City Council Agenda Packet 09-12-1988AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CIT`: COUNCIL
Monday, September 12, 1988 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting held August 22, 1988 and
Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting held August 30, 1988.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints.
4. Public Hearing on Proposed Assessment Role for the 86-7 Improvement
Project and the Otter Creek Road/County Road 75 Intersection Project.
(R.W.)
5. Consideration of Adopting the Assessment Role for Certification with the
County Auditor Covering the 86-7 Improvement and the Otter Creek
Road/County Road 75 Intersection Improvement. (R.W.)
6. Review of Sheriff's Department Report on Cruising. (R.W.)
7. Rezoning Request to Rezone a Lot from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to
R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential). If Rezoned, a Request to Replat
this Residential Lot into Eight Townhouse Lots and One Common Area Lot.
If Replatted, a Conditional Use Request to Allow up to Eight Townhouses
on an R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) Lot. Applicant, Floyd
Markling. (G.A.)
8. Consideration of Accepting Petition Ordering Feasibility Study,
Preparation of Plans, and Specifications, Advertisement for Bids and
Calling for Public Hearing - Utility Improvement for Floyd Markling
Subdivision.
9. Consideration of Offer to Sell Assembly of God Church to City. (R.W.)
10. Consideration of Request by Quintin tanners to Reconsider Conditions
Attached to Acceptance of Kenneth Lane Improvements-Ritze Manor. (R.W.)
11. Simple Subdivision Request to Subdivide One Unplatted Lot into Two
Unplatted Lots. Applicant, Tom Holthaus. (G.A.)
12. Tabled Request for a Preliminary Plat Review for a Proposed New
Subdivision Plat. Applicant, Charles Ritze. (G.A.)
13. Consideration of Council Chamber Renovation. W.O.)
14. Consideration of Dictaphone Purchase. 0.0.)
A
AGENDA/CITY COUNCIL
Monday, September 12, 1988
Page 2
15. Consideration of Gambling License Renewal - Knights of Columbus. (R.W.)
16. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for Modification p3 of Project
Costs for Tax increment District $2. (O.K.)
17. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing (Relocation and Moving
Expenses). (O.K.)
18. Consideration of Setting a Special Meeting for Purpose of Canvassing
Results of Primary. (R.W.)
19. Adjournment.
W
F
MI',MTES
RETJLAR MEETING - MONTICELLO C:Ty COUNCIL
Monday, August 22, 1988 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen,
Bill Fair.
Members Absent: None
2. Approval of meeting of regular meeting held August 8, 1988.
Motion made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Fran Fair to approve regular
meeting minutes of meeting held August 8, 1988. Motion passed
unanimously.
3. Citizens Comments/Betitions, Requests and Complaints.
City Council reviewed a letter submitted by Dan .;anussewski which outlined
Mr. Janus:ewski's concerns about the cruising problems on Broadway.
Discussion on this issue was deferred until input could be received from
the Wright County Sheriff's Department. Council directed staff_ to place
further discussion of the crusing problem on the agenda for the next
meeting and request the attendance of members of the aright County
Sheriff's Department.
4. Consideration of MNDOT's response to River Street and Highway 25
.ntersect:on clostna.
Representatives of MNDOT presented design plans for widening the Highway
25/94 Bridge. Plans for controlling the intersections on both sides of
the bridge were presented. MNDOT proposed that stoplights at both
entrances to the freeway be established and that protective left hand turn
lanes be installed on Highway 25. in addition, MNDOT proposed to correct
slope problems and proposed to install sidewalks on both sides of the
Bridge approach. Council member Bill Fair asked if the project is ready
to go. Bud McCulloch of MNDOT stated that the project is programed into
MNDCrr's budget and that there will be no cost to the City, however City
approval of the concept of the proposed plan is needed.
Dan Blonigen, although not objecting to the plan, requested more time to
study the proposal. Bud McCulloch noted that MNDOT is asking for
preliminary approval only.
Warren Smith suggested that there appears to be an inconsistent
application of signal lights along Highway 25 in Monticello. Smith noted
that, according to MNDOT, signals at River Street and Highway 25 are a
problem because such signals will be in close proximity to signals at the
Broadway/Highway 25 intersection. At the same time, MNDOT endorses
signal lights right next to each other on another segment of Highway 25.
He asked MNDOT to explain the inconsistent position. Bud McCulloch
explained that signal lights at Highway 25/94 intersection can be
justified because of high traffic volume. The level of traffic volume on
Highway 25 River Street intersection, on the other hand, is not of a
level that would justify installation of signal lights.
City Council Minutes - 8/22/88
At this point the discussion turned to the problems associated with River
Street and Highway 25 site Line problems. Bud MCCullocn of ?WOT noted 1
that the state is currently exposed to liability risk because of the
present situation. The Attorney General's Office recommended that MIDOT
move quickly to correct the situation. McCulloch provided six potential
options for controlling traffic at east River Street and Highway 25. He
went on to say that the option recommended by the State Highway Department
is option @2, which would provide for one-way traffic movement on East
River Street with a raised median across the intersection. Bill Fair
informed Council that in talking to members of the community, few said
that a light was needed at the intersection. Fair went on to say that he
likes option #2. Mayor Grimsmo mentioned that option 12 is not as
desirable because the median will block access to the park. Council
memoe: Blonigen was opposed to limiting traffic movements on east River
Street as proposed with options 12 and #4. He stated that every time you
close a street you create a prcblem for someone else. Blonigen would
approve full signal lights only. Bud McCulloch was asked by Council what
authority the state would have in closing or limiting access to a state
highway. Mr. McCulloch responded by saying the state does have the
policing power and can exert it's authority in the name of public safety
to close a public street.
John Sandberg had questions pertaining to the traffic counts that were
collected for the intersection. He noted that the traffic counts may be
low at the intersection because of the construction activity associated
with the tr1-te--'•----- .. __ .... :ctcd he -as had
been adjusted toaccountfor trip diversion associated with the bridge
construction. Sandberg went on to way that he supports maintaining all
traffic movements at the intersection and reminded Council that all of the
planning associated with the bridge construction included maintaining all
traffic movements at East River Street and Highway 25. Warren Smith
commented that the state with it's various options have presented no
information that has altered his previous view that the intersection
should remain open. Smith explained that volume of traffic is of major
consideration in establishing signal lights but it is not the only
consideration and that the current situation is not a normal situation.
There are extenuating circumstances created by the State that justify
installation of signal lights. It was the view of Smith, that the options
proposed are no safer than installation of signal lights, and that the
only concern of the State is to speed traffic.
At this point, motion made by Warren Smith to approve option 65, which
calls for signalization of River Street and Highway 25. Motion seconded by
Dan Blonigen. voting in favor of the motion, Blonigen, and Smith.
Opposed, Grimsmo, Fran Fair, and Bill Fair. Motion was then made for
option 02 by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair. At this point in the
meeting a discussion regarding MJDOT's participation in installing
improvements to River Street associated with option 42. Bud McG llcch of
MNDOT made no commitment to providing assistance to the City in developing
improvements to River Street. Mayor Grimsmo withdrew his support to
option #2 without a firm commitment from the state to pay for necessary
Improvements to River Street. Bill Fair amended his motion to approve the
concept of option 12 with appropriate contribution to the city made by
M.n= to compensate for loss of River Street access. Amendment to the
City Council Minutes - 8/22188
motion seconded by Fran Fair. Grimsmo again noted that his is not
comfortable with the potential of added city expense associated with
improvements to River Street, voting in favor of the amendment, Fran
Fair, Bill Fair, opposed, Gr:.msmo, Smith, and Blonigen. Amendment to the
motion fails 3 to 2. Bill Fair then withdrew the original motion.
At this point in the meeting, further discussion was tabled pending
M.m=ls research on potential contribution toward modification of River
Street associated with option 42. Council asked staff and MNDOT for a
report on the different factors used in establishing signal lights.
