City Council Agenda Packet 10-27-1986AGENDA FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, October 27, 1986 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. G rimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen.
1. Call to Order.
2. Presentation — Carroll, Franck 6 Associates.
3. Consideration of Approving Request for Proposals for Computer
Systems and Authorizing Distribution.
d. Adjourn.
Special Council Agenda - 10/27/86
3. Consideration of Approving Request for Proposals for Computer Systems
and Authorizing Distribution. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Ms. Anne Carroll, of Carroll. Franck 6 Associates, will be attending
the special meeting to discuss the final Request for Proposals (RFP)
for a computer system. I suspect she will briefly discuss the process
that she and staff have gone through to date, and will wish to answer
any questions the Council may have. The RFP that has been assembled
through joint consultant/staff effort is quite comprehensive. A
decision was made fairly early on in the preparation process to not
start cutting away entire sections of possible computer uses until
the bids/proposals have been submitted and the actual cost can be
evaluated against the benefit. The difficult part in computerizing
is that with today's state of the art, no single element is extremely
expensive; but as the system becomes more comprehensive, the overall
cost, obviously, increases. The requests that we are seeking will
be for comprehensive systems, and then the individual elements need
to be evaluated on a cost versus benefit basis. In order to keep
the process moving, we will need a motion from the City Council approving
the Request for Proposals in their final form and ordering the distribution
to potential vendors/suppliers.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the RPP as presented; order the distribution to potential
vendors/suppliers.
2. Do not aporovs the RFP; discontinue the computer process.
3. Amend and/or alter the RPP; adopt a motion approving the amended
RPP; order the distribution to vendors/suppliers.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the RFP as prepared and submitted by the consultant
with the assistance of staff be adopted and that the order be given
to distribute to potential respondents.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the RFP was presented to you at the last Council meeting
for your review over the past two weeks.
5M
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
ADDENDUM TO THE AGENDA SUPPLEMENT FOR THE
REGULAR MEETING OF 10/27/86
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: (T.E.)
The following material is being presented as a tentative agenda item
for the next meeting. This item is tentative due to the lack of
hard data available at the time of preparation and the varying alternatives
that may result as the information is compiled.
At the September 22, 1986, regular Council meeting, the City Council
debated whether or not to accept a petition from Kent Kjellberg for
annexation and thereby amend the original petition to annex 704 acres.
The action that grew out of that debate was to rescind the original
petition to the Municipal Board for the annexation of 704 acres and
adopt a new resolution for filing with the Municipal Board to annex
the entire Orderly Annexation Area. The primary rationale behind
that decision was stated to be the undesirability of handling individual
petitions on a repetitive basis. The Council stated its conclusions
that the Orderly Annexation Area Study indicated that the entire
area was appropriate for annexation at this time and that the Council
ought to pursue the findings of that study rather than go through
the perpetual headache of petition, filing, hearing, court battle,
and final order. Upon adoption of that resolution. I ordered OSM
to prepare the legal description for the text of that resolution.
At the regular meeting of the City Council hold October 14, 1986,
the City Council adopted their half of a joint resolution calling
for the immediate annexation of property lying within an area designated
for annexation, to wit, 238.3 plus or minus acres (includes 80 acres
of school site and 158.3 acres of water reservoir project corridor).
This action was taken independent of the earlier resolution calling
for the annexation of the entire OAA and independent of the School
District's request for a contract for water and sever service outside
of the corporate limits. The water/saver service policy was discussed
briefly and laid over until a conclusion to the joint resolution
was achieved. No to: The legal description required for the first
resolution had not yet boon submitted to me by OSM, so consequently,
the resolution calling for the annexation of the entire OAA has not
yet boon submitted to the Municipal Board. I am holding that resolution
on file until a conclusion to this question of 238 acres has been
reached.
This much is historical data. what follows are the issues that are
still uncertain. On Tuesday, October 21, 1986, Mayor Grimamo and
School Superintendent Johnson attended the meeting of the Monticello
Township Board. At that meeting, they presented the executed joint
resolution and provided the rationale for the request. After some
discussion (Mayor Grimamo can provide greater detail), no specific
action was taken at the time. Here, then, begins the uncertainty.
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
City staff has been informed by rumor (and I emphasize by rumor)
that the Town Board will execute the joint resolution, but with certain
contingencies or conditions attached. It is our unofficial, unsubstantiated
information that the primary consideration is that the City rescind
its resolution to annex the entire OAA and agree to pursue annexation
only on an as -petitioned basis. This, of course, is the very process
you opted to avoid when you took your action to annex the entire
area on September 22.
If this information is accurate, then this issue becomes quite involved
and complex. I realize it would be most desirable to keep the issue
in its simplest form, but I believe there are so many parties involved
with so many varying concerns, that the matter has evolved into an
extremely complex problem. Clearly, in a relatively small community
like ours, the needs and desires of the community at large need to
be evaluated, but your ultimate obligation as an elected official
of the City involves decisions affecting the City in particular.
I will attempt to lay out the scenario in order to clearly illustrate
the possible alternatives the City may pursue.
Let us assume that the Town Board adopts the joint resolution
free of all demands, conditions, and contingencies. If this
occurs, then the executed resolution will be submitted to the
Minnesota Municipal Board, and the annexation shall be ordered
within 30 days. Upon the issuance of the annexation order, I
will than file the resolution calling for the annexation for
the remainder of the Orderly Annexation Area. The adoption of
the joint resolution will allow for the provision of services
to the new middle school without going beyond corporate limits,
and it will further allow for the construction of the planned
water reservoir and the extension of the distribution lines all
within the corporate limits within the City.
Let us assume that the Township will not adopt their half of
the joint resolution. This would mean that we have nothing to
file with the Municipal Board and that annexation of the water
system corridor and the school site will not occur within a short
period of time. In this avant, the issue becomes slightly more
complex because the School District has made a special request
to the City Council to be provided with sever and water even
if they lie beyond the corporate limits of the City. At the
Last meeting, staff presented to you a proposed sower and water
policy for non-rosidents. Also provided to you was a proposed
contract for the provision of services to the School District.
If there 1s to be no immediate joint annexation, then the City
needs to evaluate whether or not they wish to extend services
beyond their corporate limits. If the Council opts not to extend
those services beyond the corporate limits, the School needs
to be notified immodiately so they can make alternative plans
or change proposed sites. If the Council has no objection to
providing those services beyond the corporate limits, than I
suggest the Council adopt the non-resident policy and adopt the
-2-
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
contract for services. With such a contract in place, then the
School no longer becomes a middle party in the on-going issue
of annexation. Once the School has received a final absolute
decision from the City concerning the provision of municipal
cervices (whether it be for or against), they no longer are an
active force in the question of annexation. The City may then
pursue its annexation of the entire Orderly Annexation unfettered
by the special interests of the School.
Let us assume that the Town Board will enter a joint resolution
for the immediate annexation of 238.3 plus or minus acres, contingent
upon the City's rescinding its earlier resolution to annex the
entire Orderly Annexation Area. This possible action is the
one that generates all of the complexity. As of this writing
(Thursday, 10/23), we do not know if there will be contingencies
attached and if there are, what they will be. This writing is
operating on assumption. Let us also assume for the purpose
of this discussion that the City Council does desire to provide
municipal sever and water to the middle school site. (The reason
I make this assumption is that if the City has no desire to provide
those services, then the location of the school and their request
is totally irrelevant to any future City decisions on annexation.)
Basically, the problem then is this: The school would like municipal
sever and water, the City would like to provide those services,
preforrably to properties within the corporate limits rather
than out in the Township; the property can be annexed immediately
to the City limits with the cooperation of the Town Board, but
only if the City will reverse its earlier action regarding annexation.
In essence, the City would like throe things, to wit, immediato
annexation of 238 acres, to provide cervices to the school, and
lastly, to pursue annexation of the entire Orderly Annexation
Area. If the Town Board issues the joint resolution conditional
on some other action, the City Council cannot have all three.
Thus, the decision is what will be sacrificed.
I see two primary options. If the conditions stipulated by the
Township are found to be unsatisfactory by the City Council,
then the City may simply adopt the extension to non-resident
policy and enter a contract with the school to provide municipal
sower and water. With that action complete, there is no immediate
demand for annexation, and the Council may than pursue the time
consuming effort of annexing the entire OAA. If the Council
finds the Township's conditions not to be obstructive, the Council
can simply rovoks its earlier resolution, fila the joint resolution
for the immediate annexation of 238 acres, and do all future
annexations on an "as -needed" or "petitioned" basis.
I believe that each of those options boars a little further discussion.
It is my understanding that the school takes no position whatsoever
on annexation in any form. They have but one concern, that being
the provision of municipal sower and water. It is further my
understanding that they have evaluated the cost of extending
-3-
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
oversized lines to accommodate the lack of water pressure should
the now system not be installed, and that cost is but a small
fraction of the total project. In essence, the school wants
sever and water, and they don't care if they are in or out of
the City limits. If the City Council selects the first option,
of the three desirable goals, the City will forfeit the immediate
annexation and the desire to not extend services beyond our corporate
limits. The Council does save the ability to pursue the annexation
of the entire orderly Annexation Area. If the City Council selects
the second option, it achieves the immediate annexation of the
small area, and it avoids the necessity to provide services beyond
its corporate limits, but it forfeits the pursuit of annexation
of the larger area. It is the relative value and importance
of each of these actions that must be determined by the Council.
Where is the greatest long term good for the City.
I offer the following discussion as a summary of staff perspective,
not as a formal recommendation to the City Council from staff. The
entirecontroversy of annexation seems tome to center around conflicting
definitions of "need for annexation.'• The conclusions of our annexation
study indicate that the entire area "needs" to be annexed to allow
for proper planning, growth, and orderly development. It conforms
with the language in the Statute that says annexation should occur
when an area in or is about to become urban or suburban in nature.
