City Council Agenda Packet 11-13-1989AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, November 13, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor: Ken Maus
Council Members: Fran Fair, warren Srnith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held October 23, 1989.
3. Citizens coiruwnts/petitions, requests, and complaints.
4. Public hearing on the adoption of a supplemental assessment roll for the
89-03 improvement project (Oakwood Industrial Park Overlay).
Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for certification to County
Auditor.
5. Continuation of public hearing for sanitary sewer extension on Oakwood
Drive.
6. Review Pinewood connunity playground plans, receive project update.
1
7. Consideration of a conditional use request to allow a tri-plex in an R-2
(single and two family residential) zone. Applicant, Brad and Cindy
Fyle.
8. Consideration of permit which would allow development of a single mobile
home site at the West Side Park in Monticello.
9. Consideration of final plat approval for Prairie West subdivision.
10. A simple subdivision request to allow a B-3 (highway business) coimnercial
lot to be subdivided into two comnercial lots. A variance request to
allow a zero lot line setback requiremenL. ApplicanL, The Lincoln
Caipanies.
11. Consideration of renewing the 1990 fire contract with Silver Creek
Township.
12. Consideration of approving on -sale liquor license transfer - Ornnfort Inn.
13. Consideration of renewing contract operation of the City's wastewater
treatment plant with Professional Services Group.
14. Consideration of odor control measures for the wastewater collection
system and wastewater treatment plant.
,"15. Consideration of resolution adopting a proposed preliminary 1990 budget
and setting a proposed tax levy.
Council Agenda
November 13, 1989
Page 2
16. Consideration of installing street light at private driveway as requested
by the Plaza Car Wash on Highway 25.
17. Consideration of hiring rink attendants for winter skating facilities.
18. Consideration of setting a meting for the purpose of establishing the
1990 salary/wage policy for non-union personnel.
19. Consideration of proposed supplement to cooperative construction
agreement with MN/DOT for upgrading Highway 25.
20. Adjourrunent.
U
'
11 b7 r
`1 1
`Jpr� Il
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ren Maus, Shirley Anderson,
Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
Approval of minutes.
Motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Warren Smith to approve
the meeting minutes as presented. Motion carried unaniunusly.
3. Citizens coimnents/petitions, requests , and complaints.
Brad and Cindy Eyle requested that Council consider granting them a
conditional use permit that would allow them to operate a tri—plex in an
R-2 zone. After discussion, it was determined that the z:atter should be
referred to the Planning Commission for review via the conditional use
permitting process.
Council reviewed a petition submitted by property owners near the Plaza
Car wash along South Highway 25 requesting the installation of a street
light at the intersection of their private access approach to Hwy 25.
Councilmember Blonigen suggested that the City develop a policy regarding
street light installation and that consideration of this matter should
wait until the general city policy is adopted.
l Motion made by Dan Blonigen to table issue pending outcome of further
study. Motion seconded by Shirley Anderson. Motion carried unaniuously.
Council was informed that the Evergreens subdivision has not proceeded
because the developer had been unable to obtain necessary financing. The
developer requests that the City consider installing a portion or all of
the necessary improvements in assessing the costs back to the developer.
Dan Blonigen noted that this method of financing the development of
residential lots has backfired in the past. Mayor Maus agreed that the
City should not get involved in this project without considerable money
from the developer provided up front, thereby reducing the per lot
assesmnent which would mitigate the financial risk to the City.
After discussion, motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan
Blonigen to table this matter pending development of a specific proposal
for using the assessment process to assist the development of the
Evergreen subdivision. Motion carried unanimously.
Public hearing - consideration of sanitary sewer extension on Oakwood
Drive between Chelsea Road and Dundas Road.
Mayor Maus opened the public hearing. John Simola explained that the
project was initiated at an earlier Council meeting at the request of
Leo Parks, who is the owner of the old auction house on the west aide of
Oakwood Drive. Simola recommended that upon favorable support from those
benefitting property owners, the City Council could authorize the City
Engineer to prepare plans and specifications, but withhold advertisement
for bids until the project can be incorporated with another utility
Council Minutes - 10/23/89
project as an alternative to achieve the lowest possible cost. I_`,
however, an urgent need is present for extension of the sewer, utilities,
then Council may wish to go ahead with the project and not incorporate it
with another City project. This would result in a slightly higher
project cost. Members of the council noted that one of the benefitting
property owners (Stuart Hoglund) was not present for the public hearing
and were therefore concerned that this individual did not support this
project. Fran Fair noted that Council should get Mr. Hoglund's input
prior to making a decision on this matter.
After discussion, motion made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan
Blonigen to continue the public hearing and strive to get input from
Stuart Hoglund regarding his level of support for the sanitary sewer
extension on Oakwood Drive between Chelsea Road and Dundas Raod. Motion
carried unanimously.
5. Consideration of ordinance amendment to establish garbage refuse charge
in accord with recycling plan.
John Simola explained that the ordinance amendment allows the City to
follow its recycling plan and allows the City full flexibility in
modifying or changing either the rates or the plan without having to
modify the ordinance.
Simola went on to note that the anti—scavaging portion of the ordinance
is necessary to declare legal ownership of the recyclables once they are
placed on the curb. The value of these recyclables offsets the recycling
cost and once set at the curbside becomes the property of the City. Once
they are picked up they become the property of our contractor. This has
not been a significant problem for the city of Monticello, but it has
occurred and Sheriff's deputies have been stymied by no appropriate place
in the ordinance under which they could take action. Typically, the new
ordinance provides for first offense as a petty misdemeanor and repeated
offenses as a misdemeanor. After discussion, motion made by Fran Fair
and seconded by Warren Snith to adopt the ordinance amendment and to
adopt the garbage processing fee as presented.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. Consideration of purchase of audio video equipment.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill requested authorization to purchase a
variety of audio video equipment utilized in the Council and Planning
Comnission decision making process.
O'Neill outlined the quotes received from Abols T.V. 6 Appliance.
After discussion, motion made by Fran Fair and seconded by Warren Smith
to purchase a VCR, camcorder, equipment table and mike stand from
Flicker's T.V. 6 Appliance. Staff to purchase tape recorder from
Flicker's T.V. 6 Appliance contingent on additional research. Motion
carried unanimously.
Council Minutes - 10/23/89
Consideration of authorizing purchase of a telephone system for City Hall
and the Maintenance Building.
Administrator Wolfsteller explained that the major purpose for
considering purchasing our telephone system is that currently the City is
spending approximately $100 per month to lease equipment and telphones
within City Hall. By owning our own system the City should be able to
save approximately this amount of money per month and apply it towards
the purchase of our new State of the Art electronic telephone system. In
addition, many features are available with new electronic phone system
that could benefit City Hall, including options to allow off site
locations such as the Maintenance Building the ability to use our metro
phone line and thus save some labor and add efficiency by not having the
Public Works emrployees come to City Hall to use the phone. It also
appears that with the new phone system we may be able to eliminate 1 or 2
telephone lines at City Hall by being able to combine phone numbers and
uses, and save additional monthly charges for these lines of
approxinately $40 per month per line. The potential $140 savings per
month would be sufficient to cover the cost of purchasing our own
equipment, if the new system costs $7,500 and is amoritizied over 5 year
life. It is expected that a new phone system would last longer than 5
years, when one considers that our present phone system has been in City
Hall for 11 years already. Administrator Wolfsteller requested that
Council authorize staff to acquire systematic cost not to exceed $7,500
to allow installation of an additional metro line estirreted at a cost of
$175 per month.
Mayor Maus noted that the features included in the State of the Art phone
systems can be utilized to achieve the maximum capacity of the metro
phone line, and thereby forestalling the need to install a second metro
phone line. Warren Smith supported continued research on this natter,
but suggested that Council decision regarding purchase of this equipment
be delayed until staff has prepared its final recormnendation on which
system to purchase.
It was the consensus of Council to table this matter pending development
of a final staff recommendation on which system will suit the City's
needs in the most cost efficient manner.
B. Consideration of abatement of dangerous buildings.
Building Inspector Cary Anderson noted that there are two residential
structures in the City that are vacant and in an extreme state of
disrepair.
one property is located on Elin Street across from the Legion Club. The
other structure in located near the site of the proposed addition to the
Monticello Mall. Both properties have windows and doors that are broken
out and are, of course, accessable to children and rodents. In light of
the recent murder in the city of Monticello and the manhunt that
followed, the Wright County Sheriff'o Department recouanended that at a
minimum, the windows and doors should be boarded up. Cary Anderson
noted, however, that tho structures are beyond repair. It, therefore,
may snake sense to demolish the blighted structures.
Council Minutes - 10/23/89
Administrator Wolfsteller noted that the City staff will work with the
property owners cooperatively, in an effort to get the owners to remove
the structures. Wolfsteller asked Council if staff should take action if
the property owners are unwilling to demolish the structures.
After discussion, motion made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan
Blonigen to require that the subject structures be closed by boarding up
the windows and doors; this to be done within the next 2 weeks.
Furthermore, said structures should be removed by Dec. 1, 1989. Motion
carried unanimously.
9. Consideration of ordering 4 booster pump control valves for the water
reservoir.
John Simola explained that the existing check valves in the booster pumps
at the reservoir on Chelsea Road open immediately upon pummp start and
slam close upon pump stop. This causes extreme water hammner and pressure
fluctuation in and about the reservoir, which ultimately could affect the
pressure throughout the City, as well as cause damage. Simola noted that
the City needs to replace these valves with electronically controlled,
hydraulically operated slow opening and slow closing check valves. In
preparation for this purchase the City requested that OSM include in the
electronic control package for the water system mechanisms to operate
these 4 new valves at the reservoir. Simola noted that we have obtained
a quote for these units for costs of $2,441 per valve, for a total cost
of $9,764, plus freight.
After discussion, motion made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Warren Smith
to authorize purchase of the 4 Claval check valves from Northwestern
Power and Equipment Company in St. Paul at a cost of $9,764, plus
freight. Motion carried unanimously.
10. Consideration of approving amendment to labor agreement for additional
Groundakeeper/Maintenance position.
Administrator Wolfsteller explained that during May of 1988
Tom Schumacher, the City's part-time permanent groundskeeper/building
maintenance person, filed an application to be part of the union
membership for the Local 49. Wolfsteller noted that although the City
staff could not see benefit for this position being added to the labor
agreement, the City has no choice in the matter since the Bureau of
Mediation Services has determined that this position can be part of our
present labor agreement. Ironically, even if Mr. Shumecher now did not
want to join the union, it is too late and the Local 49 would have to
agree to eliminate this position from the bargaining unit, which would
never happen. The labor agreement proposed is not detrimental to the
City at this point, and actually results in a cost savings to the City
even with the addition of extra benefits such ae the vacation and
holidays. From staff standpoint, there does not appear to be any benefit
to not approving the labor agreement and returning to the negotiating
table as it does not appear that we could end up with a better contract
than what is being proposed. Ren Maus noted the need to develop a
a
Council Minutes - 10/23/89
non-union workers policy which would allow employees to be under 1
personnel policy umbrella. Dan Blonigen noted that, in his view, the
public works employees now part of the union would be better off if the
union had not been established in Monticello.
After discussion, motion wade by Fran Fair and seconded by Warren Snith
to approve the proposed amendment to the labor agreement including the
groundskeeper/maintenance position as part of the union. Motion carried
unanimously.
11. Review of engineering data related to the recent overlay project in
Oakwood Industrial Park.
Administrator Wolfsteller explained that at the recent public hearing
concerning the assessment procedures used in the Oakwood Industrial Park
overlay project some property owners were contending that the City's
intent of assessing half of the overlay was inappropriate because the
project was initially designed as a 9 ton road, and that it was an
engineering problem and should not have been assessed at all. In
response to this position, City Engineer John Badalich prepared a letter
which outlines the events that took place in 1977 and confirms that the
road design originally placed within the Oakwood Industrial Park was
meant to be a 7 ton design and not a 9 ton design. The original
feasibility study for the Oakwood Industrial Park proposed sewer and
water improvements along with storm sewer iuprovements and a permanent 9
ton road design with curb and gutter. Due to the high cost of the curb
and gutter and otorin sewer project, the bituminous paving was originally
eliminated from the project and was intended to only have a gravel road
along Chelsea Road and Thomas Park Drive. After the utility work was bid
the Council later authorized a change order which did include paving
Chelsea Road to the reservoir site frmn County Road 117 and a portion of
Thomas Park Drive. This change order was designed as a 7 ton project, as
was the balance of any street construction done within the Oakwood
Industrial Park.
Wolfsteller went on to state that although this information is now
presented after the assessment hearing, the Council did request that this
information be researched and provided for review. Although the
assessment roll has been adopted for the project, the Council always has
the option to hold a reassessment hearing should it find new information
or costs that should have been assessed. Wolfsteller explained that
although Council may have felt that they were treating Mississippi Drive
residents equal with Oakwood Industrial Park in that both received a 208
assessment for their work, it actually turns out now that the Oakwood
properties are paying $1.75 per front foot, whereas Mississippi Drive
residents were charged $4.91 per foot. As you may recall, in discussing
how the Mississippi Drive project should have been assessed, it was
decided that the under drain system and the major street construction
that was necessary should have been placed on advalorem taxes and that we
can now only charge Mississippi Drive for typical overlay costs. When
this cost turned out to be less than 206 of the project cost it was
determined that the assessment had to be at least 206. Basically by
lowering the Oakwood Industrial Park assessment from 506 to 206 Council
In affect has charged fc- tha IaCm:atrial Fark o.arlay at lcza than half
of what the overlay was charged to the Mississippi Drive residents.
W
92
Council Minutes - 10/23/89
Based on the information supplied by John Badalich there is even
rationale for charging 1008 of the overlay in Oakwood Industrial Park, as
they technically never paid for a 9 ton road and this could have been
considered an improvement rather than an overlay. Finally, Wolfsteller
noted that staff is a little uncomfortable with the policy used in
assessing the overlay for the industrial Park and that Council will be
looking at an overall assessment policy in the near future. In light of
this we wanted to make Council aware of the current inequity that
resulted from lowering the Oakwood Assessment to 208 and that they now
are paying quite a bit less than Mississippi Drive residents.
Dan Blonigen noted that the original road was designed for 7 ton capacity
and that it was his recollection that when the project was undertaken the
affected property owners wanted the original 9 ton road reduced to the 7
ton.
Fran Fair asked Dan Blonigen if he was sure that he had his facts
straight.
Dan Blonigen said "Yes.".
Warren Snith asked "Why do the streets strengths vary in that area?".
OSM Engineer Dan Cling noted that the street strength depends on the
thickness of the asphalt combined with the quality of the road base.
Both components of a street may vary throughout the length of the
street. In this situation portions of the roadway exceed the 7 ton
specification.
Dan Blonigen noted that there is a big difference between the downtown
property owners and the industrial owners in to nos of direct benefit
created by improvement projects. It was his view that road improvements
provide a greater direct benefit to industrial users than comercial
users and therefore roads iiproved in the industrial areas should be
financed to a greater degree by the property owners. Blonigen reiterated
that he is opposed to the previously adopted assessment roll which called
for a 70/90 split of the Industrial Park overlay.
Warren Smith noted that he would like to see efforts made to establish a
policy for street assessments.
After discussion, motion made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to call for a reassessment hearing to correct the assessment
formula for Oakwood Industrial Park street construction and to return to
the 50/50 split of project costs as originally agreed upon at the outset
of the project. voting in favor: Dan Blonigen, Shirley Anderson, Ken
Maus. Opposed: Warren Snith, Fran Fair.
12. Consideration of assigning costs to study feasibility of extending public
iinprovements to the Marvin Road/H14hland Heishts area and consider
authorizing study contingent on financial contribuition by developer.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill explained that George Rivera requested
that City Cnuncil direct the rity Engineer to coinrlete a feasibility
study which would outline the costs of providing public service to the
properties located along Marvin Road. O'Neill asked Council to review
O
Council Minutes — 10/23/89
the feasibility study cost estimate and determine what portion of the
cost should be paid by Rivera and what portion should be paid by the City
based on relative benefit of any improvements in the area. O'Neill
reported that staff recommnends that a feasibility study be conducted for
costs not to exceed $3,000 contingent on the developer paying 758 of
initial cost, or $2,250.
After discussion, motion inside by Fran Fair and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to direct OSM to complete a service area update and utility
feasibility study for the subject area at a cost not to exceed $3,000
contingent on the developer paying 758 of initial costs or $7,250.
Motion carried unanimously.
13. Consideration of bills for the month of October.
Motion wade by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to pay the
bills as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
14. Other matters.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill informned Council that the City has been
invited to participate in the Train 250 Ride Across Minnesota. The
Multiple Sclerosis Society is sponsoring the event in conjunction with
the Celebrate Minnesota prograin. It is expected that 1,500 bike riders
from the Upper Midwest will participate in the event. Monticello
participation to consist of providing food, entertaimmnent, and overnight
facilities for the cyclists.
After discussion, motion made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Warren
Smith to participate in the Train 250 Ride Across Minnesota and to direct
staff to work with the Chamber of Connerce on this matter. Motion
carried unanimously.
Assistant Admninitstrator O'Neill requested that Council adopt the
official namne of the transit system that will begin December 1, 1989.
The namo suggested by the Monticello Transportation Advisory Commnittee is
"Monticello Heartland Express". Council adopted this namne by consensus.
Admninistrator Wolfsteller requested that Council establish a date for a
budget workshop and public hearing.
As a result of the discussion the budget workshop was scheduled for 7
o'clock, December 4th, with the public hearing on the budget scheduled
for 8 o'clock, December 4th.
There being no further discussion, mneeting was adjourned.
Je f O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Council Agenda 11/13/89
4. Public Hearing on the adoption of a supplemental assessment roll for the 89-03
Improvement Project (Oakwood Industrial Park Overlay). Consideration of
adopting an assessment roll for certification to County Auditor. (R W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the October 10th Council meeting, an assessment roll was adopted for the
Oakwood Industrial Park for the 89-03 Project covering the recent bituminous
overlay. Some property owners affected by the assessment from the Industrial
Park questioned the rationale for assessing 508 of the project costs for
increasing the road tonnage limit when they felt the initial project
constructed in the late 70's was always planned for a 9 ton road. Because of
the apparent uncertainty over whether the initial design was rated at 7 ton or
9 ton, the Council adopted the assessment roll at a lower figure of only 208.
At the last Council meeting, the Council was supplied with information from our
City Engineer, John Bidalich, indicating that the original bituminous paving
within the Oakwood Industrial Park was always planned and designed for a 7 ton
capacity. According to the letter from OSM, a feasibility study was prepared
by OSM covering sewer and water extensions within the Industrial Park along
with bituminous paving which included curb and gutter and storm sewer
improvements estimated at a total cost of $800,000. At the public hearing held
on April 25, 1977, the Council and the property owners reviewed the estimated
project cost and tabled any action until May 9, 1977, at which time the Council
ordered preparation or plans and specs for servicing Oakwood Industrial Park
with water and sanitary sewer only with bituminous paving, curb and gutter, and
storm sewer improvements being deleted from the project. According to the
minutes of the May 9th Council mewing, George Phillips, representing Oakwood
Industrial Park, requested that the storm sewer, and curb and gutter
improvements be eliminated from the project to lower the cost. This appears to
substantiate Mr. Bidalich's record of the events.
Although the elimination of bituminous surfacing under this project does not
necessarily mean the change order approved later adding bituminous paving was
only designed at 7 ton, it has always been OSM's recommendation on other
projects that the 9 ton design would be achieved when curb and gutter was
installed by adding an additional bituminous overlay to the existing pavement.
It seems to indicate that when the chango order occurred on September 26, 1977,
adding bituminous paving along a portion of Chelsea Rd and newly platted Theme
Park Drive without the installation of curb and gutter that it would have nnly
been designed to a 7 ton capacity to allow for a 9 ton capacity to be reached
when (and if) curb and gutter was ever installed later.
In light of the action taken at the last Council meeting, I have prepared an
additional supplemental assesmmnt roll for all of the parcels within Oakwood
Industrial Park for the additional 308 of the project cost that was eliminated
during the original assessment hearing. All property owners again were
notified of tonight's public hearing and were given a brief explanation as to
why the Council was considering a reassessmmont for this project.
After receiving additional input from the public concerning this proposed
reassessment, the public hearing can then be closed and the council can
mnnider adopting the additional supplemental ansesament roll as prepared or
altering it in any way you determine feasible. Should the additional 308
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
of the project be assessed, the assessments would not be payable until the year
1991, as we have already missed the cutoff date for certifying for next year's
taxes. This does not cause any problem, only that a one year delay is
expected. In addition, this supplemental assessment would only be spread over
10 years rather than 15, as was the case with the first assessment roll to
coincide with the length of our bond sale.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the supplemental assessment roll for the Oakwood Industrial Park
Overlay Project as prepared and adopt the resolution certifying the same
to the County Auditor for collection beginning in the year 1991.
