The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Agenda Packet 10-10-1989AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, October 10, 1989 - 7:00 p.m. Mayor: Ken Maus Council Members: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held September 25, 1989 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and comrplaints. 4. Public hearing on the proposed assessment roll for 89-02 and 89-03 improvement projects (Mississippi Drive and Oakwood Industrial Park). 5. Public hearing on proposed assessment roll for delinquent charges. 6. Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for certification to County Auditor. 7. Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for certification with the County Auditor covering delinquent charges. B. A simnple subdivision request to allow R-2 (single and two family residential) lots to be resubdivided into 2 residential lots. A conditional use request to allow a 4-plex in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. A variance request to allow a resubdivided lot to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the existing residential structure to be converted into a 4-plex. Applicant, Brad and Cindy Pyle. 9. A variance request to allow an attached garage to be constructed within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant, Lawrence and Lynn Gantner. 10. Consideration of petition from residents of Meadow Oak for imryrrovements and maintenance of the Meadow Oak Park. 11. Consideration of modification of street lighting policy to include lighting cul-de-sacs and/or dead end streets. 12. Consideration of approval of Transportation Management Plan and budget. 13. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing contract with State of Minnesota to provide public transportation service. 14. Consideration of contract with Hoglund Transportation for provision of public transportation service. 15. Consideration of adopting an agreement authorizing a contract with Township of Monticello outlining annexation process. Council Agenda October 10, 1989 Page 2 16. Consideration of adopting a resolution setting a public hearing date for the adoption of the development program for Development District No. 1 and for the adoption of TIF plan for TIF District No. 1-1. 11. Consideration of replacing underground heat pipes at the City's waste water treatment plant. 18. Consideration of establishing moratorium on development of infectious and/or hazardous waste disposal or incineration plants within the city of Monticello for a period of one year. 19. Adjournment. Irf�S. s,'J of Fvos. Sr4.oly — C� 2d ii7 S¢�..�. FxT I MINOTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, September. 25, 1989 - 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: Fran Fair 2. Approval of minutes. Motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held September 11, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Citizens coments/pet it ions, requests, and complaints. Lee Parks requested that the City investigate the potential of extending city sewer service to his property located between Joyner's Bowling Alley and the NAWCO structure. Mayor Maus suggested that Mr. Parks work with the Building Inspector and City Engineer toward development of a plan that could result in the extension of sewer to the property owned by Parks. it was suggested that OSM work on an hourly basis toward resolution of engineering problems relating to extension of sewer to the Parks property. 0. Kenneth Hooaer retcd that a Tcact:-aater'a Club is forming in Monticello, and he invited those in attendance to became part of the Toastmaster's Club. Harold Pittiran was present to discuss his concerns regarding the increase in water pressure that will result from bringing the new water tower on line. John Simola reported the plans that the City has in place to mitigate water pressure related problems. Consideration of conditional use pennit which would allow expansion of a shopping center in a B-3 zone. Gordon Orschlager from KKE Architects reviewed the proposed site plan. Orschlager reviewed the building layout, landscaping plan, and parking design. City Planning Consultant, John Oban, provided a site plan review and noted his observations regarding the cite plan and its iirpact on Monticello in general. He stressed the ivportance of designing a good road syetem connecting the 7th Street shopping area to Broadway. He noted that continuation of Minnesota to Broadway should be considered in order to achieve the proper traffic flow from Broadway to the 7th Street shopping area. Uban also noted that the K -Mart addition will have a significant visual impact on the residential areas north of the development. Uban recoimnended that this lipact be buffered by landscape plannings or by creating a deeper green area between the 7th Street right-of-way and the parking area or by eliminating access to the apartment using the 7th Street right-of-way as an obstruction to site (� lines between the apartment and the K -Mart. 8 Council Minutes — 9/25/89 Uban also noted that RRE has responded to somne suggestions by the City Planner and OSM's traffic engineer which has resulted in an lmr%noveinent to the traffic flow and parking plan as originally proposed at the Planning Commnissiom mneeting of September 20, 1989. In addition, the landscaping plan has been slightly modified to reflect his concerns. Uban recoimnended that the City Council adopt the Planning Connission recormnendations that a conditional use permnit be granted to Lincoln Companies for the expansion of the existing mall subject to the conditions noted by the Planning Coiranission. Dan Rling reviewed the site drainage plans and noted that the water discharging from the site should not exceed 5 cubic feet per second. Ren Maus noted his concern regarding the traffic that will be created at Highway 25 and 7th Street. Maus suggested that since the development is highly dependent on the intersection and because the development will create a significant increase in traffic in this area that it should in the future participate in funding any street light improvemnents that would be needed on Highway 25 and 7th Street. After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, to approve the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: a. Approvall of --!,c pia.: ti. .we City En,-:n___'Emcn.v?nn t i permit provided only after site drainage plans have been approved by the City Engineer. Storm water discharge from the site must be restricted to 5 cubic feet per second. b. In the event the public iuprovemnents are installed privately, all improvement specifications and construction unist be approved by the City Engineer. c. Lincoln Conpanies' dedication of land to the City which is necessary for 7th Street alignment. d. City acquisition of utility easement areae as defined by the Building Inspector and City Engineer. C. Alternate site plan approved contingent on ineeting or exceeding standards associated with site plan presented to City Council at the meeting of September 25, 1989. John Uban and City staff charged with evaluating and judging alternative site plan relative to performance standards established with initial plan. f. Staff and Planning Consultant approval of landscaping plans. g. Planning Consultant and City Engineer approval of revised parking plan. Council Minutes - 9/25/89 Motion based on the finding that the conditional use permit is consistent with comnprehensive plan, geographic area involved, character of the area, the need has been sufficiently demonstrated, and the development will not have a negative impact on the adjoining land values. Motion carried unanimmusly. Consideration of utilization of tax increment financing to fund a portion of public improvements associated with the K -Mart project. O'Neill reported that at the previous meeting of the City Council, Council discussed use of tax increment financing for the purpose of assisting with realignment of the 7th Street right-of-way. As a result of that meeting, staff was directed to work with the HRA, property owners, and Lincoln Companies towards development of a finance plan that would achieve the straight alignment utilizing finance option 2A as the basis of the negotiations. Since that time, Tom Holthaus has reduced the price of his property from $56,000 to $49,900, and Marvin Kramer has reduced his property price from $197,000 to $187,000. The HRA met to discuss option 2A and concluded that although the straight alignirent is the best aligrunent, the cost to achieve this alignment is not offset by the benefits or public purpose achieved. The HRA in their motion referred the matter of whether or not to use tax increment financing to assist realigrunent of 7th Street back to City Council. On September 20, 1989, the Planning Coimnission recommnended approval of Lincoln Companies' canditicnal c c urcct -na '^a'cated-_ri-__ for the strai•]ht alignment in aseparate motionThe motion was based on long term benefit of the straight alignment. O'Neill stated that the most significant development, however, since the previous meeting pertains to Lincoln Companies' new request for a mmich greater TIF contribution than previously requested. O'Neill reviewed the letter submitted by Tom DuFresne to the City of Monticello dated September 21, 1989, in which Lincoln Companies outlines the need for tax increment financing based on financial need. O'Neill noted that Lincoln Commpanies' request changes the focus of Council's decision from determining to what extent TIP could be used to achieve the straight alignment to determining to what extent tax increment financing should be utilized as an incentive for Lincoln Companies to proceed. O'Neill noted that the HRA decision to reject use of tax increment financing was based on financing of the street portion only, and TIP use based on financial need was never presented to the HRA. The HRA was never asked to review use of TIP under the terms presented to Council. O'Neill reported that the addition housing the K -Mart facility will generate approxivately $105,000 annually in revenue available to pay off public firprovement related debt accrued at the outset of the project. Over the life of an eight-year economic developmrent district, this 7 project has the capacity to pay off a potential debt of $600,000. Council Minutes - 9/25/89 Lincoln Companies is asking for TIF assistance equal to $452,400. Under this scenerio, it would take about seven years to pay this debt before the taxes would be available to the City, school, and county. In their proposal, Lincoln Companies requests that tax increment financing be used to finance the construction of 7th Street in the amount of $130,500; partial payment of acquisition costs associated with Pratt and Holthaus property in the amount of $71,500; acquisition of the Kramer property in the net amount of $127,000, installation costs associated with sanitary sewer connections and temporary ponding in the amount of $84o000 and $39,400 respectively. Altogether, use of tax increment financing dollars requested amounts to $452,400. Under this scenerio, Lincoln Companies is asking that Council establish its own tax increment district and finance plan associatedwith the addition. This plan will be separate from the project area now managed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Utilizing Council authority to develop this alternate TIP district represents a break from City tradition: however, it is totally legal and permissable for Council to establish its own tax increment financing program. Chuck DuFresne noted that use of tax increment financing is proper in this situation, as TIF will be used to offset the cost for firproveinents that benefit the City as well as Lincoln Coinpanies. in addition, it is appropriate to use tax increment financing dollars to help defray the cost of site reclamation. Ad.4idtdnt A6idiiibLCaL*)r G -17e-21 revleWed the various potential financing plans and suggested that council review its philosophy towards use of tax increment financing and develop a financing plan accordingly. Ken Maus noted that there appears to be strong connunity support for the straight alignment of 7th Street. He went on ' .0 state that this alignment which benefits the City would not occur unless the City participates in the use of TIP in financing of the straight alignment. Shirley Anderson concurred by saying that the majority of the people she has spoken to as well indicated that the straight alignment is the better of the two alignments, and the City should do what it can to promote the highest and best use of the land between the freeway and 7th Street right-of-way. Warren Smith noted the long term benefit of the straight alignment and supported the notion of financing the cost to create the straight al ignment. After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Shirley Anderson to utilize tax increment financing for the purpose of financing the City's portion of the 7th Street right-of-way which equals 25 percent of the total cost for collector street oversizing and approxiinately 25 percent of the non -assessable street frontage. Motion to include 0 Council Minutes - 9/25/89 use of tax increment financing dollars to finance land acquisition and demolition costs associated with purchasing three properties in the net amount of $216,000. Voting in favor of the motion: Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus, Warren Smith. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. Consideration of reviewing requirements for Star City recertification. Economic Development Director, 011ie Koropchak, reviewed the Star City Program, informed the Council of the Star City recertification requirements, and asked Council to consider approval or denial of Monticello's continued participation in the Star City Program. Koropchak noted that the Star City Program is designed to assist cities in developing and maintaining an organized economic development program. Monticello was certified as a Star City in 1982, and today Monticello is one of 90 communities that are now organized as Star City communities. The Star City Program explores ways a community can reach economic development objectives by organizing. The Star City Program provides the framework that can be used in organizing the community which creates a common purpose, focal point, and community theme which results in greater opportunity for economic development. Ken Maus asked if the program is truly effective and if the City is in a better position in terms of economic development by maintaining certification. 011ie noted that the benefits of the program are difficult to measure. [ia:e.er, ac a result of the progran, the City is better organized and able to respond to companies that may wish to locate in Monticello; and, therefore, the program has a positive impact on the City's ability to encourage industrial development. After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, to continue participation in the Minnesota Star City Program and to seek recertification. Motion carried unanimously. 7. Consideration of Town of Monticello ordinance prohibiting the use of sewage sludge within the Town of Monticello. John Simola noted that Monticello Township passed an ordinance on September 5 prohibiting the use of sewage sludge from our municipal waste water treatment plant anywhere in the Township. In addition, Monticello is prohibited from transporting sludge across any Township roads and further from depositing sludge in any waste facility located in Monticello Township which would include a cc-comrposting facility for garbage. The Township did not notify the City of the passage of this ordinance, which took effect on its publication date of September 14. Staff found out about the ordinance in the Monticello Times on the afternoon of September 12 when the Monticello Times called to ask if we had any comments. Simola then outlined the action that he has taken since that point, which included a letter to the Township asking that the Township consider revoking or modifying their ordinance to allow Monticello to utilize, at a minimum, PCA approved sludge disposal sitee. C Council Minutes - 9/25/89 After discussion, mnotion was made by Warren Smith to submit a formal request to the Township asking the Township of Monticello to revoke, rescind, or modify their ordinance in such a way as to allow the City legal use of existing permitted sites and develop a commnittee to work with the City to locate a single site in Monticello Township where the intended purchase by the City of Monticello was continued agricultural use by area farmers. Motion seconded by Shirley Anderson. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of maintaining old water tower as a backup and Monticello landmark . John Simnola noted that the new 800,000 gallon above ground tank will go on line toward the end of September. At that time, we will empty our existing elevated tank and remove it from service. Simla noted that the City has discussed the pro's and con's from moving the tank or letting it stay and explained that the cost to remove the tank could easily be between $10,000 to $15,000. The cost to leave the tank in service would amount to $9,200, which would include interior sand blasting and painting. In addition to that, of course, there would be long term maintenance cost associated with leaving the tank in place. Simla recoumnended that the City keep the existing tower as a standby unit and for a Monticello landmark and to authorize City staff to have the interior of the tank painted at a cost of $9,200 and obtain estimates for fitting LLe lddder wiL15 a Safely fail device. Warren Smith noted that the obvious decision is to keep the water tower, as it provides a good backup and a commmminity landmark. Dan Blonigen stated that he was glad that John changed his mind regarding the future for the water tower in that he supports keeping the old water tower. After discussion, motion was mnade by Warren Snith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, to keep the existing tower as a standby and to authorize staff to have the interior of the tank painted at a cost of $9,200 by H 6 H Watertower of Sleepy Eye. Motion carried unanimously. 9. Consideration of bills for the month of September. Motion was wade by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to approve payment of bills for the month of September. Motion carried unanimously. Other Matters. Motion made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to adopt a resolution adopting a proposed 1990 budget and setting a proposed tax levy. A budget workshop moeting was scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on October 10, 1989, with the final public hearing on the budget scheduled for October 23, 1989. SEE p.ESOLUTION 89-27. Z Council Minutes - 9/25/89 Dan Kling requested that Council provide City staff with the authority to make the final payinent to Rictmnar once the final problems regarding the well construction and pump house project are resolved. Kling noted that the City will get lien waivers prior to authorizing payment. Motion was wade by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to grant City staff authority to cake final payment to Richmar once the remaining problems regarding the control system development and other problems have been resolved. Motion carried unanimously. Refinishing the front of the Hi -way Liquor Store was discussed. After discussion, motion was wade by Warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, to remove and replace trim boards and then stain the boards for the sum of $2,530. Motion carried unanimously. John Simola asked Council for authorization to spend $3,800 and $1,650 toward application of lime on PCA approved sludge deposit sites. After discussion, motion was wade by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to approve said expenditure. Motion carried unanimously. John Simola noted that he has not obtained a quote to install skating rink lighting and other park lights at the Meadow Oaks Park. Administrator Wolfsteller noted that a public hearing will be conducted on October 25, 1989, at which time changes in the method of valuating public utilities will be discussed. There is a potential that if the changes as proposed are made, the City would lose $26,000 in tax revenue. The proposed change in the method of calculating valuation would have even greater negative iiapact on the school and county. Although the dollar aimunts are not extremely significant, the proposed changes present a foot in the door toward continued changes in the method of calculating valuation which could result in further deterioration of the City's tax base. Ken Maus noted that we need to be involved, and we should be present for the public hearing scheduled for the 25th. Warren Smith noted that the City should contribute towards any lobbying efforts necessary to retain the City's tax base. City Administrator Wolfsteller submitted a letter to Council from Vaughn Veit which outlines problems Veit has had in working with Public Works Director, John Simola. Wolfsteller noted that problems noted by Veit need to be reviewed on a case by case basis to explain to Veit what actions have been taken by Simola as a result of City policy. He went on to note that Council needs to be aware of both sides of the issue. Council Minutes - 9/25/89 Motion was made by Dan Blonigen to direct the Administrator to prepare a written report outlining what circumstances instigated the letter and to include any other clarifications that can be provided. There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator (D Council Agenda - 10/10/89 4. Public hearing on the proposed assessment roll for 89-02 and 89-03, improvement projects (Mississippi Drive and Oakwood industrial Park). AND Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for certification to County Auditor. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the previous Council meeting, approval was granted to Buffalo Bituminous for final payment regarding the Mississippi Drive and Oakwood industrial Park overlay projects. With the final cost being tabulated for these projects, including all the indirect costs, it is now time to hold a public hearing to consider adopting the assessment roll for these projects. Based on the original bids received earlier this summer, it was estimated that Mississippi Drive improvement project would cost $111,010, which included a 274 allowance for engineering and other associated costs. The actual contract turned out to be less because some portions of the underdrain system not being needed and lower quantities being used, which resulted in the total project cost being only $88,365. This is approximately a 208 reduction in our original estimate. Based on the direction given by the council when this project was ordered, I have prepared an assessment roll based on 218 of the project cost being assessable to the benefiting property owners. This 218 ammunted to approximately $4.79 per front foot for the property owners on Mississippi Drive and as a result, the average lot is proposed to be assessed approximately $491.00 each. Originally we were estimating in the neighborhood of $550 to $600 each. In regards to the Oakwood Park overlay project, the costs also were lower than originally estimated by $22,753. The original estimate with indirect costs was $126,115 and the actual cost for the assessment roll was $103,362. Again, based on Council directive during the public hearing to consider this project, I have used 506 of the total cost as the assessable portion. This amounts to $4.17 per front footage, with a typical assessment per lot being approximately $1,500 based on a 300' to 350' lot. As was noted during the public hearing on this improvement, some property owners felt the road should have initially been up to 10 ton standards when originally constructed in the late 70's and early 80's. it is try understanding that the City Engineer had always planned on some overlay work being needed to upgrade the roads in the future, and it may be worthwhile to note to the public that the cost of the overlay today is actually cheaper than it would have been 8 years agog and if it had been done to higher standards earlier, their previous costs would have also been higher. As a result, I don't believe the property owners are being penalized at this point, and as a matter of fact, they are only being proposed to pay 504 of the cost instead of 1008. i Council Agenda - 10/10/89 After receiving input from the public concerning the assessments being proposed, the public hearing should be closed and then the Council can consider adopting the assessment roll as prepared or altering it in any method you should determine feasible. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the assessment rolls for both the Mississippi Drive and Oakwood Industrial Park overlay projects as prepared and adopt a resolution certifying the same to the County Auditor for collection beginning next year . 2. Amend the assessment roll if necessary and then adopt. 