preliminary reports have different figures on the amount of water that could be retained in the holding ponds and questioned why the City Engineer would prepare alternatives for runoff water if the ponding area was considered adequate in the first place. As a result of the discussions, motion was made by Maus, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to formally direct the developers of the Meadow Oak Subdivision to prepare a now Environmental Assessment Worksheat on their reduced development size and direct the City Administrator to obtain the services of an independent engineer to review the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and the dovolopmant in general to sea if there would be any problems with storm water runoff. All cost associated with the independent engineer would be the responsibility of the developers as part of 'Cho CAW. 8. Consideration of Waivinq the Fen for a Lieuor License on a Proposed Project. Mr. Stuart Hoglund was present at the Council meeting and noted that he has recently applied for a liquor license for his proposed motel project he is planning in the near future. The city's current ordinance requires that before a liquor license can be held far an applicant, the applicant is required to pay on a pro rate basis the annual foo, in this case amounting to 81,650 for the last half of the license period ending July 1. 1983. Mr. Hoglund requested that he would have no use for the liquor License until after the renewal period beginning July 1, 1984, and requested that the half year fee for the first half of 1984 be waived. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to waive the license fee for the on -sale liquor license for the first half of 1984 but to accept Mr. Hoglund's application for an on -sale liquor license effective July 1, 1984. Risk wolf at .& Assistant Administrator o-• i __ __ . --o Council Agenda - 3/26/84 4. Public Hearinq - Consideration of Application for Liquor License, Applicant - Stuart Hoqlund. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUNDi Our City Ordinance requires that a public hearing be hold prior to the issuing of an intoxicating on -sale license. While Stuart did come before you at the last meeting to request the fee waiver, that formally does not meet the requirements of the public hearing. Notice has now been published, and this will be the official hearing for the record. At the close of the hearing, the Council should decide whether or not to grant the license. Such motion should be contingent upon supplying the necessary insurance forms, a surety bond, and final approval by the Liquor Control Commission. After your approval motion, then City staff will handle the remainder of the paperwork. B. ALTERNATIVE ACPIONSi 1. Grant the liquor license. 2. Deny the liquor licpnse. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION, Staff recommends that the license be granted, and that the fee be hold in escrow and be applied to the renewal license fee effective July 1. The latter part of my recommendation has really already been approved by the Council. D. SUPPORTING DATA, Copy of Stuart Hoglund's liquor license application. -1- LIWOR LICFNSE APPLICATION Application for: Set up license ($100.00) y„ 3 3 00.E _ On .sale intoxicating liquor ( ) On sale non -intoxicating liquor ($100.00) Off sale non -intoxicating liquor ($15.00) Stuart HnnLind Age: 61 Date: O'arch 1, 19-14 lam: of Business: Oakunod Inn Andress: Oakwood (hive, fonticello. IBI Telephone No. - Home ?n5_ n6f, Business Procent business owned or operated (if applicable): Namn of Business Address Tyne of Ooeration Ilnne it�f� renceas lla�_ Address Telephone ?lumber .leral4 •lamps CoA Hnntieello. 1111 T.^5-517!1 'iryee Hunt Sax 2761 Iligh Point. NC 27:61 919-9R^-4171 n. !'. a -annus Kansas City, mn s 455-55'1r, +:rLdiL references (list at least one 'bank you do businesu wiLh): Nnmv Address Telr_nhone Number {Irinht County !tote ran[. Nnnticelln. I41 295-2051 ?o•:e you ever been convicted of n folony, or .of violating the National Pr:fl bitlon Act or any State law or ordinance relating to manufactur^ jr tranc-portation of intoxicating liquores NO Explain typo of operation ynu desiro license for: I1otn1 of propasud buslnues: J City of fanticclln. (ilwool nrive )i -Oo :nl,!xiestinn liquor onlyt A -n 'Lnt of lnv�73tmentq exclusive of land: Srnnw1.nn O ' Council Agenda - 3/26/84 5. Consideration of Purchase of the Bob Saxon Property. (T.E.) CA. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the last meeting you made an offer of $59,500 to the Saxons for their property, provided that the property remained essentially intact. Mr. Saxon indicated that he had already removed some carpet and had no real desire to replace it since it was already installed in another house. lie also indicated that he did wish to remove the refrigerator, the washer and the dryer, since they were personal possessions. Mr. Saxon called me shortly after the meeting and indicated that he fully agreed to the terms of the City offer. I asked him to drop off the key and as of Thursday, the 22nd, I have inspected the building. In order to rent the property, it would require some clean up and conceivably refinishing one wood floor. The kitchen range is still in place, but a renter would need to provide his/her own refrigerator. The dryeris still in the basement, but I believe Mr. Saxon does wish to remove that. He has agreed to leave everything else there except any of his personal belongings that are still behind. I have instructed Gary Pringle to begin preparing the decd and to do an abstract review. There being no unusual circumstances, we should be able to close on the property by the end of the month. B. ALTrRIATIVE ACTIONS: II 1. Make a motion to close the sale of the real estate. Give v' direction to staff to execute the dead for the transference of property. 2. witlidraw tho offer. Some justification ohould be provided for withdrawing the offor. C. STAFF RECOMKENDATION: we recommend that we consummate the purchase and complete the transaction. Any decision that is to be made with respect to potential rental or demolition can either be made at this time or at a future meeting. It might be boat to postpone the decision for ono meeting to allow City staff to got in and make a dotormination as to the effort and work that would have to go into it to make it ready for renting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: No supporting data for Chia item. I - 2 - Council Agenda - 3/26/04 6. Update on Fire Barn and Pumn House Project and Consideration of Proccedinq with Fire House Plans. W .S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the last Council meeting in February, the City Council directed staff to work with the Fire Department and look for different sites and put together some additional information as to the feasibility of a new Fire Hall. The City staff reviewed approximately 20 possible sites in the downtown area having easy access to either the light at Highway 25 and. Broadway or the light at Highway 25 and Seventh Street. A Copy of the description of these sites and the review is enclosed. The review led us to approximately four prime sites and possibly five, using a combination of two of the first four sites. I will list those sites in order of preference or priority, going from the least preferable to the best site. The first site, of course, is Lots 2-5, Block 34. This is the existing Fire hall site and the parking lot located to the west of the Fire Barn. There is approximately 44,000 square feet in this area. In order to use this for the site of a new Fire Barn, it would require the demolition of the existing building. This demolition would probably cost less than $10,000. We would, however, have to relocate that portion of the downtown parking area taken for Fire Barn use, and we would still be faced with the 50 foot distance from the existing walls. Site number 2 is Lots 1-5, Block 13. This is an approximate 55,000 square foot parcel located west of the Liquor Store and north if tha existing Wright County Bank Drivo-In facility. There is a significant amount of earth work needed to bring this site up to grado. Preliminary estimates are in the neighborhood of $25,000 to $30,000 for this work. Site number 3 is Lot 3, Block 2, of Lauring Hillside Terrace. Ibis is the second lot cast of the intersection of Cedar and Lauring Lana an the south aide of Louring Lane. It line approximately 106,000 square foot. The width is slightly restrictive in this lot. However, there is more than adequate depth. There is minimal aito preparation needed at this site, and the utilities are adequate. Site number 4 would be Lot 1, Block 2, louring Hillaido Terrace. This is the lot in the southeast eornor of the intersection of Cedar Street and Lauring Lane. It is approximately 63,000 square feet in size and would have very easy access, including adequate width and depth. The utilities aro adequate and site preparation would be very minimal on this lot. Site number 5, which is the beat of all possible locations, would be a combination of Lot 1, Block 2, and the north half of Lot 3, - 3 - Council Agenda - 3/26/84 Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace. The site preparation for this particular parcel would be minimal. The utilities are all in and the access for fire equipment is the best possible of all the sites. At this time, we do not have accurate information as to the value of these different properties. In most cases, a fair market value is not the asking price for these lots. Taking into consideration information received from the Monticello Fire Department and information we have achieved through City