2. Amend the assessment roll if necessary and then adopt.
3. Do not adopt the assessment roll.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the information supplied by the City Engineer and in ury review of the
minutes and supporting data during 1977 when the initial bituminous paving took
place in the Industrial Park, I do believe that the roads were originally only
designed for 7 ton capacity to allow for the ultimate 9 ton design to be
achieved when curb and gutter and a final overlay lift was installed. During
the original project in 1977, the Industrial Park had very little activity and
the owners of the Industrial Park were concerned of the larger project cost
being a burden on them until more development occurred. Because of this, it
does appear that assessing even 50% of this recent overlay is a fair allocation
because if it had been done originally in 1977, the property owners would have
paid 100%. In corrmpering this project to a streetscape project, you could
assume that the streetscape project entailed replacement of existing sidewalks,
whereas the bituminous overlay in the Industrial Park was done to bring up the
road limits to the intended design capacity.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the resolution and copy of supplemental assessment roll for this
project; copies of provious minutes pertaining to original projoct.
L
D
PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT
IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT 89-03
OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR
PID $
NAME
LOT
BLOCK
ASMT. AMT.
Thous Park
155-038-001010
Pat Townsend
1
1
$
395.04
155-038-001020
MacArlund, Inc.
2
1
$
363.07
155-038-001030
MacArlund, Inc.
3
1
$
363.07
155-038-001070
Thomas Schany
7
1
$
363.07
c/o Northdale
Construction
155-038-001080
Thomas Schany
8
1
S
363.07
c/o Northdale
Construction
155-038-001090
MacArlund, Inc.
9
1
$
363.07
155-038-001100
Thomas Schany
10
1
$
363.07
c/o Northdale
Construction
155-038-001110
Skoglund
11
1
$
242.05
Communication
5
2,815.51
Oakwood Industrial
Park
155-018-001011
Monticello
N 1/2 -
1 1
$
619.13
Roller Rink
155-018-001012
Joyner Lanes
S 1/2 -
1 1
$
740.15
155-018-001021
Hermes Investment
N 1/2 -
2 1
$
871.36
c/o Ralph Hermes
155-018-001020
Joyner Lane
S 1/2 -
2 1
S
871.36
155-018-001031
WCSB
N 1/2
- 3 1
$
629.32
155-018-001030
SMA Elevator
S 1/2
- 3 1
$
726.14
155-018-001040
Oakwood Ptnr.
N 1.12
- 4 1
$
726.14
155-018-001041
0. Dale Larson
S 1/2
- 4 1
$
726.14
155-018-001050
City of Monti.
5
1
S
1,282.85
155-018-001060
Oakwood Ptnr.
6
1
1
T
1
32 06
D
PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-03
OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK
Page 2
PID S
NAME
LOT
Oakwood Industrial
Park continued
2 3
155-018-002012
Simonson Lumber
W 1/2 - 1
155-018-002011
Darryle Anderson
E 1/2 - 1
155-018-002020
State of Minnesota
2
155-018-002030
Oakwood Ptnr .
W Part 3
155-018-002031
Wayne Labeau
E Part 3
155-018-002040
Oakwood Ptnr.
4
155-018-002050
Clow Leasing
5
155-018-002060
Oakwood Ptnr .
6
155-018-002070
Oakwood Ptnr.
7
155-018-002080
Oakwood Ptnr.
8
155-018-002110
NAWCO Minnesota
11
155-018-002120
NAWCO Minnesota
12
BLOCK ASMT. AMT.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
155-018-003010
Oakwood Ptnr.
1 3
155-018-003020
Oakwood Ptnr.
2 3
155-018-00 3030
Oakwood Ptnr.
3 3
155-018-00304 1
HSP
W Part 4 3
155-018-003040
City of Monti.
E Part 4 3
155-018-003050
Monticello FMA
5 3
155-018-003060
Ron 6 Dee Johnson
6 3
155-018-003071
Jay Morrell 6
7 3
John Plaisted
$ 773.43
$ 802.39
$ 1,258.63
S 989.75
$ 777.18
$ 895.56
S 747.34
$ 871.36
$ 871.36
$ 1,040.80
$ 847,16
S 924.42
$10,799.38
S 949.01
$ 726.14
$ 726.14
$ 522.82
$ 517.97
$ 1,040.80
S 871.36
S 871. 36
S 6,225.60
I
PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-03
OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR
Page 3
PID $ NAME IAT BLOCK ASMT. An.
Dundas Circle
City of Monti. 1 1 $ 698.69
City of Monti. 6 1 $ 611.67
$ 1,510.36
TOTAL OAKWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARR
SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT $29,971.85
8
RESOLUTION 89 -
RESOLUTION ADOPTING SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notices duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and heard and passed upon all the objections to the proposed
supplemental assessment for iuprovement 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 benefitted 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 10 years, the first of the installments to be payable on
or before the first Monday in January, 1992, and shall bear interest at
the rate of 8.15 percent 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, 1991. 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
paprent, 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, and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer
the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest
accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such
payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged
through December 31 of the next succeediny yedr.
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 assessments shall he collected and paid over in the
same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the Council this 13th day of November, 1989.
Ken Maus, Mayor
Rick Woirsteller
City Administrator
6. Consideration of Extenains Sewer and Water, - Oakwood Industrial
Park and West of Hillcrest Addition.
Petitions have been received by the city from the Oakwood
Industrial Park and John Sandberg requesting sewer and water
extensions to their respective properties.
John Badalich, city engineer, prepared a preliminary report
on the above extensions. (See supplement 4-11-77 #3.)
Sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street and appur-
tenant work to serve a portion of the Industrial Park was
estimated to cost $802,000.00 with approximately $296,000
placed on ad valorem taxes.
Sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and street work to
serve approximately 32 lots in a development proposed by
John Sandberg, west of Hillcrest Addition was estimated at
$160,000.00 with approximately $32,000 picked up by ad
valorem taxes.
Motion was made by S. Hall, seconded by D. Blonigen and unan-
imously carried to adopt a resolution ordering Orr-Schelen-
Mayeron to prepare a feasibility report on extending sewer,
water, storm sewer and street improvements to Oakwood Indus-
trial Park and Mr. Sandberg's development, and providing for
a public hearing on said improvements on April 25, 1977 at 7:30
P.M. (See Resolution 1977 #2.)
3. Public Hearing - Sanitary Sewer Extension to Oakwood Industrial
Park and along County Road Ill to Highway 25.
� I1 SI'11
John Badalich, city engineer, presented to the council a feas-
ibility report on extending sewer, water, street, and storm
sewer to Oakwood Industrial Park.
The estimated costs of the improvemenr..a ago o-,•
TOTAL PORTION PORTION ON
EST. COST ASSESSED AD VALOREM
Sewer $391,000 $157,000 $234,000
Water 59,000 SS,000 -D-
Street 230,000 220,000 10,000
Storm Sewer 151,000 ? ?
$800,000 $435,000 $244,000
A policy has not been established on what portion of the storm
sewer improvement might be assessable. A typical industrial park
lot with 350' of frontage would be assessed, (not including
possible storm sewer assessment), approximately $23,170 per
parcel.
Because of the uncertainty over whether the MPCA will approve
any sewer extensions at the present time, G. Walters entered
a motion, seconded by D. Blonigen and unanimously carried to
defer any actiun uu LI -0 potitioncd oer:er extension req"•'at•. �•
� r/,1.7
4. Consideration of Sanitar/Sewer ESrtension to Oakwood Industrial Park
and Along County Road 111 to Hwy. 25, Water Main Extension, Street
Irmrovement and Storm Sewer.
At the last council meeting, John Sadalich presented a feasibility
report on extending sewer, water and street improvements to the
Oakwood Industrial Park.
George Phillips, representing Oakwood Industrial Park, inquired as to
whether the storm sewer and curb and gutter could be eliminated from the
improvement project along with a portion of the proposed water mains
which serve the purpose of looping the water mains only.
Mr. Phillips also inquired as to the possibility of extending water
service only this summer if the sewer could not be constructed.
John Badalich, city engineer, indicated that he would report back
to the council on the feasibility of eliminating a portion of the
looped water mains in Oakwood, and that water service could be
installed separately, but would be more costly.
S. Hall entered a motion, second by A. Grimsmo to adopt a resolution
ordering O.S.M. to prepare plans and specifications for servicing
Oakwood Industrial Park with water, and sanitary sewer only. noting
in favor: C. Johnson, S. Hall, A. Grimsmo, D. Blonlgen.
Abstaining: G. Walters.
. (See Resolution 1977 #5)
Regular meeting - August G, 1977 - cont'd.
q. Consideration of Adopting Resolution Aporovinq Plans &
Speci_ficatinns and Directin¢ the Advertisement for Con-
struction Bids on the 1077-1 Sanitary Sewer, Streets and
Watermain Improvement Prnjecr..
John Badalich, city engineer, reviewed the plans for
constructing sewer, water and street improvements for
Oakwood Industrial Park and along Matthew Circle in
Ritze Manor. The estimated cost of the improvements was
placed at approximately $570,000.
Gene Walters made a motion, second by P. white and unani-
mously carried to adopt a resolution approving plans and
specifications and advertising for bids on the 1977-1
Sanitary Sewer, Streets and Watermain Improvement Project.
The bids would be returnable September S, 1977 and could
be awarded at the September 12, 1977 council meeting.
{See resole,r.ion 1077 ,}11).
C4)
i
7. Consideration of Awarding Contract on 1977-1 Improvement Project.
I�? On 9-8-77, bids were opened on the 1977-1 Sanitary Sewer, Water
qly Main and Street Improvement Project with the lowest apparent
bidder being Arcon Construction Co. of Mora, MN. with a bid of
$353,616.95• (See Supplement 9-12-77 #5).
Estimated cost of this project for construction was 5462,000
so the bid is over 5100,000 less than projected.
P. White entered a motion, second by G. Walters and unanimously
carried to award the contract for construction on the 1977-1
Sanitary Sewer, Watermain and Street Improvement project to
Arcon Construction Co. in the amount of S353,616 -95-
9A
16. Consideration of Change Order - 77-1 Sewer & Water Project.
A motion was made by G. Walters, second by D. Blonigen and unanimously
carried to authorize the preparation of plans and specifications for black -
topping Chelsea Road and the new road proposed for construction under the
77-1 Sewer and Water Improvement Project.
9. Consideration of Change Order BlacktoppinR of Certain Streets in Oakwood
Industrial Park.
At the council's September 26, 1977 meeting, John Badalich was directed to
prepare plans and specifications for blacktopping Chelsea Road from the
water reservoir to the intersection of Chelsea Road with Oakwood Drive
(County Road 117) and the blacktopping of the two newly created roads
in Oakwood Industrial Park.
The total construction cost, based on unit prices received from Arcon Construc-
tion,
onstructtion, would be 542,072.00.
A motion was made by P. White, second by D. Blonigen and unanimously carried
to adopt a resolution approving the plans and specifications and change
order #1 with Arcon Construction in the amount of 5!,2,072.00 as part of the
1977-1 i=rovement project for blacktopping streets in Oakwood Industrial
Park. (See Resolution 1977 A28).
U
Council Agenda — 11/13/89
5. Continuation of public hearing for sanitary sewer extension on Oakwood
Drive. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the last meting, the City Council continued the public hearing for
the sanitary sewer extension due to lack of cormnents from Stuart
Hoglund. Jeff O'Neill has been in contact with Stuart Hoglund, and I
spoke with Stuart on Thursday, November 2. Stuart indicated that he had
not missed the meeting intentionally and will make every effort to be at
Monday evening's meeting, even though he has a slight conflict with
another meeting.
Stuart stated he was somewhat disturbed that the City was proposing to
extend sanitary sewer to a large piece of property of his when the
innediate need was only for a couple of individuals such as the auction
house property and the old Heskin's Electric building. He stated that he
had no irmnediate needs for sanitary sewer on his property. Stuart went
on to state that he was under the impression that his property was
unbuildable because of correspondence from the City Engineer a few years
ago concerning a piece of property on Cedar Street, which denoted storm
water drainage problems. it is his opinion that the City cost him a sale
of a portion of his property by bringing to light coiaplications from
storm runoff when development occurs. Stuart indicated that the City
should be looking at solving the overall storin drainage problems in the
area prior to doing anything with the sanitary sewer extension.
I tried to explain to Stuart that the original correspondence from the
City Engineer was not to inhibit development of the property but merely
to point out the need to address the storm water runoff situation either
by elevating the property or by installing storm water retention ponds on
site. Because the City is concerned that storm water be properly handled
does not mean that the property is undevelopable. Stuart went on to say
that he felt that storm water issues in and about the freeway and Highway
25 have been a mess for years and that the City has not properly handled
these in the past, and it should be our concern to straighten out this
mess first.
I asked Stuart if he would be in favor of the project if the assessments
were deferred under such a program as Green Acres. lie indicated that the
property could meet Green Acres but that with the interest accruing, this
would be just as bad as no deferment at all. Stuart indicated that he
would like to sell the property and asked if the City would be willing to
purchase it. I informed Stuart that I did not know of any needs of the
City in that area and, therefore, doubted whether the City would be
interested. I informed Stuart that he could pursue that with appropriate
City staff if so desired. Stuart stated that he would be in favor of the
proposed newer extension if the City would help him develop his property
so that it could be sold. He did not go into great detail as to what he
meant by assist with developing tho property but indicated he would make
every effort to come to Monday evening'a meeting.
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
The alternatives are relatively the same as those included in the
original agenda item for the public hearing. There are essentially two
issues in regard to this item. one is the environmental issue and
iimnediate needs, and the other is the financial burden of extending city
utilities past a property that has no immediate needs.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
From a public works standpoint, the project is feasible; and from an
envirorunental standpoint, it is needed. It is unfortunate that it was
not put in with the original improvements on Oakwood Drive and in the
industrial park in the late 1970'x. From a policy and political
standpoint, it is much more difficult to deal with, even though the
benefits of the project would be easy to demonstrate. No matter which
way the Council decides, there will be financial burdens on property
owners. It is difficult to determine which is in the overall best
interest of the City of Monticello as well as the involved property
owners.
D. SUPPORTINC DATA:
Please refer to copy of agenda supplement from last meeting.
council Agenda - 11/13/89
6. Review Pinewood coimnunity playground plans, receive project update.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Cheryl Fuller will be in attendance to provide a quick update on the
progress of the protect. No Council action is requested.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Attached you will find a preliminary design of the play structure, a
project update, and a volunteer sign—up sheet.
C
m
F~51YS75A I
rvew R.CG "N005RBIK OUTOCKA CLAMKC)Oli,,
Vlr
5,114P 1lelX/FAJLLWCr=
&MIIRROR F?400M/TELEPtfCA-jE
5rCOKY MlWrlk WN E
CwAeON 10 re,
TIRE Sr VNrT /6 -^'r -W. "OLr=
ROCKET/UPO
W RIZONr^L LRP L-AIAVR I f
PICNIC ^AEA
`Ol.
�7 101
&U3,51ACLE 0. --e
co c4 -A r
-Wyt)CrlvtAIJNII'( 11-A)'0L*tWP
KIM 3,1.FAI*ti I'r-.
LIW ti�
PINEVOOD C-01MRITY PLAYGROUND PROJECT
UPDATE - HOVEMBER 1989
DESIGN DAY - OCT. 3 Rachael Dougan (architect, Robert Leathers)
7:30 - Site planning, meeting with Principals, P. E. Teachers
8:45-10:45 - Seven sessions with all students grade 1-5, sharing
of ideas for playstructure equipment
11:00-2:00 - Initial drawing of plans from students' ideas,
students informally offering suggestions, comments
2:00-2:40 - Meeting with Childrens Committee
3:00 - Meeting with faculty, preliminary plans explained
3:30=4:30 - Meeting with Core Committee
4:30-7:00 - Dougan working on final drawing
7:00 - Community Meeting
8:30 - Care meeting
B. PRELIMINARY PLANS - received from Leathers. Month of November to
review plan, gather suggestions for design changes or additions.
Have scheduled the following events to gather input:
1. School Board presentation
2. City Council presentation
3. Faculty presentations at all three schools
4. Times article/schematic and Expo booth
5. Community meeting on Nov 28, 7pm Monticello Public Lib
After compiling suggestions, the Design Review committee will
make the final design changes.
C. ORGASIZATION DAY - Feb. Meeting with a Leathers rep. to finalize
plane, responsibilities and other details. (Should have 75% of
funding goal by this time)
D. BUILDING DAYS - May 2-5 (Wed -Sun) Rain or shine, Community
Celebration on Sunday evening
'**.t* 41k'k.i<10 t 4 fl* 1*** k*
E. VOLUNTEER RECRUITMENT
1. Groupe (service organizations, business, schools, military
reserves, etc. ) - follow-up presentations
2. Individuals - recruitment at community events, through
community publications, etc.
F. CHILDRESS CON111TTEE - About 55 students from Pinewood to serve
so spokesperson for playground in their class. Activities:
Playground newspaper, helping with publicity, fundraising (Toy
sale, Pennies for Pinewood), organizing time capsule project and
"Monster Contest", and more.
G. FUNDRAISING - Approx. goal of $00.000:
1. 112,000 architect fees/service from Leathers
C
2.32 000 construction contingency
3. 14, 000 maintenance fund
4, 82,000 organisational committee costs
5. $60.000 lumber, timbers, poles, stone, surfacing, hardware,
play equipment.
DOES NOT INCLUDE: site work, electric and phone site utilities,
curb cuts, paved areae, landscaping
Fundin¢ to date: $50,000 ($30,000 more needed by Kay)
Sources of additional funding:
Aoorox. Gaal
1. "Pledge -A -Plank" (Nov. - > $6,000
2. "Pennies" (March) $7,000
3. Sports Day (Jan. or Feb.) $2,000
4. Corporate donations $5,000
5. Community organization donations 56,000
6. Other smaller fundraisers $5,000
(T-shirts, Toy sale, raffles,
book collection, etc.) 531,000
ETC **7wt .r ETC Eli. +*kw1.iETC
F. In contact with Forest Lake Leathers project coordinators
(also Pine City, Mounds View and Maple Lake)
I. Meeting with representatives from the state Multiple Sclerosis
Society to explore ties between the MS Bike Trek through
Monticello, their "Access Minnesota" program and our new
"universally accessible" playstructure. (Ours will be the 6th or
7th universally accessible playstructure Leathers has built in
j the country).
J. Working with Margot Imdleke, Accessibility Advocate from the
Minnesota State Council on Disabilities.
I
r,a Pinewood Community Playground
WE CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN!no
VOLUNTEERS
(J Build the Playground ( JSkllled or ( ]Unskilled - Both Skilled and
Unskilled are Needed (Skilled - Cut a straight line with a saw)
(j Foreman - instruct and Supervise Construction - Commitment of 5 days,
lam -Spm, Men & Women, Need 2 skilled and 6 skilled or unskilled
(j Provide Food for the Builders - Prepare and/or Serve
(Casseroles, bars, sweets broads, salads, etc.)
(J Provide Care for Worker's Children • Construction Weekend at School
]) organizational Work on Committees - Fundraising, Volunteer, Food,
Child -Care, Telephoning, Publicity
MATERIALS AND TOOLS'
(j Donate or Help Locate Materials
() Land my Tools (Hand & Power)
CONSTRUCTION WEEKEND - MAY 2.6, 1990l+�
pteeae Check Times 5/2 Sif S/e S/5 5l6 r yY
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
8:00.12:00 .tt tl t1 t} t1
12:30-5:00 (! (! t ! t } t 1
5:30 -quit
Name Phone
Address
Childcaro Required? (number/ages)
(Available during Construction Weekend)
l
99400
Mall to, Pinewood Community Platypround
i � P.O. Box 124t,Mantiurto,1111n, Si362
1)
IL
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
7. Consideration of a conditional use request to allow a tri-plex in an R-2
(single and two family residential) zone. Applicant, Brad and Cindy
Fyle. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Brad and Cindy Pyle request a conditional use permit which would allow an
existing house to be converted into a tri-plex. The property on which
the tri-plex would be located consists of 22,077 sq ft of area. The
minLmim amount of square footage required for a tri-plex is 16,000 sq ft
if all three units are two-bedroom units, and 14,000 sq ft if one unit is
a two-bedroom unit and the other two units are one -bedroom units. In
short, Fyle's have more than the miniimnn amount of land area necessary
for a tri-plex. However, the site plan fails to utilize the full land
area potential of the property in a manner that will minimize the
negative impacts created by the tri -plea.
At its regular meeting on November 7, 1989, the Planning Comnission
conducted a public hearing and reviewed the site plan prepared by the
applicant. As a result of this review, Planning Comnission recomended
that Council deny the conditional use request based on the following
rationale.
Although the property area including Lots A and B are of sufficient size
to accoimoodate a tri-plex, the site plan is designed in a manner that
does not properly utilize the space available. In other words, despite
having two lots to work with, the bulk of the use of the property is
confined to one residential lot. It was the view of the Planning
Comnission that approval of this conditional use pernit based on this
site plan would be contrary to the City Ordinance because the development
is not consistent with the character of the neighborhood, the use will
tend to depreciate adjoining property, and there is not a demonstrated
need for the tri-plex.