It occurs to me that the opponents of annexation define "need for
annexation" as meaning that when an area is fully developed and causing
problems, then annexation is needed and should occur. There is a
basic difference between proactive need and reactive need. I do
not find it desirable to establish a policy that will allow the extension
of municipal services beyond the corporate limits and to provide
those services to residents beyond our corporate limits. The reason
I find that undesirable is that once those services are provided,
than people living beyond the corporate limits have 100% of the benefit
of being within the City but at a much loaner tax rate and further,
avoid theresponsibility and obligation of being part of the overall
health of the city. However, if a particular policy or desire needs
to be compromised, I think the long term consequences would be far
less to conpromiso the no extension policy than to compromise the
land use plan that calls for major annexation. I believe that it
makes more sense to create a policy that will allow the extension
of services to the School District than to forfeit the desire to
pursue annexation of a major part of the Orderly Annexation Area.
I think that the City would be going backwards to enter into another
agroomant that regulated annexation with respect to petitions and
some nebulous form of reactive need. The original Orderly Annexation
Area document agreed to by both parties stated that the area would
eventually be in need of orderly annexation and that it would, in
fact, occur when that need has been determined. Our study indicates
that that need has occurred and that for proper planning and development
purposes, annexation is needed. To say that we will only annex based
upon reactive need and petition will be essentially the same ae ignoring
the findings of our study, reverting back to 1972, and essentially l
pretending that a problem doean't exist. In my estimation, that
is not a sound conclusion.
-4-
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
The agenda already has an item that discusses the plans and specifications
for the public improvements to provide services to the middle school
Bite. That is a separate issue. If we receive an unconditiondl
response from the Town Board to jointly annex the 238 acres, then
no further busineseneeds to be conducted on this at this meeting.
If, however, we receive no answer, then the Council needs to discuss
the City limit sever/water policy and the school contract. If the
City receives a conditional response, the Council needs to evaluate
which alternative to pursue, viz, agree to the conditions or pursue
the major annexation. If your decision is the latter, then again
you must consider the municipal service extension policy and the
contract with the school.
-5-
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
ADDENDUM TO THE AGENDA SUPPLEMENT FOR THE
REGULAR MEETING OF 10/27/86
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: (J.S.)
We have enclosed a revised copy of our policy to serve non -city property.
A change has been made that makes it necessary for the City to enter
into a contract to provide those services. It is my understanding
that if the joint resolution is not acted upon by the Township that
the School would wish that the policy and contract be enacted by
the City Council to guarantee the School service. Prior to the writing
of this text. I have been unable to reach Shelly Johnson to see if
it is still his intention to have this acted upon Monday evening.
We will include it with your packet just in case.
j
SEWER AND WATER SERVICE POLICY
FOR PROPERTIES OUTSIDE THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
The City may contract to allow hookup to City sever and water from
systems outside the city limits. Such systems shall be inspected
and certified by a registered civil .engineer at the cost of the applicant
to meet the minimum standards of the Minnesota Department of Health,
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the City of Monticello
Engineering Department. The City will not accept responsibility
for the actual installation or maintenance of such lines outside
the city limits, but shall establish standards to protect the integrity
of the municipal system.
Since the administration expenses associated with sever and water
services are generally assumed through ad valorem taxes, and ad valorem
taxes in the Township and properties outside the city limits are
not available, excess charges for such services are found to be reasonable
and just.
Since it is recognized that governmental and institutional users
are of the general benefit to the community at large, a reduced rate
can be offered to those bodies.
The measurement and control of water and sewer usage shall be as
outlined in the City Ordinance.
I. Hookup Charges for Water or Sever
1. Residential, Commercial and Industrial• users will be billed
three times the normal rates plus engineering review costs
as necessary.
2. Governmental and Institutional users will be billed at the
normal rates plus engineering review coats as necessary.
II. Users Fees for Water or Sever
1. Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Users:
A. Billing shall be 3 times the normal rates.
B. The minimum bill par Quarter shall be $125.00.
2. Governmental and Institutional users shall be billed at 1k times
the normal rates.
This policy shall be in effect by order of the City Council on October 27,
1986.
•NOTE: Definitions of user classes shall be as found in the City Ordinance.
10/24/86
AMENDMENT TO AGENDA:
DATE IN: FRIDAY, 6 p.m.
No resolution is forthcoming from the Township this meeting. Hence,
the steps to be followed are:
1) Decide whether or not to provide municipal services to school
even though not in the City.
2A) If NO, matter ends and question of approving plans and specifications
becomes irrelevant.
28) If YES,
a) adopt sever and water extension policy.
b) enter contract with school district.
3) Regular Agenda Item - Approve Plane and Specifications for Sever
and Street Extension. Motion should acknowledge escrow amount
of $350,000.00 which must be placed in City's name prior to ordering
project.
1
L with these steps completed (either option), the joint resolution
for annexation of 238 acres becomes irrelevant. If Township adopts
without any conditions attached, then this much area can be annexed
within 30 days without jeopardizing your intentions to pursue the
larger annexation. If, however, the Township says they'll adopt
it based upon certain concessions by the City, you may conclude that
you no longer need (or want) the resolution and still proceed with
the larger annexation.
Regardless of your decision on the school's request (yes or no),
once it has been made, the school no longer needs to be considered
Involved in the annexation issue, and you may proceed with your September 22,
1986, resolution to annex the whole OAA.
AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, October 27, 1986 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Mooting Heid October 14, 1966.
3. Citizens Comments/Patitiona, Requests, and Complaints.
Old Business
4. Consideration of Approving Construction Pians and Specifications
for the Extension of Sanitary Sewer and Chelsea Road from Oakwood
Industrial Park to County Road 1113.
5. Consideration of Change Order No. 5 for 86-1 Project.
6. Consideration of Adopting a Joint Powers Agreement to Enter aLn i
Airport Commission.
New Business
7. Sketch Plan Review, Planned Unit Development - Lionel Kull and
Steve Upgron, Applicants.
B. Consideration of Bills for the Month of October.
9. Adjourn.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, October 14, 1986 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell,
Dan Blonigen.
Members Absent: None.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held September 22,
1986.
3. Citizens Comments.
Mr. Don Heikes presented a letter to the city Council criticizing the
City regulations regarding requirements imposed upon developers when
installing sewer and water connections. Mr. Heikes noted that he recently
completed a hook up of sower and water on West River Street adjacent
to the trailer park and felt there was a lack of communication between
the Public works Department and his contractor regarding the required
bonds and insurance forms that were necessary before the work could
be completed. In addition, he criticizod information supplied by the
Public Works Department and felt soma of the information was inaccurate
causing him excess coot and time delays. John Simola, Public works
Director, noted that Mr. Heikes was not treated any differently than
any other contractor and that proper bonds and inauranco wore always
required before work can commence, and that any information regarding
the utilities was supplied to Mr. Heikes based on as built records the
City had. In addition, Mr. Simola noted that Mr. Heikes had not yet
supplied a proper drainage plan for his development and a utilities
plan as builts would be required from Mr. Heikes before final approval
is granted by the City.
Mr. Ken Maus appeared before the Council to express concerns over possible
traffic congestion that may occur on Cedar Street now that the Sixth
Street Station development is nooring completion. Mr. Maus requested
that the City look into traffic congestion at the intersections of Third
and Fourth Streets along Cedar, and to review the possibility of making
Cedar Street and through street similar to Walnut Street, with yield
signs being a possibility on Third and Fourth Street at those intersections.
Council indicated that these intersections will be looked at in the
future to zoo if problems are occurring with traffic congestion.
A Certificate of Appreciation for service rendered was awarded by the
Mayor to former employee, Albert Meyer, for his years of service to
the City. Mr. Mayor was the Superintendent at the wastewater Treatment
Plant and is now an employee of PSG, Inc., who currently operates the
facility under a contract with the City of Monticello.
Council Minutes - 10/14/86
4. Public Hearing on the 1987 Annual Budget. AND
7. Consideration of Adopting the 1987 Municipal Budget and Certifying the
Tax Le
A public hearing was open for comments on the 1987 Budget, and no tomenta
were received.
The 1987 Budget and resulting tax levy was reviewed by the Council,
which proposed a tax levy requirement of $1,676,900.00, or approximately
6.32% increase over the 1986 levy.
Motion vas made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to adopt the 1987 Budget as presented and Resolution 86-23 setting
the tax levy at $1,676,900.00. See Resolution 86-23.
5. Public Hearing on a Request to Vacate Easements in the Meadows. AND
8. Consideration of Vacating the Lot Line Easements in the Subdivision
The Meadows.
This item was tabled until a future Council meeting because of lack
of information from the developers regarding legal descriptions on the
easements.
6. Public Hearing on the Proposed Assessment Roll for Delincuent Charges. AND
9. Consideration of Adopting an Assessment Roll for Certification with
the County Auditor Covering Delinquent Charges.
A public hearing was held on the proposed adoption of an assessment
roll for delinquent never and water chargee which wore at least 60 days
past duo. No comments were heard from the affected property owners,
and the hearing was closed.
After reviewing the individual parcels in question, a motion wan made
by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt
a resolution adopting the delinquent assessment roll for sewer and water
charges and to certify the same to the County for collection with taxes
for 1987. Soo Resolution 86-24.
10. Consideration of a Request from Independent School District #882 Guaranteeing
the Provision or Sanitary Sever and Municipal water to the Middle School
Site.
Representatives from the Monticello School District appeared before
the Council to request that the City enter into an agreement with the
School District that would guarantee sower and water connections for
the now proposed middle school site should annexation not occur on the
80 acres owned by the school before the building is completed. Mr.