Motion made by Bill Fair to approve the general concept of the Highway
25!44 Bridge widening concept as submitted by MNDGT. Motion seconded by
Dan Slonigen. Motion passed unanimously.
As the discission cane to a close, Don Smith of the Monticello Times noted
that if the signal lights are not installed, he would like to go an record
as requesting two-way traffic to be extended through the mid -paint of the
block between Cedar Street and Highway 25 .on Riven Street.
5. Consideration of purchasing additional property from Ken Shultz for the
water tower site.
After discussion, motion made by Bili Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen to
approve purchase of additional property from Ken Shultz at the proposed
water tower site. Motion passed unanimously.
6. Cundiccrdciun of acceptance of Kenneth Lane improvements - Ritze Manor.
City Engineer, John Badalich reported that all is in order regarding -
development, except that it was discovered that individual sewer service
was installed incorrectly, which has created a slight chance for a sewage
back-up. John Simola noted that the city might be liable for future
problems associated with the incorrectly installed service line. He noted
that the problem could be diminished by annual or semi-annual jeting of
the sewer line that this service connects to.
After discussion, motion made to accept the project without the
incorrectly installed sewer service and require a recordable document
notifying potential owners of the property of the condition of the sewer
oervice and that the city shares no responsibility for it's adequacy.
Motion made by Warren Smith, motion seconded by Dan Blonigen. voting in
favor of the motion, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen, Arve Crimsmo, Fran Fair,
opposed, Bill Fair.
7. Consideration of Change order 43 and final payment an Well 43 project.
Motion made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair to approve the change
order 43 in the amount of $6,675 and authorize final payment to E.H.
Renner and Sons in the amount of S3,387.44. Motion passed unanimously.
B. Consideration of setting a public hearinq to adopt assessments for Otter
Creex ROaa re-ai:gnment ano 86-7 Improvement Project.
Motion made by Warren Snith, seconded by Dan Hlonigen to approve
Resolution 88-25 Declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation
3
City Council Minutes - 8/22/88
of proposed assessment, and approve Resolution 88-26 Setting a hearing on y
the proposed assessment for September 12, 1988, 7:30 p.m. at the
Monticello City Ball. Motion passed unanimously.
9. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment adjusting Mayor and Council
compensation.
It was suggested by Mayor Grimsmo that the Mayor monthly stipend be
established at $225 and the Council stipend at $175 per month. Mayor
Grimsmo also noted that a $600 allowance be provided to the Mayor for his
costs associated with promoting the community, public relations, travel,
etc... After discussion, motion made by Grimsmo to establish monthly
stipend for payor at S225 per month and Council at $175 per month and
establish a travel allowance for the Mayor at 5600 for the use by the
Mayor. Motion seconded by Fran Fair, motion passed unanimously.
10. Consideration of East Bridge Park sliding facility and parking lot
a:rprovements.
Public works Director, Simola reviewed the concept of developing a Finnish
winter slide at the East Bridge Park. Council approved the concept by
consensus, He also reviewed proposed parking lot improvements. After
discussion, motion by warren Smith to direct staff to begin parking
improvements and regrading of area around Saxon property with estimated (3
cost of the parking lot of $7,680. Motion seconded by Fran Fair, motion
11. Consideration of ?arking lot paving and underground diesel fuel oil tank
at maintenance buliprng.
After discussion, motion made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen to
authorize purchase of fuel tank pump from Zahl Equipment and authorize
installation of diesel fuel system at an estimated cost of $3,929 and
authorized the parking lot restoration and minor landscaping at the
maintenance building at an estimated cost of $4,000. Motion seconded by
Dan Blonigen. Motion passed unanimously.
12. General discussion of water tank design.
.john Badalich reviewed two refinements of the water tower design already
established he report that the city could save about $15,000 and reduce
problems associated with ice build-up by eliminating a jog in the water
tower were the wall meets the domed area of the structure. Dan Blonigen
stated that the money saved by streamlining the water tower should be
spent an water tower site landscaping. It was the general consensus of
council to develop the streamlined water tower design, and contribute
savings toward site landscaping.
13. Consideration of August Bills.
Motion made by warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve the
August bills as submitted. )
City Council Minutes - 8/22/88
In other matters.
John Simla reported to Council that the "Streetscape" project is progressing
well and is only slightly behind schedule.
Assistant City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill reported that the initial
organizational meeting of the Monticello Celebrate Minnesota Program Advisory
Committee will be held Thursday, August 25, 1988, at 1:00 p.m.
There being no further discission, meeting adjourned.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jeff O'Neill,
Assistant Administrator
4
MIN=ES
SPECIAL MEETING - MO;ITICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 30, 1988
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bi'' -1 Fair, Dan Blonigen,
Warren Smith.
Member Absent: None.
The meeting convened at 7:35 a.m.
Consider Establishing City Position Regarding Design of Highway 25/R4_ver
Street Intersection.
Council discussed options previously presented by MNDOT officials
regarding potential design of River Street/Highway 25 intersections. Dale
Lungwitz of Wright County State Bank noted to Council that the existing
"temporary blocking of the access to Highway 25 from River St_eet has
resulted in diversion of 10-15 cars per hour through the Wright County
State Parking lot." Lungwitz noted his concern about increased chances
for vehicular accidents in the Bank parking area.
Warren Smith explained to Council that the state will more likely respond
to the City's concern if the City provides a unted position on the
matter. Motion made by Warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen to adopt
Resolution 88-27;
RESOLUTION 88-27
Directing State of Minnesota Department of Transportation
to Install Traffic Signals at the Intersection of
Highway 25 and River Street in the City of Monticello..
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello wishes to promote the safe movement of
traffic at the intersection of State Highway 25 and River Street within the
City of Monticello: and
WHEREAS, due to historical patterns of physical and commercial
development of and within the City of Monticello, the City has limited
East/West traffic arteries; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to maintain easy access to its commercial and
recreational facilities including parks adjacent to or near Highway 25, not
only for its citizens, but for those who travel to and through the City; and
WHEREAS, recent improvement to Highway 25 by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation including the construction of a now bridge and bridge approach
have resulted in sight line problems at the intersection of Highway 25 and
River Street; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted informal public hearings with respect to
the problems associated with the Highway 25 and River Street intersection and
has received public and business input regarding resolution of the problems;
and
RESOLUTION 88-27
PAGE 2
WHEREAS, the City has met with representatives of the Minnesota
Department of Transportation to discuss alternative solutions to the problems
with the Highway 25 and River street intersection, and
WHEREAS, no alternatives have been put forward which satisfies all
interested parties; and
WHEREAS, alternatives favored by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation will result in diversion of traffic from public rights-of-way to
private parking areas, will pose practical maintenance problem and safety
hazards in the maintenance of the intersection and will impede East/West
traffic within the City to the detriment of commercial enterprises within the
city and to the detriment of those seeking to take advantage of the City's
commercial and recreational facilities; and
WHEREAS, the competing safety, commercial and convenience interests can
best be served by the installation and operation of traffic lights at the
Intersection of Highway 25 and River Street; and
WHEREAS, all competing interests should be considered in determining
whether to install traffic lights and not just one interest such as traffic
flow;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOL'M THAT:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation should install at its expense,
traffic light signals necessary to assure safe and convenient movement of
traffic at the intersection of Highway 25 and River Street within the City of
Monticello.
Adopted by the Council this 30th day of August, 1980
it was the general consensus of City Council that the City will take
legal action to protect it's rights regarding this matter.
Respectfully Submitted,
�
' �eD
Jeff O'Neill,
Assistant Administrator
F]
F]
U
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
4. Public IfearIng on Proposed Assessment Role for the 86-7 Improvement Project and
the otter Creek Road/County Road 75 Intersection Project.
5. Consideration of Adopting the Assessment Role for Certification with the county
Auditor Covering the 86-7 Improvement and the Otter Creek Road/County Road 75
Intersection Improvement. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The 1986-7 Improvement Project consisted of an extention of Lauring Lane
through the Construction 5 Development and the improvement of Fallon Avenue.