The site plan submitted shows six parking spaces. Three of the spaces
are inside the garage, and three are noted in front of the garage. The
plan calla for moving the garage entrance from the front to the side of
the garage. In order for vehicles to use the garage, they must enter the
side yard and then make a 90 degree turn into the garage. As you can
see, this configuration creates garage door openings that actually face
the back yard of the property to the west. Planning Crnmnission was
concerned that thio arrangement would have a serious negative effect on
the adjoining property and it would devalue the property to the west.
Planning Comission did not close the door to an approval of this
conditional use permit request contingent on development of a new site
plan which would call for Lwo suitable usable parking spaces developed in
the rear of the property with such spaces gaining street access directly
onto Maple Street.
u Council Agenda - 11/13/89
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the conditional use request to allow a tri-plex in
an R-2 zone subject to the following conditions:
a. No more than four developed parking spaces allowed to front Third
Street, including enclosed garage space.
b. Garage openings must face Third Street.
c. Dirt areas along Third Street driveway shall be sodded by
i�V April 30, 1989, and landscaping materials shall be strategically
st placed in areas so as to prevent utilization of green area as
parking area.
{ d. Curb cut and bitmninous parking surface with access to Maple
Street must be installed and able to accormnodate two vehicles.
ca c.>�G'� +L' (�+ra /t;cW
This alternative assumes that Pyle will find development of the two
e t, parking spaces in the rear of the property as being acceptable.
Staff is not sure if Pyle is interested in this option. The Planning
Corromission did indicate that approval of the conditional use permit
,T mho ,r,l i from their view would be possible if Pyle developed two parking
11 r� stalls in the rear of the property.
2. Deny the conditional use request to allow a tri-plex in an R-2 zone.
E
Council refusal to grant this conditional use permit based on the
Planning Cormnission's concerns appears consistent with the Zoning
Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance requires that each conditional use
permit be consistent with geography and character of the neighborhood
and must not depreciate adjoining land values. Denial of this permit
appears supportable in terns of those criteria.
3. Motion to approve the conditional use permit without modifications to
the site plan as proposed.
C. STAFF RECOMMEI.'DATION:
Staff recomnends that the conditional use permit be denied unless the
applicant expresses a willingness to adhere to the conditions listed with
option #1. In other words, the character of the neighborhood can be
better preserved while allowing a tri-plex to operate if the area behind
the house is utilized for off-street parking, and the character of the
neighborhood can be further preserved if measures are taken that provide
assurance that only four vehicles are parked In the front of the
structure.
In the event that the tenants of the tri-plex do not utilize the parking
spaces to the rear of the property, the City does have the option to
withdraw the conditional use permit. If this happens, then Pyle would be
required to reduce the number of residential units from three units to
two.
7�
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of location of proposed conditional use requestr Copy of the
proposed site plan.
r
Y�y6st i°°�
zo
eYl°
F R * �O D1°%c i68Sd°t► ioAY
�� 1 'rll Pr fl'r -t • r '` ni; �,!.•' J _ r'�i y ' .• -w
� "'r-L:S7 �'. rrt w e• ,,, .. � !1 . in � c i- '+-+.:;; . s. ; ,1 >( `�. _
��,�, . t r• c ' t :� r ;1f/r r `� ...+ p rtl ,p :
�"`-� '' ' '";.,�::]� t .L,1��r�,'_�_.1+" ~'" a ,tf p�-„r' t �• �� '„^..:
.i ., •.1 .I• ''+.,:t ' f r•. • �r r• ?�'"..—, -.r ' r !+:; ` r ' t s ':l.�:Si • .
if
r-�;�e i•,�,�r r1r ~',"'1: r' t .r ��r�.r.r Grh y JL.
,(� . ,��d , . �� � ; X11 ��� ,, • �C' ;.,,;f4. /i�”'
MIGMWAY NO. 94
o ;
f �r
t
Ir.,
.,9 1 g 7 G
0
ca..ry. sf-cd.�..or/ _,. J ;'mss' �►i •,• I t
-i.,...-�,,,•.II �.�s�..•-.rte . '�C'�r.•�s' .:� A.✓ I `1
( I o
. 1z...µ...
J t s .��. pyAw•Ln✓I F.w1sr�- -a' s '`! �' .,`'t '' i' 4
� :^.. •.11? mai>..::�; � ,, •r
!(ilii/il�i,G it �'_!s •�� �[en6� � �. 'e• yea
+4
. '4� �0- wrw�r ,�.•er a.crw�rm .i er rit 'k`F,+
Pb
n I
I
s '
NNip Ntr
.- - .S'�ca'+•oo rif�t E /.�Z, Ri-- 4' ^: •,_ 1`�'J
�+r` ,-�cc..i •'.Ga.•_ �I W ,r ca. Gv„vry .� ;,`•R]y'.r� ,-� � ►1=
� ..�v:s �••i� ,... .��n.�..•.' �.r. tai • ' �•.✓ VV�
a p \-ate,; r •ice'=' .� .. V '- o ��yo�. `
lk
10 LA.
04
IIiF If''
✓ri /s '�� •' NGy °O01'ay7' i /!?d, 7Y--
nth � .E :'.. ..: � ,. ,,. .• .• ,
�Dd�b h r A/VI 9YH/6 0/ GM r)
rev �-T.Bfc�T
J
I
d✓wrrY..c
' 0
tr • 0
� fir- �, �
�'p��eis��Fi .S .i ;
�
t �js�.�w".
.wa.yrJsi'ari �e.. _— �••
0,
`'
r/ii.!/fL�iL
r
rFttt4d • ..{
�
�3 +T"�r+•
41+'IIs ��r: "«S';— �J .•.,\�y�1.��d0'�j/" ,� ./.�P: irr-- fr'<'""'i
/1'
\11
?14{ r
.wrwsr ..r�6/ tte,►.w.s.
r
n
A
� y I
r � "
1 /o.
-- 3'Ag3"'or� :..r E /.tea*: J..�-- �,`' ;; •-._ `U
�'- � '_.� - ca.-In..r,� sc.: (yz.arj ni a'!'�t� A►t� �_ � -
� .. P �.. -r'`+ GN�...,C,..Go"' -'� ':..i.. ',` Ery , � • � �'' ; + 4 I � !:
+ '� K. t7--�••o—�- Y"i��' r Ipv,/IJrr1 v, , �. .
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
8. Consideration of permit which would allow development of a single mobile
home site at the West Side Park in Monticello. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Some months ago, the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a
request by Don Heikes to install four mobile home sites in the area known
as the West Side Park. The request was approved by the Planning
Commission subject to the completion of improvements required by City
Ordinance which included developmnent of street curb and gutter. Heikes
was also required to complete a number of other irriprovemnnts, including
development of curb and gutter.
Heikes is now submitting a new request to the City of Monticello which
calls for development of a single mobile home site rather than four sites
as he previously requested. Heikes has indicated to City staff that the
cost to develop the property in a manner that would allow development of
four mobile home sites cannot be justified by the revenue that he will
gain through the development. Therefore, he is asking the City for
permission to develop the property as the site for a single mmbile home;
and he also asks that the City reduce the required level of improvements
associated with the four lot development.
Specifically, Mr. Heikes would simply like to extend a private sewer and
water line to the mmbile horn site as noted on the attached drawing. Tn
addition, a narrow bituminous drive would be created along with a
turn -around which would provide access to the site.
Planning Connission conducted a public hearing and received testimony
from Scott Hill and the Cemetery Association (see attached). No one else
testified regarding this matter except Don Heikes. AS a result of this
testimony and input from staff, Planning Commission recormanended approval
of the permit to add a single mobile homm lot contingent on the developer
fulfilling conditions under alternative i1. Please note that Mr. Heikes
dgreed to turrply with all of the conditions listed.
B. Ar.TERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to Allow expansion of the West Side. Park with the addition of
a single mobile home site subject to the following conditions:
a. A fire hydrant shall be installed per the direction of the Public
Works Director or mobile home site may be located no further than
300 feet from existing hydrant.
b. A bituminous driveway shall be Installed to provide access to the
mobile have expansion site.
c. The trailer shall be on a concrete slab as approved by the
Building Inspector.
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
d. Electric, phone, and cable lines shall be installed underground.
e. A storm shelter shall be provided in the lower level of the
duplex which is maintained by the park caretaker living on the
upper floor. The shelter shall have a sign placed above the door
and all new tenants shall be informed of the emergency shelter.
f. Expansion of the mobile home park in this area shall be limited
to a single mobile home site. No further requests for additional
mobile hone sites shall be approved without meeting all the park
expansion requirements.
g. Snow removal grounds and driveway maintenance, water and sewer
maintenance will be performed by the owner/operator and/or his
agents.
h. A fence six feet in height shall be installed along the northern
edge of the property. The fence shall be 6 feet high and 90%
opaque.
I. Developer shall install a retaining wall of sufficient height and
strength to prevent erosion into the cemetery property.
2. Motion to deny expansion plans.
Council could take the view that this proposal could be construed as
a foot in the door which would allow enlargement of the park area
without first meeting the street curb and gutter requirements.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the Planning Commission's recommendation that the Council approve
the expansion subject to the conditions listed. The proposed development
of a single mobile home site seems to present potential for a minimmal
Impact on the adjoining properties and may serve to entourage better
maintendnce of the general area. Due to the fact that a single mobile
home site expansion is requested, it is staff's view that the street curb
and gutter requirements associated with development of multiple mobile
home sites is not appropriate in this case. At the same time, however,
development of this mobile hone site far apart from Lhe original aublle
home park site presents a unique situation and along with it a unique set
of problems. It is staff's view that the potential problems created by
this situation can be mitigated if the developer complies with the
conditions listed under alternative A1. Therefore, staff and Planning
Commission recomend that Council approve this request subject to those
conditions.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Location map; Copy of proposed site plan showing the location of the
single mobile hoe expansion site along with required fmmmprovemnents;
Letters from Scott Hill and Cemetery Association.
\,' 1 _ - � --'- - ` • r �� \�` �\ Pt Pei•..
:.�.. __�•� .y..;;;tn ��`°fir,$\\ ar•..sn^"n".. ` � \�\ ty _
ftp-- i. , ' .�.�� .�,a • •a•i•tid�i�s:c � � • . `.. + �\ � _
� S :6.altd ' r`,.+?, ��`'LiOKLV�/•/• 'W .^! l:r�y ••. ' Y
�:'�t�j •, 04�. •4°/,�; `� \t, t t '`'�- i t r r +4. If :1 �. i„ •,; •:;,;+�:w
• sat• n• '�• '}•� �,' T.••'°v f •\ j J v—•�""�i��',
'� LCT •�•`°
e
^A `• �q • y .°cam �• \�
t
tNl
FASr4 >• '--`•,•—
C%
G�GUETSLCI£ L7E„2EtEZy C771S0daR0Iz
Dlonlicc��o, Nlinncsuta 55362
November 6, 1989
Monticello Planning & Zoning Committee
City Offices
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Dear Planning & Zoning Members:
Please be advised that the Riverside Cemetery Board is OPPOSED
to the proposed expansion of lleikes mobil home park.
Riverside cemetery, in any event, would like to have Don Heikes
locate the Cemetery's Northwest boundary marker and replace It,
which was apparently dug up and lost when the present excavating
work was done.
Riverside cemetery also requests that the area in question be
restored to its original condition by Don Heikes.
In the event that the proposed expansion is approved over the
objection of the cemetery, the board requests the following
conditions be mnde a requirement and pnrt of the approval.
1. Thnt a retnining wall be installed along the entire North
boundary of the cemetery to prevent any future erosion.
2. That a privacy fence of substantial material be erected
along the entire border of the cemetery property and be maintained
in o proper order.
3. That the Northwest boundary stake be replaced.
Riverside Cemetery Board
Jif PI en nu, Ch firman
c Li�pqui. Secre ry
Members of the board:
Hegry Rouson�
WAJlia7 S arrow
/( . Jl 12
O W I��iiftj{ .
�w-�fte p MY
'� fe... sa•,T N,ta
. _ -_ __ s DJC r? . �A. IA+a[._BfP541r _ T.o . Favf••D _ f ar.tn ?nes .
Lecar co Ar- 1711, Jfsr .T.YQa sTaerr,
ryer
Q rhea Aerw Ata..va w..Z.usA , S.dff� At 4jAD✓ dAS
Th- -rAAMa ca..r_r
dAl .o %rAA!!.a C•N rI.. 1.4.v• (SA/ •.tr) AT -NC
O• e faf. •rACFr. 0014/ 6ArAN),uM 0A'
TNIa r/ep.teA COaar y..tt eacy A/> re
Aa Aaae AD/ VAD l.r.",at.. a%A...ro a/ A)k
cwar.vlalr,r,-`as`a®��� e! �R.ufwA/f p,vD I(Iad Jot ..nE
OF C-Aff elf a.Clr RI•eA s,At'd 7.
Iw an/.cE.vrfv "it (FaAT ?~m w.Aa•.+r rolls C.r.Afo
pfR/.91r> 'eac. TAparsi ARr aC. or IMO /al
TNe Ares tAAr rl at..r6 fa'a.C.1ra r.A MA✓-% ... /
Ar.O AI 04 0.7..Attj %MA"900 LW. .14414 V/CWCa7
rea— +AAF cs—erA4r. •.I/tt. -f)le je _.wio
ewR•Mef T TNC eAtT A! MF.+ reA4eAs Rai
bicwta�f •� 7RA/Nt: f NA /1F w.vJ wArl0.
/fsuCs 104E CO.•.✓r/ .. ate.. .
C•A+.../la ra wr lla HAuI Ai.7.acd'D Tlli 9Ro?faTy
VAL4)0af r1YA /!•tale/ Ato* fa W, R..r4a fTaevr
M.— 7NIs t/AAwea PARK iC*cerr_
Alt OJ< rde'!f 111..Ca vl rat i✓r ..OAU-
u/rN sA/i e.VPA.rJrw 01• IAle TA.40,404 Ikox.
D
t6-
oj
000
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
9• Consideration of final plat approval for Prairie west subdivision. (J.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKCROUND:
Some months ago, City Council gave preliminary approval of the Prairie
West subdivision. Attached you will find a copy of the final plat which
shows the development of seven lots on the property once owned by the
Temple Baptist Church. This property is bound on the west by the
property once owned by Dan Reed and now owned by Fred Gille, to the north
is Highway 75, located to the east of the property is Pinewood Elementary
School, and the Monticello Country Club and railroad tracks are neighbors
to the south of this property.
As you recall, when the Council reviewed the preliminary plat
application, it was discovered that Lot 5 of this subdivision did not
possess the required front footage on a public street. The ordinance
requires that each lot possess at least 52 feet of street frontage.
Lot 5 of this particular subdivision has only 32 feet of lot frontage.
During the preliminary review, Council approved the concept of granting a
variance which would allow the developer to create the lot configuration
as described in the preliminary plat.
Due to the fact that the proper public hearing notices weren't provided
prior to Council's concert approval of the variance, it was necessary to
bring the variance issue back to the Planning Cotmnission via the proper
process. The Planning Cotmnission did conduct a public hearing and cake a
recotmnendation regarding the variance at the previous Planning Cotmnission
meeting. The Planning Cotmnission concurred that the variance should be
approved.
Council now has the option either individually or as a group to appeal
the Planning Coitudasion's recommendation that this variance be approved.
if one or core of the Council members wish to appeal the decision made by
the Planning Cotmnission, then this item will be brought up for formal
consideration at the next meeting of the City Council. If no one appeals
the Planning Cotmnission's decision, then ODuncil may act to approve the
final plat of the Prairie West subdivision.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the final plat of the Prairie west subdivision.
�t
This alternative assumes that none of the Oouncil members appeal the
Planning Crnmnleslon's recommendation regarding the variance, if
Planning Cotmntasion's approval of the variance is appealed, then
Council can only consider this Matter once the variance, issue is
In reviewed at the subsequent meeting of the City Council. Oouncil
�o 4 approved the preliminary plat without making any changes. Therefore,
Capproval of the final plat should be a foregone conclusion.
10
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
2. Motion to deny approval of the final plat of the Prairie West
subdivision.
Except for the variance request, this plat appears to meet all land
use requirements associated with an R-2 development. In addition,
according to the City Engineer, it is feasible to develop the
property as platted. There appears to be no reason to select this
alternative.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Unless Council has a change of heart regarding the variance request, it
is recommended that a motion be made to approve the final plat of the
West Prairie subdivision.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of West Prairie plat with area of variance noted, Copy of Planning
Couunission variance form.
IE
•
MrptG„T
�ryitt[LOR •
CItX Qt
p"EpS
Vrf,r FOR'
IFOO
PpErpREi�
t. • i _ =+..w;:^.moi .'i..,� !y/" .:
+� � .....,,v � P �`^'•� 1r M � ��'`�p"... ^ Ohl
I
r
• O,.t" V Q
Qta„w �4
C b p04A S
•
33�
f`avrr�t .
0
VARIANCE REQUEST FORM (See chapter 23 of Zoning Orinance?
APPLICANT: Pas-, LOP It%alE• DATE FILED: /O//9/af F=E: Sep
APPLICANTS ADDRESS: 313 PHONE: HM O� WK Sfs.313L
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 BLOCK / SUBDIVISION
DESCRIBE VARIANCE REQUEST: L. f A,—A.S i /r Sf A
CURRENTLY ZONED: '2-1 VARIANCE TO s -JCS" SECTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE
Describe any applicable precedents:
�.t 4 ;71.-A, I Q•vc2-s Cd- C:,,I.r - AI/..�...' lxvrf,ar.:/�
eSI .rlr- /.1 - 11 9. R
DEFINITION OF ALLEGED HARDSHIP:
What are the unique circumstances associated With the lot that crests
exceptional difficulties when utilizing lot in manner customary and
legally permissable?
rr rn..ald e- -A e. to 14 d /o 4,— Of FnraA r�i. ��
�,.�isi �.tt 1/clews %c•�ew GJ.'d/n,� C�Rt J/ar:oir. TRS
e.n4ri e.,P, o1A
.,sr esP L. -d o/.,,
Will approval of this variance impair tie intent of ti,e ordinance to the
extent that a zoning ordinance amendment might be more appropriate? YES - NO
PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING: DATE: 42111' PLNG CDM.
FINDING
WILL APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST:
A. IMPAIR ADE^.UATE S;PPLY OF LICIT AND AIR TO ADJACENT PROPERTY? YES
B. CREATE AN UNREASCNAELE INCREASE THE CONGESTION IN THE PUBLIC STREET? YFa
C. INCREASES THE DANGER OF FIRE OR ENDANGER THE PUBLIC SAFETY? YES
O. UNREASONABLY DIMINISH PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN NEIGH9CRH0007 YES
E. Be CONTRARY TO THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE? YES - NO
�CCWLNTS RE3AROING PLANNING C"ISSICN FINDING: r�
1!�- /ifr /r r. r.nr r��rrr /, • r.Ilr ✓ LG.•r L.% (,..!
r. 'v / / ♦ f r / r L '� 14-- 1� /T-/ f irk.
1 /
RF;rRT rOUNrIL FINDING IF PLANNING COAMIS31CN DECISION IS APPEALED: �Q
APPEAL DA'E: C--44LNTS: 7
Special Planning Camnission/Council Agenda - 11/13/89
10. Public hearing - A simple subdivision request to allow a B-3 (highway
business) commercial lot to be subdivided into two comercial lots. A
variance request to allow a zero lot line setback requirement.
Applicant, The Lincoln Commmpanies. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commnission will be reviewing this item at a public hearing
iimnediately prior to the Council meeting. The Lincoln Companies, owners
of the Monticello Mall, are proposing a simple subdivision as described
in Outlot A to subdivide the existing mall and the area within
description A from the unplatted property which was purchased to the
west of the call. The proposed subdivision will create a separate
parcel on which the addition will be placed. The separate identity
created will allow the developer to obtain the necessary financing.
The need for a variance to the side yard setback requirement is needed,
as a part of the westerly portion of the lot line, which is described
under description A, will actually be the east wall for the new K -Mart
store. The reason you see a variance along with the simple subdivioion
request is to allow a zero lot line side yard setback requirement for a
portion of this westerly property line of description A.
Prior to further subdivision of this property, the owners should corn up
with a formal subdivision request for this area. The rationale behind
this is that with the creation of these unplatted lots, we end up with
very lengthy metes and bounds descriptions, and that's not good zoning
practice. However, in this case a siuple subdivision is allowable on a
one time basis with certain conditions.
Mother concern that the City staff has is if the K -Mart store actually
does not become a reality, the minimwm we should have is the dedication
of streets and easements associated with the original curved road
aligrunent. This is the layout which goes around the Tom Holthaus
property, and that area should be dedicated to the City for permanent
street and utility easement purposes. If, however, the K -Mart store
does become a reality and the developer chooses to go with a straight
7th Street version to Minnesota Street, we then could vacate those
public street and utility easements that were dedicated to the City.
The City does not want to create the image that we want to play hardball
with the developers, who are also the owners of the existing moll and
the area proposed to be developed. We do want to look out for the best
interest of the City should something not transpire with the proposed
K -mart project.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the siuple subdivision request to allow a B-3 (highway
business) commnercial lot to be subdivided into two commercial lots.
12
Special Planning Coimnission/Council Agenda - 11/13/89
2. Deny the simple subdivision request to allow a B-3 (highway
business) co:mnercial lot to be subdivided into two co:mnercial lots.