Jim Metcalf, representing the School District, noted that the 80 acres
owned by the school had boon petitioned for annexation, but the school,
in order to proceed with their purchase an.2 development plans, feels
an agreement is necessary guaranteeing saver and water services should
annexation be a lengthy process.
Council Minutes - 10/14/86
Mayor Grimsmo noted that,in his opinion, the best solution for the school
and the City is to approach the Township Board requesting that a joint
annexation agreement be approved between the City and the Township concerning
the 80 acres in question, which would then immediately become part of
the City and an agreement would not be necessary. Council members Bill
Fair and Dan Blonigen questioned whether the City should just seek a
joint annexation agreement on the 80 acres or whether a larger area
will be needed immediately to enable the City to proceed with its plans
to construct a new water tower on Monte Club Bill. Mr. Fair noted that
without the water tower improvements being constructed soon, the school
property would still not have adequate water pressure for their needs.
Mr. Blonigen again noted that the City should not just consider annexing
the school property by itself, which would again revert to a piece -meal
annexation process, but rather felt the City should proceed with the
entire annexation of the OAA as originally recommended by the City's
Planner. Mr. Blonigen also felt that by accepting a smaller area at
this time, the City might jeopardize future annexation proceedings later.
Administrator Eidem noted that if a joint resolution between the Township
and the City could be arranged, he did not feel that this would jeopardize
the City's plans for future annexation in the OAA and may actually be
to the City's benefit in that one of their requirements for annexation
is showing a need for municipal services, which would be occurring with
the improvements planned in the water system, including a water tower.
it was recommended that the City approach the Township concerning a
joint annexation agreement, not only for the 80 acres owned by the school,
but for an additional 160 acres along a corridor to trio Monte Club Hill
that would be needed by the City for construction of the water tower
and related improvements. This way the planned water improvements would
be entirely done within the City limits without extending services into
the Township.
Mr. Jim Metcalf noted that the School District could wait approximately
30 days to see if a joint resolution could be accomplished between the
City and the Township before an agreement between the City and School
guaranteeing sewer and water services would be needed.
Citizen John Sandberg expressed opposition to the City entering into
a contract to provide sower and water for the school without the school
first being annexed into the City. Mr. Sandberg felt the School District
should have boon previously in contact with the City regarding utility
extensions prior to selecting the site and questioned why the City should
now be guaranteeing future services if annexation doesn't occur.
After further discussion, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by
Fran Fair, to adopt a resolution to be presented to the Monticello Township
Hoard that would jointly request the Municipal Board to order immediate
annexation of approximately 238 acres consisting of 80 acres owned by
the School District and an additional 158 acres lying adjacent to County
Road 118. Voting in favor was Sill Fair, Fran Fair, Arve Grimsmo.
opposed was Maxwell and Slonigon. Seo Resolution 86-25.
Council Minutes - 10/14/86
11. Consideration of Change Order No. 5 for 86-1 Project.
This item was tabled until the next Council meeting due to lack of
sufficient information regarding the change order.
12. Consideration of a Request by John Koppy to Utilize City Property.
Mr. John Koppy appeared before the Council to request a reconsideration
on the Council's recent decision not to allow him to use a portion
of the City property adjacent to his insurance building for a blacktop
driveway access to his parking lot. Mr. Koppy's plans for blacktopping
the driveway require approximately 6 feet of the driveway width to
be on a City lot adjacent to Mr. Koppy's building and discussion
concerned whether the City should allow Mr. Koppy the right to use
and blacktop a portion of the City property for the driveway. Mr.
Koppy indicated that the driveway has always existed, and blacktopping
would benefit both his property and the City's property even if they
planned on selling the parcel in the future.
It was noted by Administrator Eidem that the City Attorney advised
the City to enter into an agreement with Mr. Koppy that would protect
the City from Liability if it decided to allow Mr. Koppy to use a
portion of the City property as a driveway access. Mr. Koppy felt
that the driveway has always existed and has been shared by the two
property owners, and he would not be changing or increasing any liability
to the City than what exists now.
Previous Council action was to offer the property to Mr. Koppy for
$7,500.00; and if Mr. Koppy was not interested to offer the property
for sale to the general public.
After further discussion, motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by
Maxwell, to allow Mr. Koppy to blacktop 6 foot of the City property
as a driveway access to his parking lot. Voting in favor was Blonigen.
Maxwell, and Orimemo. opposed was Fran Fair and Bill Fair.
13. Consideration of an Offer by the Oakwood Industrial Park Partnershio
to Sell the Remaining Acreage to the City of Monticello.
The partners of the Oakwood Industrial Park have decided to moil
the entire balance of the lots available and have approached the
City with a proposal to moll to the City the remaining 79 acres of
the industrial Park for a total price of approximately 5660,000.00.
The Council briefly discussed the offer by the partnership, and it
was recommended by the City staff that the item be tabled for further
study by the staff on the merits of the proposal and alternative
financing methods that may be available if the Council should decide
in the future to pursue the purchase. The item was tentatively scheduled
to be discussed by tho Council at the November 10 Council meeting.
-4-
6H
Council Minutes - 10/14/86
14. Consideration of Adopting a Joint Powers Agreement to Enter an Airport
Commission.
This item was also tabled until the next Council meeting for additional
information.
15. Monthly Status Report from PSG.
Mr. Mike Nelson of PSG, Inc., gave a brief report to the Council
on the first month's operation of the wastewater Treatment Plant.
PSG, Inc., entered into a contract with the City on September 1,
1986, to operate and maintain the wastewater Treatment Plant. Mr.
Nelson briefly explained some of the various maintenance and operational
procedures the firm has completed during the month and indicated
that the operation is going smoothly at the present time.
16. Considerati,)n of a Request for Final Payment on Fire Hall Construction
Project - Fullerton Lumber Yard.
Representatives of Fullerton Lumber Company, the general contractor
on the Fire Hall construction project, were in attendance requesting
final payment be made on the project. They indicated that the City
has had occupancy of the Fire Hall for a number of months and felt
they should be paid the retainage being held by the City.
Building Ccmmittee members, John Simola and Gary Anderson, noted
that in March of 1986, the contractor was given a number of punch
• list items that had to be corracted or completed and that Fullerton
has been ale. in completing some of the items. It was noted that
a few minor details had not yet been completed and that soiae items
will need repairs under warranty.
After a lengthy discussion with the contractor, it was the consensus
of the Council that the Building Committee members meet with Fullerton
Lumber rapicscnta tivas to work out any remaining details that need
to be completed and when done, the final paymont will be made.
17. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a Cold Storaqe Buildinq
Ruff Auto Parts.
Mr. Ron Ruff appeared before the Council to request approval of a
conditional use permit to allow for the construction of a cold storage
building at their salvage yard. Mr. Ruff noted that the Planning
Commission recently met and recommended approval of the conditional
use permit for the addition, and Mr. Ruff requested consideration
of his request at this time to enable construction to be completed
yet this year.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to approve the conditional use permit request for the cold
storage building for Ruff Auto Parts.
y....t I.CJ�/,7.C�Cv..�
Rick welts tell r i1
Assistant Administrator Oi
_g_
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
4. Consideration of Approving Construction Plans and Specifications
for the Extension of Sanitary Sewer and Chelsea Road from Oakwood
Industrial Park to County Road 118. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
On Thursday morning, I met with John Badalich, Chuck Lepak, Bill
Block (Boyle's engineer), and Larry Gustafson (General Superintendent
for Rehbein, the lower bidder on sewer and water portion of Chelsea
Road). The meeting was held at OSM's office and centered around
finalizing plans and specifications for the project, as well as pinning
down total costs.
Mr. Bill Block held a bid opening on Monday. October 20, based upon
a preliminary set of plans and specification.n. Upon going over plans
and specifications, we noted some areae of concern. The sanitary
sewer line appeared to be deeper than what was absolutely needed
for the school. Upon discussions, it was determined that this line,
even at its depth, would be of minimal benefit to any areas outside
Boyle's own property. we then contacted the school and their architect
to determine whether or not the elevation of the sanitary sewer could
be raised. we were informed by Uban, the school's architect, who
checked with mechanical people, that they wanted to keep the elevation
of the sanitary sewer as planned, not to essentially serve the proposed
school but to servo the entire 80 acres that the school had purchased
sometime in the future without the need for lift pumps of any type.
Once it was determined that the plans were to pretty much go as designed,
some minor changes were made requiring four manhole drops near Fallon
Avenue, and a change to a higher grade of PVC for the deep sewer.
In addition, we added sodding to the ditches and an amount for a
retention pond for drainage of the road surface and some of Boyle's
property. During our examinations of the bids, Chuck Lepak noted
a deficiency in the quantities for gravel base. The deficiency amounted
to approximately $31,000.00 in quantity. By adding a $10,000.00
contingency, the total cost was 5333,300.00. Mr. Bill Block had
indicated he was going to do the dasign, construction staking, construction
engineering, and inspection, and preparation of the as builts on
a separate contract with Boyle. Be would provide the City and/or
the school with lion waivers so that he would not attach the job
if not paid and that he would complete the work. The only additional
Stoma to be added were some outside testing for soils and materials,
inspection by OSM, and some miscellaneous engineering requested by
them. Thin engineering came to about $12,443.00, making the total
coat $345,743.00. By adding 5750.00 in City legal foes and $3,507.00
in City administration costs, the project comes up to $350,000.00.
Thera was much discussion by Mr. Bill Block prior to adjourning our
mooting that there ware some coot savings that could be realized
by raising the sewer to serve only the school building itself as
was originally agreed. The savings could be in the area of $25,000.00
and would also affect some of the other costs as wall. There will
be on-going discussion, I would assume, between Boyle, Block, and
the school and their architect on the actual pricing. Based upon
fie
Council Agenda - 10/24/86
the job as planned, the City should have the guarantees from Block, J
and a check for escrow fund in the amount of $350,000.00 prior to
authorizing the work. Plane and specifications will be available
at Monday evening -a meeting and will be reviewed by John Badalich.