The improvement project included street, curb and gutter, storm sewer, sewer
and water construction at a total cost of $295,837. Of this total project
cost, $59,680.40 was attributable to street and utility construction along
Fallon Avenue that benefited abutting property owners, Mr. Bill Malone and
Mr. Merrill Busch (former Rand Mansion) . As you may recall, a tax increment
district was established within the Construction 5 Development and this project
was to be primarily paid by tax increments generated by the new apartment and
commercial construction within the plat. This assessment hearing is intended
to only cover those property owners along Fallon Avenue who benefited from the
improvements by receiving permanent streets and sewer and water utilities.
During the initial tax increment project, the city Staff had contacted
Mr. Malone and Mr. Busch regarding the proposed improvements. Since these
in2!*-'id'-1B1= had nct :�et!tiened for the hi,.t wF!ro receiving them as
part of the tax increment project, the City had originally indicated that a
favorable interest rate of 5 percent be used on their assessments for the
improvement over 15 years. The 15 year term was used because the home owners
were existing at the time of the development to avoid a financial hardship for
the property owners.
A worksheet on the proposed assessments is attached with your agenda outlining
the individual cost associated and the total assessment for each parcel. It
should be noted that both properties are large and have the potential to be
subdivided in the future and thus it is recommended that a portion of the
assessment be deferred until the property is subdivided or a connection is
requested. The proposed assessment that would be levied at this time is for
the entire street frontaga applicable to each parcel and only one sewer and
water service per parcel. In �.he future, the deferred assessments would be
payable if and when the property is further subdivided.
OTTER CREEK ROAD/COUNTY ROAD 75 RE -ALIGNMENT
The re -alignment of the intersection along with the construction of the right
turn lane had a total Project cost of $9,652.30. The original condition as part
of the Conditional Use Permit required the property owner to pay half of the
cost of the intersection re -alignment which total $4,122.90 plus all of the
right turn lane construction totaling $1,406.50. After adding all indirect
costs, the total assessments for the West -Side market would be $6,743.98. This
assessment is proposed to be levied over a 3 year time period at an interest
rate of 8 percent.
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
After the close of the public hearing, the resolution adopting the assessment
role and certifying the assessment roles to the County Auditor should be
adopted by the Council. If from the public hearing, adjustments are made to
any of the assessments, this will have to be noted prior to the actual adoption
of the assessment role.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the assessment roles as presented for both the 1986-7 Project and
the Otter Creek Road/County Road 75 Re -alignment Project.
2. Adopt the assessment roles with any alterations determined.
3. Do not adopt the assessment role. This alternative is not really feasible
unless there is question as to the proposed assessment not equaling the
increase in value to the property.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The assessment roles prepared are recommended to be adopted based on the actual
construction costs and the indirect costs associated with the projects. In the
Otter Creek Road assessment, the property owner had originally agreed to
sharing in the cost of the re -alignment and has not objected to the
assessment. In regards to the Fallon Avenue assessments, the staff feels the
costs are appropriate and that the city has been fair in deferring a portion of
the assessment until the property is sundivided and using a lower interest rate
then normal.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the assessment roles and cost summaries for the projects, and a copy of
a Resolution adopting assessment roles.
RESOLUTION 88 -
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESS4E`7': POLL
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for
the improvement of the re -alignment of otter Creek Road intersection with West
County Road 75, and construction of a right turn lane and appurtenant work.
NOW, :'HEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED 8Y THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA:
1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a
part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special
assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land
therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed
improvements in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 3 years, the first of the installments to be payable on
or before the first Monday in January, 1990, and shall bear interest at
the rate of 8 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this
assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest
on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December
31, 1989. 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 dainty Atdi`_o:, pay the *Ihcle of
the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged
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 succeeding year.
4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this
assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists
of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the
same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the Council this 12th day of September, 1988.
Arve A. Grlmsmo, Mayor
Rlck Wolfsteller,
City Administrator
CONSTRUCTION COSTS SUMMARY
OTTER CY£E:< IMPROVF-MENT
A. Right :Kira Lane up to and Including Driveway Work (Approx. 10%)
1. Grading and Mobilization S 250.00
2. Remove Concrete Pavement 16 sq yds. $5 per yd. - 480.00
3. Adjust MH East of Driveway 200.00
4. Class V; 20 Tans @ 56.00 per ton 120.00
5. Granular Fill, 6 cubic yds @ 56.00 per yd. 36.00
G. 02341 Bituminous, 9 tons @ $24.50 per ton 220.00
i. Sod 50 sq yds 0 52.00 per sq yd. 100.00
Total S 1,406.00
B. Right Turn Lane West of Driveway Plus Construction of Otter Creek Road.
Total Cast of Pro'ect Less A
S 9,652.30 S 1,406.50 S 8,245.80
One Hal! of S 8,245.80 - 5 4,122.90
+ 1,406.50
West Side Market Cost - 5 5,529.40
Plus Applicable Design,
Inspection, Administration
(1/2) of S 2,429.16 1,214.58
TOTAL 5 6,743.98
WESTSIDE MARKET
OTTER GEEK ROAD RE-ALIGNM&3T S
RIGHT TURN LANE
Amount S 6,743.97
Interest Rate 8%
Tera (3 year) 3 yrs
1st Year Interest Due .from 8/22/83
Year
4rinciole
Interest
Total
Balance
1969
S 2,247.99
S 733.14
S 2,981.13
S 4,495.98
1990
S 2,247.99
5 359.68
S 2,607.67
S 2.247.99
1991
S 2,247.99
S 179.84
S 2,427.83
5 0.00
F1
RESOLUTION 88 -
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSM.ENT ROLL
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for
improvement of Fallon Avenue, between Lauring Lane and Washington Street by
construction of new road surfaces, curb and gutter, storm sewer, water,
sanitary sewer and appurtenant work.
NCR, TSEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED 8Y THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTIA:
1. Such proposed assessment, 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 in hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvements in
the amount of the assessment levied against, it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on
or before the first Monday in January, 1990, and shall bear interest at
the rate of 5 percent annum from the date of the adoption of this
assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest
on the entire assessment for the date of this resolution until December
31, 1989. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest
for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so ease^.seA. rr-iy, at any t! -::e priceo
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of
the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of
payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged
if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of 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 if made. Such
payment must be mado before November 15 or interest will be charged
through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this
assessment of the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists
of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the
cams manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the Council this 12th day of September, 1988.
Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor
Rick Wolfsteller,
City Administrator
COST SUMMARY
'86-7 IMPROVESMENT PROJECT
(FALLON AVENUE)
Street 6 Storm Sewer Construction $ 28,642.73
(656' _ $43.66 per ft. or $21.83 per ft. each side)
Water Main Construction $ 16,647.49
(9) units @ $1,849.72 each
Water Services:
1. "Busch parcel
A. 6" Service $ 705.03
B. 2" Service $ 660.34
2. "Malone" parcel
A. 1" Service $ 793.16
3. C'tf Park
A. 1" Service $ 793.16
Sewer Main Construction (Busch Prop.) $ 5,645.90 5 units
Sewer Main Construction (City 6 Malone) $ 4,366.15 4 units
Sewer Services:
1. "Busch" Parcel (included in main) $ 0.00
2. "Malone" Parcel (Ave.) $ 713.22
3. City/Park (Ave.) $ 713.22
TOTAL COSTS $ 59,680.40
Street @ $21.83 per ft.