3. Approve the simple subdivision request to allow a B-3 (highway
business) co:mnerciai lot to be subdivided into two cotmaerciai lots
with the following conditions:
a. Prior to recording of this simple subdivision, the
owners/developers dedicate to the City of Monticello for street
and utility purposes sufficient right-of-way as described or
laid out by our consulting engineering ficin, OSM, for the
existing layout of the extension of west 7th Street, which would
go around the existing Tom Holthaus property.
b. Prior to anymore subdividing of the property by a simple
subdivision request, the owners create a co maercial subdivision
creating blocks and/or lots for the entire property which they
own, that being the Monticello Mall and the Country Kitchen
complex, the proposed new K -Mart store, and the proposed land
area that would be left after the street right-of-way is taken
out in whichever layout is chosen.
4. Approve the variance request to allow a zero lot line side yard
setback requirement.
5. Deny the variance request to allow a zero lot line aide yard setback
requirement.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
city staff recoimnends 93 and 64 above subject to the conditions listed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed eiirple subdivision requests Copy of
the post -construction survey of the simple subdivision request.
13
Tpq%le,T..
JbaivieiOo pimple a 'its
OJO:
a
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
tt. Consideration of renewing the 1990 fire contract with Silver Creek
Township. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
For the past six years, the joint fire department has contracted with
Silver Creek Township for fire protection under three-year contracts.
The current contract expires at the end of this year, and a cost estivate
has been prepared for a contract renewal utilizing the fair share format
that the City of Monticello currently uses in determining Monticello
Township's share of the fire department cost.
The fair share format utilizes the assessed valuations of the City of
Monticello along with Monticello Township and Silver Creek Township and
also takes into account the total manhours spent in each location
fighting fires over a ten—year history. These two categories, assessed
valuations and mDnhour cost, are averaged out to determine each entity's
share of the total cost to be split. In utilizing our 1990 budge, the
fair share format indicated that Silver Creek Township should be charged
$9,908 for the year 1990.
Silver Creek Township has preferred a three-year contracts and as such,
it is reco;mnended that this $9,900 figure be inflated by 5 percent per
year, which would amount to an average annual cost of $10,411. This
information was supplied to the Silver Creek Township Board for their
review. Based an the number of housing units located within our fire
district for Silver Creek Township, this amounted to approximately $22
per parcel.
The joint fire department services approximately one-half of Silver Creek
Township, with the other half being provided protection by Maple Lake
Fire Department. Maple Lake charges $25 per parcel that contains a
building; and after the Township Board reviewed my cost proposal, they
felt it would be easier and shriller to have the same $25 charge be used
in both fire districts. For the year 1989, there were approximately 440
parcels in our fire district that contained a building, and this would
aimunt to the annual charge being approximately $11,000 per year if this
same format was used. This turns out to actually be a little higher than
what I was proposing, and it appears reasonable for our contract to be
renewed at this rate.
A copy of the proposed contract has been reviewed by the Joint Fire Board
and has been submitted to the Monticello Township Board for their
approval, as all parties must sign the new contract.
B. ALTERNATIVE. ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve renewing a three-year
contract with Silver Creek Township for fire protection utilizing the
$25 per parcel charge which would amount to approximately $11,000
annually.
14
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
2. Do not enter into a new contract for fire protection - Does not seem
to be an option since Silver Creek Township does need fire
protection, and our department is willing to serve them.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As I indicated above, calculating the annual cost for Silver Creek
Township utilizing the fair share formula over a three year period
amounted to only $10,411. Since Silver Creek Township would prefer to
have a charge similar to what they are experiencing from Maple Lake Fire
Department, it is approximately $600 more per year in revenue than what I
had anticipated. As a result, there appears to be no reason why we would
not wish to amend the contract to utilize this $25 per parcel fee. In
addition, new construction that takes place within Silver Creek Township
would be automatically added to the contract over the three year life,
and we should realize the $11,000 annual fee to be increased in the
fut-ire years.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed contract; Calculations under the fair share format.
15
FIRE PR0—ECTION AGREEMENT
This ACREEMENT between the City and Township of Monticello, Monticello,
Minnesota, hereafter referred to as the JOINT FIRE DEPARTMEN^., and the Township
of Silver Creek, hereafter referred to whether in whole or in part as the
TOWNSHIP, both agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
The JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT agrees to furnish fire service and fire protection to
all properties subject to the teens of this agreement, within the TOWNSHIP
area, said area being set forth in EXHIBIT A, attached hereto.
ARTICLE Ii
The JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT will make a reasonable effort to attend all fires
within the TOWNSHIP area upon notification of such fire or fires, and under the
direction of the JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT fire chief, subject to the following
terms and conditions:
A. Road and weather conditions must be such that the fire run can be
nade with reasonable safety to the firemen and equipment of the JOIN"
FIRE DEPARTMENT. The decision of the fire chief or other officer in
charge of the fire department at the time that the fire run cannot be
made with reasonable safety to firemen and equipment shall be final.
B. The JOINT FIRE DEPAR"ITIENT shall not be liable to the TOWNSHIP for the
loss or damage of any kind whatever resulting froin any failure to
furnish or any delay in furnishing firemen or fire equipment, or from
any fialure to prevent, control or extinguish any fire, whether such
loss or damage is caused by the negligence of the officers, agents,
or eirployees of the JOIN': FIRE DEPARTMENT or its fire deparunent, or
otherwise.
ARTICLE III
The JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT further agrees:
A. To keep and maintain in good order at its own expense the necessary
equipment and fire apparatus for firs service and fire protection
within the town area so serviced.
B. The JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT shall provide sufficient manpower in its
fire department to operate fire equipment.
0
Z
Fire Protection Agreement
Page 2
ARTICLE IV
The TOWNSHIP agrees:
A. To pay an annual fee of $25.00 for each tax identification parcel
containing a building structure as determined by the Silver Creek
Township Assessor and/or Wright County Auditors office for years 1990
through 1992. These fees shall include all standby charges and fire
call costs.
The total annual fee is(istimated to be 511,000, based on an
estimated 440 parcels @ $25.00 each.
B. Annual fee shall be paid as follows:
prior to January 1st of each year - 258
prior to April 1st of each year - 258
prior to July 1st of each year - 258
prior to October 1st of each year - 258
C. All payments must be made in accordance with this schedule to render
this agreement effective for calendar years 1990 through 1992.
Additionally, any amount past due for 1989 must be paid by
March 31, 1990,
D. The JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT will submit a suimnary t0 the Township of
all fires on a monthly basis.
ARTICLE V
In case an emergency arises within the JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT while equipment
and personnel of the fire department are engaged in fighting a fire within the
TOWNSHIP area, calls shall be answered in the order of their receipt unless the
fire chief or other officer in charge of the fire department at the time
otherwise directs. In responding to fire calls within the TOWNSHIP area, the
fire chief or other officer in charge shall dispatch only such personnel and
equipment as in his opinion can be safely spared from the JOINT FIRE
DEPARTMENT.
ARTICLE VI
In cases where the JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT recieves a notification of an
emergency, other than a fire, and its assistance is requested in the area
defined in Exhibit A of this contract, it shall respond to such emergency in
the same manner as a fire as outlined in this contract. Charges for such
service shall be as outlined in ARTICLE IV.
ARTICLE VII
The TOWNSHIP agrees to make a fire protection tax levy or otherwise to provide
funds each year in an ammunt sufficient to pay the JOINT FIRE DEPARTMENT the
cou>pensation agreed upon.
N&
Fire Protection Agreement
Page 3
ARTICLE VIII
This AGREEMENT shall be in force for a terra of three years beginning on
January 1, 1990, and ending on the list day of December, 199. This contract
may be terminated upon a six month notice by either party.
CITY OF MONTICELLO 'TOWNSHIP OF SILVER CREEK
By: By:
Mayor Chairperson
Attest: Attest:
Clerk Clerk
Signed this day of Signed this day of
, 1989. , 1989.
TOWNSHIP OF MONTICELLO
By:
Chairperson
Attest:
Clerk
Signed this day of
, 1989.
0//
Fire Protection Agreeunent
Page 4
EXHIBIT A
This EXHIBIT is a part of the attached FIRE PROTECTION AGREEMENT, and its
purpose is to designate the area covered under this AGREEMENT and referred to
herein as the TOWNSHIP area. Therefore, the TOWNSHIP area in which protection
for fires is agreed to involves the following sections of the TOWNSHIP herein:
Sections 9, 14, 15, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 34, 35, 36, North
half of Section 20, Section 21 except Southwest Quarter, and
Southeast Quarter of Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 122,
Range 26; Section 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14 except Southwest Quarter, all
in Township 121, Range 26.
CITY OF MONPICELLO TOWNSHIP OF SILVER CREEK
BY By
Mayor Chairperson
Attest: Attest:
Clerk Clerk
TOWNSHIP OF MONTICELLO
BY
Chairperson
Attest:
Clerk
0
FAIR SHARE PROPOSAL
TAX CAPACITY VALUES
FIRE DEPARTMENT MANHOUR SALARY COST
FOR PAST 10 YEARS BY LOCATION 1979-1988
1989
8 of Total
City of Monticello
Assessed Valuations
9 Of Total
City of Monticello
515,627,722
84.8%
STEP I Monticello Township
1,992,029
10.8%
Silver Creek Township
816,713
4.4%
TOTAL VALUATIONS
518,436,464
TO.00%
FIRE DEPARTMENT MANHOUR SALARY COST
FOR PAST 10 YEARS BY LOCATION 1979-1988
0
0
Amount
8 of Total
City of Monticello
S 37,873
36.1%
STEP II Monticello Township
51,879
49.4%
Silver Creek Township
15,227
14.5%
TOTALS04
,
0T 0.1f
Monticello Silver Creek
City
Township Township
B of Assessed valuations
84.8
10.8 4.4
STEP III 8 of Manhour Costs
36.1
49.4 14.5
I2
1�. 197
Average of Above %'a
2
= 2 r 2
—T.-9
Share of Total Costs
grg
1990 Fire Department Costa to be Shared $104,845
STEP IV SILVER CREEK TOWNSHIP 8
X 9.458
1990 Silver Creek Township
Fire Costs
08
0
0
Net estimated 1990 costs to be allocated $104,845
Silver Creek Township 8 (estimate) X 9.458
ESTIMATED 1990 COSTS �, 0$
0
SILVER CREEK TOWNSHIP
ESTIMATED 1990 FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS
l
/
1990 Operating Costs (Budget)
Without Capital Outlay or
Firemen's Relief
S 56,300
Amortization of Capital Items
(A) Beg. total 1/1/90 (est.)
$272,078
divided by
20 yr. _
$ 13,604
PLUS: 1990 Capital Outlay
$ 12,475
divided by
20 yr. e
S 624
(B) New pumper truck @
$280,340
divided by
25 yr. _
$ 11,214
(C) Building costs
$577,583
divided by
25 yr. _
$ 23,103
TOTAL 1990 ESTIMATED COSTS
$104,845
Net estimated 1990 costs to be allocated $104,845
Silver Creek Township 8 (estimate) X 9.458
ESTIMATED 1990 COSTS �, 0$
0
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
12. Consideration of approving on -sale liquor license transfer
Comfort Inn. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Robert Eidsvold of Rogers, Minnesota, has made application to the
City for permission to transfer the liquor license, including Sunday
Liquor, for the Oakwood Comfort Inn into his naive for the balance of the
term expiring July 1, 1990. Mr. Eidsvold has apparently purchased the
Oakwood Inn from Stuart Hoglund and family and will be assuming ownership
December 1, 1989.
Mr. Eidsvold has completed the necessary applications and supplied a
surety bond and liability insurance certificate. A background check on
Mr. Eidsvold history has been completed by the Wright County Sheriff's
Department with no noted convictions of felonies or violations that would
prohibit the City Council from approving the transfer.
The application along with the surety bond and certificate of insurance
will be submitted to the Liquor Control Division for their approval if
the transfer is approved by the City Council. Since the license fee has
been paid in full by the Comfort Inn until July 1, 1990, there would not
be any additional fees involved for Mr. Eidsvold since the Comfort Inn
has sold the motel with the liquor license included and will not be
requesting a refund. This liquor license transfer has been published in
the Monticello Times as a public hearing allowing any affected resident
to voice their opposition or support. This meets the requirements of our
own ordinances and State Statutes.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the transfer of the on -sale and Sunday liquor license for the
Comfort Inn to Mr. Robert D. Eidsvold from Stuart Hoglund effective
December 1, 1989.
2. Do not approve the transfer.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff can find no reason why the Council would not want to approve
the transfer of this existing on -sale liquor license to Mr. Eidsvold for
the Comfort Inn. The background check has not turned up any negative
information that would affect this licenrn^ at tho present timet. As a
result, the transfer is reconnended with no additional fees since Oakwood
is not requesting a refund for the balance of the year.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:eI
Copy of liquor license application.
16
CITY OF MONTICELLO
LICENSE APPLICATION
This application is being submitted for the following licenselsl:
Set-up license Off -sale, non -intoxicating liquor
p/ On -sale, intoxicating liquor on -sale, wine
On -sale, non -intoxicating liquor Cn-sale, wine/3.2 beer
""IL �-?-yo
1 I /
Applicant Name: RoOP:t} U. E,AI„o/d Age: '7/? Date: /C- .70- J'i
Applicant Address: P6,3ct. 4/L Q„reas m.d Phone: ,'yoS
Name of Business: i',,,,,j,.,a+ Z..
Address of Business: -)p e, F.,sI lln ru,o,.�.l isy 1i:1. YJi
f -)).-IV J, Ce i/o 1)1AI
Business Phone: .?y S-////
Describe nature of business operation: Li,.aei Lc,Ntc Ea4,,,y
If Corporation: Officers:
Directors:
Do you or does your corporation, partnership, etc., currently hold any licanso
allowing the sale of wine, intoxicating liquor, non -intoxicating liquor, or
act -ups? yes i/ no
If yes: Name of Businana:
Address of Business:
Phone:
Typo of Licenea: Years hold:
References:
Name Address Telephone Number
D�rvwIs %rusu: /y/G rrc,.rvr: A: te4i- Aedi n7,e : 1/Yi %:L- 5'1
%✓/jcYC, 16 A- 2.al UT[rvc,,: Ar w. Fr '., F.r/r r),- !>rY) 7.'6. .;i`y,�
�a Ve i r.re,J VA; 7/ j Urr/ eti 4,1 a S rP 2, u 4" 71- 7U. - T1- k -
Credit References (list at least one bank you do business with) :
Name Address Te lechone Number
_S/"V' 9,4"e /JY c ce.uA.r<Ir,� �r•c,::rfri/r GJ/.Yl �'6- SYi'�
Q'�.e •llq/.v:.SJr 3�ru jrr�r,wa�i:./ Sf Le..r/sa,rrr n,� %r -•i- J:s 1
err
Amount of investment, excluding land: %OC,voo- uo
(only applicants for on -sale, intoxicating liquor must provide this information)
Have you ever bean convicted of a felony, or of violating the Rational
Prohibition Act or any State law or ordinance relating to manufacture or
transportation of intoxicating liquors: rJ
NO
I declare that the above information is true and correct, to the beat of
my knowledge.
Applicant Signature
For City Use Only
Surety Bond Liquor Liability Cortificatu of
insurance
Application Foe Licanna Foe
Shoriff, Wright County
Data Mayor, City of Monticello
City Administrator
/a-
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
13. Consideration of renewing contract operation of. the City's wastewater treatment
plant with Professional Services Group. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
It has been slightly over 3 years since Professional Services Group entered
into partnership with the City of Monticello for contract operations of our
wastewater treatment plant. Some of you may recall the reasons why we
considered a public/private partnership for operation of the wastewater
treatment plant at that time. To refresh the memory of those individuals and
also give insight to the Council members who were not involved, I list the
following reasons found in the .July 2, 1986, Special Commnittee Report to the
City Council.
1. Cost being incurred to (run) the plant at efficiencies much greater than
that required by the discharge standards.
2. Lack of (long-term) maintenance of plant equipment and facilities.
3. Staffing deficiencies due to employee absences and request from treatment
plant management for additional personnel. (The plant was staffed with 4
individuals plus part-time personnel. A fifth full-time eirployee was
requested.)
4. Lack of adequate training of present staff.
5. Lack of proper sludge management techniques being practiced at the plant.
6. Improper operation of various plant equipment items, which required an
increase in gas and electrical consumption, with resulting increase in
utility costs.
7. Improper management at the plant.
8. Poor record keeping practices.
9. Lack of commminication between (plant) and (City Hall).
For continued operation of the treatment plant by the City, a 1987 budget of
$241,100• was proposed. This figure was for staffing with the existing four
treatment plant personnel and a part-time worker. No ammunt was budgeted for
the fifth person requested by treatment plant staff. A contract was negotiated
with Professional Services Group for an annual cost of $265,000. The City was
rebated approximately $3,000 during the first year of operation for unspent
maintenance funds. The negotiation commnittee and the City Council at that timne
felt the difference between the two coats of $23,900 was justified, as the
contract with Professional Services Group would address the nine problems as
previously addressed and would result in long termn overall lower costs and the
safeguarding of the City of Monticello's investment in its wastewater treatment
facility. In addition, workers compensation and City Hall staff support were a
major part of the $23,900, making the actual difference much less.
-NOTE: Excluding workers componsation insurance and City Hall support timet.
17
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
The past three years with PSG, while a significant improvement over past
operations by the City, has not been without problems. The three most
significant problems that occurred were the following:
After 12 months of operation by PSG, the manager was promoted and
replaced within a period of two weeks with a less experienced
operator/manager from another facility.
In July of 1988, Dave Stromberg, a seasonal City employee, rolled over
the sludge nurse truck on East County 39 while he was a part-time
employee for Professional Services Group.
Odor problems at the wastewater treatment plant in the fall of 1988 and
again in the summer of 1989.
During the above three significant incidents, Rick and I found PSG very open,
candid, and cooperative in resolving the problems. When Kelsey McGuire
replaced Steve Sunt, City staff negotiated a verbal commnitment from PSG that
they would never again change the manager at Monticello without consideration
of the City of Monticello. This feature was added to the new proposed
contract.
For the sludge truck, things were a little bit more complicated. PSG, however,
demonstrated their willingness to deal iimnediately with the problem and brought
two semi -tractors and drivers from another facility to haul sludge at no cost
to the City of Monticello. The City rented two trailers during that period of
time. Although the City felt it was not responsible for the sludge truck
accident, our insurance trovers the wastewater treatment plant and all the
vehicles and, therefore, paid for the damiage. our insurance company indicated
that the City should have had in place a driver certification programn for City
emeployees as well as any contract operators who may use the City vehicles. In
a spirit of cooperation, PSG agreed to pay for our deductible and the
difference between replacing the frame on the truck as requested by the City
versus straightening the framne as allowed by the insurance company. PSG also
initiated a truck driver's school taught by an outside instructor. Three City
employees attended the school along with PSG eirployees, and we now have a
certification programn in place.
As an alternative, the City considered leasing the rolling stock to PSG and
asked them to provide insurance through their own carrier. We learned that the
cost of PSG providing insurance for these leased vehicles would be more than
three tions what the City of Monticello is currently paying. Consequently, the
insurance increases did not appear to be justified. City staff is of the
opinion that the existing certification program for drivers will significantly
reduce our risk.
The third significant issue discussed above is the odor control problems. As
you may recall, we were having significant problems in the fall of 1988. PSG'a
staff and the Monticello staff were struggling with attempts to identify and
reduce odors at the treatment plant. At the City's request, PSG brought in
representatives from corporate headquarters and other wastewater treatment
plants and identified the trickling filters as the drea releasing odurs. PSG
is
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
agreed to increase their operational costs in an attempt to reduce odors
immediately, to study the problem, and determine a cost effective method of
dealing with the odors.
They accoumplished this in a relatively short period of time, and PSG
recommended the installation of an economical spray mist odor control system
for the trickling filters. This system was installed through a joint effort of
City staff and PSG and has been effectively controlling odors generated from
the trickling filters ever since, with the City picking up the chemical costs
for the system.
This summer, beginning in July, odors again were being released from the City's
wastewater treatment plant. This time the odors were unstable, inconsistent,
as they mysteriously disappeared during attempts to investigate their origin.
Several key factors made tracing the odors a monumental task. Three parameters
had changed during the summer. First, the nuclear power plant was down for
refueling and was generating two to three times the aimunt of wastewater
normally produced. Sunny Fresh Foods had altered its waste stream and
installed pretreatment equipment that changed the makeup of their wastewater,
but was yet having problems meeting effluent standards. Lastly, the City put
two new wells on line which slightly altered the characteristic of the City's
water itself.