3. Do not adopt the assessment roll. C. STAFF RFCXMENDATION: The original bond sold to finance this project had anticipated the assessment roll would be adopted yet this fall and placed on the tax rolls beginning next year. According to the County Auditor, the City only has until October 15th to adopt any assessment rolls if they wish to have them on the tax rolls next year and it is recommended that the , assessirent rolls as prepared be adopted. I believe the 219 assessment 0 for property owners on Mississippi Drive recognizes the fact that the street has not lived up to its original standards. The 509 assessment proposed for Oakwood Industrial Park is also a fair allocation and there would also be justification for even having a higher percentage attributable to the property owners. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copies of resolutions and copy of assessment rolls for each project. R£SOLUT16N an_ RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT RO:.L WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passes upon all objections to the proposed assessment for improvement of Mississippi Drive between East County Rd. 39 6 its termination point with bituminous surfacing and under drain system, and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notices duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all ogjections to th proposed assessment for improvement of Thomas Park Drive, Chelsea Rd. (from Oakwood Drive to Fallon Ave.), and Dundas Rd. (from Oakwood Drive to Fallon Ave.) with bituminous overlay. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessments, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included and hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1991, and shall bear interest at the rate of 8.15 percent annum from the date of the adoption of this assesstrent resolut.on. To the first i^4.l.g:en. ^gall ...,^ added inte:est on the entire assessment for the date of this resolution until December 31, 1990. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of his resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment retraining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment trust be trade before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment of the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessmnents shall be collected and paid over in the same mranner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the Council this 14th day of October, 1989. Ken Maus, Mayor T Rick Woltsteller City Administrator C IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-03 OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR PID 8 NAME ..homas Park 155-038-001010 Pat Townsend 155-038-001020 MacArlund, Inc. 155-038-001030 MacArlund, Inc. 155-038-001070 Thomas Schany c/o Northdale Construction 155-038-001080 Thomas Schany c/o Northdale Construction 155-038-001090 MacArlund, Inc. 155-038-001100 Thomas Schany c/o Northdale Cunstructiun 155-038-001110 Skoglund Coimnunication Oakwood Industrial Park 155-018-001011 Monticello LOT Roller Rink 155-018-001012 Joyner Lanes 155-018-001021 Hermes Investment 2 c/o Ralph Hermes 155-018-001020 Joyner Lane 155-018-001031 wCSB 155-018-001030 SMA Elevator 155-018-001040 Oakwood Ptnr. 155-018-001041 O. Dale Larson 155-018-001050 City of Monti. 155-018-001060 Oakwood Ptnr. LOT BLOCK ASMI. AMT. 1 1 $ 681.11 2 1 $ 625.98 3 1 $ 625.98 7 1 $ 625.98 8 1 S 625.98 9 1 $ 625.98 10 1 $ 625.98 11 1 S 417.32 $ 4,854.31 N 1/2 - 1 1 $ 1,067.46 S 1/2 - 1 1 $ 1,276.12 N 1/2 - 2 1 $ 1,502.35 S 1/2 - 2 1 $ 1,502.35 N 1/2 - 3 1 $ 1,085.03 S 1/2 - 3 1 $ 1,251.96 N 1/2 - 4 1 $ 1,251.96 S 1/2 - 4 1 $ 1,251.96 5 1 $ 2,211.80 6 1 $ 2,467.95 $14,868.94 Z s❑ C IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-03 OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR PAGE 2 PID $ NAME LAT BLOCK ASMT. AMT. Oakwood Industrial Park continued 155-018-002012 Simonson Luuber W 1/2 - 1 2 $ 1,333.50 155-018-002011 Darryle Anderson E 1/2 - 1 2 $ 1,383.42 155-018-002020 State of Minnesota 2 2 $ 2,170.06 155-018-002030 Oakwood Ptnr. W Part 3 2 $ 1,706.46 155-018-002031 Wayne Labeau E Part 3 2 $ 1,339.97 155-018-002040 Oakwood Ptnr. 4 2 $ 1,544.08 155-018-002050 Clow Leasing 5 2 $ 1,288.52 155-018-002060 Oakwood Ptnr. 6 2 $ 1,502.35 155-018-002070 Oakwood Ptnr. 7 2 $ 1,502.35 155-018-002080 Oakwood Ptnr. 8 2 $ 1,794.48 155-018-002110 NAWCO Minnesota 11 2 $ 1,460.62 155-018-002120 NAWCo Minnesota 12 2 S 1,593.83 $18,619.64 155-018-003010 Oakwood Ptnr. 1 3 S 1,636.23 155-018-003020 Oakwood Ptnr. 2 3 $ 1,251.96 155-018-003010 Oakwood Ptnr. 3 3 $ 1,251.96 155-018-003041 NSP W. Part 4 3 $ 901.41 155-018-003040 City of Monti. E. Part 4 3 S 893.06 155-018-003050 Monticello FOIA 5 3 $ 1,794.48 155-018-003060 Ron 6 Dee Johnson 6 3 $ 1,502.35 155-018-003071 Jay Morrell 6 7 3 $ 1,502.35 John Plaisted $10,733.80 E� 1 t c IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-03 OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR PAGE 3 PID # NAME LOT BLOCK ASMT. AMP. Dundas Circle City of Monti. 1 1 $ 1,204.64 City of Monti. 6 1 $ 1,399.44 S 2,604.08 TOTAL, OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR $51,680.77 (ED D t C IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-02 MISSISSIPPI DRIVE PID @ NAME LOT BLOCK ASMI. AMT. Hoglund Addition 155-014-001010 Troy Chaplin W - 1 1 $ 573.02 155-011-000011 Ahmad Nakib E - 1 1 S 491.44 155-014-001020 Bruce Neiger 2 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001030 Edna Griefnow 3 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001040 Floriano Brion 4 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001050 Wallace Jensen 5 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001060 Donald Lundquist 6 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001070 Thomas Tabor 7 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001080 Tom St. Hilaire 8 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001090 Bob Rohland 9 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001100 Victor Hellinan 10 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001110 William Johnson 11 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001120 William Bellach 12 1 $ 491.44 155-014-001130 Ron Adkins 13 1 $ 491.44 $ 6,961.74 155-014-002010 James Lawrence 1 2 $ 507.90 155-014-002020 Ron Hackenimieller 2 2 S 491.44 155-014-002030 Jeff Wallace 3 2 $ 491.44 155-014-002040 Bradley Barger 4 2 $ 491.44 155-014-002050 Gary Gault 5 2 $ 517.78 S 2,500.00 4�L J IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-02 MISSISSIPPI DRIVE PAGE 2 PID $ NAME LOT BLOCK ASMf AMT. 155-014-003010 Kevin Boynton 1 3 $ 589.73 155-014-003020 Leslie Strong 2 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003030 Dennis Taylor 3 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003040 Alfred Kiel 4 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003050 David Partridge 5 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003060 Robert Graham 6 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003070 Hans Cary 7 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003080 Robert Graham 8 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003090 Melvin Monjeau 9 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003100 Robert Graham 10 3 S 491.44 `-01403110 MI'Sha `Ic:iccn 11 ? g 401,44 155-014-003120 Barthel Const. 12 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003130 City of Monti. 13 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003140 City of Monti. 14 3 $ 495.27 155-014-003150 Gladys Hoglund 15 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003160 Gladys Hoglund 16 3 S 491.44 155-014-003170 Gladys Hoglund 17 3 $ 491.44 155-014-003180 Gladys Hoglund 18 3 $ 638.23 $ 9,094.83 C TOTAL MISSISSIPPI DRIVE $18,556.56 OD Council Agenda - 10/10/89 5. Public hearing on proposed assessment roll for delinquent charges. AND 7. Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for the certification with the County Auditor covering delinquent charges. (R.W11 A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Annually, the City Council is asked to adopt an assessment roll for those accounts which are delinquent (aimunt is over 60 days past due) on the assessment roll to be certified to the County Auditor for collection the following year with the real estate taxes. Minnesota statutes allow for special assessments to be collected for various types of current services that are delinquent. Those people whose accounts are delinquent have been notified of the public hearing tonight and are given an opportunity to present input if they so desire. It is recommended that the delinquent accounts be put on an assessment roll for certification in 1990 at an interest rate of 88. As in the past, if any of the accounts are paid by the time the assessment roll has to be delivered to the County Auditor, they will be removed from the assessment roll. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the assessment roll for delinquent charges as presented. 2. Do not adopt the assessment roll. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: it is recoimnended that any individual who has not paid their account in full by October 15, 1989, be certified to the County Auditor for collection with next year's taxes. Numerous bills have been sent to these individuals and a public hearing notice has been issued advising them of this last opportunity. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of resolution adopting assessment roll and coirplete listing of delinquent sewer and water accounts and other service charge accounts. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City of Monticello City Council on October 10, 1989, at 7:00 PM in the Monticello City Hall to consider the following matter: Consideration of adoption of an assessment roll on delinquent accounts pursuant to Monticello Ordinance Sections 7-2-21 and 7-3-3 (C) , Minnesota Statute 429.101, and Minnesota Statute 444.075. A copy of the assessment roll is on file at the Monticello City Hall and may be reviewed during normal business hours. Written and oral testiimny will he accepted on the above subject and all persons desiring to be heard on referenced subject will be heard at this meeting. The following accounts are included in this notice: MOWING: 106.52 Ham, Thomas Holker, Richard 42.38 (3 lots) Longley, Wi l l lain 25.00 " Jonsson, Al ice 25.00 93.88 Graham, Robert 258.20 (3 lots) TREE AND BRUSH REMOVAL: Kleindl, John 94.87 Hanson, Robert 177.63 Christian, Ernie-dba Ernie's Bait Begin, Ron 176.75 90.90 Carlson, Richard 353.50 Hohetool, Dick MISCELLANEOUS RECEIVABLES: Ltlja, John 30.06 Fair's Garden Center 468.65 (water meter) B -Clean Laundry (Wayne Bachler) 256.47 (curb repair) Century 21 Bane Key 5.10 (ascot search) WATER S SDiER HOOKUPS: Peters, Jerry 495.30 Blonigen, Patric 390.00 Anderson, Charles 320.00 Stokes, Doug 320.00 UTILITY BILLINGS: Rice, Dick 106.52 Ham, Thomas 33.92 Straw, Darwin 41.61 Barthal, Jerry 24.58 " 70.08 Sanplea on Broadway 93.88 Sonsteby, Randy 37.66 Bollne, Albert 148.72 Kleindl, John 94.87 Downtown Standard, c/o Don Crewe 940.04 Christian, Ernie-dba Ernie's Bait 167.23 Mengeltoch, Lawrence 90.90 Ludders, Earle 37.66 Hohetool, Dick 28.32 Ltlja, John 30.06 Rowan, Kathleen 118.74 C Anderson, David A. 73.09 Hanson, Robert 24.58 Pratt, Larry 47.42 Seig, Guy 60.50 McCarty, Clarence 262.96 B -Clean Laundry, c/o Wayne Bachler 18.24 Johnson, James E 56.12 Cole, Richard 73.56 Agosto, James 130.00 Maas, Christopher 129.60 Reinking, Ronald 75.97 Cox, Wayne 131.90 Born, John 46.18 Weinhold, Karen 85.29 James, Duane 131.62 Heikes, Don (Westside Park) 43.39 " 18.64 " 105.76 " 18.64 " 54.63 Stokes, Judy 93.76 Hahn, Earl 54.90 [arson, Leland 116.84 Christopherson, Burnette 177.92 Schumacher, Dan 150.04 Robinson, Michael 101.29 Mitchell, Kent 51.03 Fisette, Kim/Wright County State Bank 77.65 Kraemer, nark 130.62 Daniels, Ted 77.65 Seig, Stephen 29.43 Ditty, Diane 36.00 Peterson, Michael 119.32 Walter, Ivan 82.75 Johnson, James 72.28 Drahota, Margaret 145.57 Burandt, Mark 18.64 Olson, Brian 32.18 Cellette, James 56.72 Preusse, James 83.06 Torell, Luke 178.88 Hanson, John 30.06 Karanda, Lloyd 106.31 " 2.00 Maus, Ken 6 Gary DeBoer 55.96 Kaiserlik, Jiimay 60.75 Maus, Gregg 20.55 Lange, Woodrow 57.00 Hoglund, Heikes 6 Carter (Curt Hoglund) 77.63 Strong, Leslie 97.60 Boynton, Kevin 78.38 Barter, Michael 162.74 Robinson, Joan 81.47 Rising, Michael 121.75 Van Schaick, Donald 72.54 Poplin, David 85.10 Michael Cyr Construction 71.92 Silver Fox Inn 1403.17 Amunt No. —R 3 Owner's Name: Reuter, if MW. - j Address: TAtv Meter current Water Sewer Total Deis Aimount Late 1% Fin. — Memo Date Reading Cmuumed Water Chg. Tax Charge Current m Paid Penalty chp. Bahme 7 A17 Is _u L P 7- 1 7-- iftft— 2AO 71 is 117 7S 1-0-h 57 it , ?I � 1- 1, 41 -LA jo �-V Aj P z ae v 2/ Z7 Y'P /1w f3' 47 /[. /.;C- V-4 4, * Gd 1g .1 ! v 4'( .7 -',), !LL --'U /ale AID ryi q 0 w 0 .2 '3 Oro c 3 TJ 17 P7 .77 Jq 4,f s ao A aur rAcd RESOL(frtr),,' °^- RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROL„ WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for delinquent sewer and water billings and other service charges. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the parcels named herein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in one (1) annual installment payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1991, and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1990. 3. The owner of the property so assessed, may, at any time prior to certification cf the ;�csoaaironr to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution. 4. The City Administrator shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to the county hudituc Lo be extended on the proper tax list of the County, and such assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the City Council this 10th day of October, 1989. City Administrntor A Mayor (0 8. This is a quick memo intended to supplement the information provided by Gary Anderson. (J.4.) Brad Fyle requests a lot split and a conditional use permit which would allow operation of a fourplex on one of the lots. Simply put, the two requests are mutually exclusive. if Fyle wishes to split his lot he may do so based on previous precedent, however, if he does split the lot, there is not nearly enough room left over for a fourplex. Thus Pyle must choose, does he want a lot subdivision or a fourplex. Fyle owns a rental home which is situated on part of two city lots. Pyle proposes to create an additional buildable lot by reorienting his interior lot line 184 degrees. This type of subdivision request is not uncommon and has been granted on previous occassions. Under this scenerio, Pyle needs a variance to the minimum lot size requirement (12,000 sq ft) in order to subdivide the lot as requested. Again, precedent says that this request should be approved. Planning Commission approved the subdivison request and included conditions as outlined in Gary's memo. Planning Commnission was not in favor of the development of a fourplex on the lot remaining as the lot area is far less than the area requiered by ordinance. According to the Planning Commnission, the fourplex should not be permitted as proposed as such a development is not not consistent with the character of the neighborhood, inconsistent with comprehensive plan, may contribute toward a reduction in adjoining land values, etc. ..^^i: ^y C -aissiou JW uvc act un any request for a conditional use permit for fourplex without the subdivision. it is my understaning that Pyle will opt for the subdivision rather than the fourplex if given the choice. if Pyle chooses the fourplex, it is suggested that the parking be moved to the emrpty lot with extensive landscaping required. C4 City Council Agenda 10/10/89 g, A simple subdivision request to allow 2 R-2 (single and two family residential) lots to be resubdivided into 2 residential lots. A conditional use request to allow a 4-plex in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. A variance request to allow a resubdivided lot to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the existing residential structure to be converted into a 4-plex. Applicant, Brad and Cindy Pyle. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. Simple subdivision request. Brad and Cindy Fyle are proposing to resubdivide two existing inner city existing platted lots into two new lots with the same configuration having the same amount of lot square footage except they would have additional lot frontage and less lot depth than the current lots as they are platted. It is not uncoimnon to find inner city lots of this nature which can be resubdivided the other way to meet the minimum requirements of the ordinance with the exception of the minirmim lot square footage that is required, 12,000 sq. ft. today, where when these lots were platted they only needed 10,890 sq. ft., or 10,000 sq. ft. was the requirement. The property listed as Parcel A and Parcel B do have the minimum drainage and utility easements that we do have by r,day'c M- - .:anis, trsidentidl iota when tnese are platted having these recorded with them. The Fyles have no objection to drainage and utility easements being placed on Parcel A and Parcel B and have them recorded if such subdivision is approved. There are three possible conditions that would be considered subject to the approval of this request. They are as follows: 1. The parcel, if approved, be recorded within 30 days after the Octobar (Ott. City Council doting. 2. The drainage and utility easements be drawn up on a separate recordable document to be recorded along with the recording of this simple subdivision. 3. The Parcel A, which is the northerly one half of these 2 existing lots 3 6 4 of Block 39, original plat addition in the city of Monticello are not served by a water and sewer service into this Parcel A. The condition should be that the owner and/or buyer are made aware that a document be recorded that states that the City is not responsible for providing a water and sewer service up to the property line for Parcel A. The Monticello Planning Comnission approved the simple subdivision request with the three conditions as listed above and attached two additional conditions. They are as follows: 1. The existing house on Parcel B and the prospective house to be built on Parcel A to be single family only. 2. The existing deck on the north side of the house on Parcel B, the portion of the deck which lies within 10' of the lot line between Parcel A and Parcel 0 be removed prior to simple subdivision recording. w L City Council Agenda 10/10/89 Conditional use request. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. Ccanpletely disregarding the simple subdivision at this time, and we are only considering a conditional use for this site, we are dealing with two platted lots of record which are the lot by description and by actual measurement is 132 .71 ft. of lot frontage by 166.36 ft. of lot depth, with the total square footage accuinulating to be 22,077 sq. ft. .The minimam required lot square footage ,for a 4-plex would be 10,000 sq. £t. for the first unit, 3,000 sq. ft. for each additional two bedrooia unit, and 2,000 sq. ft. of lot area for each addition one bedroom unit. So the total aimunt of square footage that would be needed for a 4—plex as the Pyles are proposing to renovate the existing structure to accomodate would be 19,000 total square foot of land area, with approximately 3,077 sq. ft. of land area left over the minimum requirement of lot that is needed. As shown on the enclosed site plan the Pyles have indicated where they would provide additional off street parking space to accomodate the minimum number which are required per unit. The Pyles are showing 6 residential off street parking spaces, of which two would be within the existing garage. They have also showed an option for additional parking spaces which could be Created. However, we are suggesting that they not be created, so that we leave as inuch green area in this project, if it so be approved. The proposed parking spaces are no different then .`hat -o find within our exieUny residential structures in this area or In new developments in that their direct access out of their garage or out of their parking space is out into a public street which serves the property. Variance request. The reason that you see a variance request tagging along with their siiiple subdivision and conditional use request is that the Pyles have done a considerable arount of research before pureha.;irg this properLy acid are looking at all possible options to accoirplish the beat of all worlds. If Parcel 8 was allowed to be split off from the total lots 4 6 5 we would have a parcel in lot D being less than the minimum 19,000 sq. ft, of lot area that is required. It would have approximately 11,000 sq. ft. of lot area if it was subdivided, therefore requiring the miniinum lot square footage variance as requested. The same is true in Parcel A if it is allowed to be split off it would be less than the minimum lot square footage that is required today by ordinance and that is 12,000 eq. ft. of lot area where the lot has approximately 11,038 sq. £t. of lot area in Parcel A also. The ultimate request of the Pyles is to be allowed to have a 4-plex on Parcel B and to subdivide off Parcel A for a single family residential lot. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS; SitVie subdivision request. Approve the simple subdivision request to allow 2 R-2 (single and two family residential) zone lots to be resubdivided into 2 residential lots, with the following conditions: City Council Agenda 10/10/89 a. The recording of this simple subdivision be done within 30 days after the October 10th City Council ineeting. b. The drainage and utility easements around parcels A 6 B, as indicated on the certificate of survey, be recorded on a separate document within 30 days after the October 10, 1989 City Council meeting. c. The owner/buyer of parcel A acknowledge that the city of Monticello is not responsible for the installation of a water and sewer utility stub up to the property line, and that this be recorded within 30 days of October 10, 1989 City Council meeting. 2. Deny siinple subdivision request to allow 2 R-2 (single and two family residential) lots to be resubdivided into 2 residential lots. Conditional use request. 1. Approve the conditional use request to allow a 4-plex in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. 2. Deny the conditional use request to allow a 4-plex in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. variance request. Approve the variance request to allow a resubdivided lot (Parcel B) to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the existing residential structure to be converted into a 4-plex. To approve the variance request to allow a resubdivided lot (Parcel A) to have less than the miniimun lot square footage to allow the construction of a single family residence on it. 2. Deny the variance request to allow a resubdivided lot (Parcel B) to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the existing residential atructure to be converted into a 4-plex. Deny the variance request to allow a resubdivided lot (Parcel A) to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the construction of a single family residence on it. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As you can see, there are two separate issues being requested, one being a simple subdivision request which will require a variance, and the second being a conditional use request also requiring a variance. In regards to the simple subdivision request, the Planning Comission and City Oouncil have in the past approved similar typo requests when the replatting of two existing lots into a different direction does not alter the square footage of each lot. The City staff would recomend approval of the aixple subdivision request and the resulting variance that is needed since the lot would be less than our current minimum standards provided the existing structure does not require any additional variances as far as setback distances are concerned. This recoimnendation is also subject to the three conditions listed above for a simple subdivision requirement. City Council Agenda 10/10/89 In regards to the second request, if the siurple subdivision above is approved, the staff recomanends denial of the conditional use request to allow a 4—plex on the rernaining newly created parcel. with the simple subdivision approval, the lot size for the requested 4—plex would only be 11,038 square feet, 7,962 square feet short of the rninirmrrn 19,000 square feet required for a 4—plex. It would appear that the variance requested on the square footage requirement is far too excessive and with a simple subdivision, the existing dwelling should not contain more than two family units. If, on the other hand, the Pyles would prefer to convert the existing dwelling into a 4—plex rather than have an extra lot available for sale, the staff could support the creation of a 4-plex provided that all of the existing property remains intact in one parcel. In other words, if the applicant desires to have an extra lot for sale, the existing house should only be allowed to be a single family or a duplex; but if the applicant would rather have a 4-plex, then the simple subdivision should not be approved. In addition, granting a conditional use permit for a 4—plex and requiring the two lots to remain as one lot of record, sufficient land would be available for meeting the minivann parking requirements of our ordinance. As indicated previously, a 4-plex does require eight off—street parking spaces that are supposed to be hard surfaced, which this additional land area could be utilized for if necessary. C D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the location of the proposed simple subdivision, conditional use and variance requests. Copy of the site plan for the proposed simple subdivision, conditional use and variance requests. Copy of the certificate of survey for the simple subdivsion, conditional use and variance requests. Copy of the ordinance section on minimum lot square footage requirements. Copy of signed petition by abutting property owners objecting to these variance requests. Copy of a letter from residential property owner John Lilja. Copy of the variance request form. 4 Ir All wo Jill A •imyie aubdiv a Dt io 4IL6w t (m Is and t �'c 60 p cosubdLvided , I vn 'eiiden Lqkl,�6i 'le lit' a reque 1x :;.. p A conditional 1iou a r ;%4 a . . X—OT—AT L n an R-2 Win to and two f 'climidenoal) zonqtw%_ Ow No.ra dad nw 3. t I" " to a the sin go ebast identLe a c vto( -Onveivited 40f ur PAM 7-1 19- C= ra.a...oNa Isla 374-5475 JOHN B. LIUA Ow.,mao P -11c •c-- 2017 GIRARD �ENUE 50UTM -NNE POLIS, MINNESO" 55405 October 1, 1989 Planning Commission City of Monticello Inasmuch as we are unable to attend the public hearing to be held on October 3, 1989 concerning a request for a variance involving Block 39, Lots 4 .f 5, please consider the following as written testimony. The undersigned are owners of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Block 28, immediately across nest Third Street from Block 39. We do not support the variance request at this time because we do not wish to encourage more residential or traffic density in the area. We also believe that if the City believes that the proposed uzc iz dca ^blc, then :he entire area, including our block, should be rezoned. de do not support spot rezoning of specific properties. Thank you for considering our testimony. DYours truly, John B. Lilja for John B. a Dorothy C. Lilja and Dorothy B. Lilja September 28, 1989 Dear Planning Commission Members, City Council Members and City Staff: The attached item will be on the next Planning Commission agenda and we as abutting property owners have signed a petition against this variance and conditional use request. Mr. Fyle has already purchased this property, had it surveyed and has signs up advertising apartments for rent and a lot for sale. How can this be done without this item coming before the Planning Commission first? If these requests are granted to Mr. Fyle, we as property owners feel that we should also be entitled to the same requests to do the same with our properties. This is not our intent, though, we want this property to stay as it has been in the past and the ordinances to be upheld. Thank you for your time and consideration. C 0 C We, the undersigned as neighbors and property owners, are against the following variance request: A simple subdivision to allow two R-2 (single and two family residential) zone lots to be resubdivided into two residential lots. A conditional use request to allow a four-plex in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. A variance request to allow a resubdivided lot to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the existing residential structure to be converted into a four-plex. Location is Block 39, Lots 4 b 5, original Plat Addition in the city of Monticello. Applicant: Brad and Cindy Fyle. This area is zoned as a single and two family residential area. We do not feel a variance should be granted for a four-plex because it it is not zoned for a four-plex nor does it meet the necessary requirements needed for a four-plex. We are strongly against this variance request and sincerely hope that as Planning Commission members and Council Members you will uphold the city ordinances and deny this request. We have nothing against the property owner keeping the property as a single and two family residential property as it has been in the past. 9,1 j -Z ,c.j�C��,.�as�d We, the undersigned as neighbors and property owners, are against the following variance request: A simple subdivision to allow two R-2 (single and two family residential) zone lots to be resubdivided into two residential lots. A conditional use request to allow a Four -plea in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. A variance request to allow a resubdivided lot to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the existing residential structure to be converted into a four-plex. Location is Block 39, Lots 4 b 5, Original Plat Addition in the city of Monticello. Applicant: Brad and Cindy Fyle. This area is zoned as a single and two family residential area. We do not feel a variance should be granted for a four-plex because it it is not zoned for a four-plex nor does it meet the necessary requirements needed for a four-plex. We are strongly against Chia variance request and sincerely hope that as Planning Commission members and Council Members you will uphold the city ordinances and deny this request. We have nothing against the property owner keeping the property as a single and two family residential property as it: has been in the past. 1. Clottea lint pole and w --6- 2. _a. 2. Recreational equipment and vehicles. ll , 3. Conatrlction and landscaping material currently being need on the premises. 4. OPS-strtet parking of passenger vehicles and tarts not exceeding a gross capacity of nine thousand (9,000) pounds in residential areas. 5. propane tanks, fuel oil tanks, and other aicilar residantiai heating fuel storage, tanks which do not exceed 1,000 gallons in capacity and shall not be located within five (5) feet of any property line. 6. good piles in which wood is stored for fuel provided that not care than 10 cords shall be stored on any property. A cord shall be 4' x 4' x 8'- .111 wood piles shall be five (5) feet or cars frog rear and side yard property lines and shall be stored behind the appropriate set back line in front yards. 7. solar basting systams. 3-1: Y*z RLgolRSfO:.`M.S. (A} PURPOSE: This section identifies minimum yard spaces and arosa to be provided for is each zoning district. [Dj No lot, yard or other open ,para shall be reduced in area or dimsnsicn so as to make such lot, yard or open space less than the Ainizue requirad by this Ordnance. and if the existing yard or otter open space as existing is less than the minicum required it shall not be, fnrthar reduced. Jo required open spars provided around any building or st-acture shall be included as a par: of any open space required for a=thar et:lcturo. (CI All setback distances, as listed in the table below, shall be *assured from the appropriate lot ine, and shall be required *ini*aa distences. front Yazd side Yard Rear Yard A-0 50 30 50 E-1 30 /0 30 4-' I�10 ---- � R-3 30 20 30 R-4 30 30 30 P1. -a tee Chapter 10 for specific regulations. sC-n sae Chapter 10 for Specific regulations. 8-1 30 15 20 11-2 30 10 20 Q In addition, each condominium unit shall have the minimum lot area for the type of housing unit and usable open space as specified in the Area and Building Size Regulations of this Ordinance. Such Lot areas may be contolled by an individual or joint ownership. (P] In residential districts, where the adjacent et_-ucturee exceed the minimum setbacks established in Subsection (C] above, the minimum setback shall be thirty (30) feet plus two-thirds (2/3) of the difference: between thirty (30) feet and the setback or average setback of adjacent structures within the same block. 3-4: AREA AND SUILDINO SIZE REGULATIONS: (A] PURPOSE: This section identifies minimum area and building size requiramonts to be provided in each zoning district as Listed in the table below. DISTRICT LOT AREA LOT W=TB HUILDIM HEIGHT A-0 2 acres 200 N/A C R-1 12,000 80 2y R-2 12,000 BO 24 R-3 10,000 60 t R-4 48,000 200 1 PZ -R 12,000 80 2y PZ -M 12,000 80 2 0-1 9,000 So 2 8-2 N/A 100 2 3-3 N/A 100 2 E-4 N/A WA 3 1-1 20,000 100 2 1-2 30,000 100 2 1. The building height limitation in an R-3. PZ -M, 8-1, 3-2. 3-3, 5-4, I-1, and I-2 coning dist icts shall be two (2) stories. 2. In zoning districts R-3, PZ -N, 3-1, 8-2. 8-3, 8-4, I-1, and 1-2. A (3) three story building may be allowed u conditional use contingent Upon strict application of a requirwnt that fire-utlnquishing systess be installed throughout the building. (RLQUktU d Undd. O=t wt peaAit based upon paocedwtu std &OVA in dnd +eegutattd by Chapteot t2 o6 this o4d4nancel. I (e] LOT AREA PER UNIT: Single Fgpn11v 12.000 square Peet Two -Family 6,000 square feet Townhouse 5,000 square Peet Mobile Some 4,000 square Leet L multiple Family 10,6UU square Yeet for first unit plus 2,000 sq. ft. for-. each additional one bedroom unit, plus 3,000 sq. ft. for each additianel two bedroam unit. Elderly Housing , square feet (The Lot aaea pea unit aequiaement boa toumhoueea, condominimume and planned unit deveCopm nth ahaU be caLeltated on the baa.ia oS the totaP anea in the paoject and as contaotZed by an indi.viduat and joint owneaahip). (C] UTILITY TRANSITION AREAS: All areas in which sewer is not currently available shall be designated as Utility Transition Areas. The minimum lot area of any platted lot in such areas shall be two and one-half (2y) acres. Any lot platted according to the provisions of this subdivisl,in, may be repiattad provided that public sanitary sewer will be made available and all conditions and provisions of this Ordinance are met. (a) USEABLE OPEN SPACE: Each multiple family dwelling site shall contain at least five hundred (500) square feat of useable open space as defined in Chapter 2 of this Ordinance for each dwelling unit contained, therson. (E] EXCLPTIONS: The building height limits established herein for districts shall not apply to the following: 1. Belfries 2. Chimneys or flues 3. Church spires 4. Cooling towers 5. Cupolas and domes which do not contain useable space. 5. Elevator penthouses 7. flag poles B. monuments 8. Parapet walls extending not more than three (3) feet above the limiting height of the building 10. water cowers I 11. Poles, toners and other structures for essential 12. Necessary machan?cal and electrical appurtenances 13. Television and radio antennas not exceeding twenty ( 20) feet above roof. 14. Wind electrical generators (P) No excluded roof e4ulptment or structural element extending beyond the limited height of a building may occupy more than twenty -live (25 ) percent of the area of such roof not to exceed ten ( 10) feet unlesa otherwise noted. (G] MINIMUM FLOOR AREA PER DWELLING UNIT: 1. ONE AND/OR TWO FAMILY DWELL -=3 AND TOWNHOUSES: The miniaua floor area for such type buildings shall -zeas follow: (a) One Star/ Dwelling - 960 square feet. (b) Two Story Dwelling - 750 square feet per story. (c) E%CEPTION: The mutitmue aguaae 600tage o6 a one atony buifdinq t may be Reduced. to Bbd equate beet i6 a ga•tage i.a added with at Ltaat 336 equate Sett. In no we, howevea, ahatl the minimum dimem on o6 Lhat gatage be Wa than 14 beet. 2. MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS: Except for elderly housing, living unite classified as multiple dwellings shall have the following minicnim floor areas per unit: (a) Efficiency Unita $00 acuare feetL_ (b) One Bedroom Units lOrs sq--, fee (c) Twi-.'..:G ' llh-ofast_ (d) More Then Two Bedroom Un a -An additional 100 square toot for each additional bedroom 3. ELDERLY (SENIOR CITIZEN) HOUSING: Living units classified as elderly (senior citizen) housing units shall have the following minimum floor areas per unit: (a) Efficiency Unita 440 Square fast (b) One Bedroom 52M Snuar• fest VART-NCE RE^,UEST FOORM/(See chatter 22 cz Zoning Ordinance) APPL[CANT:�i�}C�.1[-yLP DATE F.LEgD:__l/PleY ___FEE: SO.CCJ APPLICANTS ADDRESS�-�//, 7iI��"OA�"PHONE: HM's LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT_y ±5 _BLOCK 3SUBDIIVISION %� q;.41 / DESCRIBE VARIANCE REQUEST: 7�y1�SS�i�AN��i!�C2+/U�✓/ CURRENTLY ZONED: jt -_g_ VARIANCE TO _ SECTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE Describe any/applicablle precedents: / / %IAP- ��Or-r l/ze- i)°l- A-,Z","f, DEFINITION OF ALLEGED HARDSHIP: what are the unique circurtr;tances associated With the lot that create exceptional difficulties when utilizing lot in manner customary and legally pormissable? — � p S• e .4� P �f.�Ar �O � f/!9 / i.�/s,lP D,t��lt�/I.°.v i/1n5�—/Q�AlP f��f will approval of this variance impair the intent of the ordinanco to the extent that a zoning ordinance amendment might be more appropriate? YES - NO PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING: DATE: 1Q��— PLNG COMM. FINDING WILL APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST: A. IMPAIR AOEOUATE SUPPLY OF LIGHT AND AIR TO ADJACENT PROPERTY] YES B. CREATE AN UNREASONABLE INCREASE THE CONGESTION IN THE PUBLIC STREET? YE2 C. INCREASE THE DANGER OF F;RE OR ENDANGER THE PUBLIC SAFETY] YES -IKM D. UNREASONABLY DIMINISH PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN NEIGHBORHOOV YES E. BE CONTRARY TO THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE? YES COMMENTS REGARDING PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING: ee REPORT COUNCIL FINDING IF PLANNING CCMMISSICN OECISICN IS APPEALED: APPEAL DATE: ----- -- -- COMMENTS: City Council Agenda 10/10/89 A variance request to allow an attached garage to be constructed within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant: Lawrence and Lynn Gantner. JG.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. The Gantners are proposing to be allowed to construct an attached garage within the front yard setback requirement. The proposed garage addition could so be constructed on their property to not require a variance request in that they could go with the same roof configuration as the existing house is and still construct a garage within the minimum setback requirements. The houses, for approximately one and a half blocks on this side of the street, were built in a very similar nature, being simple two bedroom split entry homes. There is very little change other than colors painted to offset the style of house that was chosen for this area. The Gantners are proposing to encroach 2' into the front yard setback to allow for the construction of a roof line contrasting to the existing roof line of this and other houses in the area. The method that the Gantners haves chosen is more expensive than the traditional attached garage with the same roof line that the existing house has on it. D. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the variance request to allow an attached garage to be constructed within the front yard setback requirement. 2. Deny the variance request to allow an attached garage to be constructed within the front yard setback requirement. C. STAFF REC0I41F.NDATION: City staff recoimnends denial of the variance request to allow this garage to be constructed within the front yard setback requirement. Although the request for only two additional feet of front yard setback encroachment may appear appropriate, the eye appeal of the front view of this house and garage any appear appropriate, and the increased marketability of this home with an attached garage may appear appropriate, the City Staff fails to see any proof of hardship in which the applicant can clearly demonstrate. D. Supporting data. Copy of the location of proposed variance request. Copy of the site plan for the propsed variance request. Copy of the building setback requirements for R-1 single faintly residential zoning. ropy of the variance request form. C L A variance request to allow an attached garage to be constructed within the front yard setback requirement., {{ APPLICANT: Lawrance Gantnar • 't ----------------- , 1 j '•• 1 J ' L _ 1Cif1ITlj�j�plN f _ d 1. Clothes line pole and vire. 2. Recreational equipment and vehicles. 3. Const -ruction and landscaping material currently being used an the premises. 4. Off-street parking of passenger vehicles and trucks not exceeding a gross capacity of nine thousand (9,000) pcunds in residential areas. S. Prcpane tanks, fuel oil tanks, and other similar residential heating fuel storage tanks which do not exceed 1,000 gallons in capacity and shall not be located vithin five (5) fest of any property line. 6. good piles in which wood is stored for fuel provided that not more than 10 cords shall be stored on any property. A cord shall be 41 x 41 x B1. All wood piles shall be five (5) feet or more from rear and side yard prape_-ty lines and shall be stored behind the a;propriata sat back line in front yards. 7. Solar heating systaas. ]-]: YW REQOIRD RS: (A1 PURPOSZ: :his section identifies yard spaces and areas to be provided for in each Zoning district. (D7 No lot, yard or otter open space shat' be reduced in area or di --anion so as to make such lot, Yazd or open space lase than the min+.-.•^ required by this Ordinance, and if the existing yard or other open space as existing is less than the minimum required it shall not be further reduced. lb required open space provided around any building or stricture shall be included as a part of any open space required for another stacrara. (CI All setback distances, as listed in the table below, shall be measured from the appropriate lot line, and shall be required minimum distances. front Yard Side vats Rear Yard A-0 50 30 50 R-1 30 10 70 R-? 30 1n 30 A-3 30 20 30 A-3 30 30 30 P: -R nae Chapter 10 for specific regulations. P: -.y Sae Chapter 10 for specific regulations. 5-1 30 1S 20 1-: 30 10 20 r"�� VARIANCE RECUEST FOFd4 (See chapter 23 of Zoning Ordinance) APPLICANT: �n..4/410Z DATE FILED: FEE: /7 7"_ APPLICANTS ADDRESS: PHONE: HM WK LEGAL OESCRIPTICN: LOT BLOCK SUBDIVISION DESCRIBE VARIANCE REQUEST: CURRENTLY ZONED: VARIANCE TO &!14t cISECTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE Describe any applicable Precedents: 1idi� DEFINITION OF ALLEGED HARDSHIP: What are the unique circunstances associated with the lot that create exceptional difficulties whin utilizing lot in mercer customary and legally permissable7 / Will approval of this variance impair the intent of the ordinance to t extant that a zoning ordinance amendment might be more appropriate? CES NO PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGv - _ _ DATE: /d/3`dPLNG COMM. T FINDING WILL APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST: A. IMPAIR ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF LIGHT AND AIR TO ADJACENT PROPERTY? YES - B. CREATE AN UNREASONABLE INCREASE THE CONGESTION IN TWE PUBLIC STREET? YEj ,fir C. INCREASE THE DANGER OF FIRE OR ENDANGER THE PUBLIC SAFETY? YES -CND D. UNREASONABLY DIMINISH PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN NEIGHBOR140007 YES, E. BE CONTRARY TO THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE7 E�2 NO COMMENTS REGARDING PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING: �./11r1a4 1 l'i °,._I(a.SiLEt �,:c.- hJk',/��_ /JL11�4ia�iN+Ct.+/ _ r 1c�lzsiAak.L.c_ L1C•'i ' _ A°J.L�GIa .�1f, yUc 1� 1^i.j t;�s►f sc N� REPORT IL FINDING IF PLANNING COMMISSION OECISIW IS APPEALED: APPEAL DATE i CI LLJsl'�ill.�..��_ (i ��'--��1�=��!s.�_ r•.LLc!�_wuW. tiPl1r.N� F'♦VitlV (/ Council Agenda - io/t0/89 to. Consideration of petition from residents of Meadow Oak for improvements and maintenance of the Meadow Oak Park. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the first council meeting in September a petition was received from many of the Meadow Oak residents for 5 specific requests for the Meadow Oak Park. A copy of the petition is enclosed for your review. Items 1,2, and 4 request that the City give permission for the residents to utilize the existing pond for ice skating and as a hockey rink, to light the rink with switchable flood lights, and to remove snow as we do with other skating rinks. The pros and cons of establishing the pond as a skating facility are easily determined. The benefits of utilizing the existing pond are that it would be easy to establish the rink, and the only real maintenance required would be the cleaning of snow from the facility as well as the cost of establishing and maintaining lights. On the other hand, once the City does establish the pond as a skating facility, it must be monitored and properly signed to ensure safe use. There is always the danger that some youngsters may wander out on the ice before it is thick enough or in the spring when it begins melting or that some snow plowing equipment from the City may bust through the ice. The liability to the City could far outweigh any benefits such as less maintenance from flooding. If one were to weigh the costs, it may be more appropriate to establish an on -ground skating facility and flood it when needed. North Star Risk Services is in the process of sending a letter to us regarding pond skating. There will be a list of responsibilities for the Cicy and ways to limit or manage the risks. Item 13 has to do with lighting the playground structure with an on/off switch. It appears more appropriate at this time to light the park facility, and I have proposed that we install a minimum of 4 lights in the park, lighting not only the playground area, but providing some light along the pathway to a point on the west end where continuing the light system may conflict with proximity to the rear yards of some residential property. It would be proposed in this lighting plan that, if approved, two floodlights could be installed on the back of two poles to light either the skating area on a pond or skating area on the ground surface. I will have costs for this system available for Monday evening's meting. I have asked that the cost be broken down so that the trenching would be separate as requested by a resident representative from Meadow Oak. There is some feeling that residents of Meadow Oak could assist the City's contractor with the installation of the wiring. Item p 5 has to do with removing snow from the bike path. The bike path or trailway system not only runs in this park but also along the eastern portion or trio Meadow Oak plat. it would certainly be appropriate for the City of Monticello to clear snow from portions of the pathway if we established winter recreational facilities from that pathway. It may be more difficult, however, to remove snow from the pathway where it adjoins residential property, as it could be considered once of a sidewalk 1n that area. I 11 Council Agenda - Io/Io/89 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Instruct the Park Department to establish a skating rink in the Meadow Oak Park, either on the pond or on the ground surface as directed by City Council. In addition, this would include lighting the park with 4 lights and the skating area, with one or two floodlights, as necessary. This would also include cleaning of the snow necessary on the park pathway system from the parking lot to the skating area only. 2. Not to establish any skating facilities in the Meadow Oak Park, but to light the park with the 4 lights as shown on the enclosed plan. 3. Any other combination of the above, such as clearing the entire trailway system in Meadow Oak of snow and ice. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: As Public Works Director, I favor alternative ;1, and snore specifically establishing a skating facility on land rather than the pond. If the City Public Works Department was charged with monitoring the ice thickness and determining when it is safe to be on the ice in the fall or spring and sign it appropriately, we may misjudge the ice thickness or some other factor may enter into it that we could at sorne point be held negligent for. I would be in favor of establishing a skating facility on land and signing the pond "No ADMITTANCE". The Park Superintendant feels confident, however, that the risks of skating on the pond would be manageable and he is in favor of it. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of petition from Meadow Oak residents. Copy of the lighting plan. Copy of the estimated costs for lighting, if it arrives in time. 10 ,- M�ADo..I OM, PARK U�•'{CT N c—'loop �:. �-�--_ - ---_� � 2— 400 ►� � n'A !moi �" 10 ---_____ --; fir•+•.� ��•�_. __ `V!j!`i_�-rte 1 1 •` 7 i ' 1 ` � ' / 00 '1 ` -�. Dc 1 � I . •- r i .� • .�. .'IWi � -_ �._� 1.-=�.� �-a...-- �—� — _.:rs��=ice �•-�.,,:a.mfYi� - , r 240 West Oakwood Drive - Box 686 Monticello, MN 55362 (612) 295-2690 October 6, 1989 City Of Monticello 250 E. Bdwy. Monticello, MN 55362 Att'n: Roger or John RE: Pole Lighting Project Meadow Oaks Park Dear Sirs: We have surveyed the above referenced project and are pleased to submit our proposal in the amount of $5,700.00 (five thousand, seven hundred and 00/100). This proposal includes any necessary labor and material to complete the following: 1) Installation of four 30 ft. fibre poles with 15OW HPS fixtures on each. Location is as per attached map. 1800 linear feet between poles and panel. Each fixture has photo cells. 