Water Main @ $1,849.72 per unit
Hater Services
Sewer Main
Sewer Services
70TAL ASSESSMENT
Less: deferred Amount:
(until subdivided or used)
(4) units water:
(4) units sewer:
PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS
'86-7 PROJECT
(FALLON AVENUE)
"BUSCH"
'MALONE'
"CITY/PARR"
325' _ $6,896.50
80'
_ $1,697.60
Bal.
a $20,048.63
(5) _ $9,248.60
(2)
a $3,699.44
(2)
_ $ 3,699.44
(2) _ $1,365.37
(1)
- S 793.16
(1)
_ $ 793.16
(5) _ $5,645.90
(2)
_ $2,183.07
(2)
- $ 2,183.07
0.00
(1)
- S 713.22
(1)
- $ 713.22
$23,156.37
$9,086.25
$27,437.52
($7,398.88) ($1,849.72) (1) unit water
($4,516.72) ($1,091.53) (1) unit sewer
ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 1988 $11,240.77 $6,145.00
�6
Council Agenda - 4/12/88
6. Review of Sheriff's Department Report on Cruising. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the last Council meeting, Mr. Don Januszewski, 38 River Terrace Park,
presented a copy of a letter to the Editor that was recently published in the
Monticello Times concerning the cruising problem in Monticello. The Council
requested that Sheriff's Department representatives be in attendance at a
future Council meeting to present a report and update on the cruising and
related problems that have occured this year.
I discussed the Council's concerns with Mr. Jim Powers of the Wright County
Sheriff's Department and the department will be preparing a brief report to
present to the Council concerning their observations of the problem this year. .
Mr. Jim Powers and or Don Boserpa will be in attendance at the Council meeting.
At this point, I do not know of any specific action the Council may want to
take other than review of the report and discussion with the Sheriff's
Department representatives.
B. REFERENCES:
Ordinance on curfew for minors in the City of Monticello.
6-1-4
6-1-9
(0) Looks, peers or peeps into the window of any structure, not in
his own property, which structure if occupied or is intended to be
occupied as a residence, or loiters around or within view of any
said window with the intent of watching or looking through said window.
6-1-6: CBSTRUCIMNG LEGAL PROCESS OR ARREST: Whoever intentionally
obstructs, hinders or prevents the lawful execution of any
legal process, civil or criminal, or apprehension of another on a charge
or conviction or a criminal offense, is guilty of a misdemeanor and may
be punished as provided in Section 1-4-1 of this Code.
6-1-6: DRUNKMMSS: Every person who becomes intoxicated by
voluntarily drinking intoxicating liquors, is guilty of a
misdemeanor and may be punished as provided in Section 1-4-1
of this Code.
6-1-7: MINORS: POSSESSION: It shall be unlawful for a minor to have
in his possession any intoxicating liquor, or any non -intox-
icating malt liquor, with intent to consume the same at a place other than
the household of his parent or guardian. Possession of such intoxicating
liquor or non -intoxicating malt liquor at a place other than the household
of his parent or guardian shall be prima facie evidence of intent to con-
sume the same at a place other than the household of his parent of guardian.
A person violating a provision of this Section, is guilty of a misdemeanor
and may be sentenced as provided in Section 1-4-1 of this Cade.
6-1-S: T=T: 'd.1cc:cr tontionally eu:d without claim or right
i takes, uses, transfers, conceals or retains possession of
`- the property of another where the vacua of said property is one hundred
dollars ($100.00) or less, without his consent and with intent to deprive
the owner permanently of possession of said property, is guilty -of a mis-
demeanor and may be sentenced as provided in Section 1-4-1 of this Code.
6-1-91 CURFEW: No minor under the age of eighteen (18) years of age,
fto when not accompanied by parents or guardian, shall be allowed
on the streets, sidewalks, or any public place in the City of Monticello
after the hour of 11800 p.m- and before 4:00 a.m. the succeeding morning
without reasonable cause. Any parent, guardian or other adult person
having the care and custody of a minor under the aqe of eighteen (18)
years, who shall permit such minor to violate the aforementioned curfew
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be
subject to a fine of not more than twenty-five dollars (328) plus coats
of prosecution. (11-11-76 022).
600
G-�'`1
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
7. Rezoning Request to Rezone a Lot from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-2
(Single and Two Family Residential). If Rezoned, a Request to Repiat this
Residential Lot into Eight Townhouse Lots and One Common Area Lot. If
Replated, a Conditional Use Request to Allow up to Eight Townhouses on an R-2
(Single and Two Family Residential) Lot. Applicant, Floyd Markling. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Floyd Markling has purchased the former Betty Grossnickle property
immediately south of the existing entrance to the Monticello Country Club.
Mr. Markling is proposing to remove all structures on this property and is
requesting to rezone the property from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-2
(Single and Two Family Residential). If the rezoning is allowed, he would like
to replat this existing unplatted residential lot into eight townhouse or
condominium lots and one common area lot. If allowed to be reolatted, Mr.
Markling is proposing a conditional use request to allow up to eight townhouses
on an R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) lot.
We currently have in the Par West Development along the easterly portion of the
development, land that is zoned just for townhouses on each of these five
lots. Even though the entire development is zoned R-2 (Single and Two Family
Residential). The development to the north of this subject property the Club
View Terrece Addition, is zoned single family residential, and also is the
Country Club Manor Addition to the northeast of this existing unplatted lot.
However, the property across west County Road 39 adjacent to the freeway and
separated by Cotmtry Club Road is property that is zoned R-3 (Medium oz,citl
Residential).
Mr. Markling does meet or exceed all of the minimum lot square footage
requirements for townhouses, which are 5,000 square feet per lot. He also
meets or exceeds the minimum setback requirements, which is 30 feet to the
front and rear and 10 feet on the south side of the property and 20 feet on the
north side of the property. This property has had a feasibility study done for
water and sewer and actually part of a bid item with the East County Road 39
Project, so water and sewer is available to this residential unplatted lot.
Also as part of the bidding for this proposed project was providing of a water
and sewer stub for the Monticello Country Club to accomodate at some point in
time them hooking up to the city water and city sewer.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the rezoning request to rezone a lot from R-1 (Single Family
Residential) to R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential). Approve a
request to roplat this residential lot to eight townhouse lots and one
common area lot. Approve conditional use request to allow eight
townhouses on an R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) lot.
2. Deny the rezoning request to rezone a lot from R-1 (Single Family
Residential) to R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential). If rezoning
denied we would also deny the replatt£ng and the conditional use request.
C. STAFF REMMMENDATION:
The developer in requesting the upzoning from R-1 (Single Family Residential)
to R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) zoning is consistent with other
1
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
zoning in the area. The land area that is represented by this residential
unplatted lot over exceeds the lot area requirements for each townhouse unit,
which is 5,000 square feet. The total land area that would be needed for the
eight townhouses is 40,000 square feet and the total land area that is provided
by this lot is 87,000 square feet.
D. aur—Aiue. DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed rezoning request, copy of the site plan
for the rezoning request and copy of the setback requirement, lot area
requirement and building area requirements for townhouse development, copy of
zoning district map of vicinity.
J
J
ttw
rr
L7 -
Tr
i 1, COON I Y_. ROAD HO_ 09.
7-s
PLAW""
t Vk
m
.. '• � — �, \\ ` � rem`' Iv,
A Rezoning Request ors no! ` 4• 9 �` �' _ i
a Lot fro R -i Hing £am y .!'�i4?�} + •' �• .N/r !/
?nr- ntial). if roaoitad,
a .est to replat thi
s 'r.7'Tl7•�...
res.-entia1 lot into to)I •`�� r.� y. •~ l /
Dight townhouse -lots and i)• 1 1„ •+•y •� �•wIj
one common area lot. 2t rept tted, s !
a Conditional Use Request up yi •°•r r,!
to eight townhouses on an R-2 - �' - _ ,,. r• • t
(Single "..Two Family Residential �•YT - - f
lot. Location is part at
S.E. corner of N.E. of N.w.,! Onplatted sT ,.`. `r
Property in the City of Mon 0110 r4t4F - ✓ •.
4PPLICANT: Floyd Markling.