staff in site selection, I have come up with three proposed building sizes and the costs to go along with that. The buildings are basically "T" design, wherefore the main Fire Barn is the longest projection running east and west on some proposed sites and north and south on the other with the main objective of the Fire Barn facing toward a street in all instances. The rear portion of the building is designed for firemen's meeting area. Depending on the site selection, at least one end has been allowed for in building calculations as an expandable and to add on at some later time if need be. Incorporated into the design of the building are several key features. The main feature in the design is basically a maintenance free building, adding some architectural design to offset one plain rectangular building. Energy efficiency is the high note of the design, looking at many energy conservation measures being put into building and the design of the insulated steel entrance doors. The square footage remains from 8,000 sq. ft. to approximately 9,300 sq. ft. in total building size. One other notable feature will bo a basement under the mooting room area to accommodate storage of miseollaneaus Fire Department equipment and/or supplies. The attached arc some cost estimates on the buildings. Please nota that they are only an catimate arrived at by measurements presented to me and the figures which I have calculated. The staff would like the Council to discuss the building again and again make soma direction as to the course to follow. we again wish to look at the importance of the building of the additions to the pump houses. If tho City Council is continuing to proceed along the paths of building a new Firo Hall, then the plans and specifications should be finalized for the pump houses and we should go to bide. In addition, we have studied the posaiblo uses of the old Piro Hall should the City Council decide to pursue the building of the new barn. The old Fire earn could be used by the City Water Department. Currently the City Water Dopartment is spread between two areas, the Water Reservoir out in the Industrial Park and the Bawer Plant on the cast and of town. Thio building could offer a central location for all of the water motor aquipment and sewor collection equipment. In addition, we would be able to use come additional space for storage for such items as off-season equipment and ono of the sludge trucks from the Wastewater Treatment Plant in the wintertime, so the City could make good use of this building. - 4 - Council Agenda - 3/26/84 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Again, there appear to be several alternatives. One, of course, is to build the new building at any one of the five proposed sites. It does not appear practical to add on to the existing building. It continues to be a staff recontmendation that the City pursue the building of a new Fire Barn and authorize the plans and specifications for construction of the new additions to the pump houses. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Fire Hall Site Selection Review. Copies of the five proposed sites. Copies of the proposed building size and layout. Cost estimates. - 5 - FIRE HALL SELECTION REVIEW John Simola, Wry Anderson, and Tom Eidcm reviewed possible sites for the construction of a new Fire Hall. It was determined that the minimum amount of space required would be 170 x 170. Because the members of the Fire Department have stressed the need to have quick access to a traffic signal, we used blocks within an 800 foot radius of traffic lights at Broadway and 25 and the proposed traffic light at Seventh Street and 25. The 800 foot dimension is largely arbitrary. There is no suggested formula that equates 800 fact to improved response time. 1. Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, and Lots 14 and 15, Block 51; fronting on Locust. 132 x 330 Inadequate depth, excellent width Must acquire some parcels Water supply -6 inch water main, cast iron, circa 1930 2. Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, Block 51; fronting on River Street. 1G5 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width Would require reverse routing to reach a street light Grade problems Must acquire some parcels Water rupply-G inch water, n.ain, cast iron, circa 1930 3. Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, Block 521 fronting on River Street. 165 x 130 Marginal depth, excellent width covorue routing to light Suvoro yrado prublcros No acquiuition required Water supply -G inch water main, cast iron, circa 1930 Would eliminate substantial amount of public parking 4. Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, Block BI fronting on River Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width Water supply -adequate Would have to buy and demolish the A-V Room and five hoses S. Late 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block DI fronting on Third Street. 165 x 264 Marginal depth, adequate width Would require excessive grade work, perhaps berming Would require acquisition and demolition of three homes FIRE MALL SELECTION REVIEW 6. lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 34; fronting on Third Street. ` 165 x 264 /1 Marginal depth, adequate width Would require demolition of existing Fire Barn No acquisition of parcels required .Eliminates substantial public parking Would require relocation of water main Would require building at least 50 feet from existing pump house 7. Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 35; fronting on Third Street. 198 x, 165 Marginal depth, marginal width No room for expansion Requires no acquisition of land Eliminates substantial public parking 8. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 36; fronting on Third Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width would require acquisition and demolition of three homes Possible substantial traffic congestion with grocery store/hardware store Indirect routing to light 9. Lots 1, 2, 9, and 10, Block 32; fronting on Walnut Street. 132 x 330 Inadequate depth, excellent width Would require acquisition of all four parcels, no demolition required Substantial congestion on Walnut Street No direct route to traffic light 10. Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Block 33; fronting on Third Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width Would require the acquisition and demolition of four homes Adequate grade Adequate water supply 11. Lots 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10, Block P'; fronting on Cedar Street. 198 x 330 Good depth, excellent width Adequate water Adequate grading Would require the acquisition and demolition of four homes and the Cedar Court Complex 12. The parcel labeled "Exception" fronting on Cedar Strout. Irregular shaped, 471 x 352 Excellent size Good access to Cedar, however, stop signs at the iutarw tions of Cedar and Louring and at Cedar and 75 Requires acquisition and demolition of two houses Rsquiras the installation of water and sower mains Requires moms fill FIRE HALL SELECTION REVIEW 13. Lots 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10, Block L5; .fronting on cedar Street. 198 x 330 Good depth, excellent width Would require an exchange in ownership with Wilbur Eck May require acquisition of at least one additional lot Adequate access to Cedar Street Same stop sign constraints as listed in number 12 previously Would require substantial fill and/or soil removal Questionable as to whether or not we can build on the railroad right -of -ray 14. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, Block 6; fronting on Seventh Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width Severe grade problems, perhaps unbuildable Total acquisition of land required, no demolition required 15. Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Block 6o fronting on Sixth Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width Would require acquisition and demolition of Wright County State Bank Drive Through Adequate water Adequate grade Indirect routing to a stoplight 16. Lots 1, 2, '3, 4, and 5, Block 15j fronting on Sixth Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excollont width Would require the construction of Sixth Street Would require property exchange with Wilbur Eck Would require substantial fill and/or soil removal Would require installation of sewer and water mains 17. Lot 1, Block 2, Lauring Hillside Addition] fronting on Louring Lane. 233 x 301 Excellent depth, excellent width excollent access to Lauring, uninterrupted route to traffic light water cupply-12 inch newly constructed main Requires acquisition of land No demolition required Minimal site preparation required 18. Lot 3, Block 2, Lauring Hillside Addition] fronting on Louring Lane. 185 x 633 Adequate width, excellent depth Width expansion would be negligible Excellent access to During, uninterrupted route to traffic signal Water supply -12 inch newly constructed main, excellent Raqulrs acquisition, no demolition required Minimal site preparation &squired FIRE HALL SELECTION REVIEW 19. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 13; fronting on either Sixth Street or 55 Street. 165 x 330 Marginal depth, excellent width .Questionable soils Would require acquisition, no demolition required May wish to investigate relocating bulk tanks to provide for extra parking Water supply -adequate Minimum site preparation [lased on the concept that acquiring and demolishing structures would make this economically prohibitive, we have narrowed the selection to four of Lhcsc sites. Those are: 1. Lot 1, Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace. 2. Lot 3, block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace. 3. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 13. 4. Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 34. Thero is a possible fifth alternative which is a combination of Numbers 1 s 2 above or Lot 1 of Lauring Hillside and the north 5 of Lot 3, Lauring Hillside. Such a combination would accommodate any forsecable growth for 20-25 years in the future. Also, based on the notion that a direct route to a stoplight is desirable, we sec the Lauring Hillside locations as being most beneficial. Preliminary cost figures are shown on the attached pages. (00 1. 50' x 130' 16 foot side wall, G,500 sq. ft. fire barn with 1 -30' x 50' 10 foot side wall meeting area with a full \ basement underneath it. Total cost: $433,900. Parking lot, driveway, and driveway aprons, bituminous surface would be $14,400. 2. 60' x 130' 16 foot side walls, 7,800 sq. ft, fire barn with 30' x 50' 10 foot side wall, 1,500 sq. ft. meeting room area. Total cost: $494,400. Parking lot, driveway, and driveway aprons, bituminous surface would be $14,400. 3. 70' x 110' 16 foot side wall, 7,700 sq. ft. fire barn with a 30' x 50' 10 foot side wall 1,500 sq. ft. meeting area. Total cost: $487,500. Parking lot, driveway, and driveway aprons, bituminous surface would be $14,400. Each of the above buildings will have a colored steel exterior walls and roof with colored steel on the interior walls and ceilings. There will be six inches of insulation in the walls and 12 inches of insulation in the ceiling. The building will have an interior partition wall for a wash room area. It will also have eight 12' x 14' steel insulated overhead doors, four 3' x 7' exterior steel insulated walk doors. Reminder: :'hese are just some preliminary prices with the preliminary square footages and debigns of the building. We must also add into here any land costs and site preparation if needed. PLOT PLAN 'ADDRESS PERMIT NUMBER LEGAL :CSCRIPTION LOT BLOCK ADDITION ',u. FT. OF SITE AREA SJ. FT. OF AREA OCCUPIED BY BUILDING_ 9, -?6O INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT fSH13/ORM 1K co NOT OL USED WHEN PLOT PLANS DRAWN TO SCALL ARL PILCD WITH THE PERMIT APPLICATION. fOR NCU SUILOINGS. PROVIOC THE POIICOINO IN►ORAIATIOMI LOCATION OI PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND EXISTING 111 ROVCMLNTS. SHOW BUi LDINO SITE AND SETBACK DIMENSIONS. SHOW LASMENTS, PIMISN CONTOURS OR OAAINAOC. . t'IRST PLOOR LL[VATIONS. STRCCT [LCV ATIOII AND BCWCR CLEY..((��_�T ON. SNOW LOCATION OP WATER. SCW[R, OAS. SAND CLCCTRICAL SL RVICC LINES. SNOW LOCATIONS Of Suav['�I�MS. SPCCIPT THE Use OP EACH BUILDING LAND EACH MAJOR PORTION TNCRCOP. O INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE 91T CALX CRmX SQUARE EQUALS 101-0' BY 101-0" ILI 5d — _ wig wc' Nw. m.ttltV Inco the aopon0 comitluatian.111 COnl.nm It the Blm/mlOro And U.n tllawn abov and that no cR.ngn wiR be msa. without Um obtaining monad. ...........- ..............tab.w ..... 0....J....1..... 1...f............................ HH 664..a.n........ (roe CITU use ONLY) jMED APPROVED DT DATE ' CL-Qz—cLAv ,DDmSS PERMI www �o wwwo 11cAL :�Eop.,-..CU m, omm_______=m".ON U. n. or SITE AREA so. n. OF AREA OCCUPIED m BU.m."c 9300 v, .°noenmmm w°ucw" ~'" �^ �""°" � .11D WHEN "=` �°° "�~ TO SCALE °" ~�" ~'� °� �=` ��'^^`=' .°. ~° ..`°.=". ,~°.� ^" �`=.= .""=°.=. ""^,.= � ,~�"�=",.�,.". ~" "..�= .°~=."~�' ,�.""==".� °°��°".~�"`°°' �" "�.�, . ,...". �"��,= ~^.~^". ."",`�"�=°�.��,"��.�="�.�"�.� u��°.��="._S�.."�. ~" "`","."° =I."" "1S �" ""=.�� "_", ,.~� 3�".= ,� "= Of "=. �.`"= .� "^" ."" ,"�.".T~E"' — 0-D�^`c��R��x�pmLc'3w x�" GRAPHSQUARE EQUALS J6--O-"`��^r� — — ----—_ __ ' , / *^ ~m I I~_= -.I~ rH ~_^~_ll.~°~~tha~_~..d"=~C%. IV. .111° -We —h.. �"~^1—~ -A.- —~'.-----_— --^=-"",� —,^~..............,..,~~~~...,.i��I�.u��..^...~,..,.....,....,.........,...,............ =m APPROVED By DATE FL4T_r_LA'J :.or) RE55 PERMI T MA•IIER ..EGAL :•E5CR I P71 ON LOT BLOCK ADDITION J. f7. OF 517E ARCA F7. OF AREA OCCIPIED BY CUI LD1 INSTRIX TION$ TO APPLICANT .NI] PORN N[[0 NOT B( U.", Vn[N ►LOT PLANS D.AVN TO SCALE AR( IILCO VITN TN[ P(.NIT APPLICATION. i0. N(v Bu'L.I..S, ►.0110[ ln[ IOL LOV IND INTO -1T ION' LOCATION 01 _a PC SED CONSTRUCTION AND (AIST1110 "PAOV[NCNT 7. 1NOV DU I LD IND 11iC AND ![.SACK D.....IDN]. INOV LAINCNTS. FIN11N CONTOU.! O. ORAINACC. f IR]T FLOOR (L[v Ai IONS • STRC[T CL[V AT IOM AMD ICK. (l [Y AT IOM, $MDV LOCATION 01 VAT[R. ![WC.. Al.O AND (L[CTRICAL BCRIICE LIN[]• BNOV LOCATION! 01 SU.V(T PINI. !►CCI rY THE USE 01 EACH BUILDING AND TACN NAJOA ►O RTION TNC.[OI. TI INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE S --O- K EACH GRAPH SQUARE EQUALS �I-0" BY 1D1-0' ---_---- _ K,[T.--- --- — Rig cc;4m ------------Ry-------------- 501 Sa IIW. (vIN, IMI 114 01 DI"RnO CDMv1aNDw VIII fOnlwm .O IM D�NNnuO.0 ..v v.n ANnwn .Mw..b IMI n. CMro.1 wdl M1. ,n.0. wgNuul Inll .Ul .innp .Iiy,u..I. -� rc. A rv.rpr-y�v.rcrpN-c�NTnACIn.-D,.-R[r.(*(NT Arl yr ....................................... ...................................................................... (10R CII; U1( ONLY) 'NED APPWVCD BY DATE a t•DORESS��S7E� _EGAL / XSCRIPTION LOT 1 ..0. F1. OF SITE AREA J3?0 .9N/ P 1.O3—PJ.1 v PERMIT NUMBER BLOCK �� ADD I T I 9 Ad Af. SJ. FT. OF ARCA OCCUPIED BY BUILDING 4300`.y _ INSTTXTION11 TO APPLICANT I INIS 'Oft" MUCO NOT O( USED NILM PLOT PLANS DRAWN TO SCALE ARE ►IUCD vITN TNC PERMIT APPLICATION. !OR N(V OYILDIMOS, PROVIDE THE rOLLOWINO INFORMATION LOCATION Or PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND EXISTING INFROVEHEMTS. SNOW SUILOINS SITE AND SETOACK DIMENSIONS. SHOW CASHEMTO. FINISH CONTOURS OR ORAIMAO(, .IRST rL.00R ELCYATIOMS, STREET ELEVATION AND SCWCR CLEVATION, SHOW LOCATION OF WATER. SEWER. OAS, AND ELECTRICAL SZRVICE LINES. SHOW LOCATIONS Or SURVCT PINS. SPECIFY THE USE OF EACH OUILOINO AMO 'CACN MAJOR PORTION TXLREor. INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE EACH GRAPH SQUARE EQUALS a01—O. BY 30I-0' ■ ME M 0 0 i�v ■ i � i�■ii0 MEN 'INN010MIN mlWIMMOMEMIN on 1/we ..rll1T that the moPft d tomm0fon will wnlwm to Ihr dlmom4ro end Wu. UNRNN Mone 0.6 that .0 Chwips ..It W IND/ wnhOUt ILII Oltteinll% /DYt OVel. iTIIYA1VRC OT'WRLT VlPC41R71ALTOTQR'RET'MCSCRTIIYYC• ..........................Oe..e......................1...............................1....1...............1. (ran CITY use ONLYI cTNED APPROVED DY DATE PLOT PJAN SOORESS �.X TF �,� PERNIT MAKER _Ecu:> .CSCRIPTION LOT _ BLOCK ADDITION FT. OF SITE AREA____Jj"0-�' Sp. FT. OF AREA OCCUPIED BY 13UILDING 7.3Od' /�- rG.3 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT INI. IORN NCC. NOT OL U.0 W.CM 't.1 PLANS DRAWN TO SCALL ARE FILO WIT" TMC ICRNIT APPLICATION. /OA N(V OVIL0I MOS• PROV IOC THC FOLLOWING INFOAMATIONI LOCATION 01 PROP03CO CONSTRUCTION AND EXISTING INP "INTO; .NOW OUIL.I NO SITC AND .CTOACR DIM[NSIOMS. SNOW CASNCNTS. ►INISR CONTOURS OR ORAINACC. FIRST FLOOR (ILV AT. Or.S. .TR[LT LLLVATION AND $EVER LLCVATION. SNOW LOCATION OP VATCA. 3C -CR. GAS. AND CLCGTRICAL SCAVICC LIN(S• EMOV LOCATIONS 0/ SURVEY CT IIN7. SPCCIIY TML USC Of CACH OVILOINO AND C►CN MAJOR PORTION TMCACOF• -0. INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE tiff nACA r_ WN SOOARE EOUALS30l—O' BY 301-0' IIW. Rattily that IAS propmod lambV[llon will lonfetm N IM dimmn/iRnl .AS WIII w— AbM. and MAI M CIMrl0.1 will 01 Nude w1lAoul INN achm 1 App..Al, 9VICRATVWr-gy TJWMW-VIrODRTNRL'lofl Gr-ALVRClLIT'►ATITC- U R.......-.....-..-..-.....-...0 F N ..................A .. A .................................................... . (FOR CITY U1C ONLY) NNEO APPROVED BY DAVE 0 1 PLOT PLAN '•UDRC95 S7 TF '� PERMI T IUM13ER _Cc;AL f �. 3r'F' .L'SCRIP7 ION LOT ` BLOCK ADDITION ��lr Q. FT. OF SITE AREA 113r l&Q SQ. FT. OF AREA OCCUPIED BY DUILDING 95M IIISTRUCTIOtIS TO APPLICANT i Ml! FORM NC[D NOT OC USED WHEN PLOT PLAN! 0PAWN TO SCALE ARE TILED WITH THC PERMIT APPLICATION. 1pR NEV OUILOINOS, PRO1101: THE FOLLOWING IN/ORMATIONI LOCATION 01 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND [MISTING IMPROV[M[MTp. OHOv OUILDI NO OITL AND a[TOACR OINCHSION!• SNOW EASNCNTl. /UNI lM COHTOYn! OR DRAINnOL. �IRaT FLOOR LLLV ATIONl. OTRLLT LL[V AT IOM AMO a[v[R LEEWAY ION. SMOV LOCATION OI VAi[R, SCv[x. oAl. AND [L[CTRI CAL Be VICE LIME a. aHOV LOCAT IOM! Of SURVEY PINS. SPLCIIY THE USL 0/ EACH OUILDING Ax0 EACH MAJOR PORTION TMC... 1. INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE EACH GRAPH SQUARE EQUALS 101-0' BY 101.0" _ .. _ I • — \ 1 J,J `I Uvil --- —tea- --- - - - - -- - -- - 60' -- - - -- IIW. L.r111T IR.t lM .. proPOO CONUVCtipn will CpRlwm to IM ds—on..r.p wn .R.w.n.DRW. And tR.l no ch..O.A.111 b. I.1.0. —houl IirM .Duini�p .pwoYN. ••••••••••••••••••••• •....v*...................... A A ..................................................... (Foo CITY Yat OIgT) 'UNCO APPROVED BY DATE © 1 I„ PI OT PLAN , 'ADDRC 93 IE y PERM T NUMBER _[GAL z CSCAIPTION LOT _�, / BLOCK FT. OF SITE AREA / 3c41(n l�il SJ. FT. or AREA OCCUPIED BY BUILDING_ 9300 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT IMI] FORH wClO HOT DE VSCD —E. PLOT PLAN! OR.-. TO SCILC ARC /ILED VITH THE P[RwIT APPLICATION. OR NLV O., LDIHG O. P101I LII THE FO LLO`.'1.0 I. POR.AT 10111 LOCATION 01 PIOP0311 COHSTRVCTIO1 AHD CC TOTING F.OV CHCHT D. !11011 OVI LV I HG SIT[ AMD SCTOACIt plwC1131 pHf. lHOV [ASw[NTl. PINIlN C011TOUR3 OR DRAT RAGE. 