2) Installation of service on existing pole, for supplying power to poles. Options are as follows: #1 - Add GFI receptacle on each pole. . . . . Add $100.00 112 - Add two 40OW floods on two poles for lighting pond area . . . . . .Add $815.00 #3 - Copper wire in place of aluminum . . . . . Add $775.00 114 - Less trenching and burial .. Deduct $600.00 All work is guaranteed for a period of one year. We hope this proposal meets with your approval and that we may be of future service to you. Thank you. ACCEPTED BY: Very truly yours, TITLE: DATE: Wesley J. Olson, treasurer OLSON 6 SONS E LX RIC, INC. Mr. Rick wolfsteller City of Monticello March 6, 1989 Page Two CITY HALL: R-3-89 The exit lights should be reviewed on a periodic basis to make sure they are all in proper working order. It was noted at the time of survey that one exit light was not working. R-4-89 All exit doors should be kept clear of debris so the doors could be utilized in the event of an emergency. R-5-89 The occupancy/capacity of the council chambers should be determined and posted. Measures should be in place so that the occupancy/capacity of the room is not exceeded. FOURTH STREET PARK: R-6-89 The warming house facility should be equipped with noncombustible, self -extinguishing type waste cans. This eoulel cnnaiat of gelf.-extinnuishina "dome" type cans of metal or plastic construction. R-7-89 The City should post appropriate warning/rule signs appropriate to skaters in the rink areas. These signs usually separate hockey players from pleasure skaters, rule on the type of skates worn, and also indicate hours of operation. The City legal counsel should be contacted for the appropriate wording, placement and coloring of the signs, as well as additional rules/warnings to be included on the signs, or the City may consult with the LMCIT staff attorneys. R-8-89 The bearing on the tire swing should be appropriately shrouded to reduce the potential for injury to children's fingers. R-9-89 Consideration should be given to the City for adult supervision of the rink areae, at least during periods of peal: use. C L41 Council Agenda - 10/10/99 11. Consideration of modification of street lighting policy to include lighting cul-de-sacs and/or dead end streets. (i.s.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: A number of citizens have expressed interest in the city modifying its lighting policy to include lighting of cul-de-sacs and/or dead end streets. There are currently 20 existing cul-de-sacs in the city of Monticello and three additional ones planned in the near future, for a total of 23. In addition, we have approximately 9 dead end or semi dead end streets in the community. To light all of the cul-de-sacs and dead end streets in Monticello would require an additional 32 street lights. Currently the city in most instances uses NSP installed lights ranging from 100 to 150 watts. The current cost for these lights are $160.80 per year for 100 watt, and $178.80 per year for 150 watts. These rental fees include the pole, fixture, wiring, installation and ongoing maintenance. In most instances NSP has power located close enough so that there would be no accessory charges for inaccessibility to power. Consequently, to light the 23 cul-de-sacs with 150 watt high pressure sodium lights would cost $4,112.40 annually. 4b light the remaining 9 dead end streets would cost $1,447.20 annually for a total of $5,559.60. In discussing the lighting of cul -de -sate with Northern States Power they have indicated that cities such as Buffalo, Albertville, and St. Cloud currently light cul -de -sate. When new subdivisions are installed the underground wire is put in each cul-de-sac for the installation of a light at a later date. So1ne conaunities install the lights timnodiately upon street construction, others wait until the property begins to develop. Typically, the lights are put in on a single unit basis and not as a residential lighting project wired separately to a single source point, wiring the units together only clutters up the boulevard with additional wiring and only would be required if the city required developers to install lighting in new developmento and pay for same. If this were done in the future there would be some savings realized, but they would have to be determined on a cars by case basis. The city's past policy has been only to light intersections, lnid-block points and other areas affecting public welfare or safety. We have not lighted cul -do -sacs, as they have been considered more of a noed from a security basis for private property. At this particular time I have no information as to how many people actually living on cul -de -lace or dead end streets would really want a light. The council may wish to consider ordering a survey of those areas prior to establishing a city wide policy, which may be Imre applicable than dealing with cul -de -sate on an individual basis or on a petition basis. Council Ag-:v'.a - io/io/89 In the past we have advised all residents on cul-de-sacs or other individuals requesting a special interest light to contact NSP for a private light or petition the City Council. Such petitions could be considered a petition for a public improvement and could be assessed in accordance with Minnesota statutes ennotated chapter 429, where deemed necessary by council. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. order a survey in the form of written letters to all individuals on cul-de-sacs or dead end streets in the city of Monticello to determine whether or not they want a street light. 2. Council amend it's existing policy to include lighting cul-de-sacs only with 150 watt sodium lights at an annual expected cost of $4,112.40. 3. Light all cul-de-sacs and dead end streets utilizing 150 watt high pressure sodium on the cul-de-sacs and 100 watt high pressure sodium on the dead end streets because of the narrower width on the street at an estimated annual cost of $5,559.60. 4. Amend the city's policy to light cul-de-sacs and dead end streets, but only by petition of the majority of the property owners within benefiting distance of the light, thereby eliminating the need for the survey to amend the policy. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Since the lighting of cul-de-sacs is generally not an overwhelming need to the general public welfare or safety of the comunity at large, it is more of a decision of the council rather than the public works department. It does appear, however, that other cities have seen the light and are involved in lighting of cul -de -sate and therefore, it may be appropriate for the city of Monticello to do so also. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Existing cul-de-sacs. 1. Balboa Circle 11. Center Circle 2. Marvin Elwood Rd. Circle 12. Sandtrap Circle 3. Hillcrest Circle 13. Eagle Circle 4. Matthew Circle 14. White Oak Circle 5. Oakview Circle 15. Acorn Circle 6. Craig Lane 16. Red Oak Circle 7. Kenneth Lane 17. Meador Oak Circle 8. Riverside Circle 18. Thomas Circle 9. Kairpa Circle 19. Dundas Circle 10. Bunker Circle 20. Wright Circle 12 Council Agenda - 10/10/99 Planned Circles. 21. Crocus Circle 22. Nicholas Circle 23. 1 cul-de-sac in the new Evergreen-, plat. Permanent dead end streets 24. Oak Lane 25. Minnesota St. @ railroad 26. Minnesota St. @ I-94 27. EUn St. @ I-94 28. Fallon @ I-94 29. vine St. @ railroad Semi -dead end streets with through access. 30. Lynn St. @ 6th St. 31. Maple St. @ 7th St. 32. Territorial Rd. @ railroad. In addition to the above there are several streets in the community which teoporarily dead end. On a teuporary basis one does not really kaws hvw Tony they will oe temporary, such as the roads that end up in Meadow Oak or other existing plate. They are as follows: 1. 7th ST. or Lauring Lane at the Malone property 2. Meadow Oak Ave .1. Meadow Oak Lane 1 4. Meadow Oak Lane 2 5. Red Oak Lane 6. Meadow Lane 7. Oakview Lane 8, Meadow Oak Drive 13 PETITION DATE: September 25, 1989 TO: Mayor and Council Members I/We, the Undersigned, hereby petition the City of Monticello Council to install a street light in the cul-de-sac on our street, Oakview Circle. Your consideration in this request would be greatly appreciated. ��A-caw (5/J_O� Council Agenda - to/ro/89 12. Consideration of approval of Transportation Management Plan and budget. 13. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing contract with State of Minnesota to provide public transportation service. (.1.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Staff and the Monticello Transportation Advisory Commnittee (MTRAC) has incorporated Oouncil's previous contents on the management plan into the document to be submitted to the State of Minnesota. MTRAC requests that Council provide final approval of the mnanagernent plan and adopt a resolution which authorizes the City to enter a contract with the State of Minnesota to provide public transportation service. Enclosed you will find a completed application for state transit system funding assistance. As you will note, the program calls for utilization of a leased bus and calls for operation of the system for a period of ten hours per day. Please review the management plan for more detail. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve the Monticello Public Transportation Management Plan and adopt resolution authorizing contract with State of Minnesota to provide public transportation service. Under this alternative, staff will submit the application materials to the State of Minnesota for their final review and approval. It should be noted that I have reviewed the materials with the program director, and he has indicated that everything is in order and ready for State approval. Once the final review of the materials by the State is comnplete, then they will submit a check to the City in the amount of 40 percent of the State share of the transportation system cost. At the mid point of the contract, the State will submit an additional 40 percent. And at the end of the contract, the remaining 10 percent of the State's share will he submitted to the City. in the next few weeks, MTRAC will be working diligently toward promoting the program and will be putting all the pieces in place necessary to start the transportation system off on the right foot. Please review the attached MTRAC timet table for an outline of some. of the major tasks that must be completed between now and the startup date of December 1, 1989. 2. Motion to deny approval of management plan and deny approval of said resolution. Under this alternative, the transportation plan would not become a rea 11 Ly. M C Council Agenda - 10/7o/89 C. STAFF RE0OMMENDATION: MTRAC and staff recomend that Council select alternative 11 with any modifications they might wish to make as a result of discussion. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of management plan; Resolution for adoption authorizing contract with State of Minnesota to provide public transportation service; Project timeline outlining implementation schedule. is MANAGEMENT PLAN Monticello Transit System 1989-1990 A. ORGANIZATION The transit system is organized and monitored by the City of Monticello under a contractual arrangement with Hoglund Transportation of Monticello. The Monticello Transit System will ne operated through 1990 as a "demonstration project." Competitive bidding for the bus service delivery contract will not be conducted prior to initiation of the demonstration project. It is anticipated that the 1991 management plan, contract bid specifications, and budget will be based on the service demand and delivery experience gathered during the demonstration period. If as a result of the demonstration project it is found that utilization of a private contractor is in the best interest of the Monticello Transit System, selection of the service provider for budget year 1991 will be the result of a formal bidding process and in keeping with state requirements. Hoglund Transportation owns the transit system and is responsible for the day to day operation of the transit program. Gordy Hoglund, owner of Hoglund Transportation, is responsible for the day to day management and operation of the transit system. The owner/operator of Hoglund Transportation is responsible for hir iny, esLaUlishing wages, and terainaLing a.. conjunction with the Monticello Transit System. The City of Monticello's Assistant Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, will represent the applicant in negotiating an assistance contract with the State. The Assistant Administrator, with the assistance of the Senior Center Director, will be responsible for monitoring the on-going operation of the system and will assist the Monticello Transportation Advisory Commnittee and the City Council in development of Monticello transportation system operation policy. In addition, the Monticello Transporation Advisory Committee will provide marketing and operations support for the programn in the form of in-kind contributions of time. Hoglund Transportation currently provides bus service to the Monticello School District and to other organizations. The transportation company staff consists of 35 drivers and 1 dispatcher. Two employees will be added to the existing Hoglund Transportatlun staff to service the contract with the City of Monticello. Of the staff added, one will be a full-time driver and one will be pert -tion. It is oxpected that each part-time driver will work ten hours per week. Hoglund Transportation is responsible for filing required reports to the Transportation Regulation Board. 10/05/89 Management Plan Page 2 C B. PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES GOALS: The main goal for 1990 is to establish a client base through delivery of an efficient and effective transportation service. 1. Cost Efficiency Establish service level designed to encourage ridership while maintaining reasonable operating costs through efficient use of employees and a single 25 passenger vehicle. Dec. 1989-1990 Estimated miles: 29,250 Dec. 1989-1990 Cost per mile: $2.36 Dec. 1989-1990 Hours per employee: 1250 2. Service Effectiveness Target elderly and handicapped markets with a variety of marketing campaigns to attract initial ridership. Establish user oriented system featuring a minimal call ahead requirement of one hour. Achieve a ratio of .67 passengers per mile. 3. Cost Effectiveness Make efficent use of transit dollars by establishing cost per passenger at $3.55. Establish revenue to cost ratio of .18. C. LEVELS OF SERVICE 1. Service Area and Population The Monticello Transit System is intended to service the population residing within the city of Monticello, the areas immediately adjacent to the city known as the Orderly Annexation Area, and a portion of Big Lake and Becker Townships, which are populated areas lying adjacent to Monticello across the Mississippi River and within the Monticello School District boundaries. The population of the city of Monticello is estimated at 4,500. The Orderly Annexation Area and township area is estimated to be 4,000. These areas are outlined on Exhibit A. 10/05/89 Management Plan Page 3 Transportation to the Big Lake Nutrition Center from points in Monticello will be provided once a day during the noon hours. Transportation to and from the city of Monticello will be provided to users of the local airport which is located on Highway 25 approximately .7 mi'.es from the city limits. No other transportation outside the areas mentioned is anticipated. Of primary iinportance is establishment of a transportation service level that will attract citizen of Monticello ridership, as the City of Monticello is the primary source of local revenue for this program. Therefore, except for service to the Nutrition Center and airport, extension of transportation service to areas outside the Monticello city limits will be phased in as the service demand and concurrent impact on service delivery becomes better understood. Extension of service level beyond city limits will be considered by the City Council when it can be demonstrated that service expansion will not diminish capability of the system to offer desirable service level to Monticello citizens. In addition, it must be demonstrated that the City portion of the cost to deliver service to the outlying areas can be recovered through a combination of user fees and through added cost efficiency created by new ridership. At such time that the bus service is expanded into outlying areas, the City Council of _., ccl to will ec_.,..^h tuz .a:es that re ler .he added ^ost of servicing outlying areas that do not contribute to the local share revenue generated by taxation. 2. Type of Service to be Operated The City will administer through contract a "dial a ride" service which will feature a minimum one hour call ahead requirement. The prograin marketing effort will stress the iirportance of calling ahead sooner than one Mur before the ride is needed. 3. Days of Operation The City will be providing 2,108 hours of service between December 1, 1969, and December 31, 1990, which is equal to 10 -hour -a -day service, five days per week, not including holidays. At this time, 10 -Mur -a -day service is planned for Monday through Friday. Initially, days of operation do not include Saturday and Sunday. However, days and hours of operation may be adjusted to reflect service demand experienced. For instance, if it does not appear cost justifiable to operate on Tuesday between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. , those hours might be transferred to Saturday or Sunday morning . Sunday service might also be possible in the event that additional funding becomes available or in the event that an organization or individual would volunteer to drive the bus on Sunday mornings. 10/05/89 9 C Management Plan Page 4 4. Hours of Operation Initially, service will be provided between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., which is equal to a 9 -hour day. The "extra" or unused hour of service will be shifted to the appropriate day and time as service demand is identified. D. FARES The proposed fare structure calls for a base fare of $1.00 per one-way ride. This fare will apply to all city of Monticello riders, including elderly, children over the age of 6, and able-bodied adults. Children under 6 years of age may ride free with a parent or guardian. Reduced fares will be available to all potential users of the system through purchase of ticket books. Reduced fares can be obtained when tickets are bought in bulk through ticket books per the following table: Base rate: $ 1.00 10 ride ticket book S 7.50 (5.75 ride) 50 ride ticket book $25.00 ($.50 ride) Except fur the Ci[5l lew weeks GC G1+2 CoCluil, bus dilverC wiil not Sell ticket books or make change for individuals paying the base fare. Ticket books will be sold at a variety of local establishments, including local retail stores, City Hall, Public Library, Senior Center, School District, etc. The Senior Center Director will be responsible for coordinating ticket printing, distributing ticket books, and collecting ticket book revenue. Fare structure for outlying areas shall be established by the City Council at such time that it is determined that it is feasible to serve outlying areas. Service to local airport located in Big Lake Township shall be provided at the inception of the program, and the fare for this service shall be twice the standard normal fare in tickets or currency. 10/05/89 Management Plan Page 5 E. MARKETING 1. The initial thrust of the marketing effort will be focused on the primary users of the system, which is expected to be the elderly and handicapped. Approximately 750 citizens over 60 years of age reside within the city of Monticello, of which a significant portion participate in programs offered by the local Senior Citizens Center. -his center will be a major trip destination point and will alsobe the primary distribution point for marketing information regarding the program. Successful development of the senior market will occur if the senior center resources are properly used in promoting the program. The remainder of the transit market is difficult to identify. It is expected that some children will utilize the system in conjunction with after school and suarer recreation activities. Marketing efforts will be made to coiamnicate the service to this segment of the population through cooperative effort with the school district. Twenty percent of the local households are considered to be "low income" as defined by the State of Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Developnent. This represents- approximately 140 huuselwlua "iLbiu Lha city o2 I•Sonticelio. n porton of t.esa households may utilize the bus transportation program for economic reasons. An additional focus of the marketing effort will include comnnmicating the program to this group through standard mans and through organizations that have frequent contact with this aegrnent of the population. Local social services such as the food shelf, the "wIC" program, and aright County Social Services and local churches will be utilized as the medium by which the program can be marketed to this special group. Much of the work force that resides within Monticello comnutes to points well outside the City limits. 2. MARKETING CONCEPT Standard methods for promoting the transportation system will be utilized. The City of Monticello will strive toward development of an efficient marketing program by utilizing many of the techniques now in place in other communities. Such techniques may include, but not be limited to, the following: Of primary toportance in development of an advertising caupaign is the proper utilization of the local newspaper. A series of advertisements will be developed prior to the initiation of the system. 10/05/89 Management Plan Page 6 Development of information brochures describing the transportation bus service. Brochures to be distributed to various organizations for further distribution. Development of an attractive image by maintaining a clean and attractive bus. Service image will focus on providing "coach" service rather than bus service. Clean and efficient operation of the transportation service will be goals which will allow the system to market itself through word of mouth advertising. Demonstration rides and tours will be given in conjunction with a moving "open house." It is expected that presentations will be given to numerous organizations for the purpose of describing the program and allowing people to get a "hands on" feel for the system and its potential. It is hoped that charitable organizations and the business co;mnunity will be impressed with the program to the extent that they will purchase blocks of tickets for later distribution to the elderly and the needy. Local schools and the local library will be asked to participate in marketing availability of service to youngsters. 3. Marketing Plan Cost/Benefit The proposed marketing plan is relatively inexpensive in terms of cost of advertising and supplies; however, it does require considerable effort in terms of man-hours. Much of the marketing effort requires personal contact and one-to-one advocacy which is likely to reap significant rewards in terms of ridership. Fortunately, volunteers and man-hours are available to sufficiently market the service to groups and service organizations. F. COORDINATION WITH EXISTING TRANSIT OPERATIONS The degree in which this program will be coordinated with the Sherburne County Heartland Express is not well understood at this point. It is likely that there will be occasions when a citizen of Monticello could be transferred to a Sherburne County system vehicle for transport to points in Sherburne County. This type of occurrence might be rather rare. By the same token, there may be Sherburne County residents that might wish to be transported to a drop off point in the Monticello transit area, with the Monticello system then transporting the individual to a specific point in the City. The Monticello Transit Program will be coordinated with an existing volunteer driver transportation prog;dm originating from Wright County to theextent that the new local service will relieve some of the local driving duties of the volunteers. This will allow the volunteer resources to be used for other longer distance driving duties such as transporting individuals to metro locations and back. 10/05/89 (�) Management Plan Page 7 G. EXPENSE CONTRACT (See attached copy of expense contract with service provider.) E. REVENUE CONTRACTS No revenue contracts are conteurplated at this time. I. CAPITAL IMPROVMENfS Capital purchases include 1 fare box ($500) and one cellular phone ($1,000) which will link customers to bus driver. The bus driver will act as dispatcher as well as driver. Radio equipment will be supplied by service provider. J. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the transportation service expense contract which includes a vehicle ioaintenance program requirement that is consistent with State requirements. Please see transportation service expense contract for details. R. DRIVER SELECTION The City shall monitor and enforce the tensa of the transportation service expense contract which includes a driver selection process that is consistent with State requirements. Please see transportation service expense contract for details. L. INSURANCE The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the transportation service expense contract which includes an insurance requirement that is consistent with State requirements. Please see transportation service expense contract for details. M. TIME DISTRIBUTION RECORD The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the transportation service expense contract which includes ioeintenance of time distribution records in a canner that is consistent with State requirements. Please see transportation service expense contract for details. 