R� R4
Yr, r ., e • : ',„•"•1.•w \ ~ r•�.y' �,..\.�. a •. •. •. 'r' 'e�`..a, it •=.•/'r"
.;`y�;� Lf. °'^ ¢o•.- ••.:..-'.. "` � :.•.w ''fir• .. '
•i� yl ,,�� ••rr•�_ -�Y�.• .;`:`moi• ..\ ` r""-.o-�'t� '� a.' ".�,4'`. , j.;a...a:*' ...�
OWL
scH,00�
GOLF
..0 -••OLS
1
\\ � • , • � j; ' Yom•{.
QsoP°"a gaz°nsa4
Si cOI '�
a
a
(\ t
1. Clothes line pole and wire.
2. Racraational equipment and vehicles.
3. Construction and landscaping material currently
being used on the premises.
4. Off-street parking of paaaanger vehicles
and t-uc!s not exceeding a gross capacity
of nine thousand (4.000) pounds in residential
areas.
S. Propane tanks, fuel oil tanks, and other
similar rasidentiai haat-1-q fuel staraga
tanks which do not e.:ceed 1,000 gallons
in capacity and shall not be located within
five (3) fact of any property line.
6. wood piles in which wood is stored for
fuel provided that not more than 10 cords
shall be stored on any property. A cord
shall be 41 x 41 x 81- All wood piles
shall be five (5) fact or core from roar
and side yard pr*party liars and shall
be stored behind the appropriate sat back
line in front yards.
7. 'Solar heating ry-qte _s.
3-3: YA)(D R2Q0YRZxr—`ITS:
- [A) pORPOSE. This section identifies minium yard
spaces and areas to be provided for in each
zoning diatrict.
w (S) um lot, yard or other open space shall be reduced
in area or dimension so as to make such lot,
yard or *pan spats loss than the minimum required
by this Ordinance, and if the existing yard
or other open space as existing is less than
the minimum required it shall not be fur -her
reduced. 2h required open space provided around
any building or structure shall be included
as a part of any open space required for another
structure.
(C) All setback distances, as listed in the table
below, shall be measured from the appropriate
Lot lino, and shall be r*quirad minimum distances.
Front Yard Side Yard Roar Yard
A -o 30 30 30
R-1 30 to 30
' R-3 30 20 !b
R-4 30 30 30
PZ -R sae Chapter 10 for specific regulations.
P2 -N see C..apter 10 for Specific r4guietions.
2-1 30 13 -.0
3-2 30 10 20
3. ELDERLY (SC11OR C:TI:LV) BUDS==
Livinq units classified as elderly j
(senior citizen) housing units shall
have the following minimus floor areas
Par unit:
(a) Stticisncy Units 440 Square fast
(b1 One Bedroom, 520 Snuare Leet
11. Poles, towet3 and other structures for essential servi
12. Necessary mechanical and electrical
appurtenances
13. Television and radio antennas not
exceeding twenty (20) feet above
roof.
14. Wind electrical generators
I1'J No excluded root equipment or structural
elemant extending beyond the limited height
of a building may occupy more than tlanty-live (25)
percent of the area of such roof not to
exceed tan (10) feet unless otherwise noted.
r
IG) m_=. n r=ca AAEA Pea DW=L;G 0:212:
1. ONE ANDIGR TWO FMILY DWE:. ZGS AND
TOWNROUSES: The -4M- floor arta
for such type buildings shall be as
follows:
(a) One story Dwelling -. 960 square feat.
(b) Two Story Dwelling - 750 square fast per stor, .
(c) LY:: =Cz.: The nZninum 4qua4e
j
6catage 06 a one 4to4y bU4t&:n9
may be aedaced to 864 4q"Ae -
deet 46 a 9=9e i.4 added wZth
dt Least 336 4q=4C deet. In
- - n0 =4 e. howevea. 4haU the ain.ii+elm .
dlmvn4 ion od Zhat Saaa9e be 4ed4 " -
than id beet.
_ 2. MULTIPLE DWELLTNO UNITS:-Sxcept for _ ',• _ "
elderly housinq, living units classified
as multiple dwellings shall have the
following miaimicm floor areas per
unit;
(a) Efficiency Units 300 square feet
(b) One Bedroom Units 600 square feet
(c) Two Bedroom Units 720 square feat
(d) More Than Two Bedroom Units -An additional 100
square fest for each
additional bedroom
3. ELDERLY (SC11OR C:TI:LV) BUDS==
Livinq units classified as elderly j
(senior citizen) housing units shall
have the following minimus floor areas
Par unit:
(a) Stticisncy Units 440 Square fast
(b1 One Bedroom, 520 Snuare Leet
(et LOT AREA PER UNIT:
single Family 12,000 square feet
Two -Family 6,000 square feet
Tovnhoiva—'��'S�UfJ+'+ •_ •eae,
Cioblia Home 4,800 squaref ea t
Multiple Family 10,000 square fact
for first unit plus
2.000 sq. ft. for%
each additional one
bedroom unit, plus
7.000 sq. ft. for
each additional two
bedroom unit.
Elderly Housing 1,000 square foot
(Tke Lot area pet urri.,: aequ,izemw doe
tounvwuaea, condor,.. oma and planned
unZz deveLop>izrlta aha Lt be ca.Zc_2ated
on the bU.,S od the to -r-4 aaea In the
paoject =d as con;toZZzd by an Zjjdjvldaa/
and joint OURek4hiP).
(C( UT:L:TY ZWIS:T:ON AREAS: All areas in
which saver is not currently available
shall be designated as Utility Transition
Areas. The mininum lot ares c' a-jy platted
lot in such areas ahaLi be two and one-half (2h)
acro. Any lot platted according to the
-
;or
of this subdivision, may be
replotted provided that public sanitary
saver vill be made available and all conditions
and provisions of this Ordinancs art mat.
(a( USEABLE OPW SPACE: tach multiple family -
dwelling sits shall contain at least five
hundred (300) square feet of useable open
space as defined in Chapter 2 of this
Ordinance for each dwelling unit contained
thereon.
(E1 EXCEPT:ONS: The building height limits
established herein for districts shall
not apply to the following:
1. •elfries
2. Chimneys or flues
7. Church spires
4. Cooling towers
S. Cupolas and dome* which do not contain useable space.
6. Elevator penthouses
T. Flag polos
P. Monuments
4. Parapet wells extending not more than
three (7) fast above the limiting
height of the building
10. Water tawera
IN
3-4:
In addition, each condominium unit shall
have the minim,,., lot area for the type
of housing unit and usable open space
as specified in the Area and Building
Size Regulations of this Ordinance. Such
lot areas may be controlled by an individual
or joint ownership.
(81 In residential districts, where the adjacent
atrncturaa exceed the minimum aetbacka
established in Su; -sac -.ion (C) above, the
mL•13mum setback shall be thi-ty ( 30 ) feet
plus two-thirds (2/3) of the difference.
between thirty (30) feet and the setback
or average setback of adjacent atzactuzes
within the same block.
AREA AND BUILDING SIZE REGM ATIONS:
PURPOSE: This sec -_Son identifies minimum
area and building size requirements to
be provided in each zoning diatzict as
listed in the table below.
DISTRICT LOT AREA LOT WIDTH BUDDING HE:GHT
A-0
2 acres 200
N/A
R-1
12,000 80 '
21•
LR -2
II-Iqg 9O
+
21. / -
R-3
10,000 8o
2
R-4
48,000 200
1
PZ -R
12,000 a0
211 " ..
P2 -M
12,000 80
2
:-
8,000 a0
2 -.
a-2
N/A 100
2 _
3-3
N/A 100
2
5-4
N/A N/A
2
1-1
20,000 100
2
1-2
20,000 • 100
2
1. The building height limitation in an
R-3,PZ-M, a-1, 5-2, 8-3, 8-4, I-1,
and I-2 zoning districts shall be
two (2) stories.
2. In zoning districts R-3, PZ -M, 8-1,
2-2, 3-3, 3-4, I-1, and I-2, a (3)
three story building may be allowed
as a conditional use contingent upon
strict application of a requirement
that fire -extinguishing systems be
installed throughout the building.