PSG set up a chemical feed system at the Sunny Fresh Food plant in an attemmpt
to tie up hydrogen sulfide gases in the wastewater stream, as it appeared the
odors were collection system generated and released immediately upon reaching
the treatment plant. Mysteriously, the odors diminished, giving an indication
of the chemical's effectiveness. However, when the chemical feed system was
stopped, the odors did not reappear, nor did any appreciable aim unt of sulfides
in the wastewater. A couple of weeks later, just as mysteriously as they
ended, the odors began being generated again. Chemicals were fed at the head
of the treatment plant but were not proven totally effective. Treatment plant
processes were modified and changed in attempts to make the release of hydrogen
sulfide gases less possible. Again, the odors continued to come and go at odd
hours and times, in late August and early October, PSG commnissioned ODIFAS, an
odor consultant coumpany, to perform an analysis of the wastewater treatment
plant and its incoming wastewater in atteapts to determine possible causes and
remedies. During the same period of time, the City staff and PSG performed a
joint, thorough examination of total sulfides in the wastewater through ut our
collection system, as well as strategic points at the wastewater treatment
plant. The results of the testing and studies will be presented to the Council
in the near future. The point of this discussion is that more efforts have
been made to identify, control, and reduce odors at the wastewater treatment
plant in the past year than have ever been made before since the initial design
of the wastewater treatent plant. In addition, the new proposed contract with
PSG has been modified so that PSG places odor control at the wastewater
treatment plant on an equal priority with the quality of water being discharged
into the Mississippi River.
For the past three months, Rick and I have been involved in negotiations with
PSG to clarify and modify the existing contract. A copy of the proposed
contract was given to the, council at the October 23 meeting. The following are
key points or changes in the contract other than those referenced above:
19
Council Agenda 11/13/89
2.2 The maintenance and repair budget has been modified from $25,000 to
$30,000 annually. This figure includes no project related labor, which
is borne by PSG. Money not spent is returned to the City. However, the
City is responsible for repairs above $30,000 when caused by normal wear
and tear. PSG pays for any repairs from lack of maintenance or
negligence out of their own pocket.
2.11 The City has negotiated a provision for the minimum qualifications for
the operators of the wastewater treatment plant. These are over and
above the requirements by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
2.17 The City has increased the permitted distance from sludge disposal sites
to the treatment plant from six to ten miles to include a newly acquired
site in Silver Creek Township.
4.1 The annual compensation has been increased to $324,070, with an annual
3.58' CPI increase, which excludes electricity, natural gas, and chlorine
and inaintenance, which are included elsewhere.
4.4 The escalator clause for increases in electrical and natural gas costs
have been reduced based upon the new base amount. Chlorine has also been
added to this section.
7.1 This term of the contract has been changed from 3-1/4 years to 5 years.
7.4 The cancellation clause for no cause has been rewritten to provide a
performance related cancellation cause.
Appendix 8 The dog pound has been specifically excluded from PSG's
liability. This is a clarification issue.
Appendix C.4 The base loadings at the wastewater treatment plant have been
changed to reflect recent changes and have allowed for reasonable
growth without a change in scope of services. The triggers for
BOD and total suspended solids have been reduced by 5%, and the
formula for a change in scope of services when no agreement can
be reached has been added.
Appendix I. This section has been added to calculate the CPI annual
adjustment.
Most of you have probably looked at the figure under 4.1 above of $324,070 and
said to yourself, "Wow, what an increaser" I can assure you that this was not
the starting figure, and probably represents a figure very close to minimal
profitability for Professional Services Group on this project. This is a
$59,070 increase over the original contract, but only $39,000 over the 1989
budget figure due to an expected increase in contract price for a change In
loadings to the plant. What one oust look at in regard to this figure is the
actual increase in cost of goods and services for the period of time of the
original contract and 1990 and, in addition, the increased loadings to the
-NOTE: variable upon extreme cases.
20
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
wastewater treatment plant, the increasing age of the wastewater treatment
plant and its need for additional attention, and the ever changing wastewater
stream which is also complicated by odor problems and sludge disposal probleins.
one could rationalize that an annual okay CPI increase over half of the
original 40 month contract (the $265,000 was an average of the 40 months) and
for 1990 would total about $35,500. The remaining $23,570 could be attributed
to a change in scope of services at the wastewater treatment plant due to
increased loadings and increased efforts in odor control and sludge disposal.
This is essentially over simplification but can show some rationale for the
increases.
One of the questions you may be asking yourself is, "Can we return to operating
the wastewater treatment plant ourselves?" The answer is yes. Our contract is
so written that upon termination by the City, PSG will assist us in resuming
operation. We will be faced with some double operation costs during this
time. The City also has right to offer employment to any of PSG's emmtployees.
The manager and one of the operators at the wastewater treatment plant are city
residents and may be open to an offer of employment from the City of
Monticello. The residency of these two individuals is quite interesting, as no
manager or operator of the wastewater treatment has lived in the city of
Monticello since Walt Mack ran the treatment plant in the 70's.
What one must realize, however, is that by hiring our own people again, we
would lose the broad spectrum of support services from PSG and would have to
duplicate those services with outside services and additional City staff time,
especially from City Hall. In addition, it is possible that we could inherit
or again develop similar problems at the treatment plant which led us to a
public/private partnership several years ago, some of which were related to the
need for additional staffing activity, workers comp insurance problems,
accountability, and the lack of problem solving capabilities by the staff. we
would more than likely again be faced with a union shop at the wastewater
treatment plant which would mean an increase in labor costs right up to the
manager. In an effort to make a comparison between City operation and PSG
operation, Rick and I established a 1990 operation budget for the plant
utilizing a fifth individual and outside consultants or contractors to fill In
the void left by PSG. The following is that proposed budget and our 1987
proposed budget.
SEWER FUND
PLANT 6 LAB
CITY OPERATION
PROPOSED BUDGET
Personal Services
1987
1990
Salaries, Regular S
85,000
$ 136,770
Overtime, Regular
5,000
5,000
Salaries, Temporary
4,400
2,500
PERA
3,900
6,500
Insurance, Medical 6 Life
10,300
22,200
Social Security
6,500
11,050
$ 116,000
S 184,020
21
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
1987
1990
Supp) ies
11,200
$ 15,000•
Office Supplies
1,900
2,100
General Operating Supplies
13,400
10,000
Motor Fuels s Lubricants
3,600
3,000
Clothing Supplies
2,200
2,800
Maintenance of Equipment Supplies
11,900
18,000
Maintenance of vehicle Supplies
1,600
2,000
Maintenance of Building Supplies
500
1,000
Small Tools b Minor Equipment
200
500
Dues, Memberships, Subscriptions
300
35,300 39,400
Other Services and Charges
Professional Services $
11,200
$ 15,000•
Communications
2,500
3,000
Travel--Conference-Schools
1,000
1,500
Utilities, Electrical
35,000
28,000
utilities, Heating
22,000
10,000
Maintenance of Equipment
7,000
6,500
Maintenance of Vehicles
800
1,000
Maintenance of Building
1,200
1,500
Rental of Equipment
800
1,400
Dues, Memberships, Subscriptions
300
450
Taxes b Licenses
1,350
N/A
Book
50
150
Miscellaneous
100
150
$ 83,300 $68,650
Capital Outlay
Buildings 6 Structures 5,000
Improvemento other than buildings 1,500 11,500'•
6,500 11,500
TOTAL PLANT AND LAB $241,100 $303,579
• NOTE: Approxiimtely $9,000 to $10,000 for outside consultants and support.
•' NOTE: "Maintenance Pac" and "Operations PAC" Software purchased from PSG
(with PC and printer from another source) .
As can be seen by the above budget when compared to the City's original 1987
budget, the most significant increases are noted in labor. The 1990 budget
includes a Class A operator/manager at o base salary of $34,000, and four
additional employees at the City's prevbiling union wage. Overtime and
teiq:)orary salaries have been reduced or not increased because of the additional
uunpower provided by one more euployee. in the supplies and other services
category, it is proposed to take advantage of the cost saving procedures
implemented by PSG in regard to operating supplies and utilities. For the
22
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
purposes of comparison, we have kept the maintenance figure identical to PSG's
at $30,000. It should be further noted that our contract allows usto purchase
the computer software in use by PSG at the wastewater treatment plant. I have
included the software purchase price allowed in our original contract, and I
have also included a PC and printer for operating the software.
The only possible cuts in the above budget for 1990 would be in the area of
salaries. PSG uses 4-1/3 full-time people with 618 of one person in overtime
and part-time people. This does not include teirporary transfers for technical
issues. We have proposed five full-time people and 29% overtime and
part-time. Also, it may be possible to hire etnployees at less than the
prevailing union wage, but it is assumed that this would only be a temporary
measure and may not be in the best interests of the City, as the quality of the
staff may be higher if the prevailing wage is offered. In addition, it would
be doubtful whether or not we could attract a quality Class A operator/manager
for the wastewater treatment plant at a salary significantly less than $34,000.
In order for us to compare the 1990 proposed budget for City operations with
PSG's annual figure, certain items must be added to the City's budget. PSG
currently pays for workers cote and clerical time/secretarial in their budget.
Workers comp insurance based upon the 1990 budget will cost the City
approximately $7,214, bringing the total to $310,793. In addition, additional
staff time will be needed at City Hall in dealing with the various suppliers in
handling the financial data as well as issuing hundreds of vendor checks,
payroll checks, report typing, and the like. Rick has estimated the City Hall
support necessary to accoiplish these tasks at $9,000 per year. This brings us
to a total proposed 1990 City budget of $ 319,793, which is $4,277 less than
PSG's operating budget. This does not allow for extra costs for PSG while
returning to City operations. The difference between the two would probably
grow slightly in the second year due to not having to budget again for the
maintenance and operations pac. However, PSG keeps this system updated with
their own budget and consequently, one would have to figure a certain amount of
dollars for software maintenance and upgrading to keep this system current.
PSG las wade at least one major change in this software since the contract
began, which pretty much outdated all of the software they started with, and
proposes to fully update every two years.
Based upon all of the above detailed information, one can state that the City
of Monticello, at least in the initial stages, can operate the wastewater
treatment plant slightly cheaper than Professional Services Group. However,
when one looks at the enormous amount of technical asaialance provided by PSC
that the City will no longer have direct access to, the difference becomes
minimal. Over the past three years, PSG has paid for and prepared two odor
control detailed reports in making recormnendations for remedial action, they
have prepared a detailed sludge analysis for the purposes of making preliminary
Judgements as to the future of sludge disposal for the City of Monticello, and
they have brought forth numerous experts and various pieces of equipment from
other plants. In the case of the cotmninutor and booster recirculation pwps,
they were able to get these pieces of equipment operating when previous
operators had abandoned them, indicating they were inappropriately applied or
tnisdesigned, which did not end up being the case. In addition, PSG has brought
in a graduated agronomist from another plant to work with our nedtby fdcmts in
23
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
hopes of establishing additional sludge sites. They have upon numnerous times
brought personnel up to assist Sunny Fresh in plans for a pretreatment system.
It is difficult to measure the value of these outside services. My guess is
that the $9,000 to $10,000 in our 1990 budget would not cover replacement
services. Certainly, having firsthand knowledge of these incidents sways my
opinion toward continued support of the public/private partnership. Either
way, the City of Monticello will see an increase in sewer rates. After
determining the 1990 budget for the City, based upon the Council's decision on
November 13, staff will prepare an agenda item concerning the rate increases.
Preliminary estimates are in the neighborhood of 15%.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the new contract with Professional Services Group as presented to
the City Council.
2. Continue further negotiations with PSG, either in the form of a reduced
contract price or other points dealing with the proposed contract.
3. Continue operations with Professional Services Group on an interim basis
and redistribute requests for proposals to other contractors as well as
Professional Services Group.
4. Return to City operations of the wastewater treatment plant. This could
be done through an interim contract with Professional Services Group to
provide us assistance while doing so.
C. STAFF REC YMMENDATION:
The City Administrator and myself favor continued contract operations of the
City's wastewater treatment plant through a private/public partnership with
Professional Services Grote as outlined in alternative gl or 12. Although the
City staff has been negotiating with Professional Services Group for several
months, and we feel that the contract before you is the best compromise we were
able to reach, the City Council could request further negotiations with PSG.
Indications are, however, that they have not presented an over -inflated budget
or contract to us, and there may not be significant room for further
negotiation in price. PSG will have representatives available for questions
and may wish a few moments to summarize operations past and future.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the new proposed contract (this was provided at the Oct. 23 meoting)m
Prop000d 1990 budget with contract operations by PSC:: Lotter of commont
by City Attorney.
24
a
REVISED
SEWER FUND
CONTRACT OPERATIONS
1990 BUDGET
FUND NO. 71
REVENUE
1989
1990
71 36
300 0
382
3582
Interest Income
$ 525
$ 150
71 36
300 0
385
4085
Lindberg -Rental House
4,8n0
4,800
71 36
300 0
391
4591
Inspection/Admin. Fees
),200
1,000
71 37
300 0
301
1601
Special Ascot. including
325
275
Interest
71 37
300 0
304
1701
P 6 I Ascot -Direct 1
-0-
-0-
71 39
309 0
378
3076
User Fees
370,000
$406,820
71 39
309 0
379
3075
Hookups
300
300
71 39
309 0
381
3078
Penalties for Late Pymt.
800
300
71 39
309 0
388
3583
Miscellaneous
-0-
-0-
TOTAL
REVENUE
$377,950
$413,645
1) The increase in uaor foes needed is $36,820.
2) Tonal increase in overall budget is $35,695.
3) This is a 9.44% increase. The actual rate increase is expected to be
in excess of 159 duo to lose revenue generated by users in 1989 than
expected, which may carry through in 1990 without an adjustment to cover
the shortage.
D
0
REVISED
SEWER FUND
CONTRACT OPERATIONS
PLANT 6 LAB
1990 BUDGET
FUND NO. 71
1989
1990
Personal Services
71 10
437 1
411
7711
Salaries, Regular
S 1,000
$ 1,000
71 10
437 1
412
7712
Salaries, Overtime
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 1
413
7713
Salaries, Teuporary
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 1
415
7715
PERA/Pension
50
50
71 10
437 1
417
7717
Medicare
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 1
418
7718
Insurance, Medical 6 Life
1.00
100
71 10
437 1
419
7719
Social Security
75
75
,22.
,22
Supp 1 i es
f 37 2
423
7723
General Operating Supplies
S 6,000
S 6,000
71 10
437 2
424
7724
Motor Fuels/Lubricants
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 2
425
7725
Clothing Supplies
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 2
428
7728
Mntce. of Bldg. Supplies
500
500
,SO
T-T"0�
Other
Services and
Charges
71 10
437 3
436
7736
Professional Services -PSG
$285,000
$324,070
71 10
437 3
437
7737
Comnunications
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 3
441
7741
Insurance (non -personal)
19,100
18,050
71 30
437 3
444
7744
Maintenance of F.quiprnent
5,000
-0-
71 10
437 3
445
7745
Maint. of Building
-n-
-0-
71 10
437 3
447
7747
Rental of Dquipment
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 3
453
7753
Taxes 6 Licenses
1,450
1,450
71 10
437 3
455
7755
Other
-0-
-0-
71 10
437 3
465
7765
Deprec.-Acquired Assets
5,400
5,400
Other
Financing uses
71 10
437 1
464
7764
Deprec. Contrib. Assets
$ -0-
$ -0-
TOTAL
PLANT
AND LAB
$323,675
$356,695
0
REVISED
SEWER FUND
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
1990 BUDGET
FUND NO. 71
1989 1990
Personal. Services
71
10
436 1
411
7611
Salaries, Regular
S
18,200
$ 18,400
71
10
436 1
412
7612
Overtime, Regular
2,150
2,150
71
10
436 1
413
7613
Salaries, Temporary
3,600
4,150
71
10
436 1
415
7615
PERA
900
925
71
10
436 1
417
7617
Medicare
50
75
71
10
436 1
418
7618
Insurance, Medical 6 Life
1,800
2,750
71
10
436 1
419
7619
Social Security
1,550
1,575
2R,250
S 30,025
Supplies
n0 436 2
422
7622
S1nall Tools 6 Minor Equip.
$
ion
$ 100
71
10
436 2
423
7623
General Operating Supplies
3,700
1,700
71
10
436 2
42.4
7624
Motor Fuels 6 Lubricants
500
500
71
10
436 2
425
7625
Clothing Supplies
250
250
71
10
436 2
426
7626
Mntce. of F.quip. Supplies
1,000
1,000
71
10
436 2
427
7627
Mntce. of Vehicle Supplies
200
20n
T
=0
T__370
Other
Services and
Charges
71
10
436 3
436
7636
Professional Services
S
4,000
S 4,000
71
10
436 3
437
7637
Co:mnunicat ion-Phone/Postage
100
250
71
10
436 3
438
7638
Travel -Conference -Schools
2.00
200
71
10
436 3
441
7641
Insurance (non -personal)
1,575
1,975
71
10
436 3
442
7642
Utilities, Electrical
1,700
1,500
71
10
436 3
444
7644
Maintenance of Equipment
3,000
3,000
71
10
436 3
446
7646
Maintenance of vehicles
300
300
71
10
436 3
448
7648
Dues, Memberships,
Subscriptions
-0-
-n-
71
10
436 3
455
7655
Miscellaneous
300
100
71
10
436 3
465
7665
Depree.-Acquired Assets
5,600
�99g
5,600
3rT7?�f5
Capital Outla
71
10
436 5
4K9
7659
IUrp. Other Than Bldgs.
$
2,500
$ 6,000
71
10
436 5
460
7660
Furniture and Equipment
3,OnO
250
Other
Financin Uses
71
10
436 7
461
7664
Depree. Contrib. Assets
$
-0-
S -0-
TOTAL
COLLECTIONS
$
54,275
$ 56,950
66NTKCt1D ORv.ta
207 SOUTH WALNUT STREET
P.m Box Sea
L MONnCMO, MINNESOTA 65M4)1M16
WRCC NK7w6 (612) 665-9.07
november 7, 1984
SMITH at HAYES
ATTORNEYS AT LAY,
OREOCMY V. SMRH
OARY L. pRINOL6n940F10071
THOMAS 0. KAYOS
RICHARD O. CLOUON
RUTH e. KRONLOKKEN
EL6 6.Y64 O,rtca
CINEMA PROPE53IONAL OLDO.
asT MAIN 3T -SUITE 102
ELK RIVER. MINNESOTA 65370
WIWI,,mONS 0I91-,-= A
Mr. John Simols
Monticello City Hall
P.B. Box 1147
Monticellp, HH 55362
RE: PSC Contract
Dear John:
At your request I have reviewed the revised PSG contract. The following are my
comments about the contract:
a. Paragraphs 2.5 and 2_.7. The contract calls for the use of now software
packages. You should make sure that the new packages are equal to or
superior to existing software.
b. Paragraph 2.17. The sludge disposal radius is increased from 6 to 10
miles. With the disposal problems we are having with the Township, I
wonder whether 10 miles is a sutflolent radius.
a. Paragraph 2.35. Owner should be changed to read ,City..
d. Paragraph 4.2. Owner should be changed to read City.
e. Paragraph 6.2 This Paragraph should be changed to read as follows:
CITY agrees to and shall hold PSG harmless from anp.liabiltly or
damages for property damage or bodily injury, including death, which
may arias from the City.'s negligence under this agreement whether such
nagligence by City or by subcontraotion of City.
�f. Paragraph 6.5. I recommend that the City's insurance agent give tha
City an opinion of the adequacy of Insurance` coverage with respect to
11 this contract.
g. Paragraph 7.4. The parties' right to terminate this contract without
cause, is eliminated. In place of the previous right, s termination
privilege for cause is substituted. The new grounds for termination
are two serious performance related incidents within one 60 day period.
Examples of what such an incidents are included in the agreement, but
what constitutes such an Incident may well be In the eye or the
beholder. Such subjective criteria are frequently disputed between
parties to a conflict. In short, should the City wish to terminate the
contract under this paragraph it will undoubtedly have a fight on its
hands.
I3
I
Page Two
Hr. John. Simola
November 7,, 1989, .
h. Appendix G.
The N_PDFS permit was not attached to the contract copy I
examined.
Should you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Thomas D. Hayes
\
TDH/sem
File No. 89-17911
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
14. Consideration of odor control measures for the wastewater collection
system and wastewater treatment plant. U.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
From some of our previous agenda items dealing with the renewal of PSG's
contract the staff has tried to explain the current odor control problems
at the wastewater treatment plant and how efforts to deal with the
problem have been less than 1008 successful. We have now received the
report from the Davis Process Division, a representative for ODIFAS.
Their report centers on an odor control survey and r ecoimnendat ions for an
odor control program resulting from an inspection on Oct. 12, 1989. In
addition, we have received the test results from samples taken in and
about the collection system and the treatment plant immediately following
the original survey. In the following paragraphs I will atteupt to
present this information as simply as possible.
The odor control survey performed by Davis Process Division, who was
hired by PSG, was begun at a time in the evening when no unusual odors
were present at the wastewater treatment plant. In fact, the inspector
was ready to conclude that there were no significant problems. Shortly
after 9 pon., October 12th, the on again, off again odors appeared at the
wastewater treatment plant during the survey. Mr. Greg Tomlinson has
concluded that high aimunts of hydrogen sulfide are being generated in
the collection system and are being immediately released at the
wastewater treatment plant. Although improvements can be made to the
existing scrubber systems at the wastewater treatinent plant through spray
water treatment and chemical changes, the plant cannot adequately handle
the enormous amounts of hyrogen sulfide being released from the incoming
wastewater .