10/05/89 Ci CITY COUNCIL MONTICELLO TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE POLICY DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION MARKETING/PLANNING SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER DIRECTOR - Monitor service level - Distribute tickets/collect revenue - Develop senior market - Daily trip/revenue accounting monthly report to State r ROGLUND TRANSPORTATION - Provide dial -a -ride transportation service - Day -toddy uandyemenL - Customer scheduling/ cowinications - Provide drivers - Maintain bus - Provide insurance 10/05/89 (0 Budget Anticipated Statistics Operating Expenses Por New Contract Period PERSONNEL SERVICES 1010 Administrative, Management 6 Supervisory Services s 7,345 1020 Operator's Wages 1030 Maintenance b Repair Wages 1035 General Office Support Wages S 3,584 1045 Operations Support Wages 1055 Fringe Benefits 5 1.536 Total 512,465 ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES 1085 Management Fees 1088 Tariffs a Traffic Expenses 5 1,084 1090 Advertising, Marketing 6 Promotional Charges 1100 Legal, Auditing & Other Professional Fees 1105 security Costo 1110 Office supplies $ 54 1120 Leases b Rentals (Administrative Facilities) 1130 utilities 1135 Other Direct Administrative Charges Total $ 1.138 VEHICLE CHARGES 1170 Fuel & Lubricants 1180 Maintenance b Repair Material (Vehicles) 1185 Contract Service Maintenance Labor 1190 Tires 1195 Other Vehicle Charges Total OPERATIONS CHARGES 1230 Purchase of Service $55.577 1238 Depreciation 1240 Mileage Reimbursement for Passenger Service 1243 Repair a Maintenance of Other Property 1246 Leases G Rentals (garages, vehicles, etc.) 1248 Other Operations Charges Total $55,577 Page 25 INSURANCE CHARGES �. 1280 Public Liability & Property Damage on vehicles 1310 Public Liability & Property Damage Other than on vehicles Total TAXES AND FEES 1350 vehicle Registration & Permit Fees 1360 Federal Fuel & Lubricant Taxes 1370 State Fuel & Lubricant Taxes 1380 Other Taxes & Fees Total 1426 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $69,179 OPERATING REVENUES 1440 Passenger Fares $12,676 1472 Contract Revenues 1478 Revenues -Other 1490 Other Financial Assistance 1492 Section 9 Federal Ooerating Grants 1505 TOTAL REVENUES 512,676 CAPITAL EXPENSES 1600 vehicle 1602 Lift, Ramp, Etc. 1604 Radio Equipment 5 1,000 1606 Farebox $ 500 1610 Other Capital Expenses 1585 TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES 5 1,500 1617 FEDERAL CAPITAL GRANTS 1619 OTHER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT EXPENSES 1700 Heartland Express Marketing 5 2,000 Page 26 C OPERATING STATISTICS The purpose of this form is to describe the anticipated operational characteristics of the participating transit system. Page 27 0 Anticipated Statistics For New Contract Period PASSENGERS 1830 TOTAL NUMBER OF PASSENGERS 19,501 of this total, how many passengers will be: Elderly 14,041 Handicapped 585 Children 2,925 Free Ride 390 General Public • • 1,560 HOURS 1950 TCT^, SEP.rrrr HOURS 2.709 Of this total, how many hours will be: Regular Route Demand Responsive 2,708 Route Deviation Subscription Contract Shared Ride Taxi Volunteer Drivers MILES 1995 TOTAL VEHICLE MILES 29,251 Of this total, how many miles will be: Regular Route Demand Responsive 29,251 Route Deviation Subscription Contract Shared Ride Taxi Volunteer Drivers Page 27 0 BUDGET SUM}IARY SHEET r I. Capital Expense TOTAL (From Line 1585) s 1.500 II. other Expense TOTAL (From Line 1700) $ 2,000 III. Operational Expense and Deficit A. Operational Expense (Line No. 1926) from Operating Expense Sheet s69,179 B. Less Anticipated Revenue (Line No. 1505) from Operating Revenue Sheet $12,676 TOTAL OPERATING DEFICIT $56,503 •f•ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff if fffffffff•tffffffflf ffffffffffff (to be completed by Mn/DOT) III. Funding Provided by Applicant A. ' ^f Capital (must be in cash) 1 H. �% of Total Operating Cost (cash) TOTAL IV. Funding from Section 18 Federal Grant A. % of Capital B. �% of Operational Deficit TOTAL V. Funding from Kn/DOT A. �% of Capital B. Total Operating Cost Less Fixed Local Share Amount and Federal Operating Dollars. C. % of Operating D. �% of Marketing TOTAL Page 28 1990 CAPITAL REQUEST FORM Transit System Monticello Public Transit system System Manager Jeff O'Neill Phone No . 333-5739 Indicate the requested capital items : # Vehicles) # Buses) Capacity(ies) Cost q Vans) Capacity(ies) Cost # Mini Van(s) Capacity(ies) Cost 01 Farebox(es) Cost S 500 # I Radio ( s) Mobile phone # Base p Handheld Model Cost 51,000 Other Total Cost 51,500 Reason for Requests: Faroboz noccesary part of transit syetom start-up. Cellular phone used for communication between driver/dispatchor and customs re. Use additional sheets if necessary. Pape 45 0 Pro)ect DRIVER'S DAILY CHECK LIST vehicle a INSPECT ITEMS LISTED BELOW AND CHECK IF OKAY. INTERIOR Brakes Steering Transmission Safety Equipment Fire Extinguisher Flares Dash Gauges/Lights Horn Window Glass Radio Mirrors Seats Cleanliness New Damage COMMENTS EXTERIOR Tires Tire Pressure Turn Signals Head Lights Tail Lights Mirrors windshield wipers Cleanliness New Damage f - Driver's signature Date Page 12 1411es UNDER HOOD 011 Level Radiator Level Battery Level Belts windshield Washer Fluid _ Transmission Fluid 0 l DRIVER'S VEHICLE DEFECT REPORT Project Vehicle Make/Type Vehicle a Vehicle Year odometer Date Reading Descriytion of Defect Driver • INSTRUCTIONS: Driver will describe any defects which occur during the days operation and advise maintenance manager. This form should be returned to vehicle following needed repairs. Page 11 0 r NOTE; It Umpliance with slate and federal regulation, wages Paid to ) ! Personnel for which relabursesent 1s expected Iron the Nim,,,) . O.Partalent of Transportation Public Transit Participation Program and federal Section 18 whose Oise will Out always be too percent chargeable and otherwise properly accountable to the transit Project suss be supported by dally tine distribution records. Tnia record must stow all tumors worked dur Ing each day segregated by act I it y. TRANSIT TIME OISTRIBNfION RECORO (sample) Enpluyee Masa (late ACTIVITIES: Trans It I 1 ! 2 # 1 ! 4 # 5 16 17 1 8 1 9 110 111 112 111 114 115 116 111 118 119 120 121 122 121 124 12S 126 127 128 129 110 111 ITotai I --------•------- I••-1 - 1--1-` 1-- l ---1---i - l---1 --1 I --1 I- 1 -# - ! --1-- 1---l---1-- 1---1 - 1 -4---1 # --1- -1 I ------i l i t i i ! ------------------ 6. --- i I i i i i -------••----- I-•-1-•-1-'-1-`•!--'1---1---1---1--- 1--1---1---1•--1---1---1-'-1`•I--•1---I---1--•I---I'--I•--1---I---1-•-I---1...1---1--•1...... 1 C. i i! I I I I{ 1 t i i t t! t t I! I! I l I f l{ 1 1 1 i i I ------------------I -1-- I --I--'I-•^I-"1-- 1- ------I d• -------•-•-- __- •+.._+ ••+' •+-'^+-"+"'+-'-+"'+•........._._..._..+"'+-` +......-+-- +'--+'- +''+.__+..-+`--+............... I ------ I Other Than Tranaltl 1 1 2 1 1 1 4 1 S 1 6 1 7 1 6 1 9 Ito 111 112 113 114 IIS 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 121 124 125 126 121 120 129 110 111 ITolal I ------------------1.__1___I_..1__.i___I___i__.I__.I___1___I.__L __1___i.._1___1_..1___1__.1___1__.1___1___1___1__ L__1.._I___I___I_..# ^i ------i "D m• i l i i i i i i i i i t i l i I i 1 i i t i i I t i i l i i l i 1 ------------------ I•--1-•-1-••1--•1--•1--•I-•-1---1---1---1--1^--I--•1---1---1-••1--•1-^l---1-•-1---1-•-1---I---1---i•'-1---1---1-••!--^1--^1---^--1 6. i# .� ------------------1-• 1'- 1---1---1-- I --I--•I -L.•1---I• 1 --1...1.._1 ` I - 1--`1---I I-- 1- 1---1'- 1 --1-- 1 1---1 - 1 -•1 1 ...... +� e• t ------------------I '-1- •I - 1- I --^I- -I -•I - I ---I---1 I ` I - I-• 1 `-I--•1-•-1-- 1 - 1--'1- 1--- 1- I --1--I .1......1 i. taint Nonha ----------------- 1.._1.._1...1- 1-..1..'1- •1-• 1---1-- L..1._.1...1.. -I...... Sick i.eave ! # # # # { i i # # # # # # # # ---------•-----.- 1 --1-- 1-•-I•••I-• I ---I- I - 1- -I - 1 1 1..1...1_..1_..1...1- •1- •1•--1 1--•I- -I• -I'- 1..1_..1_..1_..1...1...1.....-1 vacation I i ..................1._1...1...1__ 1_• 1-' I -I 1---1-- 1..1.. 1• I... I --1-"1 -I--•I 1-•-1...1..1. L_.I.._1...1 I ...... rmitpeneatury ..................I•• -I ---1•--1--.1•..1I_..1--•1--•1--•1-- 1--1 -- 1•-1-..1.._1-..1..1---I ^•1--•1•-•1---1--•1---I^--1...1.._1•--1...1_-•1---1....,.1 at he. Paid Leave ... ................... ............................ a_...-" +.................................. ............ ......_.........a...................+....... CERTIFICATION$ to the beat of my knowledge the above is a true and co111,1 statement of hour* worked a" for which I am entitled to camla^nxntion In accordance with established Policy. v tYPluyee Signature Supervisor pale AFFIRMATIVE ACTION STATEMENT Employers of 20 or Less flrployees The City of Monticello does not euploy, nor has it eitployed during the previous 12 months, more than 20 full-time employees. Date EI Signature Assistant Administrator Title Notary O CERTIFICATION OF CO"LIANCE TO 49 CFR 604 L- Charter Service Final Rule The City of Monticello hereby certifies that charter service will not be provided if there is at least one private charter operator willing and able to provide the charter service that the recipient proposes to provide. signature Jeff O'Neill Name Assistant Adtoinistrator Title Uate L L 0 Contract Nwnber ' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECIPIENT'S AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WRIGHT On this day of , 19_, before me appeared Karen Hanson, Jeffrey R. O'Neill, and Richard Wolfsteller to ire personally know, who being by me duly --.torn, did say they are respectively Assistant City Administrator and City Administrator of the City of Monticello. City of Monticello RECIPIENT C BY Title Sr. Center Director BY Title Assistant City Adrninistrator BY Title City Administrator NOTARY IV I EI hoar c.. c 70 MONTICELLO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDUL ASS I GNEO I T ASK IJO ISTAFF MEETING WITH STATE-MPLAN/CONTRACT IMTRAC IMTRAC MEETING IJO CONSIDER MPLAN/CONTRACT IMTRAC I ASSIGN TASKS IMTRAC I SCHEDULE PRESENTATIONS IMTRAC I FINALYZE TRANS SYSTEM NAME IJO IMPLAN/CONTRACT IN AGENDA PACKET IJO (COUNCIL ADOPTS M/PLAN/CONTRACT IJO ISTAFF SUBMTS PLAN TO STATE I IMTRAC I IMTRAC MEETING IJO/KH I PRELIMINARY TICKET DESIGN/COST IJO/KH I PRELIMINARY BROCHURE DESIGN IMTRAC I FINALYZE PRESENTATION SCHEDULE IMTRAC I DISCUSS EXPO BOOTH IGH I PHONE z OF SYSTEM ESTABLISHED IJO/DG I TICKET DISTRIBUTION POINTS ESTABLISHED ISA/BS ILETTER OF INVITAT;ON TO 11/15 CELEBRATION I IMTRAC I IMTRAC MEETING 10:AM IGH/MTRACI DEFINE PAINT JOB I ? I NEhCPAPER ADDS DESIGNED 1 1 FGiT mNc IMTRAC I PRE -EXPO TICKET SALES DISCUSSED IJO/KH I BROCHURES/TICKETS PRINTED I IKH I ITICKETS DISTRIBUTED I IGH I ISYSTEM COMMUNICATIONS TESTED I IGH I IBUS PAINTED I IMTRAC I (BUSINESS E:PO BOOTH SET-UP I IMTRAC I IBUSINESS EXPO I IJO I ILIONS CLUB PRESENTATION IDG/JO (ROTARY CLUB PRESENTATION IMILLER ICLERGY PRESENTATION IBS/JO/SAICHANEER OF COMMERCE PRESENTATION JKH (VFW PFESEdTsTICN ISP (LEGION CLUB PRESENTATION 1KH ISR CENTER PRESENTATION IDG 1PINEWDOD ELEMENTARY PRESENTATION IDG IM1001LE SCHOOL PRESENTATION IDG 1HIGH SCHOOL PRESENTATION IJO ICASLE TV 1J0 JKMCIM IDG/BS/KHIHOME HEALTH IMTRAC IREPORT TO COUNCIL I I IGH IBUS SERVICE BEGINS I I I I E -/0/5/89 DUE (DATE (OCT INOV I I I I (DONE I (DONE ICONSIOEI ISE I 16 I 10 I I t1 I I I I 13 13 I I 13 I I 13 I I 13 I DONE 13 1 13 I I 73 I I I 120 I 120 I 1 20 I i - 120 I 120 I I I I I1 I I I 11 I I I I1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I? t I I ? I I? I t9 I I I1 I 11 1 11 1 1 I ? I ? I? I? I? I? I I ? I I? 125 I I I I IZ I I I I I I I I AfI13 w / /c' • "o Ad -. I I I I i I I 3-171 3-171 3-171 I o i 3 5 7 1 I I I I 0 RESOLUTION 89 - BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Monticello enter into a contract with the State Of Minnesota, Departinent of Transportation, to provide a public transportation service in the Monticello area. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Monticello agrees to provide a minimum of 40 percent of the total operating cost and 20 percent of the total capital cost of the transit project from local funds, including bus fare revenue. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that authorization to execute the aforementioned contract and any amendments thereto is hereby given to the Assistant Administrator or the City Administrator. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senior Citizen Center Director or the Assistant Administrator or the City Adtninlstrator is hereby authorized to execute requests for reimbursement from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Adopted this day of , 19 RickWolfsteller City Administrator Ken Maus, Mayor CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of 19 , as shown by the minutes of said ineeting in my possession. Name Title a Council Agenda - 10/10/89 14. Consideration of contract with Hoglund Transportation for provision of public transportation service. (J.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Enclosed you will find a copy of a proposed contract with Hoglund Transportation which outlines terms of agreement associated with provision of public transportation service by Hoglund Transportation. Council is asked to review the contract and make comments accordingly. The contract has been developed over the last few weeks through the combined efforts of the State of Minnesota, MN/DOT, City staff, and Gordy Hoglund. This contract is required by the State and must also be approved by the State. It should be noted that the contract has been reviewed in detail with State officials, and there appears to be no problem with State approval of this contract. This contract has been submitted to the City Attorney as of Wednesday, October 5. Final adjustments to it based on Tom Hayes' input will be forthcoming at the meeting scheduled for the 10th. The contract is self-explanatory; therefore, I will not outline it in any greater detail as part of this menmo. If you should have any questions regarding the contract, please feel free to call 1e before the meeting. Finally, Gordy Hoglund has reviewed the contract, and has indicdted to me that he is satisfied with the contract language. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt contract between City of Monticello and Hoglund Transportation for provision of public transportation service. In order for the Monticello Public Transit Program to proceed, a contract must be established between the City of Monticello and Hoglund Transportation. Adopting this contract satisfies the State requirement and allows the implementation of the public transportation system to proceed. 2. Motion to deny authorization to enter into a contract with Hoglund Transportation for provision of public transportation service. Under this alternative, the City would need to revise the contract and get contract approval at a later date in order for the public transportation program to become a reality. If contract approval is not possible, then the program cannot proceed unless the City provides the transportation service. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: / It is staff's view and the view of MTRAC that the agreements outlined in (l the contract protect the interests of the City and the transportation provider. The contract has been developed with assistance from the State of Minnesota and is similar to contracts now being successfully executed 16 Council Agenda — 10/10/89 throughout the State of Minnesota. Staff recoimnends approval of the contract with any modifications that Council may wish to make as a result of discussion. D. SUPPOF ING DATA: Copy of public transit program contract between City of Monticello and Hoglund Transportation. 17 PUBLIC TRANSIT PROGRAM CONTRACT .- This contract is made by and between the City of Monticello (hereinafter referred to as "City") and Hoglund Transportation (hereinafter referred to as "Operator"). WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, the City desires to develop and maintain a public transportation system, and; WHEREAS, the City desires to contract for operation of the vehicles and related services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements as hereinafter set forth, the parties to this contract mutually agree as follows: TERMS OF AGREEMENT Both parties agree that this contract shall be effective from December 1, 1989, through December 31, 1990, and may be extended annually through December 31, 1992, with the agreement of both parties. OFFICE AND DISPATCHING The Operator shall provide necessary office space for routine business and dispatching activies. Telephone line(s) for rider information and reservations shall be manned during regular service hours. The Operator shall provide a telephone answering machine for after hours messages to riders. The Operator may take after hours messages from riders at his discretion. The City shall provide dispatcher orientation and guidance, including initial written vehicle schedules, fares, intended target groups of riders, and limitations on services. All group rides and services to organizations other than private charter service shall be by contract with the City. The operator shall provide one toll free phone line for incoming calls and shall be responsible for installation and monthly costs. DRIVER UNIFORMS The operator shall provide or require employees to provide and wear clean, seasonal appropriate clothing. This may include, but is not limited to, shirts of a standard color and dark colored long pants. Any public transit badges or further uniforms required by the City shall be provided by the City. DRIVERS The operator agrees to employ qualified drivers sufficient in number to operate the service for the hours contracted. Drivers shall be trained by the Operator to ensure proper attitude, courtesy, and safety in transporting passengers. 9 Contract Public Transit System Page 2 Drivers shall be trained in the operation of vehicles and wheelchair lifts and be familiar with the geographic area served. Drivers must maintain at least a class "B" license. Drivers imust provide proof of a physical exam as required by State Statute. The City shall require driver attendance at periodic training on passenger assistance. All drivers must be screened by the City and operator for accident history, driving violations. To the extent possible, drivers shall be screened for criminal history and investigations of reported abuse or neglect involving minors or vulnerable adults. The Operator agrees to employ other needed support personnel including, but not limited to, administrative, clerical, and dispatch as good business judgement may deem necessary to comply with this agreement. Training shall be provided by the Operator. PERSONNEL EVALUATION Tia Opera...- agrees t.dig - -pc..,.. and fre;:ently with employees. In the event of public complaints to the City regarding Operator employees, the City shall provide the Operator a written suarary of complaints received. The City shall require the Operator to discuss performance expectations and any unsatisfactory performance with errployees, and to sign and have einployees sign to document these discussions. BUS/VAN SERVICE Operator agrees to provide a minimum of 2500 hours of transportation service utilizing an operator owned bus and/or van. City agrees to contract for a miniimnn of 2500 hours annually. It is understood that the bus to the primary transportation vehicle and that transportation should be provided exclusively by this vehicle if possible. It is recognized that from time to time service deinand will exceed the capacity of a single bus. During peak demand periods, the operator agrees to operate a supplemental van. The hourly rate and mileage charge shall be as follows: Bus and van service hourly rate: 18.16 (Operation budget minus projected mileage expense divided by 2500 hours) Mileage shall be charged for use of the bus at a rate of .11/mile. No Q mileage expense shall be charged for use of the van. Contract Public Transit System Page 3 Hours of service greater than 2500 minimum will be charged at a rate of $7.50/hr. plus mileage and other non -fixed expenses. It is understood that revenue necessary to operate the van will be derived from a concurrent reduction in budgeted funds necessary for 2500 annual hours of bus operation. Hours of van operation shall be established under the following scenerios. 1. REGULAR VAN SERVICE As system use becomes better understood, the City may establish regular van hours and establish a concurrent reduction in bus service hours. 2. OPERATOR DIRECTED VAN SERVICE Operator has the latitude to provide van service when service demand created by 24-hour advance registration exceeds the capacity of the bus. However, operator directed van use mist be reported to the City on a weekly basis to assist the City in determining necessary reductions in bus operation hours. VEHICLES The Operator shall provide: 1. One new (1990) twenty-five foot bus with wheelchair lift and secured seating for one passenger in a wheelchair. Bus shall have a minimnim seating capacity of 21 passengers including wheelchair passenger. Operator shall finance and coordinate application of paint and stylized markings identifying the bus. Paint and marking design shall be established by the City. Detailed bus specifications shall be reviewed by the Monticello Transportation Advisory Comittee. in order to maintain program and bus identity, the transit program bus shall not be used for private purposes without prior approval from City staff. Private use of the transit bus shall be limited to after hour or weekend, out-of-town trips that originate from a comnon point. 2. Operator shall provide one van intended to supplement bus service. Special painting of the supplemental van as a public transit vehicle is not required. However, a magnetic identification strip placed on van while in operation as a transportation vehicle is required. Contract Public Transit System Page 4 RADIO COMMUNICATION EXZUIPMENT AND LICENSE 71he City agrees to provide and maintain mobile phone for use in the bus as the primary means for dispatching. The hourly service charge under bus service includes ongoing commrnmication costs to operate the mobile phone, including all toll calls. The operator agrees to provide vehicle and office radios. Radio equipuent purchases, licensing, maintenance, ongoing costs, and toll calls for Operator owned vehicles shall be the Operator's responsibility. The Operator agrees to apply for and maintain required coimnunicatfon licenses for the Monticello public Transit System. Both parties agree to comply with applicable laws and policies and to cooperate in submitting required licensing, documents, and reports. MAINTENANCE, FUEL, AND LUBRICANTS The Operator agrees to provide for all routine maintenance of vehicles, including lubricants, supplies, and tools. Vehicle maintenance shall be done following the manufacturer's suggested guidelines provided with each vehicle, anti must tw verified by signed rernrts. Drivers shall m!Tleto deily inspection formns and vehicle defect forms. The Operator agrees to maintain a clean interior and exterior vehicle appearance as determined reasonable by City staff. Maintenance, fuel, and lubricant related expenses shall be paid by the City at the rate of $.11 per mile. Of this ammunt, $.16 is earmarked for bus maintenance. An annual report shall be provided which shows maintenance completed during the year. REPAIRS The Operator shall be responsible for making or arranging for needed repairs to City and Operator owned equipment, including warranty work and replacement tires. The Operator shall utilize revenue created by the mileage charge for repairs to the bus and for replacement of tires. All repair costs in excess of the revenue created by the mileage charge shall be the responsibility of the Operator. EMPLOYEES OF OPERATOR No emgmloyees retained by the Operator shall be considered employoes of the City. Contract Public Transit System Page 5 i FARES, BILLINGS, AND REPORTS The driver shall sell and collect passenger tickets and collect fares under the fare schedules and contracts of the City and account for riders and fares daily. Drivers shall not make change for ticket book or fare related transactions. Driver accounting of ridership ticket book sales and fares shall be accounted for and verified daily by a City employee. Drivers shall complete daily forms provided by the Operator indicating total number of passengers, number of elderly, wheelchair passengers, children, and free rides. Bills shall be submitted monthly to the City including documentation required by MN/DOT. Monthly bills shall be based on hours of service provided that month at the agreed upon hourly rate plus mileage. The Operator shall complete a monthly report and submit it with their bill, including the following information: Costs: 1. Miles and hours per vehicle. 