(Rtqu,Zate a conA,, o=t eat ptunit
babtd upon paoctduata Ott boRth Ca
and atgu&tzd by Chaptta 12 o6 thia
oadlRaactl.
J
10-7-1 10-7-4
CRAFTER 7
"R-2" SWGLZ AND T'AO PAM=Y RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
SECTION:
7-1: Purpose
7-2: Permitted Uses
7-3: Permitted Accessory Uses
7-4: Conditional Uses
7-1: PURPOSE: The purposa of the "R-2" Single and Two
Family Residential Dist ict is to provide for low
to moderate density one and two unit dwellings and
diractly related, compl -ea 3r/ uses.
7-2: P�-4MZ:TEJ USES: The followlag are permitted uses
In n "R-2" Diet=ict:
(AI All permitted mass allowed in a "R-1- District.
[13] Two family dwelling units.
7-3: PE&4ITTED ACCESSORY USES: The fallowing are permitted
accessory uses in a "R-21• Diatict:
(AI ALI accessary uses as allowed in an -R-1- District.
7-4: CONDZTIONAL USE. The following are conditional uses
in an. "R-2" District: (RZgMCJaA a ZCAUtiOML nae
peutit basad Upon pxacedictea act dalth in and uguWed
by Chaptea 22 ad thio Oad wxce) . -
(AI All conditional uses, subject to the same conditions,
as allowed 1n an -R-1- District.
(DI Townhouses as de!lned by Chapter 2, Section 2DIT31of tthSszOrdinancs provided that the regulatia
and requirements of Cnaptu 20 ora saris aetorily
completed and met.
(CI four family dwelling unit.
(D) Day Cara - group nursery provided that:
1. No overnight facilities are provided for
the children served. Children are delivered
and removed daily.
2. The front yard depth shall be a mini -,-
of thirty-five (351 feat.
3. Adequate off-street packing and access
1s provided in compliance Wath Chapter
3, section 5 of this Ordinance.
1
CSa] S'REET FRONTAGE: The Proximity of a parcel
of land to one or more strea=. AA interior
lot has one (t) street frontage and a corner
lot has two (2) frontages.
(SP] SMUCTURE: Anything which is built, contracted
or exacted; an edifice or building of any
kind; or any piece of work artifically built
up eadJor composed or parts joined together
In some definite manner whether or not temporary
im character.
(Taj TE:'LEORARY SIG::; Any sign which is exacted
or displayed for a specified period of time.
(J) TOWNBCUSES: St_actures housing three (I)
or more dwelling units of not core than two
(2) stories each and contiguous to each other
only by the sharing of one (1) common wall,
such stac»ares to be of the town or row house
type as contrasted to ..u"I I is dweL' ing apar�.mant
sL=scLure- Na aingia st—uctnra shall cantata
in excess of eight (8) dwelling units and
aaeh dwelling unit shall have separate and
individual front and rear entrance.
CTC] I—n= MVY EQUIPMM. REPAIR: This business
performs mechanical, electrical, st actual,
and cosmetic repairs to trucks and heavy equipmaat.
Allowed: Tuna ups and adjustments, replacement '
of parts, rebuilding of Parts or eomponeatsr
when lastallat-an is available, body repair,
collision service, and painting. frame straightening
and repair, atoaa clasning and/or sandblasting.
undercoating and rust proofing, radiator repair,
Lire repair, wheal alignment and balancing,
washing. cleaning. and polishing.
(UA] UPLAND: Means all lands at an elevation above
the normal high water mark.
(Ue) USE: The purpose or activity for which the
land or building thereon is designated, arranged,
or intended. or for which it is occupied,
utilised or maintained, and shall include
the performance of suet activity as defined
by the performance standards of this Ordinanes-
(UC] USEAALE OPEN SPAC$; A required ground area
or terrace area on a lot which is graded.
developed, landscaped and equipped and intended
and maintained for either active or passive
recreation or both, available and accessible
to and useable by all Persons occupying a
dwelling unit or roeming unit on the lot and
their guests. Such areas shall be grassed
and landscaped or covorad only far a recrsstienal
pur;.oae. Roofs, driveways and parking areas shall
not constitute ussaols open space.
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
B. Consideration of Accepting Petition, Ordering Feasibility Study, preparation of
Plans and Specifications, Advertisement for Bids and Calling for Puolic Hearing
- Utility Improvements for Floyd Markling Subdivision. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the eight townhouse unit development proposed by Mr. Markling, the
extension of sanitary sewer and water main from Golf Course Road to the
development would be necessary. Assuming the Rezoning Request and Conditional
Use Permit were approved, Mr. Markling has petitioned the City requesting
sanitary sewer and water improvements to this development. As you may recall,
as part of the East County Road 39 Improvement Project, the City had prepared
plans and specifications and did bid for the improvements for the Betty
Grossnickle property. The improvement project at that time had a cost estimate
of approximately $48,000, but the project was deleted from the contract after
Betty indicated she was no longer interested. Based on the proposed
development consisting of eight townhouses and a creation of a private culdesac
street, the sewer and water plans would have to be altered somewhat to fit this
new development but in my discussions with John Badalich, City Engineer, he
felt the previous plans could be used with some alterations.
Mr. Markling has agreed to pay for the additional costs associated with the
feasibility study and the preparation with plans and specifications and thus I
have asked the City Engineer to prepare a feasibility study for Monday nights
meeting. If the sewer and water is extended through this development, it has
Lim ability to also provide services for the Country Club property but at this
point, the Country Club has not been a part of the original petition. If the
City Council is willing to consider extending the utilities to this development
as a City project, a number of options do exist. First of all, the Council
would have to decide whether the improvements should be extended to the Country
Club property and include them as a potential assessment or the project could
terminate within the townhouse development at this time with Mr. Markling being
responsible for all of the costs. The Council may also decide that the
improvements will not be a City project and require the developer to privately
install his own utilities. In order to reasonably assure that the project
could be completed yet this fall, if the Council is willing to accept the
petition and do the project, the advertisement for bids should be returnable by
mid-October at the latest. If the project terminates within the development
only, a public hearing on the proposed improvement would not be necessary as
100 percent of the property owners petitioned. If it is determined to also
provide services for the Country Club property, a public hearing would have to
be scheduled for the next Council meeting as the Country Club did not petition
for the improvements.
B. ALTERNATNE ACTIONS:
1. The Council could accept the petition, order the feasibility study and
preparation of plans and specifications, and also advertise for bids.
Under this alternative, the project could serve only the townhouse
development and therefore a public hearing would not be necessary.
f 2. Accept the petition, order the feaoibility study and preparation of plans
and specifications and also advertise for bids, but include a public
hearing on September 26th to include extention of utilities for the
Country Club property.
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
3. Council could acknowledge the petition but indicate that the developer
will have to install the improvements as a private project. Under this
alternative, the developer has indicated a willingness to pay all
engineering costs associated with designing the project but he would find
his own contractor for the QTrove.^x^ts.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the staff's understanding that Mr. Markling has approached the Country
Club to discuss the possibility of extending sewer and water through the
townhouse development and also provide services to the Country Club in the
future. In my discussions with Country Club representatives, they certainly do
not oppose the townhouse development nor the availability of sewer and water in
the future, but they have not indicated a willingness to be part of the
improvement project or necessarily want to pay for any improvements at this
time. As far as the financing of the project if the City were to install the
improvement, the City did include in the Past County Road 39 Project
approximately $48,000 and the City should have sufficient funds available to
finance the improvements. It appears that the main question is whether
Mr. Markling is willing to pay for all of the costs associated himself, or
whether he is requesting the City to also assess the Country Club for a portion
of the project. The staff does not have a firm recommendation other than to
note that the City would have the financial resources available to finance this
project.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of petition. John Badalich is in the process of preparing a feasibility
study and this will be available Monday night.