'IRST FLOOR ELEVATION]. OTR[CT CLCV AT ION AND SC�'CI• ELEVATION. SH0 LOCATION OI VATCR. ]EVER. LAS. 1.11 ELECTRICAL SCRYICE LINES. SNOT LOCATION] OF GU.VCY PINS. SPECIFY THE USE Of C.C. OVILOI.I.. nND EACH ..II PORTION THC.CO/. INDICAIE NORTH IN CIRCLE EAC11 CAAPII SOUARE EQUALS 101-0" BY 101-0" - - - - / --T --- ,-- ------------ j NO 1 ----•----------- .SDI ------- ----' - -_ - - - it ----------------I------------ NWIINA W F—d COn111,.EtlOn will CRNI01m IR IN. 0H"0n9-0N1 AM u.n N.rn IDO.1 Ano IN11 RR CN.R[.11-11 be mtl1 w,1Nau1 IR11 Op11,n,rq .Rur pr.l, it CR 1TTIR[X41—�VgCA��1rCT7RTTF1L101I'7TRCPq[4[q{\TIV� I......IAAIIAAAAFAAAIA....0..P........1...PI.....II..........II.......AA............III I ............. A...... I.OF CITT U[[ ON►Y) LINED APPROVED BY DATE PLOT EI AN i ::.UDRC55 S�7E #� PERMIT NUMBER _ECACluV .11 -SCR IPTION LOT �_ }% �, �/ //J BLOCK 1�ADD l TION te ZOrt/ / C!'i. TT. OF SITE AREA S0. rT. OR AREA OCCUPIED BY BUILDING g30(1 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICaYT THIS FORM NEED HOT BE VSED "E. PLOT PLANS DOWN TO SCALL A.0 FILED VITH THE PLRNIT APPLICATION. FOR NCV OUI L01 No 5, PRO IOC THE To LLO.I NO INFOR.ATIONI LOCATION OF PR. "0310 CONSTRUCTION AND Li[IST INC I HPRO VC.,.T 5. 9.0. BUILDING SITE AND SCT. ACR DIN'vl...3. SHO. EA,.E.T.. IF INI 5H CONTOVRS IS DRAINAOC, FIRS7 FLOOR CLEVAT IONS. STRC CT ELEVATION AND SC.ER CLCVATION. SMO. LOCATION Or ..TCR. lE.C.. OAS. AVD [ICCiRICAI 8[RV ICC LINES- 3NDV LOCATION! Of lVRV[T PINI. SPECIFY THE USC OF EACH OV Il01 NO AVD CAC. MAJOR PORTION THCRCOF. OINDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE EACH GRAPH SQUARE EQUALS30I-0' BYaOI-0" V P O n^LI l�DOI —. _ - "----_ —, — — 11 IBI — — _, — — — — — .� Iii• uw. c h IMl ln• D�u1unM [Dn•NucDOn ..NI mn101m m m• a.m. uom •^n mn m�rv.n •nD.• •.d ItiI ^D an•^pn will M -d- ............................ 0 .......... d- ...•...•..•••...••..••••••••••.•••.•••• •.••...••.••. (IBR CITY UAL ONLY) TONED APPROVED BY DATE _ Council Agenda - 3/26/84 7. Consideration of a Proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This is the item relating to an amendment regulating signs as a Conditional Use that was delayed from the last meeting. In the meantime, I have talked with John Uban from Dahlgren 6 Associates to discuss the original intent of our ordinance. John Uban was in full agreement that the intent of the ordinance was 10SL when the word'buildiny'was substituted for the words %hopping center". We discussed this proposed amendment: and after incorporating some of his suggestions, he feels that the new wording adequately addresses the goals of any sign provisions in the ordinance. The amendment will have had its public hearing at a special meeting of the Planning Commission held just prior to the City Council meeting. I do wish to stress that the fact that there are special meetings is because of the inconvenience created by a flaw in the ordinance, not due to pressure put upon us by the developer. It was duo to the application that we discovered the error in the ordinance. Thus, we are attempting to address the inadequacy in as short a time as possible, creating as little inconvenience for the applicant as possible. B. ALTERNATIVE. ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the amendment - This will allow review of the Conditional (—/ Uso application submitted by Metcalf s Larson under the now tones of tho ordinance. 2. Do not adopt the amendment - Thin would sustain the inadequacy that is built into the ordinance. Any application for a Conditional Use under the existing language will almost automatically be accompanied by a variance. This language oleo penalizes a building that has more than one tenant. 3. Elect to investigate a different amendment. This essentially would be sending the item back for further study and comparison. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on my conversations with John Uban of Howard Dahlgren and Associates, I recommend that the amendment bo adopted. The amandmont as it is is intended to stay oubstantially the some oven in light of the overall revision of the zoning ordinance this summer. we may be required to make soma definition changes in other forms of the ordinance, but we do not ace this wording so changing uignificantly under the rovision of the ordinance. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of tho proposed ordinance amendment. Other data wao ouppliod on this issue for the last Council meeting. =3 ORDINANCE AFIEND1dENT NO. 133 TRE CITY COUNCIL OF TINE CITY OF INONTICELLO DO HEREBY ORDAIN THAT TITLE 10-3-9 (E)2(b) BE AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: (b) For buildin3s in which there is one (1) or two (2) business uses within the B-2, B-3, B-4, I-1 and I-2 Districts, there shall be two (2) options for permitted signs. The property owner shall select one option which shall control sign size on each lot. (1) Option A. Under Option A, only wall signs shall be allowed. The maximum number of signs on any principal building shall be six sign boards or placards, no more than four (4) of which may be product identification signs, with only two walls allowed for the display of the signs. Each wall shall contain no more than two product identifi- cation signs and two business identification signs. The total maximum size of wall signs shall be determined by taking twenty percent (209) of the gross silhouette area of the front of the building, up to three hundred (300) square feet, whichever is lose. If a principal building is on a corner lot, the largest aide of the building may be used to dotormine the gross silhouette area. For purposes of determining the gross area of the silhouette of tho principal building, the silhouette shall be defined as that area within an outlino drawing of the principal building as viewed from the front lot line or from the related public atrcot(e). (2/26/79 NG4) (2) Option B. Under Option 0, aithor wall signs or pylon signs may be utilized, or a combination of both. In no case, however, shall more than one pylon sJgn W allowed. Only two product identification aigna and one premiso identification sign is allowed and theao wall signs must be only on one ooporate wall. The total maximum allowablo sign area for any wall shall be doterminad by taking ten percent (109) of the gross oilhouatto area of the front of the building, up to one hundred (100) square feet, whichever is less. The method for determining the gross silhouette aroa for wall signs is as indicated in Option A. (2/26/79 PGO) (3) Conditional Uses, The purpose of this section is to provido aosthoLic control to oignngo and to prevent a proliferation of individual signs on buildings with three (3) or more business uaco. The City shall encourago the use of oinglo sign boards, placards, or building dLroctory signs. (a) In the case of a building where thyro aro three (3) or more busineos uses, but which, by generally understood and accepted definitions, is not eonoLdared a shopping canter or shopping mall, a Conditional Use ohnll be granted to the entire building in accordanco with an overall site plan under the provisions of Option A or Option D (described in the two preceding saetionu) providod thatt v Ordinance Amendment 0133 Title 10-3-9 (E)2(b) Page 2 (i) The owner of the building files with the Zoning Administrator a detailed plan for signing illustrating location, size in square feet, size in percent of gross silhouette area, and to which business said sign is dedicated. (ii) No tenant shall be allowed more than one sign, except that in the case of a building that is situated in the interior of a block and having another building on each side of it, one sign shall be allowed on the front and one sign shall be allowed on the rear provided that the total square footage of the two signs does not exceed the .maximum allowable square footage under Option A or Option B. (iii) No individual business sign board/placard shall exceed twenty-five (256) of the total allowable sign area. Toa &042 is?nt JkK, U v) f desiring any alteration of signs, sign location, sign size, or number of signs shall first submit an appli- cation to the Zoning Administrator for an amended sign plan, said appli- cation to be reviewed and acted upon by the. Zoning Administrator within ten (10) days of application. If the application is denied by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant may go before the Planning Commission at their next regularly scheduled meeting. (v) In the event that one tenant of the building does not utilize the full allotment of allowable area, the exceso may not bu granted, traded, sold or in any other way transferred to another tenant for the purpose of allowing a sign larger than twenty-five percent (256) of the total allowable area for signs. NO Any building identification sign or building directory sign shall be included in the total allowable area for signs. (vii) Any sign that is shared by or is a combination of two or more tenants shall be considered as separate signs and shall moot the requirements thereof. % ^ (vAi) All signs shall be aeeuwtl::" : .`.'a in ft* f design, crier, materials, shapo, andjIlumination. .ried of (b) In the case of a building where there aro two (2) or more uses, and which, by generally undarstood and accepted dofinitions, iu considered to be a shopping center or shopping mall, a Conditional Use Permit shall be granted to the entire building in accordnnce to an ovorall site plan indicating their size, location, and height of all signs presented to the Planning Comnisoion. A msximtun of five percent (56) '_i_ --- — * 0 Ordinance Amendment #133 Title 10-3-9 (E)2(b) Page 3 Of the gross area of the front silhouette shall apply to the principal building where the aggregate allowable sign arca is equitably distributed amongst the several businesses. In the case of applying this conditional use permit Lu a building, the building may have one (1) pylon or free- standing sign idenLi fying the building which is in conformance with this ordinance. Tliis Amendment adopted Lhin day of 1984, :,hall Lake full force and effect upon publication. Thomas A. Eidem City Administrator Arve A. Grimsm0, Mayor 0 Council Agenda - 3/26/84 �I 8. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use, Applicant - Metcalf and Larson. ME.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This application is a new application under the terms of the proposed amendment. I informed Mr. Larson that if they chose to take the risk of making application while the amendment was not formally adopted in order to expedite matters, that would be okay with us. I did indicate that the application originally made would not be applicable under the amended ordinance, and thus the new application would be required. Again, the Planning Commission, in their special session, will be reviewing the request for a Conditional Use under the amended ordinance. Any recommendation they submit to the Council will be contingent upon final approval of the proposed amendment. If, however, the amendment is not adopted then the Council should take action on Metcalf 6 Larson's original Conditional Use and Variance Request. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: If the amendment has been adopted: 1. Review the sign plan and approve the Conditional Use. 2. Deny the Conditional Use. This should be on the grounds that it does not either meet the intent nor the letter of the amendment. I If the amendment ties not been adopted: 1. Approvo the original Conditional Use and Variance Request. This would allow a total amount of signs up to approximately 15% of tho gross silhouette wall area. 2. Grant the Conditional Use but deny the Variance. This would allow a sum total of SG eq. ft. of sign for all eight businesses that may potentially reside in the building. Fifty-six square foot represents 5% of the gross silhouette wall area. 3. Deny the Conditional Uao. Thio would essentially prevent any oign at all from being erected. This, I believe, is beyond Lho intent of oven the original ordinance. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since the amendment took final form so Tato, and the final sign plan hos not yet been submitted, staff is wiablo to prepare a recommendation for approval or disapproval. Having reviewed Lho proposed sign plan and heard toctimony at the Planning Commission, I believe the staff can better evaluate Lho proposal and at that timo make a recommendation. D. SUPPORTING DATA, There is no additional reference material at this Limo. Tho outcome of the Planning Commission public hearings will be relayed to you the evening of Ilio meeting. - 7 - Council Agenda - 3/2G/84 9. Consideration of an Amendment to the ordinance to Allow, as a Conditional Use in an R-1 Zone, more than Five Children in a Day Care or Foster Care Home. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: In looking through our Ordinance in R-1 Zoning, we don't allow for taking care of more than five children, five children being the maximum including family's own, in a day care or foster care home. Predominantly where our day care or foster care homes are found are in R-1 Zoning. I have had over the past six mol,ths probably two or three application requests for more than five children, including one family's own children, in a day care or foster care home. We had one applicant come before the Monticello Planning Co^.unission meeting on February 14 asking the Planning Commission members to consider allowing it in an R-1 Zone. The Planning Commission members, not to discriminate against it in do R-1 Zone, felt that they should have a public hearing on it for the ordinance amendment. A public hearing was held at our March 13, 1984, Planning Commission meeting. Certain things to consider when amending the ordinance to allow this is that first of all, as a condition to the ordinance amendment to allow it as a Conditional Use, the applicant for licensing with the Minnesota State Department of Welfare has to abide by Rule No. 1. Briefly, Rule No. 1 covers the inspection by State Fire Marshall's Otfico; it does a thor,,,ugh check of the applicant; and has many other aspects that deal with the licensing process. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve an ordinance amendment to allow as a Conditional Use in an P.-1 Zone more than five children, including family's own children. 2. Deny the amendment to the ordinance to allow as a Conditional Use in an R-1 Zone more than five children in a day care or foster care home. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that we do not discriminate against more than five children in a foster or day care home and staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendment to allow only as a Conditional Use in an R-1 Zone more than five children in a day care or foster care home, including family's own children. D. SUPPORTING DATAs No supporting data for this item. - 8 - Council Agenda - 3/26/84 10. Consideration of Conditional Use Pequest to Allow as a Conditional Use in an R-1 Zone More Than Five Children, Includinq Family's Own, in a Day Care or Foster Care Home, Applicant - Michael Dahmen. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Upon approval of an ordinance amendment to allow more than five children, including family's own, in a foster care or day care home, Mr. Dahmen would like to ask for your approval as a Conditional Use to allow this in his own home. The Dahmens currently have five children of their own, and they would like to seek one additional child to make the total number of children in their home six and be able to take care of one additional foster child. The condition is pretty much addressed in the State Department of Welfare Licensing Guideline under Rule No. 1. At the Planning Commission meeting on March 13, 1984, the Dahmens recognized that they were fully aware of Rule No. 1 as set by the State Department of Welfare Licensing Guidelines. We have virtually no control over licensing applications other than they have to be allowed within the zoning in which the applicant lives. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the Conditional Use Requost to allow as a Conditional Use in an R-1 Zone more than five children, including family's own,, in a day care or foster care home. 2. Deny the Conditional Use Request to allow as a Conditional Use in an R-1 Zone more than five children, including family'a own, in a day care or foster care home. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Requeot to Michael Dahmen as long as he moots the criteria established by the State Department of Welfare under Rule No. 1. D. SUPPORTING DATAi No uupporting data for thio item. - 9 - Council Agenda - 3/26/84 11. Consideration of Conditional Use Request to Allow a Pet Store in a B-4 Zone, Applicant - Joel Erickson. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Mr. Joel Erickson, Veterinarian in the City of Monticello, also has a veterinarian business located on the south edge of town on south Highway 25. Mr. Erickson is requesting as a Conditional Use to allow him to put in a pet store in a B-4 Zone. The location where Mr. Erickson would like to put his pet store is in the south- east corner of the ]ower level of the new Metcalf and Larson building. At the March 13, 1984, Planning Commission meeting, we received no complaints or comments from the public on Mr. Erickson's Conditional Use Pequesr., Planning Commission members voiced their concern along with City staff that the operation pretty much has to depend on the relationship between the owner and the renter or leasee in this case. Mr. Brad Larson, partner in the rlietcalf and Larson building, was also present to discuss that they had no problems with Mr. Erickson's request to have a pet store in their building. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the Conditional Use Request to allow a pet store in a B-4 Zone. 2. Deny the Conditional Use Request to allow a pet store in a B-4 Zone. C. STAFF RECOWIENDATION: Staff recomme,,ds approval of the Conditional Use to allow a pet store in a B-4 Zone with the only requirement being that Mr. Erickson and the Broadway partners in the Metcalf and Larson building establish their own working relationship to deal with any problems that might come forth from a pet store being in the building. D. SUPPORTING DATA, No supporting data for this item. - 10 - Council Agenda - 3/26/84 12. Consideration of a Resolution Settinq a Public Ilcarinq for LFulfillment Systems' Tax Increment Financing Plan. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you are aware, we have been progressing all along with the Fulfillment Systems project and getting them located within the corporate limits. The U.D.A.G. grant has been approved and the paperwork is being completed to process the grant monies. In the meantime, we are continuing on with the proposal for tax increment financing. The IIRA, at a special meeting on April 19, adopted a resolution approving the tax increment finance plan and sending it on to the Planning Commission, the City Council, Wright County, and the School District. Before the Council can formally adopt the plan and request certification at the County level, a public hedring must be held. The only action that is required of the Council at this time is to adopt the resolution setting the public hearing for the April 9 meeting. On April 9, after the hearing is closed, than the Council will adopt the plan and the certification can follow shortly thereafter. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the resolution setting the hearing - This keeps the process going. 2. Do not adopt the resolution setting the hearing - this effectively stops the project. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the Tax Increment Finance Plan and the Modification to the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project, Copy of the resolution adopted by the HRA approving the Plan. On Monday night approvnl should coma from the Planning Commission orally. A RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION NO. 1, DATED MARCH 15, 1984 TO THE MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN BY THE MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.411, et seg WHEREAS, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello (the "Authority') is carrying out the Monticello Redevelopment Project (the "Project") and Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan"), pursuant to the approval of the City Council of the City of Monticello (the "City"); and WHEREAS, Section 462.525, Subd. 6, of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act (the "Housing Act") provides that a redevelopment project may be modified at any time provided that the modification shell be adopted by the Authority and the City Council of the City upon such notice and after such public hearing as is required for the original adoption of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the Authority recommends that the project be undertaken as rapidly as possible and be financed with local funds including tax Increment financing as authorized by Minnesota Statutes. Sections 273.71 through 273.78; and WHEREAS, in connection with the undertaking of certain project modifications by the Authority.pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 4G2.411 et se_c. the approval by the Board of Commissioners (the "governing body") of the Authority of the redevelopment plan for the project area involved in such undertaking is required by the local governing body before it will consider for approval said Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, there was presented to this meeting of the governing body of the Authority for its consideration and approval, a copy of a housing and redevelopment plan for said project area dated March 15, 1984 which plan is entitled the Redevelopment Project Plan Modification ql; and WHEREAS, the Authority adopts the tax Increment financing plan as part of the method of financing; and WHEREAS, the Authority has prepared Modification No. 1, dated March 15, 1984, to the Plan ("Modification No. 1") and submitted Modification No. 1 to the City Planning Commission of the City of Monticello (the "Planning Commission") for Its review and opinion; and NOW, Ti EREFORP., BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority In and for the City of Monticello: 1. That the redevelopment project area described in said Redevelopment Project Plan Modificntion No. 1 dated Uarch 15, 1984 contains blighted and deteriorated or deteriorating areas as defined In the Minnesota Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, Subdivision 13, and requires public assistance in order to eliminate said blighted, deteriorating and economically obsolete areas. 2. The said Plan and Project will carry out the purpose and policy of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act of the State of Minnesota, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.415 to 462.111 as set forth in Section 462.415. 3. The said Redevelopment Plan is hereby in all respects approved and the Secretary is hereby directed to file said Redevelopment Plan with the Minutes of this meeting. 4. Application is hereby made to the City Council of the City of Monticello, the governing body of the City in which said project is located, for the approval of said Plan and project area, and the staff of this Authority Is authorized to transmit said Plan to said City Council, together with a copy of this Resolution, a plan for financing the project including the adoption of the tax increment financing plan and to take such other action as the said staff may deem necessary and advisable in order to secure from said City Council its approval of said Plan and project. Said City Council is hereby requested to hold a public hearing on said Redevelopment Project Plan Modification No. 1 after giving published notice of the date, time, place and purpose of such hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Monticello, such notice to be published at least ten days and no more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. Said City Council is hereby requested to approve said Plan and project modification and to find by Resolution that: (1) the land in the project area would not be made available for redevelopment without the financial aid to be sought; (2) the redevelopment plan for the redevelopment project in the locality will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the locality as a whole, for the redevelopment of such areas by private enterprise; and (3) the redevelopment plan and tax increment financing plan conforms to a general plan for the development of the locality as a whole, and (4) that the project will result in increased employment In the municipality and will result in the preservation and enhancement of the -tax base of the municipality, and (5) that the plan for relocation of the Individuals and families displaced in carrying out the Project in decent, safe and sanitary dwellings in conformity with acceptable standards is feasible and can be reasonably and timely effected to permit the proper execution and completion of the project. Said staff is hereby authorized and directed to transmit to the State Department of Energy and Economic Development, Office of Local Government, certified copies of this Resolution, of said Plnn, and other papers and documents described or referred to in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.445, Subdivision 8 of said Municipal Housing and Rcdeveopment Act. Adopted this 19th day of March, 1984. ATTEST: t:hairman 2 Council Agenda - 3/26/84 13. Consideration of RePlacemont of Park Equipment, Itillcrest Park; and Consideration of Health Course for Anders Wilhelm/Par West Park. W.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROtD:D: The City staff is concerned with the replacement of the playground equipment built in the mid -70's at various parks. We began re- placing this homemade type of park equipment with the Ellison Park Project, and last year we replaced the playground equipment in West Bridge Park. This year we have placed funds into the budget to replace the equipment at Hillcrest Park and Fourth Street Park. At this particular time, we are only concerned with the equipment at ilillcrest, as we are yet uncertain of the development path for the Fourth Street Park. The playground equipment or park equipment at Hillcrest Park was built in the mid -70's, I believe by Stan Hall. The equipment is basically built out of old telephone poles and bent pieces of rebar 6 ready rod. Our monthly inspections during the summer reveal quite often that something has cone loose from one or more of the play devices and could cause injuries. We have selected a playground structure similar to the one installed in west Bridge Park last year. The structure would consist of a horizontal ladder, a spiral. slide, tire swing, and two belt swings. We have enclosed for your review a quote from E.F. Anderson 6 Associates for the structure for $4,195, F.O.B. Bloomington. This particular unit is a Landscape Structure. we checked with a competitor, Miracle Recreation Equipment, and found their price similar. City staff has a preference for Lite Landscape Structures due to the complete detailed oat of drawings enclosed, which make the installation much easier. Tho structure down in Ellison Park is the Miracle Equipment, and there was some difficulty in getting things to fit together properly, and the drawings provided were loss than adequate. The second matter before the Council this evening is the consideration of the installation of a Health or Vita Course in the Anders Wilhelm/ Par west Park. Some members of the Council may remember this from post meetings, as we have briefly touched upon this item several times in the past. The City staff has made a rough layout of the north and of the park, approximately the north G00 fact, that area from the park entrance from Anders Wilhelm and the park entrance from Par west. I have enclosed a drawing showing the proposed Monticello Vita Course. It allows a small parking lot, approximatoly 40 x go, which will allow approximately 10 caro, and it shows the installation of approximately 11 stations, tiro first two being the same, a start,a finish. A brochure is enclosed showing the actual =F1M Council Agenda - 3/26/84 jj configuration of each different station. We have shown various trees `l• and shrubs throughout the site. We have not actually weighed out the plantings, as the different species have to be considered due to the overhead power lines. We have included approximately seven benches in this area and allowed the center to be used as an open recreation area. A light and drinking fountain is included in the initial construction with the installation of sewer and water services for a possible rest room sometime in the future. The pathways between the stations will be constructed of limo. In addition to this construction, the site generally needs additional black dirt and seeding prior to development. We would propose spot fencing the area to delineate the park from the surrounding residential area. The following is a tabulation of the proposed cost for development in this park. ESTIMATE Vita Course $ 3,901 7 Benches 980 Trees s Shrubs 900 Lime, 50 yards 825 Black Dirt S Seed 750 Spot Fencing 500 Concrete 