It was Mr. Tomlinson's opinion that there are sulfates in the wastewater
in significant proportions so that they are being released when coupled
with the high BOD waste from local industry, as this waste consumes the
dissolved oxygen in the wastewater.
Our collection system and wastewater treatment plant tests for sulfates,
sulfides, and sulphur, which unfortunately were taken on an evening when
no odors were generated during the testing, still show strong evidence
that the wastewater coining from Sunny fresh Foods and the Monticello
Nuclear Power Plant contain significantly higher amounts of sulfates than
other wastewaters. Since these were taken on a good night it is
conceivable that much higher levels would be found when odors are being
generated. It appears that the combination of the sulfates and the high
BOD are causing hydrogen sulfite gases to be released in the collection
system for which the wastewater treatment plant is incapable of properly
dealing with.
Mr. Tomlinson, of the Davis Process Division, has recommended changes for
the scrubber system at the wastewater treatment plant. PBG has already
begun implementation of those changes and they could possibly be complete
by the time you road this agenda supplemnt. For the collection systaia
25
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
they have recommended that we inject large doses of ferrous sulfate. It
is most applicable to inject these chemicals into the collection system
to inhibit the production of hydrogen sulfite, which not only creates
odors, but can decay concrete. Rather than to inject them into the
treatment plant where they will treat only the symrmptomn and not the cause,
Mr. Tomlinson has recommended chemicals injection as high as 35 gallons
per day. with chemical costs of $1.18 a gallon and above, one can see
how this could be very expensive, let alone the cost of the hardware or
feed system at $13,000.
PSG has recommended, and I concur, that we perform additional testing and
install a test pilot system to dose the collection system. This test
pilot system would cost approximately $1,000 to set up and have a rental
rate of $400 per month. The amount of chemical used at $1.18 per gallon
would be dependent upon the results of additional testing and of actual
conditions noted in the wastewater. Currently the nuclear power plant
has reduced its work force down to its normal level and reduced the
amount of wastewater coining from its facility. Therefore, this catalyst
may have an effect on the overall production of hydrogen sulfite gases.
All of the costs for the collection system treatment will be borne by the
City and the cost for the modifications and changes at the wastewater
treatment plant will be borne by PSG. PSG will assist the City in
setting up and assisting our collection personnel with operating the
injection system outside the treatment plant.
It is easy to see how one might be tempted to install the $13,000 system
and begin injecting chemicals at a cost of $35 a day and above. However,
at a cost of $12,775 per year for chemicals, let alone a building or feed
system for maintenance of the system, it could be very costly indeed and
may not be 1008 effective. It therefore seems applicable to proceed with
caution to see that hydrogen gases are controlled only when they need to
be and at the most economical cost.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Authorize City staff to install a test pilot chemical feed injection
system in the collection system with the assistance of PSG at a setup
cost of $1,000, plus a rental cost of. $400 per month, plus chemicals
as needed at $1.18 per gallon, plus additional testing, as required.
At the current time we are asking Sunny Fresh's assistance so that
the system may be housed at their location in an existing building.
If not, we may have additional costs for a building, etc.
2. Install the system that is recommended by Mr. 'Tomlinson, at an
estimated Startup cost of $13,000 plus chemical costs at
approximately $1.00 per gallon. Again, we would work with Sunny
Fresh to have the system installed at their facility or, if not,
another place in the collection system such as the Bridge Park lift
station.
26
C
Council Agenda — 11/13/89
3. Have PSG make the recommended changes at the wastewater treatment
plant, but that the City do nothing in its collection system in hopes
that the reduction of sulfate ( from the reduction of workers at the
nuclear power plant) will remove the catalyst from production of
hydrogen sulfate.
C. STAFF RECOPIMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the Council
authorize additional testing and the installation of the pilot chemical
feed system as outlined in alternative #1. Estimated initial cost of
this alternative is in the area of $3,000.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the odor control report from the Davis Process Division,
representative of ODIFAS. Copy of the sulfate/sulfide test in the
collection system and at the wastewater treatment plant. Letter of
recomsendation from PSG, various support data concerning odor control
matters.
27
MVIS-400.
PROCESS div.
October 24, 1989
Mr. Kelsie McGuire, Project Manager
Professional Services Group, Inc.
1401 Hart Boulevard
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: Odor Control
Dear Kelsie:
Serving the Water Industry Since 1938'
P.O. Bos 29
2650 T.11cvam Rend
TALLEVAST. FL 34270-0029
813/355.2971
I would like to thank you for your assistance during my visit to
your facility. As per our conversation, the following is a
report on my hydrogen sulfide survey findings and our
recommendations for a total odor control program.
HYDROGEN SULFIDE SURVEY REPORT 6 RECOMMENDATIONS
i. METHODS
A hydrogen sulfide survey was performed at the Monticello,
Minnesota - P.S.C. Wastewater Treatment Plant on October 12,
1989. Tasting was done at different times during the day to
establish potant-sally high sulfide locations. Analysis was
performed using a modified Hach lead -acetate test to measure
dissolved hydrogen sulfide levels and Gas -Tec draeger tubes were
used for atmospheric concentrations. One cost was performed
using a Gas -Tec tube that is designed to measure dissolved
hydrogen sulfide. This test was done to verify the accuracy of
the Hach loud -acetate method.
Other pertinent data and information was collected through
discussions with Kelsie McGuire and plant personnel.
II. FINDINGS
The results of all analysis performed can be found in Exhibit I.
The findings of this survey aro as follows:
A. GENERAL PLANT ODOR
Upon approaching the Treatment Plant on the morning of
October 12, 1989, vary little to no odor was apparent.
l
S)
October 26, 1989
Professional Services Group. Inc.
Mr. Helsie McGuire, Project Manager
Page Two
After arriving at the plant, the general odor on the grounds
was found to be non-offensive to this surveyor. Prior to my
survey, Mr. McGuire and myself went on a plant walk-through.
During this walk through, sulfide -type odors were apparent
inside: 1) the preliminary building; 2) the diverter
building and to the greatest extent in 3) the gravity
thickener. A slight "vinegar -type" odor was also noted
within the dome of the trickling filters. The general odor
on the plant grounds remained non-offensive throughout the
day up to my departure at approximately 6:30 p.m.
When returning to the plant at approximately 9:30 p.m., a
sulfide odor was apparent on Hart Boulevard, south of the
treatment plant. Once at the plant, the some odor was very
evident, particularly around the primary building. An odor
complaint from the Hospital was registered with Mr. John
Simolas, the City Public Works Director, who relayed this
complaint via telephone to Mr. McGuire at 9:58 p.m. The
reason for the increase in odor will be discussed in the
sections that follow as the results of the survey are
discussed.
It should be noted that the general wind direction on
October 12, 1989 was from the north to northwest.
B. PRIMARY BUILDING
Raw wastewater entering this building had an average
dissolved hydrogen sulfide concentration of 2.1 ppm.
However, the nighttime concentration was 60 times higher
than the morning levels, rosulting in more hydrogen sulfide
being released into the atmosphere. The odor complaint,
registered at 9:58 p.m., was a direct result of the
increased level of sulfides entering this building from the
collection system.
C
O/f
October 24, 1989
Professional Services Group, Inc.
Kelsie McGuire, Project Manager
Page Three
The plant flow at 11:20 p.m. was 0.5 MCD (which is above the
average daily flow) suggesting that the increase in sulfide
concentrations was not related to a dramatic decrease in
flow. Since a longer detention time in the collection
system, and the resultant expenditure of dissolved oxygen,
appeared not to be the cause of the increased sulfide
concentrations, other contributing factors were explored.
Through discussions with Mr. McGuire, I found that a local
egg processing company, "Sunny Fresh Eggs", discharged high
BOD waste from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. on a
daily basis. Exhibit It shows typical BOD loadings from
Sunny Fresh. This high BOD waste is consuming the dissolved
oxygen in the wastewater, allowing hydrogen sulfide to be
generated earlier and to a greater degree in the collection
system. The result is that increased sulfides are entering
this building and being released to the atmosphere.
C. DIVERTER BUILDING
Wastewater entering this building from the raw sewage
wetwell had dissolved hydrogen sulfide levels that ranged
from 0.2 ppm to 1.0 ppm. These concentrations correspond
to, and are a direct reflection on the sulfides entering the
plant.
The flow entering the diverter structure from the
equalization tank contained 1.5 ppm dissolved hydrogen
sulfide during both test periods. The detention time
involved with the equalization tank will cause additional
sulfide generation and concentrations in this flow will
depend on the hydrogen sulfide levels entering the tank and
the retention time.
A Rossvood-Marcinoz spray -mist air scrubber van in operation
in this building. At the time of the survey, X -OBJ odor
neutralizer was being applied in a central mixing system
which foods this and ocher remote scrubbers. The atmosphere
sulfide concentrations within this building averaged 5 ppm.
while hydrogen sulfide concentrations in the air leaving
this scrubber averaged 3.5 ppm. Those levels indicate that
the scrubber is not effectively removing hydrogen sulfide.
0
October 24, 1989
Professional Services Group, Inc.
Mr. Kelsie McGuire, Project Manager
Page Four
D. PRIMARY CLARIFIER
The effluent from this structure had dissolved hydrogen
sulfide concentrations of 0.2 and 0.8 ppm during daytime and
nighttime flows respectively. This increase is directly
related to raw wastewater sulfide levels. Very little
hydrogen sulfide was recorded in the atmosphere. However,
if dissolved levels increase, this is a potential hydrogen
sulfide release point.
E. TRICKLING FILTER
Atmospheric hydrogen sulfide concentrations averaged 3 ppm
within the dome of the trickling filter. The amount of
hydrogen sulfide released here depends on the dissolved
sulfides present in the primary clarifier effluent, which
again, is directly related to the raw wastewater sulfides.
Due to the addition of D.O. through the trickling filter.
and the release of existing hydrogen sulfide, no hydrogen
sulfide (dissolved or atmospheric) was recorded in the
underdrain area.
A NuTech Series 900 Odor Control System was in operation in
the hundepace of the trickling filter. NuToch's NutralitoO
product was being applied through this pressure atomizing
system. This chemical seemed to have a slight "vinegar -
typo" odor associated with it.
F. INTERMEDIATE CLARIFIERS
No sulfides ware recorded in this area.
G. GRAVITY THICKENER
Dissolved sulfides in the gravity thickener averaged 17 ppm.
while atmospheric concentrations ranged from 9 to 60 ppm.
The 60 ppm reading was recorded during a hose down of the
thickener, and the agitation of the surface facilitated the
release of the vary volatile dissolved hydrogen sulfide.
October 24, 1989
Professional Services Group, Inc.
Mr. Kelsie McGuire, Project Manager
Page Five
The Rosswood Scrubber at this location was also performing
very poorly. Air entering and leaving this unit averaged 17
ppm, yielding 0% removal.
There were no sulfides associated with the activated sludge
portion of this plant.
III RECOMMENDATIONS
The hydrogen liquid -gas equilibrium is such that dissolved
levels that are normally considered low, can produce very
high hydrogen sulfide concentrations in the atmosphere. For
instance, at 20 degree centigrade the concentration (4 ppm
dissolved hydrogen sulfide) recorded at 10:10 p.m. on the
raw wastewater could produce as much as 1,000 ppm in the
atmosphere. (See Exhibit 111). Due to dilution and
dispersion, liquid -gas equilibrium is very seldom achieved
except in very confined spaces. However, atmospheric
concentrations may be approaching this level in some
portions of the gravity sewer, giving potential for severe
corrosion as well as odor. With this in mind, Davis Process
is pleased to offer the following recommendations:
Davis Process recommends that ODOPHOSO, an aqueous solution of
ferrous sulfate, be applied in the collection system at, or very
near, the Sunny Fresh Company. By applying ODOPHOSO at this
point, corrosion will be controlled in the collection system and
odor will be arrested at the treatment plant. Davie Process
offers o package storage and feed system in which the feed pumps
are timer -controlled, and deliver product at a rate needed for
that time of the day.
Based on the data in Exhibit I and 11 an ODOPHOSO feed rate of 27
ml/min would be required from 3:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., and from
2:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. a feed rate of 145 ml/min would be needed.
These feed rates equate to a total daily feed of 35 gpd.
The effects this feed rata will have on the individual odor
problem areas, and further recommendations are outlined below.
October 24, i989
Professional Services Group, Inc.
Mr. Kelsie McGuire, Project "tanager
Page Six
A. PRELIMINARY BUILDING
ODOPHCISO will have precipitated hydrogen sulfide as ferrous
sulfide before the wastewater reaches this building. Thus
hydrogen sulfide odor and corrosion will be controlled.
B. DIVERTER BUILDING
Hydrogen sulfide will also be controlled at this location, both
in the flow from the raw wet well, as well as in the equalization
tank.
We would also recommend that the solution being used in the
scrubber be changed from X-02) odor neutralizer to sodium
hypochlorite. Although there will be very little to no sulfides
present. some organic odors may persist and this unit will
provide a "polishing" effect. Mr. McGuire stated that
maintenance problems were associated with the scrubber units in
the past when using sodium hypochlorite. These problems were
related to the make-up water source. Iron. and or, manganese was
being precipitated and fouling the spray nozzles. In order to
avoid or minimize this problem, Davis suggests that routine
maintenance and cleaning be stepped up. It is possible that the
scrubber units will no longer be needed once the ODOPHOSM feed Is
initiated.
C. PRIMARY CLARIFIER
The collection system feed point will also control hydrogen
sulfide at this location.
D. TRICKLING FILTERS
Hydrogen sulfide release will also be controlled or this
locat ion.
At this time we would recommend the continued operation of the
NuTech system. A further evaluation of its performance can be
done at a later data.
(S
October 24, 1989
Professional Services Group, Inc.
Mr. Kelsie McGuire, Project Manage:
Page Seven
E. GRAVITY THICKENER
Assuming that the pH remains above 6.6 in the gravity thickener,
sulfide control will also be realized at this location. Nearly
all of the iron applied in the collection system will end up in
the intermediate clarifier and waste activated sludges, thus
being available for sulfide control in this thickener.
We also recommend the same scrubber process changes for this
scrubber, as was outlined above for the Diverter Building unit.
Kelsie. Davis Process thanks you and P.S.G., for the opportunity
to analyze this odor control problem and we look forward to
working closely with P.S.G. in the future. Should you have any
questions. please contact me at 1-800-345-3982.
Sincerely.
DAVIS WATER b WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC.
Process Division
Grog R. `Tomlinson
Sales Representative
GRT:jk
A:ProfSar.Pro
Encl.
cc: John Mickets, Reg. Mgr.
P.S.G.
Ov
I
W
EXHIBIT I
MONTICELLO, MN - P.S.G.
WWTP
HYDROGEN SULFIDE SURVEY
OCTOBER
12, 1989
LOCATION
TIME
pH
DISSOLVED
ATMOSPHERIC
SCRUBBER AIR
HYDROGEN
HYDROGEN
HYDROGEN
SULFIDE
SULFIDE
SULFIDE
(PPM)
(Ppm)
(IN/OUT)
----------
------------------------------------------------------------------
PRELIMINARY BLDG.:
-Raw Wastewater
10: Loam
7.42
0.1
5
10:lOpm
7.80
4.0
43
DIVERTER BLDG.:
-Div. Structure
I0:28am
7.88
0.2
5
10:39pm
7.80
1.0
5
-Equalization Tank
I0:36am
7.64
1.5
5
flow
10:46pm
7.56
1.5
-
-Scrubber
10:46pm
-
-
-
5 / 2
10:49pm
-
-
-
5 / 5
PRIMARY CLARIFIER:
-Effluent
10:50am
7.58
0.2
-
10:22pm
7.24
0.8
( l
TRICKLING FILTER:
-Top
11:03am
-
-
2
I0:33pm
-
-
4
-Undardraln Area
11: loam
7.14
0
0
9:55pm
7.42
0
0
INTERMEDIATE
CLARIFIERS:
-Effluent
11 18A
7.86
0
-
GRAVITY THICKENER
-Effluent
11 36a
6.70
20
23
11 40a
-
22-
-
3:40pm
-
-
40--
11 01 Pm
7.4---
8
9
-Scrubber
11 50a
-
-
-
20/20
3:30pm
-
-
-
18/18
3:54pm
-
-
-
21/21
10:55pm
-
-
-
9 / 9
I
W
l
EXHIBIT I
(Continued)
NOTES: * - Dissolved hydrogen sulfide with Cas -Tec tube
** - Reading taken during thickener wash down
*** - pH taken on plant lab equipment, all other pH readings
taken with GallenKamp pH stick.
OTHER DATE AND INFORMATION
- NuTech Spray System in operation on Trickling Filters
(Nutralite(D being applied in system)
- X-09 Odor Neutralizer being applied in scrubber system
- Average Plant flow - 0.46 mgd
- Average sludge to Gravity Thickener 60,000 gpd
- Plant flow at 11:20 p.m. an 10/12/89 0.5 mgd
- Equalization tank flow - 0.144 mgd
SUNNY FRESH DAILY 130D LOADING PATTl-4,PZN
Himill
3000
2000
1000 --
-au
4=1 ON 1-1:3 C) C) 4= Ca 00000ao
a 0 0 Q 0 0
oonoococooc000cooaaoococ
0.=000cocoo�ooc000ooo o C
m a - ol m vio 0 0 1- Z) m 0,ll- =)- N V) 0 - 0 Mc# Lf', 0 N
O�4-" ".-q - -NNW 010 OOOOOOC
Q) TIME
(,10 "if)
usim SAYS (pla)
EXHIBIT III
should be noted that when the velocity is less than
scouring velocity, deposition of organic solids on the
pipe invert may occur, and the deposited solids will
serve as sites for sulfate reduction if anaerobic
conditions develop.
In gravity sewers flowing less than full, higher
velocitieswill result in turbulence -induced reaeration
(see Equation 2.14). While this may not affect the rate
of sulfide production from the anaerobic sulfide -
producing zone in the slime layer, the 00 caused by
turbulence -induced reaeration will be used for the
oxidation of sulfides in the aerobic zone of the slime
layer of in the wastewater stream.
2.3.2.7 Surface Area
Factors which affect the pipe surface available for
sulfate reduction in a wastewater collection system
are flow rete, pipe diameter and energy Oradiont.
These elements control depth of flow in the sewer. It
follows that, as the depth increases, so does the
surface available for development of slimes below the
water level. Treatment plant structures such as wet
wells. interprocess piping, and junctures that permit
the accumulation of solids provide possible sites for
sulfide generation.
2.3.2.8 Detention Time
As detention time in sewers, force mains. and non-
aerated holding basins increases, the oxygen con-
sumption increases. the oxidation-reduction potential
(ORP) decreases, and organic matter becomes in-
creasingly solubilized. These conditions favor the
activity of the sulfate -reducing organisms. Thus, in
the design of collection and treatment systems.
minimizing detention time can limit the activity of the
Desullavibrio bacteria and thus the rate of sulfide
production.
2.3.3 Hydrogen Sulfide Release
In enclosed vessels containing dissolved HTS at
equilibrium, the concentration of HS gas in the
atmosphere will vary with the dissolved HS con-
centration according to Henry's Law:
K - p (2.17)
x
where,
K e Henry's Low constant, atm
p a penial pressure of the gas phase over the
solution, atm
x a molo fraction of the dissolved gas in the
liquid phase, dimensionles_
10
Figure 2.9 shows the partial pressure of H2S gas as a
function of temperature for a range of concentrations
of dissolved H=S. At 1 atmosphere of pressure. the
partial pressure in millionths of an atmosphere is
equal to volumetric concentration in ppm. Thus, at
20cC. 3.0 mg/I of dissolved HTS will be in equilibrium
with approximately 780 ppm by volume of gaseous
1-12S. Increasing the temperature decreases the
solubility of the gas. and more will be present in the
atmosphere.
2.3.3.1 Rate of Hydrogen Sulfide Gas Release
The extent and rate of HTS gas release to the sewer
atmosphere are controlled by the following factors:
a. Dissolved Oxygen
Sulfides generated in the sulfate -reducing slime
layer are likely to be oxidized in the aerobic layer or in
tho wastewater stream it the 00 concentration is 1.0
mg/I or greater. If, however, the ORP and 00 are low.
some of the sulfide produced will diffuse into the
stream.
b. pH
The dissociation of H2S is dependent upon pH. The
dissociation of HS- to H' and S' is of minimal concern,
as this is significant only at high pH values. The un-
ionized H2S is the only form of sulfide which can be
Figure 2.9. Equilibrium concentration of Mrs in air.
MS in solution, mg/1
1.900 - b�
1,900 - At One Alrrtoephate
00
1.400 -
a
5 1.200
�0
Z 1,000 -
900
� 10
=
Soo -
400 1.0 .
200 0.9
0
0 10 20 30 40
Temperature, 4
0
0
a 71; 962 +aso Conn. TES: LAB. 11/02/69 1::.r P.O]
KELSIE MC QUIRE
VU2312
REPORT NO.:
35712/01
PAGE 1
PROF.SERVICES GR.