J
j
• PE2:..c1l FOR WCAL wFROMMIM
... SD TSE C.:": CCGNC= GP MSTIC=4. MARJESM:
Z (we), the undersigned owner(s) of the property described baiov
petition that such peeps= --f be improved pursuant to ,iinnasots
Statutes, Chapter 429 (Local laproveaents, Spacial Assessmants)
and hereby petition the '*LlOwiAg improvt:eats:
Please indicate with an x the
improveaaats raquested
X San --tar/ Savar
x C_tl water
Sto= Saver
situaiaous Surfacing'(blacktapping)
St—rest Lighting
Curb and Cutter
I,•(va), do hereby agree to pay all additional costs incurred by City
Engineer for design modifications pertaining to preparation of feasibility
study and dssign documents for above petitioned project, the improvement
to be determined by the City or RC petitioner not to be feasible.
Dascription of Property: Sec. 10, Twp 121, R 25, Commencing at BE
Corner of NE of NW, thence N. on 1/4 line
333 ft, thence wiy suu tt., menta a1y,
thence Ely 300 ttt- to PP/t. of Big.
signature of Owners:z4`�-� L,
N
11
L
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
9. Consideration Offer to Sell Assembly of God Church to City. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Approximately four years ago, initial conversations were held with respect of
the City acquiring the vacated Assembly of God Church on Fourth Street for the
possibility of the Senior Center. Because there was no urgency in relocating
the Senior Citizen's Center and the asking price at that time was very high
($250,000), the proposal was pursued that in depth. Approximately July of
1985, businesses in the block where the Senior Center currently is located
expressed interest in expanding their physical facilities and inquired as to
the availabilit,., of the Senior Center property. Assuming that a commercial
expansion in that block would be more valuable to the City then the Senior
Center, inquiries about the Church property were again initiated and the a -king
price was reduced a little to approximately $200,000. An appraisal was done in
1979 by Jack Maxwell that indicated the building was worth only $128,000 if
sold for an alternate use and consequently, the City still felt that $200,000
was out of the question.
In July of 1985, the City engaged St. Cloud Appraisal to do an appraisal of the
Church property and our existing Senior Center. The appraisal on the Church
property arrived at a value of $165,000 assuming that approximately $128,000
worth of repairs were needed to update the property to a modern functional
building standard. During this time, the commercial enterprise that was
interested in the existing Senior Center had decided on a new site and was then
only interested in the Senior Center property sometime in the future It and
when the City decided to relocate the Center. Because there was no urgency in
relocating the Senior Center and because of the diminished interest by abutting
property owners for commercial expansion, and the relatively high asking price
for the property, it was the consensus of the Council that all negotiations for
the purchase be dropped.
Mr. Dan Gohman of Gohman Realty recently inquired as to whether the City
Council still had any interest in acquiring this property for the Senior
Citizen's Center relocation or any other civic function. Mr. Gohman had put
together a proposal to sell the property to the City of Monticello for $110,000
which includes the option of assuming a mortgage balance in the amount of
$62,700 from Wright County State Bank. In addition as part of the proposal, Mr.
Gohman has expressed an interest in acquiring two lots adjacent to the Church
site for $22,000. Under this assumption, the asking price of $110,000 less a
poesible sale of two building lots for $22,000 would leave the net cost to the
City of $88,000 for just the Church site and a smaller parking area. The offer
to sell the property for $110,000 is not contingent on the sale of two
potential residential lots, but is only meant to be an alternate for the City
to consider.
While the asking price hao been reduced over the past four years, the building
has continued to deteriorate to a point where it is assumed it will need major
repairs just to bring it up to code. In addition, any remodeling or
alterations that would be necessary to fit the city's intended use would also
increase the cost substantially. At the present time, I have had no one
contact the city who is interested in purchasing our present Senior Citizen's
site, and there may not be an urgency to even consider another property
purchase at this time.
Council Agenda — 9/12/88
Although this offer is being presented by the Church without any initial
1
�
interest on our part, the City Staff is looking for direction on how we should
proceed on this item. Does the City Council wish the staff to continue
negotiating in an effort to acquire this piece of property and perhaps try to
sell the present Senior Citizen's property? At first glance, the offering
price has been reduced substantially, but unless the City has some specific
intended use for the property in addition to a Senior Citizen's Center, it may
not appear feasible after the remodeling and updating is completed. City Staff
is not aware of any interest by the Senior Citizen's personnel in relocating
their facility although it is assumed they would not be opposed to a new
facility.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. If there is an interest in pursuing acquisition of this property, the
Council could accept the purchase agreement as presented or counter offer.
2. Accept the purchase agreement ab pcesantcd/or c-:�umter offer and negotiate
further with the sale of two lots to Mr. Dan Gohman.
3. Direct the staff to close the file on this matter until such time as a
concrete proposal for development in the downtown block came forward thus
requiring the Senior Citizen's Center to seek another location.
C. STAFP RECOMMENDATION:
Because their does not seem to be any urgency in relocating the Senior
Citizen's Center, the staff is somewhat uncomfortable in purchasing additional
property, especially in light of the renovating coats associated with it. The
Council may have other possible suggestions on what uses could go into the
Assembly of God Property, which may alter the Staff's opinion. If the staff is
directed to counter offer or continue negotiations, I believe the Council may
want to hold off on selling a portion of the property for residential
development before the uses are determined and the parking requirements are
met.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of certain pages from the Assembly of God appraisal of July 1985, copy of
renovation estimates done by City Staff a few years ago, and proposal
agreements submitted by Gohman Realty.
ROOM
aura■
ItlftitTl
RR dtlh
uwustn
KIT' J0.113C .,w
vacvaa'r
PHONE (612) 253-4488
July 9, 1985
Mr. Tom Eidem
Cit? Administrator
City Hall
Monticello, MN 55362
ST. CLOUD APPRAISAL. INC.
REAL ESTATE APPRMSALS
SURE 101. ROOSEVELT OFFICE PARI(
Re: Former Assembly of God Church, Monticello, MN
Dear Mr. Eidem:
,rIR7l;; •• ,Olfo Q11RIir �U'�,
At your request I havewr vied and n❑p-.jsgd _ �d
s a result of my investigation Ihave estimated its Market Value,
'�_ _n its as is condition, in fee simple, and as of June 24, 1985, to be:
ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
($165,000) -
The data and methods used to arrive at this estimate are contained
in the 'attached report.
Regarding the fee for this appraisal, your attention is invited to
Item 69 in the Limiting Conditions and Assumptions.
If you have questions or if I may be of further assistance, please
feel free to call.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve you in this matter.
Sincerely,
Am RES
Y� ociate Appraiser
MA:cmh
1
-6-alummo MW&.6WA.W6WAWAAk6-& I T1 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FINAL ESTIMATE OF VALUE: $165,000
ALLOCATED AS: LAND: $ 40,000
IMPROVEMENTS: $125,000
INDICATIONS OF VALUE REACIIED:
BY COST APPROACH: $165,000
BY MARKET COMPARISON APPROACH: Not Applied
BY INCOME APPROACH: Not Applied
DATE OF APPRAISAL, June 24, 1985, which Is also the
date I physically inspected the
property.
RIGHTS APPRAISED: Fee Simple Interests in Real Estate ✓
Only
SITE. -56, 135 square feet of R-2 land, or
about 1.30 acres, more -or -less.
BUILDINGS. A former church building with a
classroom wing addition, all one-
story, with a full basement; '
total gross main floor area of 5,864
square feet.
ZONING: R-2, Single and Two -Family Residen-
tial
HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Institutional Use, such as C)uasi-
Governmental, Church, or Day -Care.
PROPERTY -TAX STATUS: Presently tax-exempt as a House of
Worship.
ii T
COST -TO -CURE ESTIMATES
I caution you that the estimates used in this analysis are for a,-p-
raisal purposes only, and you should seek professional estimates of
costs to replace and repair these items.
My figures are ball -park estimates only, obtained from national
cost manuals, and adjusted to the local labor market.