200 Class V Parking Lot 250 Drinking Fountain 300 $ 8,60G Paving Parking Lot (option this yr) $ 11800 TOTAL $10,406 The above is just a minimal amount of development in this park, so you can see the Health Course itself is approximately ono -half of the development coat of just getting the area ready. Our Park Development budget for 1984 is $15,000. This $15,000 was expected to cover the replacement of playground equipment in tho Fourth Street Park, the Hillcrest Park, the development of the Vita Course, and additional treo plantings and grading in ouch parks as Country Club, HlllcrusL•, and Meadow Oak. In order to accomplish our other work and start construction on the Vita Couroo, we would have to loavo the parking lot paving until 1985 in order to stay within budget. The only other alternative may be to use some of the funds provided from Par West to aid in the development of this park. This would allow us to complete the projects as planned including the blacktopping. - 13 - Council Agenda - 3/26/64 B. ALTERI4ATIVE ACTIONS: At this time the City staff feels that the only alternative to the replacement of the park playground equipment in Hillcreat Park would be to completely remove that playground structure and not replace it. We do not feel that we should continue to use that structure. The alternatives for the Anders Wilhelm/Par West Park could include the development of the park toward another use. The City staff, however, feels that another park with playground equipment and picnic tables is not needed at this area and that this Vita Course would be well accepted and used, not only by the residents from the surrounding area but by other people throughout the City once its existence becomes known. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: It is the staff recommendation that we replace the Hillcrest playground equipment as planned and that we do the development of the Vita Course as planned utilizing a portion of the money received from the Par West Development to subsidize the completion of the parking lot. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Drawing of proposed park addition, brochures and quotes on park equipment. - 14 - Cl v lam', 416. 0 00 e I U. by Landscape Structures Inc. VITA COURSE is the outdoor exercise course you design yourself. To suit your fitness needs, available space and budget. Whether you want an excellent overall fitness program or a special emphasis course, you can design precisely what you need with VITA COURSE. VITA COURSE offers a total of 32 exercise signs, 19 of which require redwood exercise structures, course introduction and finish signs, di- rectional brectional arrows and mileage markers. The easy -to -read exercise signs are made of durable anodized aluminum plates with photographically transferred graphics, making the instructiuns clear, sharp and weather-proof. The signs are per- manontly mounted in redwood frames. Each sign illustrates and ex- plains an individual exercise, such as the Achilles Stretch, Bench Leg Raise, Straddle Stretch and over 25 other exercises that can be in- cluded in your personalized program. Depending on the space you have available, you may select our Suggested 10- or 20 -Station Course. including all the necessary signs, sign numbers and exercise structures for ;In overall fitness program tai rows and markers a-tra). Or you can select each sign and structure individually—the cnoices rue many and the design is up to youl Suggested 10 -Station Course (Number 801) Introduction Sign, Arm Cticles, Body lwisl, HQae Tilt, Squat Extend, Balance Boom, Pull Up. Push Up, Sit Up, Spuny Up, Vault Bar and Finish Sign (see signs and structures marked "10"). Suggested 20 -Station Course (Number 1302) Malt Knoo Bonds, Knee Raise. Side Bond, Toe Touch, Achilles Stretch, Block Stretch, Jump Touch, Log Jump, Parallel Bars and Ring Twist. Plus signs and struc- tures born 10 -station course (see signs and structures marked "20"). id 63I :4Cn�Uoa t3trmcn t0 i Sign 6711 —tie Ditancs do-WW—ii/iii feign 6751 r 838 Bench L% R—e H' r (Sign 837) - tam 857 leumet•i� Suet 854 Jump Touch 10 861 Log Jump 70 858 Opposing Boeme 5'0"850) IS19n853) ^fin Ps61 )Sign 8581 v' *4' r J19, tir .Fl 't _. W pu.uei Bere to 467 Pull Up Lo/m 865 SN Rv q Lad J., (sign 8401 1 SiDP !801 i % on 886, N +�'!.,j _ sae i. . 70 8Jj J ]a F•� C�> EARL F. ANDERSEN AND ASSOC., INC. EEA alae Chele �;,l ��bom��,�es. OUOTATIOfN • oan a, Pe tw [ Eq,,u-1 . 1.W_/E• _ S."'" • f 1— So— • Traria; PW.,. • S1m F.,—Q, • c..— S19- aria L41-9 • L.— Ena,wa,wq • Tram,: r &—g N du<u •ll•mt,,Sl•O,um Saar,rq Date February 15„ 1984 • City of Monticello Your Ref, No. 250 E. Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Attn: Roger Mack, Street Conunissioner • TERMS: Net 30 Days f]( To Be Arranged D Wr are pleased to quote you th4 lollowing: QUANTITY DESCRIPTION PRICE EACH TOTAL 1 Nine (9) Station VITA COURSE as manufactured 3951.00 by Landscape Structures Structures 1 0830 - 831 - Start and Finish Signs #837 - 838S - Bench Leg Raise Sign & Structire 11840 - 841S - Body Curl Sign & Structure 11848 - 849S - liorizontal Ladder Sign & Stru Lure 11853 - 854S - Jump Touch Sign & Structure 11860 - 861S - Parallel Bars Sign & Structure 11862 - 863S - Pull Up Bar Sign & Structure #868 - 869S - Ring Twist Sign & Structure 11871 - 872S - Situp Sign and Structure #879 - 880S - Vault Bar Sign 6 Structure If picked up at our warehouse, deduct 50.00 SUBTOTAL (Material Only) SALES -TAX FREIGHT TOTAL F 0.17, Fnclory ❑ Donhnndon 1_1 WE ARE AN EOUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Shipment appro•. _..30—Days_ after recoipl 01 ordm. NOTE T his quotation vnlid tot 30 days. Picase wr ito lot confiimatmn alter mat dato By < - 0 j.' hn Demko EARL F. ANDERSEN . AND ASSOC., INC. EFA 9864 James Circle Bloomington, MN 55071 Toll.Froe WATS Lha 1-M-862-6026.612.884-7700 CornObd ton4rdtap, Onlgn, IeYout end antaBallon 40rvtosrr. City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Attn: Roger Mack QUOTATION __ ,1 • Pu4 rt 4 Re 1—ril EawtlnMrlt • ImWw/E.t SKI -90 • FRrgai STnoms • Tropic Producu • Su Furnunuv. • ^Hflpn S gm •M 0A. -N. • L-6 Em—ft• Tnalc mm -mg Pn 11xu • Bbecrnr/s:ww Smmq Dat„ February 15, 1984 Your Ref. No. TERMS: Nct 30 Days To Be Arranged ❑ Weare Pleased to qu010 you the following: GUAM ITV DESCRIPTION 1 Special Design Landscape StruCLure - All Redwood Components: 226R MainStrUCL"ure r 740SP Spiral Slide 002R Belt Swing OO1R Tire Swing 018R Horizontal Ladder 187R Horizontal Ladder Support If picked up at our warehouse, deduct PRICE EACH TOTAL 4245.00 50.00 SUB -TOTAL (Miller ral Only) SALES -TAX FREIGHT TOTAL F.O.B. Factory ❑ Destimuion 17 WE ARE AN EOUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER -hi 1110111 a 30 Days P PPro�. after raCei Pt OI order. NOTE_Thisqunlationvalid lot 30days. Plonso write lot Confirmation nitm Ihnl data. DYjAcmko �� , ("-ML O 226 Mainstructure I I' T- l ---- 018 HORIZONTAL LADDER _gyp SPIRAL SLIDI 001, SWING t'_1 C-7 ) 002, SWING i GENERAL FUND -- MARCH - 1984 AMOUNT CHECK N Nelson Radio Communications - Repair antenna - Civil Defense 14.04 18539 Wright county Sheriff Dept. - Contract for Jan. 9,494.38 18540 Lindberg Decorating Center - Dog pound material 396.59 18541 Monticello Fire Dept. - Wages thru 2/26/84 834.00 18542 Cargo Transport Co. - Freight on sand bags - Civil Defense 22.00 -18543 Equitable Life Assurance -'Ins. for K. Hanson 6 M. Theisen 40.00 18544 :Smith, Pringle s Hayes - Legal fees 990.00 18545 Wm. Johnson Electric = Supplies 62.40 18546 Comfort Craft Co. - Furnace repair at City [fall 807.80 18547 Owens Service Corp. - Furnace repair at City Hall 3,124.30 18548 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 40.00 18549 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 54.00 18550 Metcalf 6 Larson - Tax Increment Financing Pr0jectF"A4FJ% WrSys 129,500.00 18551 Corrow, Sanitation - Feb. contract payment 4,508.00 18552 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll W/H 125.04 18553 Citizens State Bank of Big Lake - Interest on Tax Increment note 278.14 18554 Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services at Library 137.50 16555 MN. Pollution Control Agency - Seminar for Matt Theisen 45.00 18556 Social Security Division - FICA W/H 2,429.03 18557 PEHA - W/H 1,537.23 16558 Cunmissioner of Revenue - State Withholding for Feb. 2,596.00 16559 Wright County State Bank - Federal W/H 4,179.40 18560 James Preusse - Cleaning city hall 275.00 18561 YMCA of Mpls. + Monthly contract payment 312.50 18562 Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary 175.00 18563 Dan Blonigen - Council anlary 125.00 18564 Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary 125.00 18565 Ken Maus - Council salary 125.00 18566 Jack Maxwell - Council salary 125.00 18567 Gwen Bateman - Animal control 371.62 18568 MN. State Treasurer - Dap. Reg. fees 36.00 10569 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 8.00 18570 League of MN. Cities - Conference Reg. fee - T. Eidam 50.00 18571 MN. Pollution Control Agency - Reg. fee for Hancock c Strands 90.00 18572 U. S. Postmaster - Postage stamps 200.00 18573 MH. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. Come 39.00 18574 MN. State 'Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 44.00 18575 Holiday Inn Duluth - Deposit for Leaque ronf. in Ju» - 260.00 .18576 Joe Poehlar - Refund of Option on elderly housing project 200.00 18577 Jerry Hermos - Janitorial services at Library 137.50 18578 Tam Eidam - Travel allowance 300.00 18579 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll W/H 125.04 18580 State Treasurer - Social Security Division - Pica W/11 2,406.93 18581 MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H 1,521.08 10582 Monticello Fire Department - Wages thru 3/17/64 839.00 18503 North Central Public Service - Gas - Feb. 2.792.55 18584 Northern States Power - Utilities 8.085.34 10505 MN. 2,tato Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 25.00 18586 MN. State Treasurer - hep. Req, feC9 22.00 16587 Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins. 3,978.52 10508 CMA Conhtruction - Blueprints and Steel 90.06. 