Trunk Sewer
REPORT DATE:
11/92/89
SEF
1481 HART BLVD
01080"
DATE RECEIVED:
18/?3/89
EFF
MONTICELLO, MN
57362
6138p"
71300"
Sul fate, Ag/L
WI DKR LAR CERTIF. 0617013986
3e
91
99
VY2388
YY2399
W2316
WW2311
( I
Interceptor
Interceptor
Interceptor
Trunk Serer
2
7:00p"
B:BBpe
9t09p"
7e00p"
Sulfate,"g/L
30
29
I9
1d
Sulfioe,Ag/L
( I
( I
( 1
( 1
Su l f i to, Ag/L
A
1
3
A
SULFUR (FEED)
( Mean. 'LESS THAN* Detectable LNel Approved ere ��
VU2312
W92313
UH2114
NU2315
Trunk Sewer
Trunk Serer
SEF
SEF
01080"
91 19;m
EFF
EFF
6138p"
71300"
Sul fate, Ag/L
29
3e
91
99
SuIfide, "g/L
(1
(1
< 1
( I
Su I f ite, Ag/L
T
1
2
SULFUR (FEED)
( Mean. 'LESS THAN* Detectable LNel Approved ere ��
[1
KELSIE MC CUIRE REPORT NO.: 33712/91 PACE 2
PROF.SERVICES CR. REPORT DATE: 11/92/99
1401 HART BLVD DATE RECEIVED: 19/23/99
MONTTCELtO, MN 53362
( Means 'LESS THAN' Detectable Level Allptoved byr 0
Ya2316
W2317
W2319
VV2319
Yater
Primary
Primary
Chestnut
6:08pm
EFF
EFF
Cty 39
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sul fate, mg/L
39
9:99pm
91GhA
43 SO
Sulfate,mg/L
13
39
41
A
Sulfide,mg/L
( I
t 1
( I
i i
Sulfite,Ag/L
! 2
6
S
4
SULFUR (FEED)
( Means 'LESS THAN' Detectable Level Allptoved byr 0
W2329
UW2321
W2322
UN2323 W2324
Meador
Brtdge
Industrail
Ent tatlear
Oak
Pari
Pard
Cty 39
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sul fate, mg/L
39
33
17
43 SO
Sulfide,mg/L
( I
( 1
( 1
( 1 ( 1
Sul f i to, stg/L
4
5
4
3 S
SULFUR (FEED)
( Means 'LESS THAN' Detectable Level Allptoved byr 0
3
11/93/89
Mr. . John SimcGla
Director of Public Works
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 5:.:362
HE 1 Udor Control
John t
Rttached are copies of the hydrogen sulfads survey performed by
Greg Tomlinson of Davis Industries Inc. (Udephos) on 10/12/8:3,
and the results of analysis of sulfur samples taken by Matt
1'heasen and myself on liD/19/d9. it should also be noted that
odor complaints were received during the 140/le/89 survey but not
during the 10/19/89 sampling.
The following are recommendations on how to proceed based upon
those studies. It should also be noted that these studies,
although quite valuables amount to only spot checks and that
further testing should be performed to get a better handle on
actual chemical dosages and food times due to the intermittent
nature of the odors. So far, we know that the evening hours
between 6100 and 11i0(0 seem to yield the highest frequency of
odor complaints.
1) previously, Potassium Permanganate and Calcium Hypochlorite
had boon used in the scrubber system. Bath of these chemicals
are oxidants and remove hydrogen sulfide, but yield precipitates
both by themselves and from the iron and hardness in city water,
causing spray nozzles in the scrubber units to plug. X -U, an
industrial odor counteractant, first recommended by Bunny Fresh
as effective, was started and in use during the Udephos survey,
wfter consulting with lacomarc, its distributor. 1'his chemical
was non -corrosive, did not cause plugging of the nozzles, and
seemed to be effective during its trial at the plant. Testing
showed that this chemical was not removing sulfide but rather
blocking olfactory receptors, making operators unable to sural l
su 1 f i dos.
Udephos recommends using sodium hypoehloi^ate which is a
completely water soluble oxidant. Additionally, 140 is
anstalling an Iron and hardness removal system to treat the city
water used 1'or the scrubber system. The chemical storage/feed
tank is being sealed and vented to the outside to prevent undue
corrosion to the boller room where the tank is located. these
changes are currently being ef'tected and both the chemical and
water treatment system should be on l are within the week. These
chwrryos wall riot aricresso costs to the city.
3
3
e) 1'o treat sulfides in the plant influent, Odephos recommends
installation of a ferrous sulfate feed system at or very near
Sunny Fresh Foods (SFF) discharge to the collection system. They
recommend that the system be timer controlled to pace chemical
food with the need for the time of day. This recommendation was
based upon intluent sulfide readings from 10/12/89 and typical
SFF BOD loading patterns as explained in their report.
Recommended feed rates amount to 35 gpd. Consideration should
also be given to feeding additional ferrous sulfate at the
nuclear plant during shut down, based upon sulfate results from
116/19/89. Ferric chloride is currently being fed in the
equalization building at low dosages in attempt to control
"normal" sulfide loadings. H ferrous sulfate food system could
be placed at the wastewater treatment plant. More control would
be provided by placement in the collection system, controlling
sulfide generation rather than controlling sulfides already
formod. Controlling sulfide generation in the collection system
will also help protect collection system components from
corrosion caused by sulfides. I have attached a diagram that
shows sulfide generation promoted by low dissolved oxygen
conditions in the collection system, conditions which high
organic oxygen demand can create. I have also included diagrams
of sulfur reactions to help with understanding the problem.
PSG recommends a permanent means of Heb control. Chemical volume
to be based upon actual experience and further testing. Rough
pricing of such a system supplied by Odephosl purchase at about
41:3.000, or a pilot system with a set-up cost of $1,000 and a
$400 per month rental fee. The system would consist of a 5000
gallon storage tank, so that best bulk chemical prices could be
obtained, all piping and timer controlled pumps. These prices
are approximate.
Sincerely,
Kelsio L. McGuire
Project Manager, PLG
cc J. Mickotts
II . ODOR THEORY
The conditions leading to hydrogen sulfide formation, additionally
favors the product ion of other malodorous organic compounds. Many
facultative and an aerobic bacteria, under proper conditions, will
produce a variety of odorous compounds as shown in table A. Once
formed, this vast array of odorous compounds can present a variety of
problems, including: corrosion of concrete, metal pipe and structures,
production of toxic gases and vapors, oxygen deficiencies in confined
spaces and the creation of combustible gases and vapors.
Odor and corrosion problems associated with the collection, handling
TABLE A
Odoroulluffur Compounds In Wastewater
Characteristic
Odor
MCdKWlsr
substance
formula
Odor
Threshold
Weight
pptn
AD" Mercepun
CHOCM-Cmrsm
Strong arlk-coffee
000006
74.16
Arno Meruplen
CHr(CHdrCHrSH
Unplessent-putrid
00000
10617
borw Merceptas
Ci4sCNg,SN
Unplestura-strong
000010
13411
Cram Mercaptan
CNrCH-CN-C"'SH
Slum -me
0.000030
0011
Ohmethyl Suffide
CHr8-CHs
Oncaved-Wetsbles
0,0001
57.13
fthoMerupten
CHsCNrBH
Oacayedcabbage
0,00010
63.10
Hlydragensufflde
Hr6
Rononegge
0,00047
34.10
Metho Maeaptan
CHSN
Oeealnd cabbage
0,0011
4610
hopo Mercoptan
CNrC94e-C71rsm
Unpleasant
0000076
7616
Sulfur Olodda
604
punpets. ir.Hning
0009
5407
Ten-bu"Mercepion
1CHaw-sm
Skunk.unplenen
000006
0010
Th1weed
CHrCe"'SH
Stuntranel0
0000063
13411
ThioplyM
C064101
►utrid.garlic-We
0000063
11011
2
0
and treatment of wastewater is most typically a result of the
reduction of sulfate to if 2S. The formation of hydrogen sulfide
is illustrated by the following equation:
_ anaerobic _
(eq.l) SO4 + organic matter bacteria S + H2O + CO2
(eq.2) S + 2H H 2 S
It is important to note that the fate of sulfate (SO4), in equation 1.
above, is a function of bacterial respiratory conditions. If
dissolved oxygen is present in the wastewater, aerobic respiring
bacteria will predominate and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) will be oxidized
to thiosulfate per the following equation.
aerobic
(eq.3) 2 02 + 2HS bacteria 5203 + H2O
Figure A illustrates the sulfur cycle. When condition best suit
aerobic respiration, odorous hydrogen sulfide will not be generated.
FIGURE A �"- n
To further emphasize to positive impact derived from maintaining
aerobic (figure B.) versus anaerobic condition-- (figure C.) oi,�erve
the fol loving figures. while the anaerobic layer is present in both
systems, the sulfide diffused Into the stream Is oxidized in the
aerobic system ( figure B.) and therefore will not generate dissolved
sulfides .
FIGURE B
Processes Occurring in lower$ with eulfic lent
oxygen to prevent sulfide from enuring the
Mroom
1V/
Blime
4 unr,
E Mgiulo
1 mm thick)
t
O.na t tthefutig the Water
Wastewater
Olssoh+d DxVpen?2 mj_t
Dissolved Sulfide 2010 o Tran
Diffusion of 0. elf N..tf isru --
00.1" d $0. erd Muthisme ---
Offfusbn end Ocidnion d Sulf.d. I
FIGURE C
Processes occurring In eewvn under sulfide
Aundup conditions
Mrs Flux to Foe Well
O.idltlon to MsSos
Air
�l
N.S Entering the Air \�
e i \
f
Ogpen
Enuring the Wne1
I
ISlime
Wetuwater
Lever
I ltvpics
Distdred Orypen <0.I mg/i
I thin
�
Diuehsd Sulfide Present, NS' • N
I
t
Deplatior of Or in elf Leminer lata 1 l '
Diffusion of 80. and Nutrients
Diffusion of Sulfide into the 6troxm
I V/11
The pH of the fluid greatly influences the ultimate fate of hydrogen
sulfide. The following reversible ionization reaction illustrates
possible configurations.
4
M
(eq.4) H 2 S HS i Hr
(eq.5) HS S t Ht
The distinction between the types of sulfides listed above is critical
in that H 2 S is the only form which can escape from solution and create
odor and corrosion problems. An adjustment to pH will drive equations
(eq.) 4 a 5 in the desired direction as demonstrated by the following
figure D.
FIGURE D
N
The rate at which sulfide is produced by the slime layer depends on
the following environmental conditions: Concentrations of organic
material and nutrients, sulfate concentration, dissolved oxygen
concentration, pH, temperature, stream velocity, surface area and
detention time. Please note the following discussion of environmental
factors impacting the sulfide production rate.
ORGANIC MATERIAL: Organic matter and nutrients must diffuse into the
slime layer to be utilized by the sulfate -reducing bacteria. Research
has indicated that the concentration of nutrients is proportional to
the BOD in wastewater, and that the rate of sulfide generation by the
slimes is proportional to the DOD if sulfate is available.
5
O/V
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
.5. Consideration of resolution adopting a proposed preliminary 1990 budget
and setting a proposed tax levy. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Now that the legislature has finally passed a new tax bill, the
Department of Revenue has recently informed all cities of the new truth
in taxation time line requirements regarding the 1990 budget process.
According to the Department of Revenue guidelines, the County must hold
its public hearing on adopting their 1990 budget first, then the School
District is second, and finally the City must hold its public hearing.
The County has selected November 20, the School District, I believe,
November 27, and our public hearing date has been set for 8:00 p.m.,
December 4. Prior to this public hearing, the City is required to adopt
a proposed 1990 tax levy that is submitted to the County Auditor by
Novell 15, 1989. What this proposed tax levy means is that the City
cannot exceed the dollar amount adopted but can lower the tax levy at its
public hearing.
The resolution enclosed for adoption to meet this November 1.5 guideline
proposes a tax levy of $2,717,506 , approximately $57,130 under the levy
limit. This proposed tax levy coincides with the amended budget, which
is also being submitted as part of this agenda package. The proposed tax
levy includes the additional $181,000 needed to replace the local
government aid ammunt that has now been shifted to the School District.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution setting a proposed tax levy of $2,717,506.
2. Adopt a proposed tax levy higher or lower than the amount indicated
above.
3. Do not adopt a proposed tax levy.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City staff reconnends that the proposed tax levy be adopted at
$2,717,506 which coincides with the proposed budget as amended. This tax
levy would still be $57,130 under our legal levy limit, but should be
enough revenue to cover our anticipated expenditures for next year. All
the proposed tax levy means is that the Council cannot go higher than
this later on but does have the ability to lower the levy if it so
chooses. If we do not adopt a proposed tax levy by November 15, the City
would be limited to the taxes collected in 1989, which would really put
us in a bind. VI
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution. Q
28
r
RESOLUTION 89-
C
RESOLUTION ADOPTING 4400FUMD 1990 BUDGET
AND SETTING A PROPOSED TAX LEVY
WHEREAS, the City Administrator has prepared and submitted to the City Council
a proposed budget setting forth therein his estimated needs of the City of
Monticello for all operations and the debt service for the fiscal year
coaonencing January 1, 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE. IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCII. OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO that
the proposed budget so submitted by the City Administrator is adopted as a
preliminary budget for the fiscal year coimnencing January 1, 1990, and be it
further resolved by the Council of the City of Monticello that there be, and
hereby 'is, levied for the fiscal year coimnencing on January 1, 1990, and the
following sums for the respective purposes indicated therein, upon the taxable
property of -the City of Monticello, to wit:
Revenue
General
$ 1,285,665
Library
28,625
OAA
28,300
HRA
19,875
Tree
16,800
Transportation
11,700
Debt Retirement
Debt service funds 1,076,541
Capital Ilprovements
Capital improvement revolving 250,000
TOTAL, PROPOSED TAX LEVY S 2,717,506
The above resolution wan introdu by Councllmember /W S ,was duly
seconded by Counctlmemher with the following voting In favor:
All
Opposed:
The City AdminietraLor to hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of
this resolution Lo Lhe County Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota.
Dated this 13th day of November, 1989.
Rick Wolrsteller
C1Ly Administrator
Ken Maus, Mayor
0
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
16. Consideration of installing street light at private driveway as requested
by the Plaza Car Wash on Highway 25. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the last meeting, the City Council requested further information
concerning a petition for a street light for the driveway entrance for
the Plaza Car Wash. This driveway entrance also serves the Glass Hut and
the now vacant Big A Auto Parts. The City Council discussed the
possibility of the private driveway becoming a service road in the future
serving many businesses, including the property located between the Glass
Hut and Tom Thumb. Because of the volume of traffic utilizing the
private driveway, it was suggested that the City install a street light
at this location.
If you have visited the site, you will see that the City currently has a
light on the west side of Highway 25 at the street intersection of
Sandberg Road. This is a 400 -watt light and lights up the intersection
as well as a portion of the highway. On the other side of the road,
there is a private duplex light near the intersection 30 feet from the
proposed location. This private lighting system belongs to Plaza Car
Wash. It is understood that this private lighting system is loaded to
the max and could not he extended to another light without high cost. At
the last meeting, the City Council requested the Public Works Director to
discuss the installation with NSP and report at this 3neeting.
The proposed location for the light would be on the north side of the
existing private driveway. NSP has placed a stake in the ground at this
point showing where the light would be located. There is a problem in
obtaining power for the light. Our light on the west side of Highway 25
is serviced by an overhead wire coining from the back of the Royal Tire
building. This overhead wire was installed due to the lack of a
transformer in the iimnediate area of that pole location but will he
converted to underground in the future. A similar problem uxisLs on the
east side of Highway 25, as the closest transformer to this site is
located on Cedar Street behind the Big A Auto Parts. The following
alternatives are presented for your review.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first option would be to run underground from the transformer
behind the Big A Auto Parts along the north side of the building
under the driveway. The installation cost would be $1,400, and the
rental cost of the light would be $164.40 per year .
2. Option two would be to come overhead across Highway 25 after
obtaining permission from the Minnesota Department of
Transportation. installation coat for this type of system would be
included in the rental rate of $164.40 per year. Although this would
be the least costly, it would be the least attractive and does not
fit well with our policy of atteirpting to install as imrch underground
puwer au pussiblu. Thls wuu1J 1x3 thu uely highway ctoSslnq overhead
on Highway 25 in the whole area.
29
C
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
3. The third option could be to install a private light at the driveway
and power it from the nearby existing lighting system from the Plaza
Car Wash or the Big A Auto Parts building. If the City feels the
light is warranted, we could pay for the light and/or the
installation cost much like MN/DOT does. But then the maintenance
and power costs would be borne by Plaza Car Wash or Big A Auto
Parts. If the light location was moved to the south side of the
driveway only 28 feet from the Plaza's existing private light.
Because of the power problem with the Plaza lights also, this mould
be costly and may not be practical.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Option #2 is the cheapest but is the least desirable in regard to
appearance and our policy to keep power underground as much as possible.
I, therefore, favor alternatives ¢1 and 13. Since this is essentially a
private driveway and not a City owned or maintained service road, there
is reason to keep it a private light as per 63. If the Council feels
that we should contribute, we could pay for all or a portion of the
installation either way.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of petition.
30
PETITION FOR
STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION
NOT WITHIN CITY POLICY
We, the undersigned, do hereby petition the City of Monticello to install a
street light at the following location:
i
0
We understand that this installation would not conform with the City of
Monticello•s street lighting policy.
s�TIIae
2•x,1.-
i lJ,�,tp
3.1/OV,1,17
!� • a, wow,{ a.
6.
7
B.
9.
10.
A
Date /x/j,If
ADDRESS PRONE NQh01ER
1140 Hwy Z
/" -o .4,. 1/.--7 7,,- 24S —.3✓.3 -�
/?GO33
V
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
17. Consideration of hiring rink attendants for winter skating facilities.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
After a fire in the 4th Street warming house last winter, Northstar Risk
Services, Inc., a risk assessment company who performs loss control
surveys for our insurance company, stated the City should install
self -extinguishing waste type cans in our warming houses. Additionally,
they suggested that we post appropriate warning/rule signs. Lastly,
Northstar Risk Services asked that we consider adult supervision for City
rink areas during periods of peak use. This was again stressed in their
October 16 letter regarding the pond skating.
We are in the process of drafting the regulations and rules for our
skating facilities. We will be conferring with the City Attorney on
those signs. The Park Superintendent has estimated that the peak hours
of use for our skating facilities during the winter months would be on
weekdays from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m., and Sundays from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. This would total
approximately 31 hours per week per facility, excluding holidays or
Christmas vacation, which could bring the average hours per week during
the overall season up to 35.
The City currently has two skating facilities with warming houses,
4th Street and Bridge Park, and two skating facilities without warming
houses, Hillcrest Park and Meadow Oak Park pond. Since the skating
season typically runs about eight weeks, each facility would require
approximately 280 hours of rink attendant time. The minimum wage,
including workman's compensation and medicare, would total $4.10 per
hour, or $1,148 per facility p -r season.
It seems appropriate that the City provide rink attendants for both
warming houses. It is my understanding that the City used to pay for a
rink attendant at Bridge Park until the middle 70's when the individual
retired. It would appear to be less desirable to have rink attendants at
the Hillcrest rink and the Meadow Oak Park pond rink, especially when no
protection or warming house is provided.
B. ALTERNATIVE. ACTIONS:
Q1. The first alternative would be to provide rink attendants for the two
(� warming houses during peak skating times as outlined by the Park
Superintendent and as recommnonded by Northstar Risk Services at an
estimated cost of $1,148 per season for a total cost of approximately
$2,300.
2. The second alternative would be to provide rink attendants for peak
times at all the facilities at an estimated cost of $4,600.
3. The third alternative would be to provide no skating rink attendants
whatsoever.
31
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As Public Works Director, I can see the merit of providing attendants for
the two warming houses at the hours outlined by the Park Superintendent
and recommended by Northstar Risk Services and so reconnend same. It is
more difficult to see the logic in providing rink attendants for the
Hillcrest area rink and the Meadow oak pond rink, as these areas are
without shelter. It may be more applicable to encourage adult
supervision from the neighborhood, possibly from the parents of the
individuals using these facilities. The Coouncil may wish to consider all
alternatives or formulate a fourth alternative.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copies of letters from Northstar Risk Services.
32
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
could consist of self -extinguishing "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 areae. 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
I
fingers.
R-9-89 1 Consideration should be given to the City for adult
1 supervision of the rink areae, at least during periods of
peak use.
67
Nordi Star
Risk Senices, Inc.
October 16, 1989
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller
Administrator
City of Monticello
P.O. Box 83A
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Mr. Wolfsteller: ,
On October 5, 1989 I returned a telephone call to your staff member,
Mr. John Simola, concerning the proposed ice skating rink over the
drainage ditch/pond area, as I understand it. I did have several
thoughts for elements of this proposed skating rink:
C9The City should be drilling holes in the ice to check for ice
thickness conditions, certainly in the fall of the year before
the rink is opened and possibly at periodic times throughout the
ice skating season, particularly if it is a warm season. All
this information should be fully documented.
If the City is to have a hockey rink, the dasher boards should
meet all specifications for length and width, as well as dasher
boards are often about four feet high. Usually there is
approximately four feet of netting above the dasher boards on
the curved end of the rink area.