Because of the increased coat over what was originally anticipated,
it is not known today if all the pieces will fall into place and
the project will be a go. we will try to keep the Council members
informed and may have further information for Monday evening -s
meeting.
J
-2-
CHELSEA ROAD
Sanitary Sever 6 Nater as Proposed $116,870
4 Drops, 80 ft. Ductile, RD PVC 13,580
Grading, Black Dirt 6 Seed 40,000
Gravel Base (531,000 error in quantity) 52,750
Bituminous Surfacing 90,000
Retention Pond 10,000
CONSTRUCTION COST $323,300
Contingency 10,000
TOTAL COST $333,300
Engineering:
Design, construction, staking, construction
engineering, inspection and as builts by Bill Block S -0-
outside Boil 6 materials testing S 1,500
OSM inspection sever 6 water 3,500
OSM inspection grading 6 surface 3,400
OSM miscellaneous to date 1.043
o5M project engineering 3,000
$ 12.443
GRAND TOTAL $341,743
City Legal Feee S 750
City Administration Costs (approximately 1%) S 3,507
TOTAL FUNDS TO BE $350,000
ESCROWED
6-0
A
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
5. Consideration of Change Order No. 5 for 86-1 Project. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the 86-1 Interceptor Sewer Project, L 6 G Rehbein Company
was responsible for initial testing and evaluation of the 10 -inch
forcemain which is located on Elm, Third, and Chestnut, and installed
during the 77-3 Project, and the 6 -inch forcemain located near Ruff
Auto on Elm Street installed during the 78-2 Project. As you recall,
these initial teats failed. we placed language in the contract to
have the L 6 G Rehbein Company do additional testing if the initial
teats failed on a time and material basis.
On the 6 -inch forcemain, the extra testing amounted to $1,160.33.
On the 10 -inch forcemain, however, due to the significant problems
and large holes encountered, the additional testing and miscellaneous
repairs amounted to $5,038.05, for a total of 56,218.38. This is
the amount of Change Order No. 5.
For your information, we have totalled all of the work performed
an the 10 -inch forcemain and passed those figures on to John Badalich
for hie review.
8. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Alternative 11 would be to authorize Change Order No. 5 in the
amount of 56,218.38. This would allow for Rohbein to be paid
for the work as outlined in the specifications.
2. The second alternative would be to not authorize payment for
Rshbein. This would be in contradiction to our specifications
and contract with Rehbein and in not an alternative.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the staff recommendation that you authorize and approve Change
Order No. 5 as outlined in Alternative 01.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Change Order No. 5.
-3-
f
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYIERON & AS',OCIATES, INC.
2021 E. HENNEPIN AVE. - St ITE 238
MINNEAPOLIS. MINN 5413
CHANGE ORDt- NO. ...... .........
S -6, 214. 38 .. ..... RE- Project. Bfi-:l.. .
Interceptor Sewer
L.&. G Rel3bei-,. ............... Contractor
r605 20th Avenue South
Hugo,,. Minnesota ..55038 ... ..................
Dear Sit (s)
Under your contract dated ...................April -0- ................... 19116. with
7he. City. of Mnt icello ....................... .... .. ...... owner for .............
Monticello Sewer, and Appurtenant .7
we are authorized by the owner to hereby direct you to . f)0 ,the, additional. pressure...
testing of the existing 6' and 10' forceluxins and provide miscellaneous
.. ... ..- . I ............. ........................... I .... I ... F ........ -- .......
mteri !3.at ply, Reqqt�at;o, pSices. and. gis a ..in
.- ... 4. ....prpyiquip ..- .... _qqi:_Al0
... -1-1- ................. I ........ I ............... ........... 1- ............ -
and to add to (deduct tram) the contract. In accordance with contract and specification. the PAw of
Six .7t.o.i.sar.4.71wo. H.undre.d.Eicth't.een. and 38 . ..... ..... .. 1100 Delta"
There will be an extension of ,Zero. . - days for completion.
The date of completion of contract was 10/31 19 . f16 and now will be 10/31 19 86
Amount of 0119inst -W1.11 Utal A44111.1'
$19,744.96
$935-720.75
Approved .......................... 19....
.............................
0—
Approved ................... ---- 19....
Twol 0*s.VI4-a cv-w t. 04'.
$3,000 1 $955,465.71
Respectfully Submitted,
ORR-SCHELEN-AkAYERON
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
........................................... Per .........................................
co."act.,
D
10" FORCEMAIN TESTING COSTS
5/22/86 Cut in 10" Valve and Sleeve
Foreman 5
hrs.
@ $35.00/hr.
$
175.00
Laborer 8
hrs.
@ $23.00/hr.
$
184.00
Operator 8
hrs.
@ $27.00/hr.
$
216.00
Operator 1
hrs.
@ $39.00/hr.
$
39.00
400 Komatsu
Loader
3 hrs. @
$55.00/hr$
165.00
5/23/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 3 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 78.00
Opeator 3 hrs. @ $27.00/hr. $ 81.00
6/5/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 7 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 182.00
6/6/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
6/9/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. 5 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 3 hra. @ $29.50/hr. $ 88.50
Foreman 1 hr. @ $35.00/hr. $ 35.00
6/10/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 2 hrs. @ $29.50/hr. 5 59.00
Foreman 1 hrs. @ $35.00/hr. $ 35.00
6/11/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 2 hrs. @ $29.50/hr. S 59.00 t
Foreman 1 hr. @ $35.00/hr. S 35.00 l
D
10" Forcemain Testing Costs
Page 2
6/12/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
s
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 1 hr. @ $29.50/hr. $ 29.50
Forcemain 1 hr. @ $35.00/hr. $ 35.00
6/13/86 Testing and Assisting City Forces
Laborer w/Pickup 5 hrs, @ $26.00/hr. $ 130.00
Foreman 1 hr. @ $35.00/hr. $ 35.00
6/26/86 Testing
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 2 hrs. @ $29.50/hr. $ 59.00
6/27/86 Testing
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 2 hrs. @ $29.50/hr. $ 59.00
Foreman 3 hrs. @ $35.00/hr. $ 105.00
MATERIALS:
10" Valve 1 ea. @ $529.47/each $ 529.47
10" Sleeve 1 ea. @ $92.22/Each $ 92.22
10" Retainer Gland 1 Ea. @ $30.74/Ea.$ 30.74
10" CAP 1 ea. @ $58.30/Each $ 58.30
MISC. EQUIPMENT:
Pipe, Saws and Blades, Test Equipment $ 440.00
Total Labor + 15% $3,651.25
Total Equipment $ 165.00
Total Materials + 15% $ 781.80
Misc. Equipment $ 440.00
Grand Total $5,038,05
r
LOO
6" FORCEMAIN TESTING COSTS
5/27/86 Testing
Laborer w/Pickup 6% hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 169.00
6/2/86 Testing
Laborer 2 hrs. @ $23.00/hr. $ 46.00
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/ht. S 208.00
Foreman 2 hrs. @ $35.00/hr. $ 70.00
6/3/86 Testing
Laborer w/Pickup 8 hrs. @ $26.00/hr. $ 208.00
Laborer w/Pickup 1 hr. @ $29.50/hr. $ 29.50
Foreman 1 hrs. @ $35.00/hr. $ 35.00
Total Labor + 158 S 880.33
Misc. Equipment $ 300.00
Grand Total $1,180.33
(f)
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
6. Consideration of Adopting a Joint Powers Agreement to Enter an Airport
Commission. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
This entire item was discussed in detail in the agenda packet for
your last regular meeting. If you will recall, the action that evening
was delayed solely because the final copies had not arrived. Nothing
has changed since it was on your last agenda. A copy of the joint
powers agreement is now included with this packet.
Staff recommends that the joint powers agreement be adopted and the
City enter the Airport Commission.
-4-
MONTICELLO AND BIG LAKE
JOINT AND COOPERATION AGREEMENT
FOR THE CREATION OF AN AIRPORT COMMISSION
I. PARTIES
The parties to this Agreement are governmental units of
the State of Minnesota. This Agreement is made pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, as amended.
II. GENERAL PURPOSE
The general purpose of this Agreement is to establish an
authority to investigate the feasibility of the establish-
ment of an airport, and in particular to study all relevant
federal, state and local laws and regulations related to
such an airport; to investigate preliminary technical
requirements of such an undertaking; to investigate the
t
financial commitment to the Member Cities of such an under-
taking; and to recommend to the Member Cities a proposed
course of action related to such an airport.
111. NAME
The name of the organization is the
Joint Airport Commission.
IV. DEFINITION OF TERMS
Section 1. For the purposes of this agreement, the
terms defined in this Article shall have the meanings given
them.
Section 2. "Airport" means the airport, the feasibility
of which is to be studied by the Commission.
In
3
Section 3. "Commission" means the Board of Directors J
created pursuant to this Agreement.
Section 4. "Council" means the governing body of a
Member.
Section 5. "Director" means the duly appointed repre-
sentative of a member of the Commission.
Section 6. "Member" means a municipality which enters
into this agreement.
V. MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. The municipalities of Becker, Big Lake, and
Monticello are eligible to be the original Members of the
Commission.
Section 2. Any municipality desiring to become a Member
shall execute a copy of this agreement and conform to all
requirements herein.
Section 3. The initial Members shall be those Members
who become Members on or before December 1, 1986.
Section 4. Should a municipality desire to become a
Member after the date specified in Article V, Section 3, it
may be admitted by an affirmative vote of four-fifths (4/5)
of the Commission. The Commission may by resolution impose
additional conditions upon the admission of additional
municipalities.