18589 Viking Pipe Service) Cp. - Sewer Dul;r. expense 36.00 10490 Goodin Company - WWTV supplies 130.47 18591. GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK N. Monticello .Aland Society.- CofteemAker for WWTP 25.00 '18592 Wright Service Oil - Gas 'for WWTP 913.00 18593 Monticello O.K. Hardware - Supplies for dog pound 18.85 18594 St.. Cloud Fire Equipment - Serviced -fire extinguishers 114.00 -18595 Safety K1een.Cor6. - Mtco.,Bldg. supplies 32:00 18596 Sentry Systems-'Telcphono claim equipment lease - WWTP 90.00 18597 Zatterlco Co., - Sturdevant kitslor 14tce..Bldg. 29.42 18598 Surplus Property Fund :- 2 medicino cabinets for WWII '128.70 •18599 Ruff ,Auto Parts,- Tire wheels for signs, 20.60 18600 Our Own Hardware r Supplies for all Depts: 544.41 18601 ilational Bushing - '.Parte and supplies - <mtee..6 WWTP 98.89, 18602 national Lifo Ins. - Life Ins. - T. Eidcm 100.00 18603 Northwestern Bell - Firephone38.97 18604 Newton Mfg. Co. - 8 magnotic signs '198.78 18605 ISt. Cloud Restaurant Supply - Towels 6 soap for Library 38.40 18606 Coast to Coast - Misc. supplies 329.00 18607, Flicker's T. V. - stereo needle for library 6.99' 18608 Mid -American Research Chemical - crack filler 74.68 18609 Metropolitan Fire Equipment - Air compressor parte - Fire Dept 800.00 18610, Monticello Office Products - Office supplies 112.52 18611 Lindberg Decorating Center - Paint 382.18 18612 Local 049 - Union duos 95.00: 18613 Kiplinger Washington Letter - Sub. 4B.00 18614 J M Oil Co., -'Gas 381.16 18615 John Henry' Foster Co. - WWfP supplies 428.69 18616 11arryIs Auto Supply - Misc- supplies 342'.87 18617 Carelick Steel Co. -.Material for shop 45.00 18618 Feed Rita Controls - 1000 feed -rite 931.31 18619 :Earl,P.'Anderson - Signs for St. Dept. 676.63 18620 Howard Dahlgren - Feb. planning'fees 3,102.07' 18621 .First Bank Mpls. - Public fund'chargo 4.00 18622 Foster Franzen Agency' - Insurance renewals 23,950.00 18623 (Carwell, o=un, Kirk 6 'Co.. - Sander for, WWTP 111.18 18624 Earl's Welding - Pad and welding, gloves - WWTP .45.30 -18625 Dowdell-Machina Tools -,Grinder and wheals-'Mtce. Bldg. 997.00 18626 Davis Electronic Service •- Pager; repairs - Fire Dept. 89.13 18627 Dorn Communications - 9th Dist. Corporate Fact Book 69.00 18628 Davin water Cquip..Co. - ,PVC pipes for WWTP 89.24 18629 Central Contractors Supply - Parts for WWTP 22.36 18630 R 6 C Aseoc. - Soap'and'dispensers 11.10 18631 Big Lake 63achino - Material for furnace - St. Dept, 23.65 18632. Barco Municipal Products - Barricadoe, brooms, bolts 376.34 18633 Ben rranklin Store - Supplies 12.87 18634 IndcDendunt Lumber -'Dog pound and city hall materials 741.96 18635 Hoglund Bus Co. -,Parts 35.95, 16636, American Linen Supply - Parke Inf. Center supplies 141.40 18637 Post. Adams Control-- Contract. - March, April, May 30.20 16636 Comfort Craft Co.: --.Furnace repair at `City Hall 137.00' 16639 Central KcGowan -, Supplion 18.38 18640 A T i T information Systems - Fire phone charges 3.40 18641 American National -Bank 6 Trust - 1960 Bond,$ interest charge 3,597.50 16642 Phillips Patro. - Cas - wWTP i water Dept@. 124.72 r 18643 Minnesota Business Journal - Sub. 8.95 18644 Maus Foods - Supplies for all depts. 158.22 18645 Monticello Floral - Misc. expense 22.50 18646 Monticello Printing - envelopes, certificates, postale, etc. 206.11 18647 Monticello Times - Pub. and Adv. 477.75 18548 GENERAL FUND MP7. City management Assoc. - Membership renewal dues Voss Electric Supply - Light bulbs f Gary Anderson - Mileage for March Jim hatch Sales - Brooms for sweeper Leet Brothers - Uniforms Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone Olson 6 Sons Electric - Misc. repairs - lights at city hall -- $3,022.50 OSM - Eng. fees - Feb. Wright County Sheriff Dept. - Contract payment - Feb. fiolmes s Graven - Legal services for Redev. plan, etc. Payroll for February TOTAL DISBURSEMEt7TS FOR MARCH - 1984 AMOUNT CHECK N 25.00 18650 540.32 18651 82.52 18652 872.09 18653 192.75 18654 843.63 18655 3,720.91 18656 2,083.50 18657 9,494.38 18658 271.55 18659 25,681.41 $269,934.25 1 LIQUOR FUND LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS FOR MARCH - 1984 AMOUNT CHECK NO. State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad. 20.00 11120 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 2,785.72 11121 Twin City Wine - Liquor 893.18 11122 Social Security Division - FICA W/H 287.48 11123 State Treasurer - PERA W/H 199.36 11124 Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H 255.00 11125 Wright County State Bank - Fed. W/H - Feb. 411.60 11126 Eagle Wine Co. - Wine purchase 459.76 11127 Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor 2,965.61 11128 Twin City Wine - Liquor 1,279.99 11129 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad. 20.00 11130 State Treasurer - Social Security Division - FICA 293.34 11131 H1. State Treasurer - Pera W/11 203.40 11132 Commissioner of Revenue - Sales tax - Feb. 4,724.53 11133 Twin City Wine - Liquor 1.967.16 11134 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 7,057.08 11135 Granite City Cash Register - Cash registers 15.807.12 11136 North Central Public Service - Gas - Feb. 266.92 11137 Northern States Power - Utilities 435.92 11138 Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse. 153.50 11139 Schabel Beverage Co. - Boer purchases 1,691.30 11140 Dick Beverage Co. - Beer, etc. 21161.80 11141 Yonak Sanitation - Garbage service 82.50 11142 Day Dist. Co. - Beer 562.65 11143 Liofert Trucking - Freight 351.84 11144 Monticello Office Product■ - Office supplies 8.20 11145 Soven Up Bottling Co. - Misc. mdse. 241.90 11146 Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Misc. mdse. 549.21 11147 Thorpe Dist. - Beer 2,991.40 11148 Dahlheimer Dist. - Beer 6,016.15 11149 Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse. 424.25 11150 Grosslein Beverages, Inc. - Beer 6,081.40 11151 Foster -Franzen Agency - Insurance renewals 11,375.00 11152 Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins. 361.26 11153 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 46.28 11154 Liquor payroll for Feb. - 1984 3.5°8.93 LIQUOR DISn11RS1NLNTS FOR MARCH - 1984 $76,990.74 CITY OF MONTICELLO Monthly Building Depprtment Report PERMITS and USES Month of eb ua 19gy Last This - Same Month Last Year Thia Year PERMITS ISSIiBD Monthianuary Month February Last Year TO Date To Date RESIDENTIAL Number 2 4 2 6 Valuation S 4,200.00 S 882,900.00 S $ 5,056.00 S 887,100.00 Fees 51.50 4,120.41 59.40 4,171.91 Surcharges 2.10 441.40 2.50 443.50 ODKWCIAL Number 2 6 1 2 8 Valuation 51,500.00 180,200.00 255,000.00 343,000.00 231,700.00 Fees 484.45 1,152.65 1,214.73 1,570.73 1,637.10 Surcharges 25.75 90.10 127.50 171.50 115.85 INDUSTRIAL Number Valuation Fees Surcharges PLUMING Number 1 4 1 5 Fees 14.00 242.00 50.00 258.00 Surcharges .50 2.00 .50 2.50 ' OTi�iS Number Valuation Fees Surcharges 14 t 19 I TOTAL NO. PERMITS 5 TOTAL VALUATION 55,700.00 1,063,100.00 255,000.00 348,056.00 1,118,800.00 TOTAL FEES 549.95 5,515.06 1.214.73 1.680.13 5,809.01 TOTAL SURCNARGM M13NTR 28,11S 533,50 137,50 174.50 559.35 CURRENT MIMI .PERMIT Mhunber to Dote PERMIT NATURE Number SURCHARGE Valuation This vosr Leet vearl Single Family 2 $ 540.30 j 47.10 S 94,300.00 2 0' Duplex 0 0 , Multi -family 1 3,544.61 393.05 786,100.00 1 0 Commercial 1 901.95 80.00 160,000.00 2 1 Industrial 0 0 Ree. Garages 0 1 _ Signs 0 0 Public Buildings 0 0 ALTERATION OR REPAIR Dwellings 1 35.50 1.25 2,500.00! 3 1 , Commercial 3 190.70 10.10 20,200.00 6 1 Industrial 0 0 i PLUMING All types 4 244.00 2.00 S 1 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES swiswinq Pools 0 0 Docks 0 0 TCHPORARY PERMIT 0 0 DEMOLITION 0 0 TOTALS _ - 14 5,' 17.00 533.50 1,063,100.00 19 I 5 I INDIVIDUAL PEPA IT ACTIVITY REPORT MONTH OF February , 1984 ' _ �ERMIT DESCRIPTION P� PiAME/LOCATION rocc UMBER (VALUATION SURCHARGE PLUMBING SURCHARGI _PERMIT f94-576 Beside Maintenance Buildimy= Department of Transportation/112 Chelsea Road 5 4,000.00 5 44.50 5 2.00 84-577 Remodel Hoose Interior AD Kenneth Holker/906 West Broadway 2,500.00 35.50 1.25 64-578 Interior Partition Wall in 184-579 Truck Garage AC Wrightco Products, Inc./218 W. 4th St,. 4,200.00 45.70 2.10 24 Unit Apartment Building Mr Construction 5, Inc./511 Washington bt. 786,100.00 2,108.25 393.05 $ 149.00 5 .50 84-580 Remodel Int. for Restauran',ACt Tom Ham¢cr/154 East Broadway 10,000.00 80.50 5.00 47.00 .50 84-581 Warehouse and Cooler Add"n Cj Dahlheimer Distributing/Co. Rd. 1867 160,000.00 583.00 80.00 84-S82 Single Family Dwelling i Attached Garage SFi ultra Homes, Inc./1000 Meadow Oak Dr 48,500.00 276.20 24.20 23.00 .50 34-584 Beaodal easement for Apt. AC; Assembly of God Church/419 E. 4th StI 1,000.00 ( I 10.00 .50 i 84-585 Remodel Rear Portion into I 2 offices ACt Metcalf s Larson/313 Braodway 1 1,000.00 I 10.00 .50 84-586 Single Family Dwelling vitt !! Attached Garage SP Quintin Lannero/104 Craig Lane ! 45,800.00 264.10 22.90 i 23.00 .50 TOTALS ,,$1,063,100.00 $3,497.75 $531.50 $ 242.00 $2.00 PLAN CHECKIHG 84-S79 1,24 Unit Apt. Building HP! Construction 5, Inc./511 Washington St. $1,396.36 84 -SBL Warehouse 6 Cooler AMID C. Dahlheioer Distributing/Co. Rd. 7561 378.95 v TOTAL $1,775.31 � I j II i 6 3 TOTAL REVENUE $6,048.56 _- -