2. Fuel gallons and taxes. 3. Other costs. Service: 1. Hours of transit service per vehicle. MONTICELLO TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MTRAC) The operator and the City's staff shall meet regularly with MTRAC appointed by the City Council to serve as an advisory group to the transit service. The City Council shall define the roles and authority of the committee regarding Major policies, contracts, and changes. PUBLICITY The City staff working MTRAC shall provide program publicity and the City shall pay for publicity costs. The Operator agrees to cooperate with transit system publicity. This may include, but is not limited to, vehicle markings, ads on the inside or outside of the vehicles, employee badges, and distributing flyers at regular stop sites and to passengers. REVENUE CONTRACTS The City retains sole authority to contract with private and public organizations to secure additional transit revenues. D Contract Public Transit System Page 6 INSURANCE The Operator shall provide liability insurance in the ainounts of at least $1,000,000 per claim and at least $1,000,000 per occurrence. The Operator shall also provide coinprehensive coverage for each vehicle and collision coverage to provide replaceinent funds in the event cf a substantial loss. MN/DOT shall be included as an additional nained insured on the Operator's insu rance. TERMS OF AGREEMENT Both parties agree that this contract shall be effective through December 31, 1990, and inay be extended annually through December 31, 1992, with the agreement of both parties. Contract agreements are contingent on availability of federal, state, and local funds, and ongoing demands for service. Contract ainendieents may be made at any time with the agreement of both parties. All contracts and amendments are subject to approval by MN/DOT. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT In the eveliL the OPLati,i beeache5 Lha Lecias or violatES the Cond.ticns of t`e contract and does not, within thirty (30) days thereafter, cure such breach or violation, the City inay terininate the contract iimnediately. In the event the City breaches the Cerins or violates the conditions of the contract and does not, within thirty (30) days thereafter, cure such breach or violation, the Operator inay terminate the contract innediately. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS The Operator agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state, and county laws, regulations, and policies including: Fair labor laws, civil rights laws, workers' compensation, uneinployinent compensation, sexual harrascinent, affirmative action, and special Chapter 13C warranty protecting individual einployees against a worsening of their positions. The Operator agrees to cooperate with any innnitoring or audit visits of the city, state, or federal government, including on-site inspections, disclosure of records, and surveys of passengers. The Operator agrees to maintain financial books and records in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Violations of Public Contracts: The Operator certifies that they are not included on the Otters States Coinptroller General's list of persons or firins currently debarred for violations of various public contracts incorporating labor standard provisions. 9) Contract Public Transit System Page 7 Price Collusion, Disclosure: The operator certifies that the prices in this contract have been arrived at independently without collusion or consultation for the purpose of restricting competition, prices have not knowingly been disclosed to any competitor, and no attempt has been made or will be made to induce others to submit or not to submit a bid in the future for the purpose of restricting competition. Conflict of Interest: The operator certifies that he presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of services required in this agreement, and agrees that no person having such interest shall be employed. Equal Employment opportunity: In connection with the execution of this contract, the operator agrees that it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, sex, or national origin. Operator will take affirmative actions to insure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to race, color, sex, or national origin. Such actions shall include but not be limited to the following: ©mployment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selections for training, including apprenticeship. Services: Services performed by the Operator under this contract shall be performed in a diligent and competent manner and their performance shall be subject to review and inspection by MN/DOT through its designated agents at all reasonable times. Insurance: The City of Monticello and its subcontractor agree to provide T�T�y insurance in the aimunts of at least $1,000,000 per claim for injury, death, or property damage by wrongful act or omission, and $1,000,000 for any number of claims arising out of a single occurrence. Insurance coverage shall be provided to protect the recipient and MN/DOT from any loss arising out of the furnishing of the service. The City agrees to furnish all appropriate certificates of insurance and to carry higher limits of insurance if required by MN/DOT. Indemmtit : operator agree to indemnify and hold harmless City and MN/DOT from M aga nst all claims or demands, including reasonable attorneys fees in defense thereof, of every nature on account of injury to or death of persona, or damage to or loss of property, caused by or resulting in any manner from any acts or omissions of the Operator, its subcontractors, or its agents or employees in performing or failing to perform any of the service, duties, or operations to be performed by the contractor and its subcontractor under this contract. It is hereby understood and agreed that any and all employees of the Operator and all other persons employed by the Operator in the performance of any of the services required or provided for under this contract shall not be considered employees of either the City or the State and that any and all claims that trey arise under the worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf Contract Public Transit System Page 8 of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims by and third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said Operator's eLTloyees while so engaged in any of the services to be rendered under this contract by the recipient shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the City or the State. Non—Waiver: The failure of MN/DOT or the City at any time to insist upon a strict performance of any of the terms, conditions, and covenants herein shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default in the terns, conditions, and covenants herein contained. Transportation Regulation Board: Under circumstances and conditions where regulations apply, the furnishing of all service and the charges to be wade to passengers in connection therewith are expressly subject to the approval, certification, and licensing of the Transportation Regulation Board or its successor and any other governmental body or authority having legal jurisdiction over any of such matters. CITY OF MONTICELIA Date Title HOGLOND TRANSPORTATION Date Title MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Date Title Council Agenda - 10/10/89 15. Consideration of adopting an agreement authorizing a contract with Township of Monticello outlining annexation process. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Council is asked to review the proposed joint resolution which spells out understandings and agreements pertaining to lands suitable for annexation and it outlines criteria for annexation. Council may wish to adopt the resolution at the Tuesday meeting. However, it is recommended that it be adopted at a subsequent meeting which would allow you more time to analyze the implications of the agreement. This agreement in its present form was created through the cooperative efforts of City staff, the OAA board, and ^bin Salkowski, the County Planner. The Town of Monticello has reviewed the document and adopted it in its present form. As you recall, the OAA has been working on and has adopted a land use/annexation plan which outlines those areas within the OAA that are ripe for annexation versus those areas that should remain agricultural in nature. This plan paves the way for development of the joint agreement, which establishes common understandings regarding the annexation of land identified as being ready for annexation. The OAA plan and the joint agreement are coinpanion documents in that the OAA plan defines the areas ripe for annexation and the joint agreement details specific criteria for annexation. Please note that the document has been approved by the Town in its present forme however, I have suggested a slight change in the language which I have penciled in on your document on page 4. I have approached the Town supervisors with the proposed changes, and it appears that they do not object to the modification. However, the Town has not forinally approved the changes either. I will be attending an upcoming meeting of the Town to gain input from the Town on the final wording. The major goals of this agreement are as follows: Reduce cost of individual boundary adjustment decisions by developing overall urbanization plan which provides the framework for efficient decision making. Provide direction that will enable Town, City, and individual property owners to plan separately for development and growth. Provide a framework for development of a cooperative relationship between City and Town which will enhance the potential for proper development of OAA area. 18 Council Agenda - 10/10/89 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Although Council may wish to adopt the agreement at this time, Staff requests that Council review the document only in anticipation of adoption at a subsequent meeting. This will give Council some titre to absorb the document and allow staff time to work with Town Supervisors on final wording. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of proposed joint resolution concerning the OAA. I will be reviewing the document in some detail with you at the meeting. 19 Tou•w t A•le'vric'.tin URUANi7,ATION PLAN JOINT RESOLUTION BETWEEN THE TOWN OF MONTICELLO AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO rONCN1tNINt.; THE ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA WUEREAS; reoccurLny boundary adjustments have occurred between tho City of MontireLln and the Town of Monticello Ear the last 1_wenry years died uncertainLy as to future adjuaLments has resulted; and WIR:HEAS; responding to requc:its for boundary, adjustments on a cava by case basis, apart from an overall plan for urbanization, is expensive, time consuming, and is counterproductive; and WIP-31:AS; it hart been dLflicult for tthe Town of Monticello and the City of Monticello and property owners within the Orderly Annexation Area to plan scpnrato ly for development and growth; and wHEHEAS, thn Minnesota Municipal Board has requested that the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board, the City and the Town work cooperatively In re-oxamining the future of the Orderly Annexation Area to de tormino if development is being properly focused; and WHEREAS; the Minnesota Municipal Board has urged the City and Town to approach the orderly annexation issue with a spirit of cooperation; and WHEREAS; it appears to be in the best interest of both parties that joint cooperation and planning between the parties be conducted; and 0 WHEREAS; the parties want to stabilize and enhance the predictability of boundary adjustments; and Willil(EAS; therm is a basis for agreement between the parties for accomplishing these yoalu and the parties hereto do set Earth the germs of this agreement by the Eollowingc Thu Town cif: MgntiCrlln and the City of Monticello hereby jointly ayrue to the Collowiiq: 1. COMr 1 NU I NG 7911; MONTW .I.I,U 01113131ILY ANNEXATION AREA ghat the Cnitowiny nrflorly Annexation Area in the Town of Montirello was established by n Minnesota Municipal Board Order un December 8 , 1977, as in need of orderly annexation pursuant to Minnaeota Strituto Chnptor 414, et at. 2. LAND USI; CUtDIi PLAN Thu Town of Monticello end th-3 City of Monticello, upon their adogtinn of this policy approval the Monticello orderly Annexation A[QA Plan which is attached as Exhibit "B" (hereinafter referred to as the Guide Plan). 3. URBAN SERVICE AREA The area identified within the Guide Plan as the "Urban Service Area" is an area that abuts the City of Monticello and to presently urban or suburban in nature or Is about to become urban or suburban. Further, the City of Monticello is now capable of providing municipal water and sanitary sewer to thLs area. 4. ANNEXATION PROCESS - 2 - Annexation may occur upon the following terms and conditions: A. Tho property must be located within the above described "Urban Service Area", B. The property owner must petition both the City of Monticello and the Town of Monticello for annexa- tion; C. 'rhe properly owner shalL submit a development plan to the City of Monticello and the Town of Monticello showing the need for municipal water and sanitary scwcr for at least 801 of the property petitioned for annexation; D. The development plan must be of sufficient detail to show it will meet the standards and requirements of the City of monticello•s zoning and planning ordinance, land use plan, comprehonaive plan, utilities plan, assessment procedures, and financing plan; E. Municipal water and sanitary sewer shall be Installed and ready for use within two (2) years from the date of annexation; and, 4 P. There shall be no future petitions for annexation until all previous conditions in the development plan have been complied with. Prior to final City approval of the development plan, said plan shall be submitted to the Town of Monticello for review. Concerns expressed by the Town of Monticello shall be addressed prior to formal approval of the development pian by the City of - 3 - a Monticello. All pfforts will he made to establish development dans that incorporate the land use planning efforts of both the City of Monticello and the Town of Monticello. "No development plan shall be hra&��dby the City under this agreement without rt�wp�. r written su{�pert submitted by the Town of Monticello. If the City receives written approval of development plan from the Town, a joint petition for ennnxAtinn shall be submitted to the Minnesota Munir,ipnl Board. If the Town of Monticglio does not approve the development plan_, it shall submit its reannns in writing to the City of Monticello. Thu City shall than nith«r rej•.c:t the development plan, or the 1•3sue my b1i sul)cnitly+d to the Minnesota Municipal Board pursuant to Minnesota Statutt- Chapter 414. S. TERM The term of this Agreement shall be ten (10) years from the offec:tive date of this Agreemont. Both parties roserve the right to terminate this agraumnnt upon sixty (601 days written notice. The uffectivo date shalt be upon the approval of the City Council of the City oC Monticello and the Town Board at the Town of Monticello and acceptanco by the Minnesota Municipal Board and said subsequent ocdor agproving this agreement. 5. LAND USE/ZONING AND PLANNING The zoning and planning throughout the Orderly Annexation Araa as described above shall be under the control of the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board until annexed to the City of Monticello. If the property is annexed to the City of Monticello, the property shall be designated as agricultural according to the City of Monticello Zoning and Planning Ordinances. Any alteration or change to the zoning classification shall be Monticello. All efforts will he made to establish development plans that incorporate the land use planning efforts of both the City of Monticello and the Town of Monticello. "Me development plan shall he approved by the City under this agreement without written support submitted by the Town of Monticello. If the City receives written approval. of development plan from the Town, a joint petition for annnxAtion shall be submitted to the Minnesota Muiiiripal Board. If the Town of Monticello does not approve the development plan', it shall submit its r--annni in writing to the City of Monticello. Tho City shall then eit'hr,r ruju-ct the development plan, or the issue: may be submitt-id to the Minnesota Municipal Board pursuant to Minnesota statute Chapter 414. L _ S. TCHM The term of this Agreement shall be ton (10) years from the ofiective date of this Agreement. Both parties reserve the right to terminate this agceoment upon sixty (60) days written notice. The effective date shall be upon the approval of the City Council of the City of Monticello and the Town Board of the Town of Monticello and acceptance by the Minnesota Municipal Board and said subsequent order approving this agreement. 6. LAND USE/ZONING AND PLANNING The zoning and planning throughout the Orderly Annexation Area as described above shall be under the control of the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board until annexed to the City of Monticello. If this property Is annexed to the City of Monticello, the property shall be designated as agricultural according to the City of Monticsilo Zoning and Planning ordinances. Any alteration or change to the zoning classification shall be subject to a public hearing to be held by the City of Monticello Planning Commission. The City of Monticello shall notify the Town of Monticello of said Land use classification hearing. 7. TAXES Any and all of the proPQCty taxes collected in the Ordecly Anno,vmion Arnn shall ruinain the property of the Town of Monticello. Any and all property taxes collected from annexerl properties shall be the pcotaerty of the City of Monticello after vurh time that said proporty actually receives City sewer and water service_ or after expleation of a period of three (3) years, whichever occurs sounur. s. IsoLA,m) TOWN PROPERTY i Any property within the "Urban Sorvice Area" that becomes cc is about to became Isolated As a result of annexation proposed under Section 4, shall be submitted for consideration to the Minnesota Municipal Board along with the proposed annexation for consideration by the Minnesota Municipal Board. In general, the creation of such Isolated parcels should be avoided. 4. DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE AREA IDENTIPUD ON THE ANNEXATION PLAN AS THE AGRICULTURAL AREA. No development should occur within the orderly annexation area which is outside the "Urban Service Area" as described in the MOAA Annexation Plan, unless said development meets the standards of the zoning and subdivision requirements of the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board, the City of Monticello, and the Town of Monticello. Said development cen only occur if all local government standards are complied with or ars capable of being complied within the future. The Intent of this paragraph Is to —S- C strongly discourage development outside the "Urban Service Area* as identified in the Orderly Annexation Plan. CITY OF MONTICELLO/MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP CJ CIO DEVELOPMr PLAN REVIEW WORKSHEET •rfi o A�`cta I 6 s� FOR CITY USE Staff: involved in re iew process Date Filed Date of Review Copies Filed Instructions to Applicant: This review worksheet is intended to assist an applicant in preparing irzformation necessary to determine potential for annexation. The checklist contains all data �r__ee fib�red by the City and Township as identified in a joint annexation agreement. This will�idered incomplete if all required information is not submitted. Applicant Name Subdivision Name For For For Comments ?plicants City Township use Use Use 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Abstractor's certificate, properly certified, identifying owner of property and owners of all properties within 350' of boundary of subject property. Proposed name of subdivision. Location of boundary linea in relation to a known section, quarter section or quarter -quarter section lines comprising a legal description of the property. Names and addresses of the record fee owner. Scale of plat or concept plan, not less than one (1) inch to one hundred (100) feet. Date and northpoint. Boundary line of proposed subdivision/annexation. Page 1 (9 7/89 s CITY OF MONTICELLO/MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW WORKSHEET For For For Applicants City Township Use Use Use Comments 8. Approximate acreage and dimensions of lots. 9. Location, right -0f -way width, or other public ways, parks, and other public lands. 10. Boundary lines of adjoining unsubdivided or subdivided land, within three hundred fifty (350) feet, identified by name and ownership, including all contiguous land owned or controlled by the subdivider. 11. Sewer and water feasibility study completed by a registered civil engineer. 12. Layout of proposed streets showing the right-of-way widths. 13. Preliminary dimensions of lots and blocks, and dimensions of street frontage. 14. Areas, other than streets, alleys, pedestrian ways and utility easements, intended to be dedicated or reserved for public use, including the size of such'area or areas in acres. 15. Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of residential buildings with number of proposed dwelling units and type of business or industry, so as to reveal the effect of the development on traffic, fire hazards, and congestion of population. 16. Provision for surface water disposal, drainage, and flood control. 17. Proposed zoning plan for the areas. Page 2 7/89 For For For Applicants City Town :hip Use Use Use CITY OF MONTICELLO/MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW WORKSHEET 18. Where the subdivider owns property adjacent to that Which is being proposed for the annexation, the Planning Commission shall require that the subdivider submit a sketch plan of the remainder of the property so as to show the possible relationship between the proposed subdivision and the future annexed subdivision. 19. Other information requested by Engineer, Surveyor, Planning Consultant, Planning Concnission, and/or staff . (Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.) Statement of Planning Consultant attached? yes no Statement of Engineering Consultant attached? yes no Comments Page 3 7/89 Council Agenda - 10/10/89 16. Consideration of adopting a resolution setting a public hearing date for the adoption of the development program for Developnent District No. 1 and for the adoption of ^.IF plan for TIF District No. 1-1. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the previous meeting of the City Council, Council authorized development of a TIP plan for the purpose of assisting with the Seventh Street realignment costs associated with the K -Mart addition to the :Hall. On September 29, 1989, the finance plan was submitted to the County and School District for their review. Council is now asked to formally set a public hearing date for the development program and finance plan which is tentatively set for Monday, October 30, at 7:00 p.m. Unfortunately, this date conflicts with the Industrial Development Comnittee Banquet. Therefore, Council may wish to schedule the hearing for an earlier time in the day. Since the School District and County have already been notified of the tentative date, a rescheduling would require follow-up notification to both jurisdictions. PROJECT UPDATE. The project appears to be on hold at this point pending Lincoln Coiq)anies' acquisition of construction financing. I have been told that final word on the financing should be forthcoming within the next two weeks. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt a resolution setting a public hearing date of October 30, 1989, at 7:00 p.m. (or other suitable time) on the aduption of the development program for Development District No. 1 and the adoption of the tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 of the City of Monticello. If Council desires to assist with the Seventh Street realignment costa via TIP funding as identified at the previous meeting, then the motion above should be adopted. 2. Motion to deny adopting a resolution setting a public hearing date on the adoption of the development program for Developnent District No. 1 and the adoption of the tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 of the City of Monticello. If Council desires to withdraw TIP support of Seventh Street realignment costa, then this alternative should be selected. 