VI. DIRECTORS. VOTING
Section 1. Each Member shall be entitled to two (2)
Directors to represent it on the Commission, one of whom
O
shall be the City Administrator of the Member. Each Direc-
tor is entitled to one vote.
Section 2. A Director shall be appointed by resolution
of the Council of each Member. A Director shall serve until
a successor is appointed and qualifies. Directors shall
serves without compensation from the Commission, but nothing
in this section shall be construed to prevent a Member or
the Commission from reimbursing expenses of the Director or
to prevent a member from otherwise compensating its Director
for service on the Commission if such compensation is autho-
rized by law.
Section 3. Each Member shall appoint at least one
alternate Director. The Commission, in its By-laws, may
prescribe the extent of an alternate's powers and duties.
Section 4. A vacancy in the office of Director will
exist for any of the reasons set forth in Minnesota Statutes
Section 351.02, or upon a revocation of a Director's
appointment duly filed by a Member with the Commission.
Vacancies shall be filled by appointment for the unexpired
portion of the term of Director by the Council of the Member
whose position on the Board is vacant.
Section 5. The Commission shall invite to participate
in the activities of the Commission as Ex officio, non-
voting members, other effected jurisdictions, including but
not limited to, townships, counties, planning and zoning
officials or similar jurisdictions.
- 3 -
9
Section 6. There shall be no voting by proxy, but all
votes must be cast by the Director or the duly authorized
alternate at a Commission meeting.
Section 7. A majority of the authorized votes of the
Commission shall constitute a quorum, provided, however,
that at least one Director from Big Lake and Monticello must
be in attendance to conduct any business. A smaller number
may adjourn from time to time.
Section 8. A Director shall not be eligible to vote on
behalf of a Director's municipality during the time said
municipality is in default on any contribution or payment to
the Commission. During the existence of such default, the
vote or votes of such Member shall not be counted for the
purposes of this agreement.
Section 9. All official actions of the Commission must
receive a majority of all authorized votes cast on that
issue at a duly constituted meeting of the Commission and
the affirmative vote of at least one Director from Big Lake
and Monticello.
VII. EFFECTIVE DATE: MEETINGS: ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Section 1. A municipality may enter into this agreement
by resolution of its Council and the duly authorized execu-
tion of a copy of this agreement by its proper officers.
Thereupon, the clerk or other appropriate officer of the
municipality shall file a duly executed copy of this agree-
ment, together with a certified copy of the authorizing
J
resolution, with the City Administrator of the City of
Monticello, Minnesota. The resolution authorizing the exe-
cution of this Agreement shall also designate the Directors
and the alternate for the member, along with said Directors'
and alternate's address and phone number.
Section 2. This agreement is effective on the date when
executed agreements and authorizing resolutions of
Monticello and Big Lake have been filed as provided in this
Article.
Section 3. Within thirty (30) days after the effective
date of this agreement, the City Administrator of Monticello
shall call the first meeting of the Commission which shall
be held no later than fifteen (15) days after such call.
Section 4. The first meeting of the Commission shall be
its organizational meeting. At the organizational meeting,
the Commission shall select from among the Directors a chair
and a vice chair/secretary/treasurer, and appoint any staff
necessary to coordinate the activities of the Commission and
to draft all necessary Commission documents.
Section S. At the organizational meeting, or as soon
thereafter as its may reasonably be done, the Commission
shall adopt by-laws governing its procedures including the
time, place, notice for and frequency of its regular meet-
ings, procedure for calling special meetings, and such other
matters as are required by this agreement. The Commission
may amend the by-laws from time to time.
O
Section 6. Officers of the Commission shall be elected
for two-year terms. Officers completing one full two-year
term shall only succeed themselves once in another full two-
year term in the same office.
VIII. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION
Section 1. The powers and duties of the Commission
shall include the powers set forth in this Article.
Section 2. The Commission may make such contracts,
grants, and take such other action as it deems necessary and
appropriate to accomplish the general purposes of the orga-
nization. The Commission may not condemn or contract for
the lease or purchase of real estate without the prior
authorization of the Member municipalities. Any purchases
or contracts made shall conform to the requirements appli-
cable to Minnesota statutory cities.
Section 3. The Commission shall assume all authority
and undertake all tasks necessary to accomplish the purposes
of this agreement.
Section d. The Commission shall conduct a detailed
feasibility study of the need for and desirability of an
Airport and retain any necessary consultants to facilitate
the development of such study.
Section 5. The Commission may develop preliminary tech-
nical and financial specifications for an Airport and retain
any necessary consultants to facilitate the development of
such specifications.
Section 6. The Commission shall investigate and iden-
tify a location for an Airport.
Section 7. The Commission may provide for the prosecu-
tion, defense, or other participation in actions or proceed-
ings at law in which it may have an interest, and may employ
counsel for that purpose. It may employ such other persons
as it deems necessary to accomplish its powers and duties.
Such employees may be on a full-time, part-time or consult-
ing basis, as the Commission determines, and the Commission
may make any required employer contributions which local
governmental units are authorized or required to make by
law.
Section S. The Commission may conduct such research and
investigation and take such action as it deems necessary to
accomplish the purposes of this agreement.
Section 9. The Commission shall exercise any additional
authority specifically delegated to it by its Members.
Section 10. The Commission may accept gifts, apply for
and use grants, enter into agreements required in connection
therewith and hold, use and dispose of money or property
received as a gift or grant in accordance with the terms
thereof.
Section 11. The Commission may make an annual audit of
the books of the Commission to be made and shall make an
annual financial accounting and report in writing to the
Members. Its books and records shall be available for exam-
ination by the Members at all reasonable times.
- 7 -
Le,
Section 12. The Commission may delegate authority to
its executive committee. Such delegation of authority shall
be by resolution of the Commission and may be conditioned in
such a manner as the Commission may determine.
Section 13. The Commission may exercise any other power
necessary and incidental to the implementation of its powers
and duties.
IX. OFFICERS
Section 1. The officers of the Commission shall consist
of a chair and a vice-chair/secretary/treasurer. The offi-
cers shall be selected from the two Directors who are the
city administrators of Monticello and Big Lake.
Section 2. A vacancy in the office of chair or vice-
chair/secretary/treasurer shall occur for any of the reasons
for which a vacancy in the office of a Director shall
occur. Vacancies in these offices shall be filled by the
Commission for the unexpired portion of the term.
Section 3. The two officers shall be members of the
executive committee.
Section 6. The chair shall preside at all meetings of
the Commission and the executive committee. The vice-
chair/secretary/treasurer shall act as chair in the absence
of the chair.
Section 5. The vice-chair/secretary/treasurer shall be
responsible for keeping a record of all of the proceedings
of the Commission and executive committee.
J
Section 6. The vice-chair/secretary/treasurer shall be
responsible for custody of all funds, for the keeping of all
financial records of the Commission and for such other mat-
ters as shall be delegated by the Commission. The Commis-
sion may require that the vice-chair/secretary/treasurer
post a fidelity bond or other insurance against loss of
Commission funds in an amount approved by the Commission, at
the expense of the Commission. Said fidelity bond or other
insurance may cover all persons authorized to handle funds
of the Commission.
Section 7. The Commission may appoint such other offi-
cers as it deems necessary. All such officers shall be
appointed from the membership of the Commission. ID
Section 8. The Commission may create and appoint such
other committees as it deems necessary.
X. FINANCIAL MATTERS
Section 1. The fiscal year of the Commission shall be
the calendar year.
Section 2. Commission funds may be expended by the
Commission in accordance with the procedures established by
law for the expenditure of funds by Minnesota Statutory
Cities. Orders, checks, drafts and other legal instruments
must be signed by the two officers with authority of the
Commission. Contracts shall be let and purchases made in
accordance with the procedures established by law for Minne-
sota Statutory Cities.
Section 3. The financial contributions of the Members
in support of the Commission shall be equal.
Section 4. The initial budget of the Commission for
fiscal year 1987 shall be formulated by the Commission and
submitted to the Members within 120 days of the organiza-
tional meeting of the Commission and shall include any
financial contributions required from the Members in addi-
tion to the initial contribution for fiscal year 1987. The
initial budget of the Commission shall be deemed approved by
a Member unless within 60 days of receipt of said initial
budget a Member gives notice in writing to the Commission
that it is withdrawing from the Commission. A proposed
budget for 1988 and any ensuing calendar year shall be for-
mulated by the Commission and submitted to the Members on or
before August 1. Such budget shall be deemed approved by a
Member unless, prior to October 15 preceding the effective
date of the proposed budget, the Member gives notice in
writing to the Commission that it is withdrawing from the
Commission. Final action adopting a budget for the ensuing
calendar year shall be taken by the Commission on or before
November 1 of each year.
Section 5. Any Member may inspect and copy the Com-
mission books and records at any and all reasonable times.
All books and records shall be kept in accordance with nor-
mal and accepted accounting procedures and principles used
by Minnesota Statutory Cities.
- 10
XI. DURATION
Section 1. The Commission shall continue for an in-
definite term unless either Monticello or Big Lake withdraws
from the Commission. The Commission may also be terminated
by mutual agreement of the Members at any time.
Section 2. In order to prevent obligation for its
financial contribution to the Commission for the ensuing
year, a Member shall withdraw from the Commission by filing
a written notice with the vice-chair/secretary/treasurer by
October 15 of any year giving notice of withdrawal effective
at the end of that calendar year; and Membership shall con-
tinue until the effective date of the withdrawal. Prior to
the effective date of withdrawal a notice of withdrawal may
/ be rescinded at any time by a Member. A Member withdrawing
after October 15 shall be obligated to pay its entire con-
tribution for the ensuing year as outlined in the budget of
the Commission for the ensuing year.