The City should also have signs, as I believe I mentioned in the
sem+ earlier recommendation letter, which oftentimes separate hockey
players from pleasure skaters, address skatewear such as
prohibition of speed skates on the hockey skating rink, hours
operation, use of alcohol, etc. The City should be consulting
with the City's legal counsel or LCMIT staff attorneys for
exact wording of the sign and coloring and placement of the sign
Inn A(�i 7om sirevi, sunr smi ■ Nmnralwdi,. Vmnrvaa SS alt ■ (6111W,1•xl I • 1''%%161!1 gill -W".4 /+ ;
7
Mr. Rich wolfstelier
City of Monticello
October 16, 1989
Page Two
4.� The City should set itself in a position so it does have proper
-` supervision of the hockey rink, provide a first aid kit, train
personnel to use the first aid kit, as well as two-way emergency
communication such as a telephone or a walky-talky unit.
If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to call. I
am generally in our office on the first working day of the week.
Sincerely, l
Douglas D. Holm, MS, ASP
Loss Control Consultant
North Star Risk Services, Inc.
DDH/cp
FE
These recommendations are made for risk improvement purposes only.
They were not made for the purpose of complying with the requirements
of any law, rule or regulation, we do not infer or imply in the
making of these recommendations that there are no other hazards and
exposures in existence. The purpose of the recommendations is to
assist in improving the risk exposure and to assist you with your
loss control program.
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
18. Consideration of setting a meeting for the purpose of establishing the
1990 salary/wage policy for non-union personnel. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
With 1990 fast approaching, the City Council may wish to set a special
meeting to meet with the Administrator to determine what salary/wage
policy will be used for setting salary increases for 1990. As some of
you may recall, last year the rising cost of health insurance benefits
was considered by the Council in establishing a pool of money set aside
for creating cost of living increases/performance related salary
adjustments. After reviewing the cost of health insurance, the Council
required that each errgrloyee who received health insurance benefits
contribute $30 per month toward the cost of dependent coverage and
granted an across the board 4-1/28 salary increase.
Prior to last year, the city Council had met in a special session to
establish a pool of money that was used to create increases in wages and
salaries which included both the cost of living adjustment and possibly
performance/merit increases. Usually, a cost of living increase was
established that was acceptable by the Council and an additional amount
of money was set aside for the sole purpose of merit increases as
determined by the Administrator. Again, this method can be used if the
council desires, or the Council could revert to last year's method of a
percentage increase across the board for all employees. Naturally, there
are other methods such as an equal adjustment per einployee regardless of
present salary or any other method the Council wishes to establish.
Ar
A performance evaluation form has been developed for all department heads
to use in evaluating employees under their control. These evaluation
Jy forms on each employee could be made available for the Council umbers to
�y review if you feel more comfortable in establishing who should be granted
of any) an increase under the performance/merit principal. Previously,
the Council had discussed what specific guidelines should be used in
!� deciding when a performance or merit increase is warranted. The Oouncil
also previously had concerns over the fact that if all errployees are
v performing adequately at their jobs, and all employees receive a
performance/merit increase, it really becomes the same as a straight
percentage increase for all employees. Although I'rn not necessarily
suggesting this as a policy, some cornnunitiea do limit the number of
employees that can receive a performance/merit increase each year. Any
method that is used whether by the Council or by myself in granting merit
increases relies on a subjective opinion of the individual doing the
rating. Any type of an adjustment outside of the basic cost of living
across the board requires a judgement call to be made, and therein lies
the problem.
if the Council desires to hold a special meeting to discuss the salary
increases for next year, it should probably be established prior to the
December 11 Council meeting, as the 11th will be the only meeting
scheduled during December.
33
Council Agenda - 11/13/89
H. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Set a special meeting date to consider 1990 salary and wage policy.
2. Do not set a special meeting but consider the 1990 salary adjustments
at a regular Council meeting.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Historically, salary and wage policies for the next year have typically
been discussed at a special meeting established for that purpose rather
than at a regular Council meeting. Reg:+-dless of what date you wish to
consider this item, I will prepare some information regarding present and
past salaries of City employees and some comparable data that might be
useful. If the Council would like to review any individual's performance
evaluation, this information can also be made available at the time of
our meeting.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
34
Council Agenda - 11/13/84
19. Consideration of proposed supplement to cooperative construction
agreement with MN/DOT for upgrading Highway 25. W .S .)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
During the original upgrading of Highway 25 which took place several
years ago, the State of Minnesota agreed to plant shrubs along Hillside
Cemetery to reduce maintenance and beautify the area. This planting was
to be 1008 State of Minnesota cost. When the original agreement came
through, this was not the case, and the agreement stated that it was
City cost. At that time, the City was informed it would be finpractice)
to amend the entire agreement and that the State would follow up later
with a supplemental agreement. The agreement and resolution are enclosed
for your review.
B. ALTERNATIVE AMONS:
1. The first alternative would be to authorize the proposed supplemental
agreement transferring the responsibility of cost of the shrubbery
from the City to the State.
2. The second alternative would be not to approve the supplemental
agreement. This does not appear to be practical, as this could make
the City responsible for the planting along Hillside Cemetery, which
costs an estimated $10,000.
C. STAFF RECOMENDATION:
It is the otaff recommendation that the Council approve the agreement as
outlined in alternative C1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA: +�
Copy of the agreement, letter, and resolution.
4x
V�
35
1p�NNESOT4
o� yO
a a
a �
$�yrOF TRPay�
October 30, 1989
Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
City of Monticello
P.O. Box 83A
Monticello, MN 55362
Minnesota Department of Transportation
District 3
301 Laurel S1., P.O. Box 978
Brainerd, Minnesota 56401 (218) 828-2460
Oualily Service Through Individual Commitment
In reply refer to:
Proposed Supplement No. 1 to
Coop. Const. Agreement No. 63132
City of Monticello
S.P. 8605-29 (TH 25=25)
State Funds
City cost surfacing. sewer, walk.
By the State on Tit 25 from CR 117
Dear Mr. Wolfsteller:
lighting A signal construction
to River Street in Monticello
Transmitted herewith, in triplicate, is a proposed supplemental agreement
with the city of Monticello. This agreement provides for deletion of the
City's share of the costs of the shrub planting performed upon, along and
adjacent to Trunk Highway (I'll) 25 from 7th Street to 6th Street within
the corporate city limits.
Please present this agreement to the city council for their approval and
execution, which includes original signatures of the city council's authorized
officers and the affixing of the city seal on three copies of the agreement
(original and two copies).
Please return, as soon as possible to this office, the three executed copies
of the agreement (original and two copies) along with all three certified
copies of a new resolution (a suggested form of resolution is enclosed)
passed by the city council authorizing its officers to sign the agreement
on its behalf.
The fourth copy of the agreement is for use by the City until a fully executed
copy is returned to the City.
Sincerely.
41a rJ a)�„ Ir'Grrv7 K�
Gary P. Dirlam
District Pro -Letting Engineer
Enclosure: cc:
Agreement (4) D.L. Rai sanen/G.N. Kreutzer - Brainerd
Resoltuion (1) C. Mlchalko - Room 715
J. Labo - St. Cloud
GPD: rjn Brainerd
l
AMENDMENT TO
AGREEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA AGREEMENT NO.
SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SECTION COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT 63132
SUPPLEMENT NO. 1
S.P. 8605-29 (T.H. 25.25)
State Funds
Supplement No. 1 to AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
Agreement No. 63132 between
The State of Minnesota (None)
Department of Transportation, and
The Citv of Monticello
Re: City cost surfacing, sewer, walk,
lighting and signal construction AMOUNT
by the State on T.11. 25 from C.R. RECEIVABLE
117 to River Street in Monticello
(None)
THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between
the State of Minnesota, Department of TransporLatio n, hereinafter
referred to as the 'State' and the City of,MonLicello, Minnesota,
acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to
as the 'City'.
63132-1
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS the State and the City did enter into an agreement dated
May 1, 1986 and designated as Agreement No. 63132 providing for
participation by the City in the costs of the roadway
construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk
Highway No. 25 (Pine Street) from Sandberg Road to River Street
within the corporate City limits under State Project No. 8605-29
(T.H. 25-25); and
WHEREAS it was intended that the cost for shrub planting, which
was made 100 percent City cost under Agreement No. 63132, was to
be the complete responsibility of the State; and
WHEREAS the StaLe and the City desire that Agreement No. 63132
dated May 1, 1986, be supplemented so that the City cost
participation In the shrub planting is deleted from the
agreement.
IT IS, THEREFORE, MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
-2-
il
63132-1
ARTICLE I - AINENDMENT OF ARTICLE II OF AGREEMENT N0. 63132
The '100 Percent City Costs' description under Article II,
Section A. of Agreement No. 63132 dated May 1, 1986, is hereby
amended and modified by deleting the following: '
3. All of the shrubs to be planted along and adjacent to the
east side of the Trunk Highway No. 25 roadway from 7th Street to
6th Street.
ARTICLE II - AGREEMENT 110. 63132
Except as amended and modified herein, all of the terms and
conditions set forth in Agreement No. 63132 dated May 1, 1986,
shall remain in full force and effect.
ARTICLE III — APPROVAL
Before this supplemental agreement shall become binding and
effective, it shall be approved by a City Council resolution and
receive approval of State and City officers as the law may
provide in addition to the Commissioner of Transportation or his
authorized reprosentaLive.
-3-
63132-1
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have executed this agreement by their
authorized officers.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Recommended for approval:
By _ /t 1aww /0 23 Ei9
Ch Director
Agreement Services Section
By
District Engineer
Deputy Division DireCLer
Technical Services Division
Approved:
By
Deputy Commissioner
of Transportation
Date
(Date of Agreement)
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Approved as to form and execution:
By
Special Assistant Attorney General
-4-
CITY OF MONTICELLO
By
Mayor
Date
By
City Administrator
Date
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
Approved:
By
(Authorized Signature)
Date
RESOLL)TION 89 -
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Monticello enter into Agreement
No. 53132-1 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for
the following purposes, to -wit:
to amend and modify Agreement No. 631.32 dated May 1, 1986 to provide for
deletion from the description of the City cost participation construction
of the shrub planting performed along and adjacent to the east side of the
Trunk Highway No. 25 roadway from 7th Street to 6th Street within the
corporate city limits under State Project NO. 8605-29 (T.H. 25-25).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City Officers are hereby authorized
and directed to execute such agreement.
Adopted this 13th day of November, 1989.
City Achinistrator
CERTIFICATION
State of Minnesota
County of Wright
City of Monticello
Mayor
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy
of the resolution presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of
Monticello at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of
1989, as shown by the minutes of said meet ng n my
possession.
City Adminlstrator
C
CITY OP MONTICELLO
Monthly Building Oaparteeot Report
Month of September , 19 89
PERMITS AUD USPS
PERMITS ISSUED
Last
This
Bas* Month Last Tarr
This Year
Month AUGUST Month SEPTE18E
tLast Year To Oat.
To alta
RESIDENTIAL
"mbar
17
12
11
94
6:
Valuation
3 166,300.00
$252
g 246,800.00 3
2.408 00
g 2,600,500.0[ -
Pess
1,494.06
1,922.69
1,966.86
:3,263.96
19,370.1:
Surcharges
et.64
125.00
122.65
t, 196.75
1.331.91
COMMERCIAL
".-bar
2
2
6
22
2
Valuation
12,000.00
235,000.00
126,000.00
1,089,100.00
1,730,400.
Paas
736.40
1,676.05
1,110.50
8,355.32
11,677.5
Surcharges
6.25
116.50
62.75
S1t. 30
067.1.
INOUSTRIAL
M umber
1
Valuation
4,500,00
Pee*
46.00
Surcharge*
2.30
PLlll®INO
ft.ber
25
6
33
31
ft
46.00
135.00
144.00
995.00
989.01
Surcharge*
1.00
2.50
3.00
16.50
15.5[
Dan 5
Su.Wr2
1
1
7
Valust..
0.00
0.00
0.00
..O{
Pau
20.00
10.00
10.00
70.00
Surcharge*
1.00
.30
.SO
3.4C
'
TOTAL NO. PERMITS
23
19
24
151
14
TOTAL VALUATION
078.300.00
487.500.00
372,800.00
3,702.500.00
4,419,200.0
TOTAL PEES
1,676.76
3.933.94
3,253.36
32,680.28
33.106.6
TOTAL SURCHARGES
66.90
244,00
166.90
1.760.35
2.21a.3
CURRENT MONTH
PEESHaber
to Date
PERMIT NATURE
Ntahar PLRNIT sumoleR06 Val+atim
Th,s nsr
Last Veer
Biagi: Family
3 81.734.99
8 109.10
8 218,200.00
30
32
OUP14
0
3
Multi•foally
2
3
Cass6Cclat
1 1,777.05
112.50
225.000.00
1
3
1 dustrlal
0
1
M6. Ger*966
4
a
81gna
0
0
Public Ouildings
0
O
ALTERATION OR REPAIR
D"It1ngs
6
343.00 14.40
29.900.00
48
37
Co'setcl:l
1
99.00 4.00
to,000.00
19
16
Indust" st
0
1
PLUMaIMO
All Types
S
137.00 2.50
.00
31
gt
ACCENOWT STRUC1t7REs
8elmmin, Poeto
0
1
OseRs
3
47.00 1.60
4,500.00
13
!
TSMPORART PBRMIT
0
0
IMNDLITIOM
0
t
TOTAL*
i} 3.933.94
244.00
487,800.00
Is$
104
PERMIT DESCRIPTION
NUNBnt
69-110] Cose*telal building
e9-1103 81ngle [sally dwelling
89-1404 aAngl• family dwelling
89-1409 aingl• fully dwelling
09-1406 nous* roof shingle rsplaeemat
89-1101 noises end garage residing
09-1406 wont dock
99-1409 a. paNt finish
a9-1/10 O.Ck
69-1411 Garegs and holds addition
09-1412 D.a
09-1413 So or building finish
6h141S 8.a*sent finish
99.1416 ri replace
LLA11 RNIIR
09.1402 CCw rol5bo1107ng
09-1103 •in910 tssily dwelling
89.1406 •I'Mil !oily dwell lop
89-1405 •Ingle [W ly dwelling
IHDIVXVUAL PERMIT ACTMTT REPORT
Moth of esousber , 19-$
TT9t NAME/LOCATION
cNorthern
states pour/Dundee Road
sP
IaM*ra Cu toe 9008 /109 Kenneth lane
If
LtMere CMtOe tlOSMe/1I I R*Meth lane
or
Jebt 0011dere. Inc./274 Maplewood Circle
AD
Inin a as" is Rawklam/9est liver it.
AD
George Ll.fert✓703 Ml na*sose at.
AD
6144 a CLrtdy Lyle/501 Wol 6th St.
AD
Wally 9oo1e/9rairls Road
ADRod
Dregsten/1220 Wet River It.
AD
Watt Moaner/1009 dolt Coos* Rd.
AD
ry a*1lpaswehle/15 sandtrop Circle
AC
8eg1*nd Tradslnortation/118 8. Oakwood Or.
AD
John 11111-.r/Jerry Lletert Dr.
AD
Rik$ and sNeky Mt1t/760 Acorn Circle
cNorthern states poeer/Dondaa Road
8► 1".rs Custoom Rens/109 ReMeth Lane
or IaMers Cwtowe solos/111 NMeth Lane
9? J&r4t iu1149re, inc./274 Rapiewod Circle
TOTAL PW RRVIM
VALUATION -rz�
rERIT sGacaARc6 vLagua ' swawtGa
$215,000.00 31,077.00 $112.50 t 16.00 6 :50
71,000.00 166.20 76.50 76.00 .50
74,700.00 471.OR 17.15 79.00 .SO
70,900.00 196.07 79.23 71.00 .50
1,500.00 15.00 .50
7,700.00 /8.00 1.65
1.500.00 15.00 .SO
1,500.00 19.00 .90
1,500.00 15.00 .50
8,000.00 09.00 6.00
1,300.00 19.00 .9U
10,000.00 117.00 5.00 77.00 .90
6,500.00 65.00 1.75
S 000.00 90.00 7.50
1187 12,977.15 8242.50 1115.00 57.50
6700.05
46.61
67.11
45.61
6676. art
TWAL RNLRII9 $4,196.94
1
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Monthly Building Department Report
Month of OCTOBER 1989
PER111TS AND USES
PERMITS ISSUED La.t This Se- Month - Last Year This Year
Month September "onth October last Year To Date To Date
RESIDENTIAL
Number 12 12 11 105 99
valuation 9 252,500.00 S 192.300.00 9 883.600.00 9 3,292,400.00 52,873.100.00
Pees 1,922.89 1,579.14 5,618.71 28,882.67 20,949.27
Surcharges 125.00 95.20 441.55 1.638.30 1,427.10
COMMERCIAL
Number 2 2 4 26 22
Valuation 235.000.00 9.500.00 163,000.00 1,252.100.00 1.747.900.00
Paas 1.876.05 95.00 1,074.00 9,439.32 11.772.55
Surcharges 116.50 4.75 81.00 625.30 872.20
INDUSTRIAL
Number 2 3
Valuation 6.100.00 10,700.00
roes 61.00 107.00
Surcharges 2.80 5.10
PLUMBING
Number 5 2 2 35 33
roes 135.00 48.00 239.00 1,234.00 1,031.00
Surcharges 2.50 1.00 1.00 17.50 16.50
OTHERS
Number 1 2 7
Valuation 0.00 0.00 0.00
reed 10.00 20.00 70.00
surcharges .50 1.00 3.50
TOTAL NO. PERMITS 19 16 20 171 161
TOTAL VALUATION $487,500.00 $201,800.00 '1,052,700.00 $4,555.200.00 84.621,000.0[
TOTAL rEES $ 3,933.94 $ 1.722.14 $ 7,002.71 $ 39,682.99 5 33,828.81
TOTAL SURCHARGES
CURRENT MONTH
Ifs Number to Det.
PERMIT NATURE Number PERMIT SURCHARGE Valuation This year Last year
Bingle Family 2 8 990.44 5 69.05 8 138,100.00 22' 23
DUplea 0 1
Multi-famlly 2 2
Commercial 1 5
Industrial 0 2
Ree. Garages 3 130.00 6.50 13.000.00 7 14
signs 0 0
public Buildings 0 2
ALTERATION OR REPAIR
Dwellings 7 458.70 19.65 14,200.00 S5 56
Commercial 2 95.00 4.75 9.500.00 21 19
Industrial 0 1
PLUNGING
All Types 2 48.00 1.00 0.00 33 35
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
SvLmming Pools 0 0
Deeks 13 9
T'aMNAl1WY PhAM1T 0 0
7 2
DSMOLITIOM
TOTALS 16 11.722.14 1 100.95 $201,00.00 161 171
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT
Month of October , 19119
PERHCN HIT I
I•
OtBCRIPTION
I Tr.aM
N NE/1,0=1O
I VALUATION
NUM
I PERMIT I
SURGE
I PLUMBIMG I SURCHARGE
89-1417
House root shingle replacament
AD
Ravin 6 Carol Westholtar/304 W.4th St.
1.500.00
15.00
.50
89-1418
New door, dock, windown
AD
Gerald Anderson/406 E. River St.
19.000.00
164.00
6.30
reahingle 6 roslding
89-1419
Open porch enclosure
AD
James 6 Jana Harbst/519 W. Broadway
11500.00
15.00
.50
89-1420
Interiorfinish
AC
Custom Sheat Metal/East Oakwood Drive
5,000.00
50.00
2.50
89-1421
House roof shingle replacement
AD
Donna Allen/407 V. 6th St.
1,500.00
15.00
.50
89-1422
Attached garage
RG
Lawrence 6 Lynn Gantner/313 Prairie Rd.
5.000.00
30.00
2.50
89-1423
Reroof. reside, new entry
AD
Kevin 6 Mary Rook/318 E. River St.
13,000.00
144.90
6.55
119-1426
Da tached garage
RC
Florence Tepper/313 V. 4th ST.
3,000.00
30.00
1.50
89-1126
Nouar Reatding
AD
Jack 6 Barbara Leaman/827 V.Broadvay
9.200.00
109.80
4.6000
89-1126
Deteehod garage
RG
Linda Whealdcn/1800 W. Bluer St.
5.0.00
50.00
2.50
89-1427
Single Family Dwelling
SF
John Miller/215 Kevin Longley Drive
59,200.00
410.31
29.60
24.00 .50
89-1426
Single Family Dwelling
By
John Mlllar/215 Kevin Longley Drive
78,900.00
490.09
39.45
24.00 .50
89-1429
Wall residing
AC
Fred 6 Dorothy Topel/225 V. Broadway
4,500.00
45.00
2.25
89-1630
Storage Building
AD
Richard Quick/113 E. 4th St.
1.500.00
15.00
.SO
TOTALS
1201.800.00
11.584.10
899.95
848.00 81.00
PLAN REVIEW
89-1427
Single Family Dwelling
By
John Miller/215 Kevin Longley Drive
41.03
89-1428
Single family Dwelling
SP
John Miller/215 Kevin Longley Drive
49.01
1
TOTAL PLAN REVIEW
I 90.04
TOTAL REVENUE I 1.822.59