20 Council Agenda - 10/10/89 t, C. STAFF RECO194ENDATION: Unless Council has a change of heart regarding the funding of Seventh Street realignment costs, it is recormnended that Council select alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA Copy of the resolution for adoption; A copy of the TIF plan will be submitted to Council at the meeting. Cugi.ctImember _ _ introduced the toIlowing resolution, the reading of whicli was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoption: CITY OF M0NTICELLO COUNTY OF WRIGHT STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT BY THE CITY OF MUNTICELLO OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM RELATING THFREI'O AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-1 AND THE PROPOSED ADOPTION Of- THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN RELATING TIIER1110. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section I. Public HearInR. This Council shall meet on October 30, 1999, at approximately 7:00 P.M., to hold a public hearing on the following matters: (a) the proposed establishment of the City's Development District No. 1, (b) the proposed adoption of the Development Program relating thereto, (c) the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Pinancing District No. 1-1 therein, and (d) the proposed adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto, all pursuant to and In accordance with Mlnnesola Statutes, Chapter 669, as amended. Section 2. Notice of clearing( Filing of Program. The City Clerk Is authorized and directed to cause nonce of the hearing, substantially In the torm attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be given as required by low, to place o copy of the proposed Development Program and the Tax Increment Financing Plan on file in the Clerk's office at City Hall and to make such copy available for Inspection by the public no later than October 6, 1989. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by councllmember , and upon vote being taken thereon, the Mollowing voted to favor thereof: .4 L 91) FR011 LQFY. III H(JFFIIRII All')VA 10. 5.1?89 10150 P. 1 If and the lolluwing voted against the samel whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the City Counci I u( Monticello, Minnesota, on October 30, 1989. ATTEST: C Clerk Mayor Council Agenda - io/io/89 17. Consideration of replacing underground heat pipes at the City's waste water treatment plant. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Shortly after the completion of the waste water treatment plant, the City staff discovered leaks in the heat supply pipes running from the hot water boiler to various buildings at the waste water treatment plant. Upon excavation, the City found many leaking joints. We made partial repairs to approximately 30 percent of the heat system piping at a cost of approximately $10,000. To determine the cause, at the suggestion of John Badalich, we forwarded undisturbed joints to Twin City Testing and Engineering Laboratories in Minneapolis for their determination. Their report indicates that the copper couplings were assembled but were never braised or soldered in some locations. Since the time of the initial repair, we have continued to be plagued with problems at the waste water treatment plant in regard to leaks in the heat supply lines. They became so severe that in 1988 we placed valves in the line and complete severed the heat to the aeration coirplex. This building does receive same heat from blowers within the building and was kept from freezing last winter. Earlier this year, the remaining portion of the heat lines began leaking at such a rate we felt it necessary to plan for a complete replacement of the heating pipes. we contacted OSM and asked them if they would consider engineering the replacement without a fee, as there was some doubt as to whether the heat supply lines were properly tested during the plant construction. OSM agreed to assist us, and in late September sent a mechanical engineer to the waste water treatment plant to begin developing plans for pipe replacement. A plan, along with general specifications for the replacement piping, are enclosed for your review. Dan Kling will be handling the project, and he has informed me that they will atteirpt to have bid documents and estimates ready for Tuesday evening's meting. lie also informed me that it is a distinct possibility that the joints were soldered but that it may have been more of a misapplication of the piping system and the solder migrated due to the operating conditions as well as the ground conditions of the pipe. Their new system, therefore, will be of a welded steel construction and placed at a depth of only three feet. in your supporting data, you will find a copy of a letter that we wrote to the Paul A. Lawrence Company, the contractor on the job. 1 followed this up with a visit to the Paul A. Lawrence Coirpany and also a discussion with the City Attorney at that time, it was generally felt that it was beyond the warranty date and would be difficult for the City Lo recover from the contractor. 22 Council Agenda - 10/10/89 11 �- B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be to follow OSH's recoimnendations with the City purchasing the materials to save time and bidding labor only for the replacement of the piping systein as engineered by 034. 2. The second alternative would be not to replace the piping system at this time but wait until next year utilizing temporary heating where necessary. It is possible that we could make it through the winter, but there would be some additional costs involved for additional boiler treatment and/or supplemental heating. C. STAFF REODMENDATION: The heating pipe system (and possibly the compressed air system which is located in the same casing) need to be replaced at the treatment plant. There was some difficulty in getting this project designed, and there may be an equal problem with installation yet this fall or winter. City staff, therefore, withholds its recommendation until after discussion at Tuesday evening's meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the various letters and test reports, specifications, and plans. C 23 City `= o1 M.ntice110 MONTICELLO, MN 55362 from your employees. I talked to Mr. Dudley Knutson in Austin, Texas on Juno 6 regarding pictures of come of that piping and its relationship to the buildings. Mr. Knutson indicated that December 9, 1985 Pnone16121295.2711 may be able to aoaiat me. As you may recall, I contacted you Mea0(6121333-5739 on Juno 12 to ask about those pictures. You indicated at that time you would check your files, but that Phil probably had Paul A. Laurence Company them. On that came date, June 12, I contacted Phil Snyder. Mayor. Nve Grmism P.O. Box 1267 City Counca: 10000 Highway 55 West if there wore soma looks that they possibly ware in some expansion Dw B1Onpen Fmn Far Minneapolis, MN 55440 WAlam Fav were the suppliers of the underground tri -pipe and may have Jerk Maxwpe Attn: Mr. Bruce Hanson Re: Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant and appurtenant Admtmaeator work. EPA C270855-03 underground heat and air lines. Tom Eldem Ftnenta Otector Dear Mr. Hanson: Nt:k W0aat00ar Pumk Warks: John Skrt" Early this year, the staff at the Wastewater Treatment Plant Pmnnn0 A zonng: discovered some problems with the underground heating and high GwV NO1f0n pressure air linea. After adding boiler troatment to the heating system for the Wastewater Treatment Plant, we found that we were unable to maintain any type of treatment in the water. By monitoring makeup wator, we found that significant amounts of makeup water were being used. An extensive examination of the Wastewater Treatment Plant indicated no looks in the aboveground or in building piping. In Juno of this year, it was determined that the underground piping was leaking. Since the as builto of the underground piping did not go into great detail, I attempted to obtain some additional information , from your employees. I talked to Mr. Dudley Knutson in Austin, Texas on Juno 6 regarding pictures of come of that piping and its relationship to the buildings. Mr. Knutson indicated that he had no picturea, but that the office or Mr. Phil Snyder may be able to aoaiat me. As you may recall, I contacted you on Juno 12 to ask about those pictures. You indicated at that time you would check your files, but that Phil probably had them. On that came date, June 12, I contacted Phil Snyder. He indicated that he had no pictures of the underground piping as ouch and did not know where they were. He indicated that if there wore soma looks that they possibly ware in some expansion joints that were installed on the project. Mr. Snyder suggested I contact Industrial Pipe and Valve in Minneapolis an they were the suppliers of the underground tri -pipe and may have more dotailsd shop drawings and information. On Juno 13 I Contacted Mr. Roger Wyman of Industrial Pipe and Valve. He indicated he would contact his supplier, Rovanco Corporation, and obtain a fabrication drawing and send it to me. On June 26, wo roc;ivod the drawing from Industrial Pipe and Valve. This drawing helped ua in datormining the whereabouts of this underground line. 250 Esm Broscuay Paula a. sok 83A Mmucedo. MN 55362 /�1 As you may recall, I visited your office in July of this year and brought with me a couple samples of the joints. As you may recall, one of the joints pulled easily apart and had very little, if any, solder in it. Due to the constraints and working conditions at the wastewater Treatment Plant, it was very difficult to excavate this line. As you may recall things are quite crowded beneath the ground surface at our facility. This excavation necessitated shoring and the hauling away and hauling back of the excavated material. our investigation was limited to the west side of the heating system, that going between the digester building to the sludge thickener building to the equalization tank to an area near the transformer. In this area we repaired 11 sets of joints. Each set includes one air, one hot water supply, and one hot water return. In October we sent a set of couplings from the hot water supply and hot water return to Twin City Testing Laboratory to see if they could determine the cause of failure of the joint. The sections or joints that we sent them were completely undisturbed. We received the results of this testing in late November. I have enclosed a copy for your review. The tooting clearly shows that the piping in some cases was not soLdured, and in other cases failure was due to improper soldering. we completed our repairs to the west side system as previously described just prior to the cold weather setting in. we were unable to evaluate the rest of the underground piping system thoroughly duo to the need to heat the buildings, but at this time we do not believe there are any large leaks. The cost to repair these leaks has been significant. To date the City of Monticello has expended $9,267.16 to repair those leaks. Since this is clearly a case of defective workmanship in the installation of those heating lines, we feel that Paul A. Laurance Company is obligated to pay for those repairs. This faulty workmanship existed from the date of installation. It is not possible for an unsoldered joint to have passed the required tooting. Please check into this matter and contact us within the next two weeks. We can furnish documentation and receipts for the work upon request. If you have any questions or if we may be of any further asistance, please contact us. Respectfully , oYV hn.. Simola Public works Director City of Monticello cc: Tom Eidem, City Administrator �{ Gerald Carrick, OSM Project Engineer l John Badalich, OSM City Enginoor Stop III Construction Filo Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor of Monticello Jeb 1--j ?+'• •4<.. �"rs :. a� f�—FA D. 4smtt. 949 • • .:-Loat�7.-:. �• � �,r-..':.:,;7-..1 ry,0 �._rAavL.M:a4e-...• •�._- `f. +i_• '•'f .y' rr�...tt''3 � `:t-j.• t• .. \ i. L'AtR�2�HW9i� �`HWR : _ � ... . _ • � � �� `•-FAR1tRwo;, 147.: t3: ' • ' • - -. - • IF �Tso - 'r,?? `TRI- 'IM E SEGTI0W u t.►aR.at .3M4 y a�a, Dewa. est. r.un.w. S� C i'Alttt'HW9,; t�HWa .•!' Kim, V14vJSI{'Cot WM = , _ �'A_.1e8.0 t HwiY.i HWS i --!'"iR,I'HWS,� I'a "'�"� tiPRL•FA� AuLMOR . rAa. btW,,t7♦ '• n ' 'C. AT�� 4 FAU. *-^ 441 SIR loop • V P P fAa. fsay a4i J• S (\�na•vew4 fro 8Z' �. .-•.,.MM ' .. - ..r..�a4.�ti.1"t -.... a.+Yt, a" 1��+tt Otat4 A01 �» Cat)Y ACTON 10 VatiF.(- a \\II A`t /y AI.IfILi W FILLD - '� Paa•FH6 P%P: 90'aL ✓ `,ot �;hit.,tt,tg gAr,.aary qa Pae•F'As. Lx P. ga•algta.R,.,...�•`-'"ij( r Ijh�`,•Fea.�r. aat F..w, VSWA. V4 a + FA11. ua.w% 34 a °' L it ul-(y—D-5 fiiTl HY /1' i.ovancd Corp. ! t pONTICELLO WA91'F-WATER�pLAIJTI 4�'MOUT iCGLLcivMl u; ;:. .:':�.i:�327• tuAn CItV te=nq _.� q MW . .61M�{& [s N �n0uwll N-v6NUE r e.. -Ul. Alii 6 ONE 6]i6.l160� `� AHPOATOF RADIOGRAPHIC EXAMINATION OF BRAZED COPPER COUPLINGS TO DETERMINE CAUSE OF LEAKAGE FAILURES PADJISCT, MONTICELLO WATER TRANSFER SYSTEM Dare, November 18, 1985 aePoiiTED To- City of Monticello Attn: John Simola FURNISHED BV6 250 E Broadway COpieoTot 1 -Orr -Schel en-Mayeron b Assoc inc Monticello, MN 55362 Attn: John P Badal ich, P.E. LABORATORY No. . 4142 86-153 GENERAL: On November; .1, 1985, we received two 2" diameter brazed copper coupl ings that reportedly failed in service: The couplings were identified as "Supply Inside" and "Return Outside", respectively. ' "The couplings were submitted to determine if the leakage failures were caused by substandard quality in the brazing operation. Both couplings were sectioned into four equal parts, radiographed and evaluated to determine the amount of solder coverage in the brazed joints. The radiographic evaluation was con- ducted according to Paragraph QB -112 of Section IX of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. RAC:IOGTiAPHIC TEST RESULTS: Sample Side Identification Number Result Supply Inside Supply Inside Unsatisfactory -no solder detected Satisfactory Return Outside 1 Unsatisfactory -no solder detected Return Outside 2 Unsatisfactory -lack of solder coverage exceeds 25% of the lap The brazed couplings do not meet the requirements of Paragraph QB -lit of Section IX of the ASME Code. Apparently, the copper couplings were assembled but never brazed an the one si de. The radiographic examination was conducted on November 8, 1985. The evaluation was con- ducted on November 14, 1985. REMARKS: CThe radiographic film and the sectioned couplings are being returned to you under separate ver with a Copy of this report. 4�v �O� �N1<1HO�AO �,-AWMA, Y��mr4 v •�A-".t•.�li � rO-d�?�Y��.� �Y�Nt10 AN��O� onwP ��ev�� Twin eitl Ond E II l0 0 , Inc. BY Heating supply and return lines run underground shall be installed in a pre -fabricated, insulated pipe conduit with all necessary fittings, anchors, expansion loops, end caps and other accessories, etc., as required. Supply and return lines shall be insulated as hereinafter specified. The conduit shall be 10 -gauge, Smoothwall, hot -dipped, galvanized steel with a zinc coating of 2 oz. minimum per square foot on each surface of conduit. The outer surfaces of the conduit shall be machine -coated with high melting point asphalt to a minimum thickness of 3/16', with an interposed layer of fiberglass screen, plus one (1) final outer wrap of asphalt -impregnated, fiberglass -reinforced pipe line felt applied spirally under tension. Field -installed closure plates shall be of the same gauge and material as the conduit. The conduit shall be properly sized to provide a minimum of 7/16' annual air space. The heating supply and return piping shall be Schedule 40, welded black steel pipe. The heating supply and return pipe insulation shall be rigid, 3 -lbs. per cu. ft., pre -formed fiberglass with a 'K' factor of .29, at a mean temperature of 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and a minimum thickness of 1'. Sectional insulation shall be banded with stainless steel bands on 18' centers. Supports for the heating supply and return piping shall be spaced at maximum of 10' spans, shall be of heavy steel (a minimum of 1/4' thick), and shall be custom-designed for the proper alignment of heating pipes. ;L Piping shall be suitably spaced and supported in conduit by specially -designed, full round insulating support guides and shall permit the pipe to expand and/or contract freely without stress or wear on the pipe or insulation, as well as provide for drainage and free air circulation. Expansion loops, where shown on the drawings, shall be custom -sized to permit free movement of carrier pipe without damage to the insulation. All loops or expansion bends shall be cold sprung 50% in the field by the Installing Contractor. System anchors shall be pre -fabricated at the factory and shall be equipped with drainage and vent openings at the bottom and top of the anchor plate. The anchor plates shall be a minimum of 1/2' thick steel plate, epoxy -coated, interior and exterior. Where a piping system terminates within a building wall, furnish a packed gland seal. If this termination is also an anchor point, an anchor plate seal may be used. All hot water supply and return piping of this System shall be tested to 60 psig pressure in the line. In the event of failure, repairs shall be made and the test repeated. After satisfaction is assured, the insulation filler pieces, approximately 6' long, shall be applied and banded with stainless steel bands furnished by the Supplier. The conduit shall be joined with welded coupling bands, M 21 aIso furnished by the Supplier, of the same thickness as the conduit and shall be air tested at 15 pounds using a soap solution at the field joints to locate possible leaks. After satisfaction is assured, the Contractor shall coat the field Joints the same as the conduit itself. ft= - before backfilling, the Contractor shall test the conduit for corrosion protection with a Holiday detector at 10,000 volts. Any voids shall be repaired and re-tested by the Contractor. The installation must be built in accordance with the plans/specifications and the Manufacturer's approved drawings, and shall be as manufactured by Riciiil or approved equal. C 1 f WJ. t/'Li, tix•JJf/wr. L•nr, y'i YLI. 4.twu I•M1•W,•w'lr. [�rt•x� 4.' LI. � 1 • �.Iw', YCr. Iwx..x r.r 4 L.we. I11`` . L-rrr. Iw c., /•w♦u arl L•.. •x4•.••.a •.• ww �4u Ku I4 Lr11UIT I • yIry? 1 .. �I r.ru.,:llJc•.Lvwvaourc I � � � .. .- Vtl ILTn•r Ilxll xIr TVI NL II•Y 11•fll LTr yi /Iftt Wf�1 ►Lt r/lJ 4e.r 1 {•�.T W. fr.ter• .[. q+..1� All+r=� 1 161 LID01 Irl rpr �TI[Ir III•r !Jt/1 Wt[ o—p— _ �L•�H wr titi :WJ••YYT ir•wll Yrx41 VMV ��. �� I IW.�n' J I v x>wrt t c .!I WIIIIT .4s+u IJ -- • '•`[ • IYKI .6LL 1 QUI • frT I.L.I. a.Il -0I rlT1F. 1� 1 r .•{LI I I 1 1 1 1 IIS r� '��_�C,IIILY 1 llllpp6ll Itl • I{6T a1P i'[.[Mr 1 [a1 �� j {�{} Exam 1 1 it . � I ' _ ifI . •I 1 n•v�.J� .J / Irtw .�v Li.•.r w.+a. w W.T•I.. 1 w.� C'• , ,.�--� �...:_.. j �•�r�4•.. vwr 4wLI. w LDJIHT I s•Ix.HL •i . O' 1 ~ _ I m I.LVA411w Af t1x•uw[c T4I/I M � 1 �wlr „Q,P,C � � `-0 H. mm • 1 ARt.ilx,•u.� /41T IIIIYx InY4fY ( I Lb11�'� •� IA•C.W +/lrlft�r. fIJ041•H."lTtw. .Lw4xJx1 tIY. m1 II I • ��'`, ♦/•IIS LMYT 1. ►.[ RMt►Tl1 1 Qpm 1 1 r x+114-7. {x.41.4 /.•.TIJx/ I I.II i 1 CIVDYIt {4C. -fp WIl44Y /IIIY. IJ hIL\ ►[!.•• LI••4lL+IIJ. I 1 I 1 1 IITr Ix4 .M4Pxx[t/ xx•u•wGn /I/wY r� 1 I 1 W LG[r 4[i. MYY III IJu T•Wlr • \1W w y• 1 IIlL\ IiI1MI /4T{H \WLIIW ' {� LTI® Llsi1ll 1 I�xLx••..�1•.. •d fJeLL.r •M�.• 1 -.. .1. �. I 1 1 � � .l I s� �Al7a L••:Ial� 4...W4 //I4. ti•JT j �,L. I � 1 I \r.• 1 p�..IIrT 141, WI`p14. ILL. 4• r 1 1 1 F1R�- J, /••i III..' 4 L IIIl1Y 1 1 f 1 r Ir `IA {.SIt1 tJ •w♦TI•• xllW I.IIW / 1 1I�/li/ti 1 T Llr • [LH'.[ ..T\ 7• Ira.11. u.I•. / i 1 1 - ,•�wwe-.1,._..r x 1W Mnit {L MW N TN'y t T LI41 /I LTIY fi\LD 1.II• V -------- ---- It, ~lP /IHl4MM I l•r.T14,. Mw. '– 1 i rh �, � ,41,,.•. L'MIV.Ta.J• KIW71JI!I.T�111 _ 1�� x:J I� •1'R.+M 4 1 1 I 1 ®1 1 41DS { DR/� TL�I I1,x �4x• I I • r� .. /Dmrm � •ItM V4 yu+ll MTW4 4111► WM.w ••LYx M+n ��W IL Mx•r.WTL Mn yxJ •Ll I WI Iln sl.{ V.IY .l.L�T•w.. _ y ,(! An( /• c" /A Cif —a WOTE I ; y K1[.J Q' hAS /Np pA[ 04 f.A- 6 4°uRS AT (AC rl CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE I°ATE 16/Co /Al I erAEET / or PIIO.IECT fn6wTI-Lo uwJTP Nr✓0[M14A.Ov.(G CEL Nws - (�.�R- rroTEe ' �r•,,... [ ^r ,-...( LOCATION -roll, EST I WA'r¢ qaF5 (1)0 rJT�IL(L-I-o ,Ma ►Jac INCLLUOe Aj►- ARCHITECT ENGINEER 0slq l 6ITI.,n la0✓ 3 kA0 %, )0 DRAWING NO. n,.) 1 �EETIYATOR -R. CAom,,s ICHEONEO eY QUANTITY LABOR MATERIAL 6UYYARr NO, UNIr PER UNITS YEAS UNIT TOTAL PER UN T TOTAL TOTAL O AT laysr., RA — !A,w 3�,oco f1E ^ /✓i4(u,[/CAI'.'{ pA(h'F(L[Iw(� �i271A.r. /( rif3y34 — r,BZ. i°fir;. •/ 2,rwaa „ T c (N �7sr.r. °-,7- Z `1D.'So l4 / 00 it 6r00.A.C@,nvA(,lo.- 37s(,r.'"�=/50/, �n7.7.�i — /0'7 T f>�f'� �J� DEmo✓710.! 8CA(P•4 j FA jo o � 00 /0 $b �j 5 a .IRA / F4,5• NuA 4,uJ.e6u,cOi✓[,S Aj JA 30.J �.j 06 I�jO TOO 2000 c.�vu,rPI ',15rt !.f• /4.uA 451!, ✓�r��Lv,( IL•er THC•I4' 3 CA 4/5.42 /T#&.Z10 (JSTAt, fq S 5 /597.75.. — K9 8 FLUV, Frff--. ALU.3r �»T°m fA. SAQ 50 do o iou too 5co /S RI.Z - JI Com of m►fN,L.rk.: � Q_ Flwll•r �O'nL SFJ 90 - y ,(! An( /• c" /A Cif —a WOTE I ; y K1[.J Q' hAS /Np pA[ 04 f.A- 6 4°uRS AT (AC rl Council Agenda - 10/10/89 18. Consideration of establishing moratorium on development of infectious, and/or hazardous waste disposal or incineration plants within the city, of Monticello for a period of one year. 0.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: In recent weeks the City has received two separate contacts from developers investigating the possibility of developing an infectious waste incineration facility in Monticello. Both proposed developments are substantial and are significantly larger than the infectious waste incineration plant proposed by Art Pretag some months ago. As you may recall, the Planning Coimnission tabled further discussion of the conditional use permit request submitted by Fretag pending further information. Pretag has not been heard from since. Staff is concerned that the City is not prepared to properly address the land use issues created with the development of a substantial infectious waste facility. The present ordinance is insufficient in that a proper zone or location for such a facility is not identified. Presently, incineration facilities are allowed as a conditional use in the I-2 zone which could possibly pave the way for development of an infectious waste incineration plant anywhere within the I-2 zone. It may be in the best interest of the City to examine the special impact created by this land use and identify a specific land area or zone for such a facility. In addition, a set of requirements outlining the conditions of operation in the new zone must also be identified. The City may be better served by having these controls in place before a forirel application for an infectious waste incineration plant is submitted to the City. A moratorium will allow us to buy time to develop the necessary land use controls. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt moratorium on development of hazardous and/or infectious waste incineration and/or disjrjsal 61tes for a period of one year for the purpose of providing time necessary for the City of Monticello to develop related land use controls necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Monticello. 2. Motion to deny adoption of said moratortum. C. STAPP RECOMMENDATION: Staff and City Attorney recoanend alternative 11. Due to time constraints, Planning Commission has not reviewed this matter and, therefore, has not had the opportunity to provide a recomirndation on this matter. Planning Commission will be receiving a copy of this memo and supporting data for future reference. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of "project Concept" submitted by Rosewood Corporation. 24 GMS GENERAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES ,91 Emerson Avenue West Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 September 22, 1989 FRED S. HIRSEKORN Phone 457-0366 President Area Code 612 Mr. Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Dcar Mr. t:olfsteller: General Management Services, a consulting firm which has done work in all phases of medical waste disposal, has been hired to conduct a feasibility study of building an infectious waste incinerator for a group of Twin Cities hospitals. At our direction, you were contacted by Rosewood Construction, Inc. to inquire about the possibility of locating such a facility in. your area. Given the interest you expressed at that time, we would now like to follow up that possibility with you. Accompanying this letter is a description of such a faci.lit-_v and of some pertinent aspects of the industry which should be helpful l in further informal discussions with you and key representatives of your planning commission and council. Peter Hilger, President of Rosewood Construction, will be in contact with you within the next 7-10 days to arrange a mutually agreeable time for such a meeting. Our objective is to obtain strong community support for locating such a facility in your community which we can recommend to our client. Your advice of the procedure to be followed to gain such support will be appre- ciated. I look forward to meeting with you. If you have any questions in the interim, please feel free to call me. Cordially, Fred S. Hirsekorn President cc: Mr. Peter Hilger 6D 1 Rosewood Construction, Inc. Commercial I Industrial I Residential September 28, 1989 Mr. Alan Fischlowitz Alba Environmental Systems 2500 Lake Place Minneapolis, MN 55405 RE: Request for Preliminary Proposal Hospital Consortium Incineration Facility Dear Alan: General Management Services and Rosewood Corporation have teamed up to develop a study for a consortium of Twin City metropolitan area hospitals evaluating the feasibility of a common medical waste incineration plant. As a part of this work, we are evaluating the initial capital outlay for the pLant. This RFP has been developed to refine the equipment cost on a preliminary basis. We would welcome a proposal from your firm, as well as your recommendations and alternatives based on the following criteria. Facility location: North Central Minnesota Baste stream: medical infectious and pathological solid and liquid Capacity: Option A: 1500 lbs./hour Option B: 2000 lbs./hour Type of incinerator: Open for your recommendation, however considering fixed hearth and rotary as most common. Auxilliary equipment: Anticipate a custom cart loader as well as a conveyor assembly for using boxes and barrels. Rosewood Once sora • Swle 300 Sana . 