Section 3. In the event 'of dissolution by mutual agree-
ment of the Members or by the withdrawal of either
Monticello or Big Lake, the Commission shall determine the
measures necessary to affect the dissolution and shall pro-
vide for the taking of such measures as promptly as circum-
stances permit, subject to the provisions of this agree-
ment. Upon dissolution of the Commission, all remaining
assets of the Commission, after payment of obligations,
shall be distributed equally among the then existing Mem-
r
bens. The Commission shall continue to exist after dissolu-
tion for such period, no longer than six months, as is
necessary to conclude its affairs but for no other purpose.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned municipality has
caused this agreement to be signed on its behalf this
day of , 1986.
WITNESSED BY:
of
By
Its
BIP
Its
- 12 - 9
�'
Council Agenda - 10/27/86
7. Sketch Plan Review, Planned Unit Development - Lionel Kull and Steve
Upgren, Applicants. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Lionel Kull and Steve Upgren will be present with a sketch plan review
Of a proposed Planned Unit Development of apartment buildings immediately
South of the existing Silver Fox Motel.
One thing to be considered is our current amended Comprehensive Plan,
which was amended in May of 1986. Under the Comprehensive Pian,
the percentage of multiple family units to residential units was
set at 454. On the enclosed supporting data you will find the number
Of multiple family units either developed, under construction, or
proposed for development are accounted for in the total count of
the maximum number of units allowable of multiple family units.
You will find that according to our figures, we have approximately
35 units still available to be developed.
S. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. Approve the sketch plan for a Planned Unit Development.
2. Deny the sketch plan for a Planned Unit Development.
(, C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
C
Staff recommends that the Council look at the enclosed data showing
the existing multiple family units, proposed for construction, or
currently under construction in comparison to the percentage of the
total amount of single family lots we have in the City. If you
would like to amend this percentage, it is entirely up to you.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of percentage of multiple family units available for construction;
Maps of Planned Unit Development.
-5-
Total single family lots - 1463
(excluding 320 in
Meadow Oak, unplatted)
Per Comprehensive Plan X456
Total multiple family unite allowable 658
Existing Units - 537
Approved - Construction 5 - 54
591
Subdivision Approved for Multiple 32
(Par West) 623
UNITS STILL "AILA= - 35
I
I
0
� /r' w►Nr u 1•.c. mI nT.mul i I
1 I. i 1 1 i I i i • i i 7 i• .. 1 �5
• � 1 1 1 1 �� 1 1 1 1 b11 1 I I I I
' r wn•s• • •oaNw T � r • ,S �� 1 � .
\' I 0 r r•N .• •'�
4,1
.�1D.. .; P., � ``C. Jnr r � Y ',. 1 ''�.,�:,•,
• �. r , ^may^: ~ �,1 II. Ir :.9 �."�, !.�
,•,' •' i.;. `w r r � Orr• • � 111 �, C. �� - .
r ` , � ••LLN�• C `111 1 11 1`
114•,
• •I 1 1 ..
r Ir
ryr r �
1
MAP .b W. Ir....
•4 I J
.rT
o IHI 1 _
V � i 1 t.pltl..O.I.II..I.p1
•w'
A � • � I .. • ►IYfTO.as .YNY!'N
1+ Y 1 • 111Y1
1p.Y.T.1K \\II
LAWU OssC91PT10N Or RCCORO: r�
1\
The r 0.on Ac:ee of tree .art ena-nelf of the nertnve •r ouertar lying ae at of ` -
Cedarnstreet all In see L..To�n•nip 171 Marto. Range 73 .••t. Cttr of
ftentle.11e, snnot Co, V, Minnesota.
SITZ nATA
Z.1•tlnq Znntnn wJ
are.Aar..
Are• r..lu trwn far a wrtsen[ building -lire •levan 7-b•dreos unite ..it on
1-WrlrneO u .7 000 squ... fast.
.got nutld Ingo pre posed 10 r .7.000 S.r. a 776.000 S.r. • 7.71 Acres)
OUILOINCS.
1.19nt 13 ... wlwrt.an[ bulldlnas Dre pO •.d
7 Lea•Ie • n 7y least• Deer• ground ..077 S.r. .etre l.val
Total tt. egret • 75 fast
Pap. IRG:
Ona 17 u.,1., .pe rtsnwt Wlld Ino reoul ns 3. p•ra[nq at•Il• vltn • beano ane le •ad
.s tree lo.•n •tell• ra0utrsa •, 73 pre po•.d 117 ft. or 7. ft. • [•111
170 span Rolla required and 17. proposed (10 ft. by 70 It. .., •tall)
TAOULATtnN Or rROPORre ALLOCATION or LAND USC
1. Total 0 n of prejtct P.r.1,M,nt • 6.00 Acres
7. AO p r saint• •ranUere[.d to r..'"nal
u e by building tYPS a 0.14 Act••
19.71 or taint pro)- enol
7. 1p1res1-1 .ra Rmen A det.d to -.oopen •pace • 4.61 Aerie 157.6\ of total
prn jOc[ er.al
•- H:Pror u•u . dsrnted to para Ing .7dt.,. late. aCCDte7•cl R
A.
1 er
e AIng . 0.60 Acr•• 17.5\ al • sal
n. nww0 bar. Ing 0..0 Act.; 16.0.0 9 of total pro).. I • .a1
e. rslnten •teen. • 1.57 Act.. 119.6\ of total project •real
PDfL1rrT CnMeTPUCTIMN SCIIZOULrt
YEAR CONPI.M0,
1901 Outld Inge I::
7, tn• prop: rtlen Of De '.lett. •Cie••
ane Ce .pan •pa C• for u1. eulldLng.
1909 eulldloo• 7 and ., tit• proportlen et D• reing. related acct••
ane co-. often •pace for and eullding.
1909 nulltling: 5 and 6. the proportion of Palming. related access
and Ces.en ep•n space for eats eulldlngs
1990 pu1101nn. 7 ane 0. tree Ore ftertl* of Deraing, r•1•tod see.•.
.no Ceason Open spot. for •a Id put lding• •• roan•
C ��
ZONING MAP
" a BUS.
-B3 ^r —•RES.
N Bus•
t
SCALE: I"= 800'
C2. -6
d
�� ►.��'a.^ri 1
eus.
--irev Bus. l
;. 8 3AO-
831:1��
ZONING d
82 a LI
83 a HI
11 a LI
12 a HI
OuxRENr us
AQ. a A4
eus. • Bt
RE S. a of
GENERAL FUND -- OCTOBER--- 1986 ;
_ AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Monticello Firemen's Relief Assoc. - 1986 State Aid
28,176.00
23121
North Central Section AWWA - Reg. fee for seminar for W. Mack
35.00
23122
011ie Koropchak - Mileage expense
14.50 _
23123
Daryl Fischbach - Temporary easement
1.00
23124
Moon Motors - Mtce. of equipment
324.73
23125
FIAM - Fire training seminar
80.00
23126
Arrowood Resort - Reg. fee - seminar - Rick Wolfsteller
56.00
23127
Monticello Agency - Notary bond - Karen Doty
70.00
23128
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded.
204.00
23129
Corrow Sanitation - Garbage contract payment
6,251.80
23130
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
27.00
23131
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
102.00
23132
Lindberg Decorating - Paint
59.81
23133
Woodworker's Store - Card holders for Fire Dept.
30.75
23134
Dept. of Employee Relations - Medicare W/H - Temp. employees
30.46
23135
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
90.04
23136
I. C. M. A. Retirement Corp. - Payroll ded.
74.67
23137
Beverly Johnson - Animal control for Sept.
275.00
23138
Dave Stromberg - Animal control expense
287.50
23139
Jerry Hermes - Library janitorial services
206.25
23140
Mr. Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
175.00
23141
Mr. Dan Blonigen - Council salary
125.00
23142
Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary
125.00
23143
Mr. William Fair - Council salary
125.00
23144
Mr. Jack Maxwell - Council salary
125.00
23145
YMCA of Mpls. - Monthly contract payment
529.17
23146
Jerry Hermes - Library janitorial services
206.25
23147
James Preusse - Cleaning city hall
337.50
23148
Professional Services group - Oct. contract payment - WWTP
22,083.35
23149
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H - Sept.
2,706.00
23150
Wright County State bank - Fed. W/H
2,714.00
23151
Dept. of Employee Relations - FICA W/H
3,019.24
23152
PERA Assoc. - PERA W/H
1,515.62
23153
League of MN. Cities Ins. - Workmen's Comp. renewal
23,627.00
23154
PERA - Ins. premiums
27.00
23155
Perkins, Restaurants, Inc. - Easement fee
1.00
23156
Anne Carroll - Computer consulting services
975.00
23157
VOID
-0-
23158
VOID
-0-
13159
Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
4.00
23160
Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
36.00
23161
Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Rog. fees
62.00
23162
Preuss Cleaning Service - Cleaning Fire Nall
100.00
23163
Olson i Sons Electric - Misc. services
545.91
23164
State Treasurer - State building charges - 3rd Qtr.
1,807.99
23165
VOID
-0-
23166
VOID
-0-
23167
PEM -- Fera W/H
458.78
23168
Dept, of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
30.00
23169
Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. feu
62.00
23170
Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
54.00
27171
Linda Johnson - Saving for Fire Dept.
103.7.5
23172
Lowe Fence Co. - Moving Klatt fence
676.00
23173
State of MN. - 1986 Mn. Statutes
135.00
23174
Northern States Power - Utilities
5,410.80
23175
North Central Public Service - Utilities
1,034.77
23176
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Automatic Garage Door - Mtce. at'Public Works Bldg.
1.41
23177
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded.
204.00
23178
State Capitol Credit Union" - Payroll ded.
90.04
23179
I.C.M.A. Retirement Corp. - Employees cont.
74.67
23180
North Central Public Service - Furnace repair at Sen. Cit.
36.00
23181
Dave Stromberg --Animal control contract
287.50
23182
Thomas Eidem - Car allowance for Oct.
300.00
23183
PERA - Pere W/H
1,405.95
23184
Dept. of Employee Relations - FICA W/H
3,478.52
23185
Dept. of Employee Relations - Medicare W/H
47.14
23186
Wright County State Bank - Fed. W/H
3,035.00
23187
Banker's Life - Group Ins.
3,810.52
23188
Monticello Fire Dept. - Wages for firemen thru 10/16
943.00
23189
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
12.00
23190
M.N. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
40.00
23191
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
54.00
23192
Int. Conf. of Building Officials - Membership dues - Gary A.
15.00
23193
Safety Kleen Corp. - Equip. maintenance
38.00
23194
Meyer Rohlin - Blueprints
6.00
23195
OSM - Engineering fees
21,572.64
23196
Karen Doty - Mileage and travel expense
21.27
23197
Mobil Oil Corp. - Gas for Fire Dept.
19.94
23198
Water Products - Meter valves
478.76
23199
Gordon Link - Gas
1,198.40
23200
VOID
-0-
23201
Stacy Thielman - Sign for Open House - Fire Dept.
10.05
23202
MN. Labor Relations Assoc. - Membership dues
85.00
23203
Meridian Aggregates - Rock for Cedar St. repair
60.83
23204
Walt Mack - Travel expense for water school
177.25
23205
Phillips Petro. Corp. - Gas for Water Dept.
28.15
23206
Share Corp. - Cleaner - Mtce. Bldg.
166.98
23207
A T 6 T Inf. Systems - Fire phone charges
3.96
23208
Brenteson Construction - Ballfields, Hwy. 25. Cedar St.
8,857.00
23209
Monticello Times - Publications i legal printing fees
2,290.97
23210
Stelton's Laundromat - Clean jackets L liners for Fire Dept.
95.00
23211
E L Marketing - Printing of ballot pages
369.00
23212
Century Fence Co. - Fence for NSP ball fields
27.717.00
23213
Braun Eng. - Interceptor sewer project Inspections
665.50
23214
Unitog Rental services - Uniform rental
140.80
23215
Century Labs. - Ice foe
142.58
23216
Cruys, Johnson - Computer services for August
290.00
23217
St. Cloud Restaurant Supply - Soap for Fire Dept.
21.15
23218
Ashwill Ceramic Tile - Sealer for Fire Hall
29.D0
23219
Moon Motor Sales - Parts and supplies
38.10
23220
Curtin Matheson Scientific - Chlorine Reagent - WWTP - Aug.
49.24
23221
Persian's Office Products - Repair dictating machine
54.75
23222
Gartner's Hallmark Shop - Frame for certificate
11.00
23223
Plumbery - Softball field supplies
161.49
23224
Aspenglow Arts - Certificate for Al Meyer
5.00
23225
Davis Electronic Service - Pager repairs - Fire Dept.
190.10
23226
Economic Press - Sub. renewal
16.54
23227
Wright County Auditor - Police contract for October
10,357.50
23228
Ranger Products - Supplies for WTP - August purchases
25.53
23229
Snyder Drug - Film for Fire Dept.
5.94
23230
Service Plus Foods - Dog food
15.62
23231
Hacpusen Equip. - Vehicle maintenance
311.44
23232
-2-
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO.
Maus Tire Service - Repairs for Fire Dept., Parks, Sever
346.17
23233
AME Ready Mix - Sand for softball fields and streets
137.93
23234
Davis Water Equipment Co. - Rubber gasket, speed trete
637.05
23235
Bowan Barnes dist. - Nuts, bolts, penetrant, etc.
262.04
23236
Simonson Lumber - Supplies
60.77
23237 ,
Seitz Servi Star - Misc. supplies
213.99
23238
North Star Waterworks - Hydrant 425 project
848.46
23239
National Bushing - Battery, hose, etc.
269.19
23240
+cid. Fire 4 Safety - Recouple hose - Fire Dept.
38.70
23241
Monticello Office Products - Binding machine, mist. supplies
660.85
23242
Wright County Humane Society - Animal control - Sept.
50.00
23243
Acucraft - St. b Parks Depts. supplies
101.25
23244
Monti Motors - Repair tractor rod
25.00
23245
Monti Truck Repair - Nuts and bolts
6.15
23246
Monticello TW Hardware - Filters, plugs, tape, etc.
63.86
23247
Martie's Farm Service - Metal posts
26.50
23248
Marco Business Products - Copy machine paper
63.90
23249
Buffalo Bituminous - Class 5
17.40
23250
Big Lake Machine - 2 ft. shaft
4.00
23251.
Big Lake Equipment - Blades, elbows. etc. for mower
78.66
23252
General Rental - Blades
27.70
23253
J M Oil Co. - Gas
339.37
23254
Harry's Auto Supply - Battery, plugs, filters, pliers, etc.
281.20
23255
Hoglund Bus - St. repairs
128.25
23256
Coast to Coast - Supplies for all Depts.
317.45
23257
Little Mountain Electric - Fire Hall mtce.
228.56
23258
Foster -Franzen - Antique car ins. - Fire Dept.
48.78
23259
Jack Anderson Assoc. - Truck dock at Whse. Foods - consult.
611.42
23260
Feedrite Controls - Sample
10.00
23261
Audio Communications - Radio repairs - Civil Defense
196.00
23262
Ramier and Cries - Prof. serv. for Raindance Corp. {TIF}
450.00
23263
Taylor Land Surveyors - Surveying Block 36, Lower Monti.
125.00
23264
Smith, Pringle 6 Hayes - Legal for Sept.
2,632.00
23265
Viking Pipe Services - Televising sewers b root control
1.120.00
23266
Jim Ennis Cabinets - Plastic materials for Fire Hail
37.95
23267
Eugene Bland - Repair fire hydrant
60.00
23268
Local 049 - Union dues
105.00
23269
U of MN. - Reg. fee for G. Anderson - Assessor seminar
55.00
23270
Adam's Peat Control - Library pest control
42.00
23271
J. D. L. Cleaning - Library cleaning
280.00
23272
Unocal - Gas for Fire Dept.
10.36
23273
National Life Ins. - Ins. premium - T. Eidem
100.00
23274
Holmes 6 Graven - Prof, services for $385.000 G. 0. Bond
2,000.00
23275
Stephens -Pock - Dep, Reg. title book
26.00
23276
Monticello Printing - S/W postale, env., Firemen invitations
465.95
23277
Al b Julia Nelson - Sub. renewal
13.72
23278
Simplex Time Recorder - Annual mtce. fee of clock - City Hall
116.00
23279
American National Bank - Agent fees for Tax Inc. Bonds
147.69
23280
Leifert Trucking - Freight charges for Fire Dept.
20.00
23281
Watertower Paint 6 Repair - Mtee. contract - water tower
1,355.00
23282
Fair's Carden Center - Tree replacements - 36 shrubs - Lib.
204.00
23283
Class Hut - Window at library
430.00
23284
Ziegler. Inc. - Loader payment E hook assembly
20,534.00
23285
Sherburne Wright Cty. Cable Comm. - Annual payment
4,170.00
23286
State of MN. - Flag
28.00
23287
Maus Foods - Supplies for all Depts.
182.64
23288
-3-
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK N0.
L 6 G Rehbein - 86-1 Interceptor sever payment 06
138,924.70
23289
Marlene Hellman - Misc. mileage expense
53.10
23290
Gary Anderson - Misc. mileage
116.92
23291
Dahlgren, Uban, etc. - Annexation, Day Care, mileage
5,168.31
23292
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
759.97•
23293
Rick Wolfsteller - Misc. mileage 6 conference expense
172.26
23294
Mr: Paul Weingardner - Prof. services for OAA board
315.00
23295
Diane Jacobson - Misc. mileage
69.98
23296
Commissioner of Revenue - Water tax - 3rd quarter
219.00
23297
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - pep. Reg. fees
15.00
23298
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
108.00
23299
MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
23300
Gould Bros. - Repairs for Fire Dept. equipment
230.66
23301
Jim Ennis Cabinets - Assemble 2 book drops - Library
90.00
23302
MacQueen Equip. - Lift arm assembly
721.91
23303
Denson Brothers, Inc. - Blacktop for streets
177.91
23304
Gary Anderson - Misc. mileage
120.00
23305
Fullerton Lumber Co. - Final payment for Fire Hall
1,650.00
23306
Payroll for September
33,196.46
TOTAL GENERAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR OCTOBER
$420,922.56
LIQUOR FUND
AMOUNT CF -ECR
LIQUOR DISBURSE.'iENTS FOR OCTOBER -- 1986 NO.
Commissioner of Revenue - Liquor sales tax - August
8,226.79
12655
Eagle Dist. Co. - Liquor
1,995.86
12656
£d Phillips 4 Sons - Liquor
1,656.43
12657
McDowall Co. - Equipment maintenance
2,259.33
12658
Dept. of Employee Relations - FICA W/H
308.62
12659
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
170.00
12660
Wright County State Bank - Fed. W/H
261.00
12661
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H
216.00
12662
Twin City Wine - Wine
937.29
12663
PERA - Pera W/H
178.06
12664
League of M. Cities Ins. - Workmen's Comp. renewal
1,246.00
12665
Eagle Dist. Co. - Liquor
3,681.78
12666
Quality Wine - Wine
528.02
12667
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
65.35
12666
Dahlheimer Dist. Co. - Beer
13,256.60
12669
Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse.
144.94
12670 '
Dick Beverage - Beer
2,032.70
12671
Maus Foods - Store expense
12.88
12672
Liefert Trucking - Freight
259.70
12673
Seven Up Bottling - Misc. mdse.