1711 wow Canny Aead 0 • Rearmed. MN 59119 • (61.1631-325' • I'AX lel 06 0? Your preliminary proposal should address the following issues for both the 1500-1b. Option A and the 2000.1b. Option B for the fixed hearth and/or an alternate technology: 1. Equipment Design Features, including: Throughput capacity. BTUH assumptions for waste scream. Hearth and chamber design concept. Combustion and gas retention design concepts. Automated loading/hopper design. Automated ash removal system. Dimensional criteria (size). 2. Auxilliary Equipment, including: Particulate emission control systems. Acid emission control/reduction system. • CO monitoring equipment. Remote monitoring and diagnostic features. Heat recovery equipment for steam production. J. Installation Factors: Auxilliary systems needed but not included• such as compressed air and low-grade steam. Ordering process and time frames for production and del ivory . Estimated transportation costs assuming FOB factory. • Estimated electrical and mechanical installation costs. Field services included during installation. 4. Operational Factors: Throughput capacity. Estimated gas consumption for: start-up period cool -down period normal hourly operations. Estimated electrical consumption. Estimated water consumption and water treatment needed. Typical effluent charactertscics and treatment needed for servicing. Type and quantity of chemicals/salts needed for pollution control equipment. Estimated annual maintenance needs/costs. Spare parts Initial inventory cost and general description. Equipment service capabilities after installation. Warranties provided. C 0 5. Costs (in a format generally as follows): Option A Option B Other 1500 2000 System Equipment Scrubber/pollution control Heat recovery Control and diagnostic systems Parts inventory Shipping Installation supervision/field service Start-up supervision/field service Testing Taxes, if applicable TOTAL COST Not included, but estimated: Electrical installation Mechanical inscallacion Gas consumption @ 16 hours of throughout based on $4.25/mm BTUH Electrical consumption @ 16 hours throughput Cost of chemicals needed per 16 -hour day Vater consumption in gallons per 16 -hour day Steam production capability 6. Installations: Please provide a list of other installations and contact persons. 7. Company Profile. We would welcome your proposal. Ac this time, the proposal is preliminary and will not represent a final request for bid. Based on the information provided, our consulting group will select those endors we feel will most adequately meet the needs of our client, from which final bids will be solicited based on more specific equipment parameters. This facility is expected to be in operation by late 1990 to mid-1991. We would appreciate your best response by October 11. I recognize this is a tight time frame. If there are problems, please call. Please concact me ac (612) 631-3254 (Fax 612.636-2844) if you have any questions . Thank you for your interest. Sincerely, A. Peter Hilger President APH:acs 0 I GNIS fi e y GENERAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES 791 E—,non Avenue µ'-, Mendota Heights. Nlin—oia 55118 PROJECT CONCEPT A COOPERATIVE HOSPITAL MEDICAL WASTE FACILITY Prepared by: General Management Services Rosewood Corporation. Inc. C INTRODUCTION For years, infectious waste was entirely unclassified and routinely dumped into landfills. The dangers of infectious wastes are well known. Recent publicity about eastern beaches receiving illegally dumped wastes, though serious, has had the beneficial effect of launching national concern on the size of the disposal problem. State and federal legislation and regulations for handling and disposal of infectious wastes are being promulgated. These efforts, desirable as they may be, are however creating a significant problem for the facilities in which such wastes are by necessity being generated, such as hospitals, doctors offices, clinics, etc. The increased use of disposable medical devices, the increasing number of transplantation procedures, the increasingly aging population requiring medical services, and other factors have combined to substantially increase the amount of infectious waste being generated. However regulations which prohibit landfill of infectious, wastes and increasingly stringent incinerator air quality standards, have created a significant shortage of safe and economical disposal sires. Restated, the supolv of infectious waste has grown substantially while acceptable disposal means are shrinkinq. The need is Otna t do enviiumuenta—y sound, fzcility' do .-'ned tc, sov1VIousthe disposal problems of generators oE infectious waste, such as this proposed incinerator, must be developed. In the Spring of 1989, General management Services was hired by the Council of Hospital Corporations, an association of hospitals in the Twin Cities, to explore the feasibility of creating a joint hospital supported project which could solve the challenge now posed by disposal of infectious wastes. The objectives of such a joint effort can best be summarized as follows: To create a facility that in every respect meets or exceeds all current and proposed environmental regulations. To create a facility which provides a saf.)disposal means for the community and surrounding areas. • To create a facility which is aesthetically pleasing and is both economically and physically compatibale with the com- munity. - To recover and utilize steam as a viable industrial or electrical energy source. - To eliminate many current outdated incinerators, replacing them with a single, professionally managed and effective facility. I The following provides information on the industry in general and on such a potential joint facility. General Management Services respectfully requests your consideration of the potential of siting such a facility in your community. THE CONCEPT The safe and proper disposal of medical waste is a responsibility of every generator. This project, which would combine the _ resources and the infectious waste volumes of all 24 participating hospitals into a centralized disposal facility, would solve their individual disposal problems. The benefit however is not limited only to those hospitals included in this facility. The State of Minnesota and your community will also benefit in the following ways: - Recovery of steam. This facility generates a significant amount of heat which can be recovered and converted into steam for use by industries or for use by a utility for electrical power. - Job creation. The const ructi?n and operatic- of this plant would create jobs. The operations would require from 6-12 people em- ployed as equipment operators, material handlers, plant manager, administrative assistant and 2-3 truck drivers. - Economic benefit. Such a facility would be a stable and permanent operation since hospitals nor the waste they generate are expected to decline. The need for City assisted financing, such as tax increment financing, is not anticipated due to the combined economic strength of member hospitals. - Environmental benefit. This facility would effectively replace older, outdated incinerators currently operating at member hospitals. The result would be an improvement in airquality.quality. Various aspects of the proposed project described as follows: Container Systems Specifically designed containers suitable for safe packaging of the various types of infectious wastes for transport would be furnished to the generators.. r� Internal Collection Assistance would be provided to upgrade the collection systems within the generators facilities, if needed to improve disposal practices. Col lection The packaged infectious waste would be picked up at the generator's dock or intermediate internal storage location on a schedule consistent with the volume of waste generated. . Disposal Using incineration, the facility would convert infectious waste material into sanitary ash suitable for landfill disposal. State of the art technology would include in-line particulate matter removal, acid scrubbers and related operational and pollution control systems. Ash Disposal Sanitary ash would be disposed in a State approved landfill. The infectious waste stream does not contain the types of materials found to cause potential environmental problems when its ash is lwl,if111Cu l-ul io GD 1CaChable C-Jwi U,i, ai-d ;vuJ; ancl bias Jva15 -3: pose a special environmental risk. Test would be run to verify that this applies to the ash generated by the incineration of the waste stream processed by such a facility. Record Neepinq Every pound of infectious waste collected would be accounted for from time of collection to time of disposal, including such information as weight, date, source, time of collection, etc. This information would be collected through a bar code system triggered at the time of collection and ending at the incinerator hopper door. Monthly reports would be prepared showing a detailed record of the waste volume collected and disposed. These reports would be suitable for submission to the generators and to the various agencies involved, and would meet the requirements of the federal waste tracking system which may well be regulated within the next 2 - 3 years. 1, Energv Recovery This faci 1 ity would have the ability to convert the heat it generates into steam suitable for various industrial uses (such a laundry) or for power generation into a public utility. This would be accomplished through use of a waste heat steam boiler incorporated into the processing unit. is I A It a THE PLANT FACILITY Approximately 2 acres of land will be required for the potential plant site. A 9,000 sq. ft. to 12,000 sq.ft. structure would be designed to be compatible with the neighboring uses and to be consistent with the requirements of the community. Property adjacent to the facility could be occupied by a potential steam user for a convenient and economical source of steam. The facility would house one larger incinerator with expansion space for a second future unit, or could contain two smaller units with an initial incineration capacity of 16-20 tons/day based on 2 or 3, 8 hour shifts per day. The facility would also contain several smaller areas. One such area would be used to clean and decontaminate the re -usable closed carts or plastic drums. Storage of other packaging goods such as plastic bags and plastic boxes would also be provided. This facility would not store, handle or dispose of municipal solid waste (MSW) or hazardous waste. Medical business records are the only non-medical type waste which would be accepted as a courtesy to hospitals. Waste material waiting to be incinerated is containerized in closed re -usable heavy plastic barrels, closed plastic carts or heavy cartons. Non-metallic and organic wastes would be incinerated generally within 24 to a maximum of 72 hours, unless stored in a refrigerated area. Metallic, or sharps, waste, may be stored for longer periods awaiting incineration at off peak periods as needed. There is no floor "tipping" operation with infectious waste. A conveyor system or cart loading system would store up to one day's incinerator charge at all times for supervised automatic loading into the incinerator. In-line bar coding equipment and digital scales are inherent to the loading system. Staff would be trained nthe proper emergency response procedures to clean up and decontaminate any affected area. This is not hazardous waste and requires only special care to clean up. Incinerator ash, cooled with water, would be automatically removed from the incinerator and transported to a standard roll- off container or cart for disposal to an approved landfill. A drawing showing the layout for such a typical incineration facility is in Appendix A. - 4 - 0 a In TRANSPORTATION Transportation of infectious waste is associated with effective disposal since sources are widespread and state-of-the-art infectious waste incinerators few in number. This facility would expect light truck traffic, based on the following operating characteristics: 1. The capacity of the incinerator(s) in theipotential facility would be 15,000 to 25,000 pounds/day, (7.5 to 12.5 tons/day) . 2.Semi-tractor trailer trucks with 48 foot trailers carry up to 15,000 pounds of containerized waste. Traditional "garbage" trucks will not be used. "Tipping" of waste onto the floor of the disposal facility is not done. 3. 20 foot service truck carry 6,000 to 8,000 pounds. 4. Thus, based on the 15,000 to 25,000 pound burn capacity of the incinerator, an average of two semi trucks per day is expected. 5. Ash removal typically occurs once every two to three days using a common containerized rolloff rubbish carrier. 6. Outbound shipment of packaging materials is visualized to be by the trucks which also pick up the infectious wastes from the generators. Thus this activity would not increase the truck traffic. 7. It is possible for short term peaks in volumes of infectious waste volumes generated to occasionally exceed incineration capacity in future years. During such peaks, the practice is to store the short term overflow volume in a refrigerated environment until incinerator capacity becomes available during the following days. Since truck traffic is based on incinerator capacity instead of storage cdpaciLy, no significant difference in truck traffic would occur, Occasionally, overnight storage of trailers on site can be anticipated based on unloading timing. B. The necessary State Department of Transportation permits, including an IRCC permit as well as a local waste haulers permit would be obtained, as required. 4. Each truck would be equipped with emergency response equipment necessary to clean and decontaminate a spill, should one occur. The trucks would be cleaned and decontaminated at the potential disposal facility. 10. In the unlikely event of a transportation mishap, the nature of the contents would be easily recognizable to response units by the international symbol for infectious waste on each container. Unlike hazardous materials which can cause public danger and evacuation , infectious wastes must simply be avoided . 5 - N INFECTIOUS WASTE Infectious waste is defined in the "Infectious waste Control Act" passed by the Minnesota State legislature and signed by the Governor in July of 1989 (Chapter No. 337, H.F. No.661), as follows: "Infectious waste" means laboratory waste, blood, regulated body fluids, sharps, and research animal waste that have not been decontaminated. 1. Laboratory Waste /_ Laboratory waste means waste cultures and stocks of agents that are generated from a laboratory and are infectious to humans; discarded contaminated items used to inoculate, transfer, or otherwise manipulate cultures or stocks of agents that are infectious to humans; wastes from the production of biological agents that are infectious to humans; and dis carded live or attenuated vaccines that are infectious to humans. 2. Blood Waste human blood and blood products in containers, or solid waste saturated and dripping human blood or blood products. Human blood products include serum, plas- ma, and other blood components. 3. Pathological waste Pathological waste means human tissues and body parts removed accidentally or during surgery or autopsy intended for disposal. Pathological waste does not include teeth. 4. Regulated Human Regulated human body fluids means cerebro - Body Fluids spinal fluid, synovial fluid, pleural fluid, peritoneal fluid, and amniotic fluid that are in containers or that drip freely from body fluid soaked solid waste items. 5. Research Animal Research animal waste means carcasses, Waste body parts, and blood derived from ani- mals knowingly and intentionally exposed to agents that are infectious to humans for the purpose of research, production of biologicals, or testing of pharmaceu- ticals. 6. Sharps Sharps mean: a. Discarded items that can induce sub- dermal inoculation of infectious agents, including needles, scalpel blades, pi pettes, and other items derived from hu- man or animal patient care, blood banks, laboratories, mortuaries, research faci- lities, aci- 1ities, and industrial operations; and b. discarded glass or rigid plastic vials r containing infectious agents. INCINERATION Incineration is the most widely used and commercially proven safe method for disposal of infectious wastes and is expected to so remain as it both disinfects and reduces the volume of solid waste. Modern technology has also provided the means to meet and exceed the air emission standards on a consistent basis. Typical temperatures in the primary combustion chamber of infectious waste incinerators are 1400 - 1600 F with waste being subjected to these temperatures for up to 6 hours. Temperatures in the secondary chamber, where the products of combustion of the first stage are further burned, are maintained near 1800 F to significantly reduce stack gas emissions. Incineration reduces the volume of material to be landfilled by about 906. It produces a decontaminated ash stream in which the original appearance of the infectious waste, which in many cases is aesthetically displeasing and which causes fear of infection by its handlers, unrecognizable. The system would be built with numerous fail safe features and controls which would cause automatic shutdown in the event the range of proper operating parameters is exceeded. This facility would have both on-site and remote location sensing to insure that operating parameters are being met. In addition the emissions of the incinerator(s) would be monitored to assure that they stay well within the emission standards being set by the MPCA. Sensors located throughout the system monitor the performance of the incinerator to a central unit. FMISSIONS Infectious wastes are primarily organic and contain plastics. Thus stack gases are primarily carbon dioxide (CO ) and water vapor (H O). A small quantity of hydrogen chloride (HCl) could also be present if PVC (polyvinyl chloride) plastics aro present in the waste stream (Syringe cylinders, tubing, etc.). A scrubber in the system will be used to remove 90-951 of such acid gases and particulate matter so that the emission quality would be well within the pending MPCA and Federal emission standards. 7 - Thus, there would be no significant contribution to the formation of acid rain. INCINERATOR ASH Ash resulting from the incineration of infectious waste is considered sterile of pathogens and acceptable for placement in approved landfills. Modern cofrtroIled air incinerators consistently achieve destruction efficiencies with 68 or less fixed carbon remaining in the ash. The recent (9/12/89) preliminary report on issues relating to reductions in ash toxicity published by the Minnesota Office of Waste Management indicates that lead from lead acid batteries and consumer electronic products account for 92% of the lead present in the general waste stream. Nickel -cadmium household batteries make up 278 of the cadmium in the general waste stream. There is no proof yet that the combustion products of such wastes contain leachable lead and cadmium, the two contaminants of concern. In any event, infectious waste does not contain these products and thus the ash would not contain any significant levels of lead and cadmium. Some plastics however can contribute cadmium when incinerated. As a result, ash testing will be conducted to confirm that the level of leachable lead and cadmium in the ash is well below the state and federal standard levels. Ash automatically removed from the incinerator is damp to eliminate any chance of post -disposal burn and to transport fly- away. REGULATIONS, TESTING AND PERMITTING Medical waste disposal handling and disposal methods were largely overlooked by the public and the regulatory bodies before 1987. Twenty eight states had no regulatory structure addressing infectious wastes in 1986. Public awareness of the dangers of AIDS, the growth of refuse derived fuel (RDF) and municipal solid waste (MSW) incineration plants in which there is "tipping" of wastes onto a tipping floor increasing worker exposure to medical wastes, and the discovery of potentially infectious wastes particularly on East Coast beaches dramatically changed federal and state legislative and regulatory priorities since 1997. The State of Minnesota adopted the "Infectious Waste Control Act" in July of 1989 and Congress passed the "Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988" which took effect on June 1989 in ten states. This federal pilot program is to provide the basic information on which federal legislation covering the handling and disposal of infectious wastes is to be promulgated within two years. 8 The proposed cooperative hospital disposal facility would meet or exceed all current proposed standards in all aspects of the operation and would provide the basic processes and operations to comply to any new federal handling, disposal and manifesting legislation. This will include the ability to track every pound of infectious waste from generator, to transporter, to handler, to disposer. A comprehensive testing program would be part of the State permitting process. Such programs would include stack emission, waste stream composition and ash analysis tests which adhere to the State testing procedures. The State permitting process is both extensive and rigerous and involves public comment. The State requires preparation of an exhaustive Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) a portion of which involves a site specific Health Risk Assessment. This assessment involves the tracing of stack gas emissions throughout the region and evaluating its effect on multiple ingestion pathways by the public, based on standard criteria. The EAta also requires exhaustive details on the equipment and other engineering features of the facility. After being reviewed and approved by the State MPCA staff, the permit is published for public comment and presented to the MPCA Board for approval. Approval would be conditional upon local community approval which would be sought by the hospital dL consortium prior to preparing the EAW and Healtn Assessment Risk. but would be conditional upon the results of the State approvals. rECONOMICS AND EMPLOYMENT A facility of this type represents a significant investment in plant, equipment and operating costs. Though not completely detailed at this time, preliminary estimates place the total cost of the facility is expected to exceed $2.5 million. In addition to a plant manager, each of as many as three shifts would require an equipment operator and handler. The primary day shift would in addition include one or two driver/handlers. Administrative office functions would be carried out by a plant manager and an administrative assistant. The entire facility, including management of legal, accounting, invoicing, scheduling, payroll and employee matters may be contracted with an independent experienced management company. Typical tax initiatives for new industrial facilities have often been requested of community officials. Tax increment financing used for land acquisition or soil correction is not proposed to be required for this facility. Factors such as public acceptance, site suitability and availability, transportation routes and a reliable labor force are more important to the project than short term tax incentives. `a - g 11 F] APPENDIX A PR IMINARY LAYOUT OF PROPOSED PLANT, 0 COST ESTIMATE SEWER EXTENSION ON OAKWOOD DRIVE (CO. RD. 117) This estimate assumes no roadway costs other than at the intersection of 117 and Dundas and that the work is performed with the Evergreen Project. Sanitary Sewer Hook into existing MH and patch street, lwrip sum $ 2,500.00 970 ft. 8" PVC SDR 26 @ $16 ft. $15,520.00 4 STD 8 ft. MH @ $850 ea. 3,400.00 12 ft. excess ml depth @ $100 ft. 1,200.00 1 - 8"x6" PVC Wye @ $60 ea . 60.00 2 - 8"x4" PVC Wye @ $50 ea. 100.00 10 ft. 6" PVC Service Pipe SDR 26 @ $12 ft. 120.00 70 ft. 4" PVC Service Pipe SDR 26 @ $10 ft. 700.00 60 ft. Jack 4" service lump sum 1,000.00 $24,828.00 Restoration, Misc. Grading, Black Dirt, Class V 6 Seeding - Lmrp Sun $ 11800.00 ESTIMATED SUBTOTAL. $26,628.00 Engineering, Inspection, Legal, etc. — 208 $ 5,325.60 ESTIMATED TOTAL $31,953.60 Aaxanable Parcels - 3 Total Footage Assessable e El JES: 10/10/89