241.00
12674
Stromquist Dist. - Beer
52.15
12675
Yonak Sanitation - Contract for garbage
91.50
12676
Thorpe Dist. - Beer
5,757.57
12677
Grosslein Beverage - Beer
12,629.80
12678
Coast to Coast - Misc. supplies
20.69
12679
Cloudy To.,- nic:. - Misc. mdse.
217.50
12680
Monticello Office Products - Office supplies
33.09
12681
Monticello Times - Adv.
174.95
12682
Bernick's Pepsi - Misc. mdse,
353.20
12683
Viking Coca cola - Misc. mdse.
286.45
12684
Foster Franzen Ins. - Liquor liability ins.
382.00
12685
The Plumbery - Filters for Store
13.99
12686
PERA - Pars W/H
88.09
12687
Eagle Dist. Co. - Liquor
1.983.89
12688
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
258.76
12689
Griggs, Cooper - Liquor
177.51
12690
Northern States Power - Utilities
722.70
12691
North Central Public Service - Utilities
13.02
12692
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
170.00
12693
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
3.897.00
12694
Twin City Wine - Liquor
828.36
12695
PERA - Pere W/H
183.28
12696
Dept. of Employee Relations FICA W/H
470.38
12697
Wright County State Bank - Fed. W/H
356.00
12698
Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins.
321.94
12699
Eagle Dist. - Liquor
3.354.91
12700
Quality Wine - Liquor
572.76
12701
Ed Phillips b Sons - Liquor
2,690.44
12702
r City of Monticello - Sewer/water account
27.48
12703
Lovegren Ice. Co. - Ice purchase
347.80
12704
McDowall Co. - Maintenance of coolers
1.391.45
12705
FIN. Dept. of Public Safety - Retailer's buyer card
12.00
12706
LIQUOR FOND
AMOUNT CFMCK
NO.
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
64.46
12707
Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Misc. mdse.
582.89
12708
Cedar Map Co. - Adv.
144.00
12709
Service Sales Corp. - Supplies
100.53
12710
Gruys, Johnson - Computer charges for August
110.00
12711
Twin City Demo's - Misc. mdse.
30.00
12712
Commissioner of Revenue - Liquor sales tax - 3rd qtr.
6,186.05
12713
Century Laboratories - Ice foe
142.58
12714
Liquor payroll for September 3.546.03
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR OCTOBER $86,465.55
C
CITY or MFIrICFLLO •
•.
•
IbnthlF•Dullding Depart -t- Report
1
•
Ibnth of Sa , 199
;
ruuurl m,a us®
_
1
. ... .-1<e�.._ ...
_
_7111 `Elam
,lbntn 'uso loot 'Shia
Yeor
•
Man Ism= I1nth
august
ltnth BGPt.
Last Year To Deto - To Date
0MIDMITIAL
Ih®ber -
11
12
17 .83
101 ,
VoluaLim 3
002,360.00
81;126,790.00
$1,433,930.00 (5.226,840.00 $6,381,270.00
Fees
2,301.40
6,036.47
6,962.79 26,239.36
31,713.33
Surcharges
221.15
563.35
716.95 2,613.33 •
3,190:30 '
ODIg07lC1AL
31
.
1 17
13
-
Uu.ber
Veluetion
3
527,100.00
655,030.00
12,700.00 1,741,660.00 .,2,744,930.00
Feaa
2,656.01
3,462.59
96.70. 8,072.48
13,231.30
Surcharges
263.33
327.90
, 6.33 870.80
1,372.OS
IkUkRIAL
2
3
Dumber
I
•475,000.00
I
375,50000
Valuation
100,300.00
3,054.77
-
Fees
Surcharges
719.57
50.23
],336.20
237.50.
267.75
Uucior
6
9
13 63
61
Pees
209.00
584.00
420.00 2,088.00
2,300.00
Surcharges
3.00
4.50
6.50 34.50
30.90
0711:117
1
S
..
Humber
Valuation
1
456,900.00
12,660.00
Fsee
10.00
2,205.02;
129.10
Surcharges
:.SO
•228.25
7.00,
•
. .j
..
_ .... ...�..
-.. _ .. __.
.
TOTAL NO PFlWl7�,
72
B
21 184
TOTAL 110111....
ATjW 1,069,960.00
2,257,620.00
1,446,630.00 7;425000.00
9,71 4,560.00
SAI. {m
5`974.98
12,439.26
7`479.49 26.643.06
50`428.50
10TAL 6URCIIARGl:e
530.45
11133.25
729.80 -' 3.746.90
4.888.40
amnn� 11xm1
PIIUUT 11MMS
Mmter
• • PERMIT -
MU AR .H Valuation h ■trot
Data
Lse rear •
Single really
1
3 434,50 3
3'5.25 3 70.500.00 36
30
Dupl as,.
4
1,539.40 -
168.30 33h;600.00 10
1
'9
Ilultl-raKUjv
2
:3.942.67
354.70 709,400.00 . 7
_
6osoerclal
2
. 3:464,29
327.20 654,400.00 4
7
Industrial
1
250.50
22.30• 45.000.00 2
0.
Bob: Garages
2
77.00
3.00 6.000.00 9
14
aim e
0�
0
Public 8u1141ngo
•
ALTUWIOI OR REPAID
'
WoUllgs
9
28.60
1.40 , 2.860.do 3e
25 '
COoerct sl
1
14.30
.70 1.430.00 11
.15
Industrial
1
2.075.10
215.00 430.000.00 1
I
0
P1N ll10
All l typ00
b
.
004.00
I
4.50 61
63
ACCCB30R1 9TRUCTUALS
0+
9uleealno POO1e1
1 1
I
DacAe
1
16.30
1
.70 1.435.00 3
�
0
PCNIIT
', 0
0
TCID'OMIIP
1
DEMOLITION
TOTALS
3e
•42.439.79
1.13:23 7.237.910.00 145
164'
' ,
I I
111DIVIDUAL I'MilT ACTIVITY REPORT
. MONTH OF BIP"DMM , 1986
NunBER
I DESCRIPTION
PI NAME/LOCATION (VALUATION
66-95521
Chealesl Lab Addition
Al Northern tutu fuwer/N. Co.Rd.75- 1
630,000.00
66-f 552
17er1
AD Richard Kolb/1124 Randy Lane .•
1;630.00
86-953
6th really Dualling
D Doyle Vedas C=strurtLon/223 f 227
86.600.00
Marvin 91r0o0-Rowd
86-:56
Screed Porch,
AD Tom 6 Diane Noor"/1318 sandy Lane
11630.00,
86-057
a Onit;Su use
q Jay 111 iiv/U], U4,176,tU,160, U2,
639,700.00
166. a 166 Jarry,Ualut Drive
06-956
told, Storage 9artlause
I Northern Stat" Power/Nast Co.Rd.75
65.000.00
86-97
AttwAsd Garage
-Two'raaily
NO BarL'S Douns Biller/3 relrway or.
6,000.00
od-958.
Dwelling
D Lamers Custom Bow/380 A 391
82.600.00
Pralrle Rob
9-95:
Two'raaily dwelling
D Dayle Vafhes COAStructi,W/227 x'.229
"64.600.00
1lmsvin rlwoed Road
"-979
OfficeDcilding
C R 4.0 ,investaeLa
n/100 Theme circle
655./00.00
d8-960
Meuse 4 Garage R"hingle
AD Glays NaCoraicy601 fast Sros"
1,630.00
"-161
f on16,Townhouae
-
Nr ODI, Buiidera/1" Riverview or.
269,700.00
. Unita 025.26, 27.28. 29 8 30
86-962
Two really. Oealllng
D DDy1e VOCh" C"struction/23t.6 .260
'mervin
96.600.00
91101med b
Ra
66-963-
"rave.Addltien
AC Nwti NOtera/101 Thames Park Drive
1,430.00
96-964
Single really Dwe11re0
Br Geral a Naris" Nelisan/17s Jerry
70.500.00
'
Liefwt Orlve
BO -965
Detached Garage
RG NSlll" a J" "Ith/109 "kv16. Uro .e
2,000.00
16-967
Offlre/Rtitail Building
C Sart" /ryertl"/1300 Buy 25 R.
197 1010.000
•
`
tOTALS ru7sa
.60
86-91Ch"ita�#A
n" RN7R6
dltisn
Al N"there Stat" NOW/g, Cs.U.79
817.70
881635
1 Unit Townhm"e
Y Jay Nluw/133,134,1".138.140,t41,1 I&
1.038."
'
Jassy usfart Drive
44-979
Office Building
C 8 8 0 Isvest"nts/108 ffis"s circle
1,033.91
66-961
6 Unit Townhouse
Nr ML Builders/169 Riverview or.
624.71
Unita 25,26,27,20,39, a 10
86-967
Offlse Retail nuildla9
C Samuel freSaatiW1300 Bay is t.
363.25
' TOTAL PUB RBVINB
13.3 .t
WTAL RNV=U
113,671.81
G
sere
(PERMIT ISURCMARGEIPLUMBING ISURCNARfr,
61.256.00 / 213.00 8-66.00, - 3 .so
16.30, .70 -
.2"-.00 ,62:10 62.00 '.50
16.30
1,561.25 '1[Tf05 iM.00' a0',
-260'.50 22.50 '
;66.60 2.00,'
361.60 41.60. i0.00 ..so
366:00 62.30 6].00
1';si6.Z5 298:63 4s.00 ao
t6a0•; ;.,.70'
807.13 .1,24.9 '120.00 ' .50
716.00 .47:70 ' 42.00 a0
14.10 .70.
434.50 35.25 '25:00 .,110
11.50 1.00
326 75 ".75
4.119NO T71Im 'siib3 i'S