The following items are estimated to need installation, updatinc,
Or replacement in the subject to bring the property up to a modern, func-
tional and versatile building standard. After estimating the cost -to -
cure the building with these improvements, I will deduct the total cost
estimate from the depreciated improvement value, add in land, and the
net result should be an estimate of Market Value for the subject in its
as is" condition.
Total floor area for calculations is 11,728 square feet.
A. PLUMB7_NG:
cf fixt,j:qs and rest:ooms to handicap standards and
with:assist bars, elevated stools and handicap faucet fixtures. cost
source is the R.S. Means Sq. Ft. Cost, 1985;
Installed
Item Cost Estimate
2 Drinking Fountains, Wall Mounted, Low Back: S 1,130
7 Lavatories, With Trim, 16" x 19" Oval: 3,745
2 Ser,.rice Sinks, Wall -Hung, 24" x 20":' 2,260
4 Urinals, China, Wall -Hung: 3,500
6 Water Closets, Wall -Hung, One -Piece: 4,500
TOTAL PLUMBING COST ESTIMATE: $ .15,135
B. FIRE PROTECTION:
Sprinkler system installation, Wet Pipe System,
Light Hazard Occupancy: 11,728 sq. ft. @ $3.35: $ 39,289
Smoke Detectors, Electronic: 950
TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION ESTIMATE: $ 40,239
33
C. WINCCWS*
Replacement, Chapel Area.
Installed
Item Cost Estimate
Wood, Casement Type, Double -Glazed, Insulated
Glass: 8 @ $635 - S 5,080
Window -Well Repair and Basement Window Repair: 4,000
TOTAL WINDOWS ESTIMATE: S 9,080
D. HANDICAP ACCESS:
Power Door Installation, Glass & Aluminum,
Electronic Operation: $ 1,450
Ramps, Poured Concrete to South and East Entrances: 3,000
2 -Stop Passenger Elevator, Sol/Minute, 1500# Capa-
city, Passenger Controlled Hydraulic:* 39.100
TOTAL HANDICAP ACCESS ESTIMATE: S 43.550 yy
-it appears to be feasible to place the elevator in the old
stair shaft near the existing stairway.
E. PARKING LOT;
Paving, striping, for approximately 14,000 square
feet of asphalt with a 4" gravel base.
14,000 Sq. ft. @ $0.75 - $ 10,500
F. MISCELLANEOUS REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT: $ 5,000
G. FLOOR COVERING REPLACEMENT:
Chapel: 320 yards of inlaid linoleum, installed,
@ 519.00 - 3 6,080
Carpets, 150 yards commercial grade, installed,
@ $15.00 - 2,250
FLOOR COVERINGS ESTIMATE: S 8,330
34
0
SUBTOTAL, ESTIMATE COST-TO-CJRE:
PLUMBING:
$ 15,135
FIRE PROTECTION:
40,239
WINDOWS:
9,080
HANDICAP ACCESS:
43,550
PARKING LOT:
10,500
MISCELLANEOUS:
5,000
FLOOR COVERING:
8,330
SUBTOTAL: 51311834
Adjust for Location, using the Median St. Cloud
and Minneapolis Cost Factors: x 97
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST -TO -CURE: $127,879
SUMMARY, COST APPROACH
IMPROVEMENT VALUE ESTIMATE, BEFORE COST -TO -CURE: 5253,325
��yy C"'.E Ems"_'._ -E• -127.979
T'OTAL5125,446
ADD ESTIMATED LAND VALUE: 40,000
TOTAL, $165,446
Estimated Market Value of .the subject, in its "as is" condition,
and as of June 24, 1985, eaY, _ $165,000
35
4�
C
AUGUST 17, 1488
CITY OF MONTICELLO
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
RE: PROPOSED PURCHASE OF ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH: 4TH STREET
AND WRIGHT, MONTICELLO, MN.
TO: CITY COUNCIL
DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE CITY OF MONTICELLO HAD PREVIOUSLY
SHOWN AN INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY, WE HAVE ARRANGED TO HAVE
THIS OFFER TO SELL PRESENTED TO YOU.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION A MORTGAGE BALANCE OF APPROXIMATELY
$62,700 REMAINS ON THIS PROPERTY IN FAVOR OF WRIGHT COUNTY
STATE BANK. WHEN ORIGINATED IN 1904, Tnc MCRT=CZ:
AT 108 INTEREST, 15 YEAR LEVEL -PAY, NON -ASSURABLE, WITH PRIN-
CIPLE AND INTEREST PAYMENTS OF $700.00 MONTHLY.
WHILE THERE HAS BEEN NO WRITTEN COMMITMENT, THIS OFFICE HAS
BEEN INFORMED BY BANK PERSONNEL THAT THE BANK WILL ALLOW
ASSUMPTION OF THIS MORTGAGE BY A QUALIFIED BUYER. THERE MAYBE
SOME SMALL INCIDENTAL CHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ASSUMPTION,
BUT WE HAVE BEEN ASSURED THERE WOULD BE NO ASSUMPTION FEE.
ACCORDINGLY, THE PROPOSAL OFFERED BY THE SELLER INCLUDES THE
ASSUMPTION OF THIS MORTGAGE.
SINCERELY,
GOO N REAL�� .
yu
D NIEL L. GOEMAN, GRI
BROKER
DLG/D8
201 West Broadway, P.O. Box 325, Monticello, Minnesota 55362-(612) 105-4200
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Tnf a.. at.aw w - — Awaa.n a
RFAIJOR$..r„aaea. Amaaw . REALTORS-
d«aLm..m e.doT Ma+g w a � w .vane d dole am
L Dufe 13 AWusr Isas
2. Poo I Ib ' P-
9-1 RECEIVED OF CITY OF 4 IICELLO
. oto sum d OI'E THA1sAND "+din ($1•o00.00 I
S by CNEG +SH -NOTE As eaarto•t money to b• depawtwa upon at Mtarcs of PUTWN 14MMM av All p xtd M Pt
B baba 1. '.n bw— off/ Mf aeeapmnoa, In • mm o—m of Holing b.tmr or to be ntum•e to sup+ n Pu"h
7 Awoo—1 to not —PI:d bF $•,W. S.O wn49 — a pen o m— tr Vf• so df— d m• pRmly im[ag]o a
B See- IN 'TREE? IM -RIC.H2 AS AS[ , ro m ---
S rkr d 1.t1}Im10 c.", d MiMl1 Stine a Lao o
fO Logof drdmpd To, IN M=DANCE Allb NO tss-nlarttsbfa O 1•••ni.�+�.n,n syn
n, % Is1�,+.;.rtllnnl
12 nmmtg T» AaoAaq prOoafY. a arty• o+wme DY Spew aro also aro brie6 m atl proawtY. go,oe^ b1At. Petra sP woo.
11 b.ma: W'm 1641. adorn auM'L soy.rfs aril •s+'Ings: wlaas lMeoee. blblm Hwtlrle erV p/Nn solo o1.PnY e1WJIIan Ilgt>o
r9
1. Eater a. Elio.: paPnbeo Munn laAta/ IIo aw I." owo (wm1 A, Rlnlwa WINI aoMwa ao a01rRlTareb1 : pad n
1S .udtol o.V_Wa L twW,,,,r a.4*—V aMRon M oi•ctov: r Do, Th.omahr
. SOWNED t RENTED NONE taa,cmr
IB ant dW--Aw, la,n gal Cal. aro prim (e » -'pony d Saoad, auda Tom - amraled [wea...all arwatn oabo rV Imdn
17. aro sting: BVILT"NC: abfttanNMA 2"boge tl ""oo,armra o moa 4p atAm aorta loop tars
e6mkl
lB a: ATTACHED: Ca Ilnp; mlrlmn; Serape Dar OP— and .e oWtTVa; .,Iom doW'^,; fflepl— oo M d0olo aro
,S haamo*M AND: tM f UQooWq pa'sonw 9-"p f
30
r.
a 0 d wrnm Poo" Seger h4o mo dry eprdad a Rea To Bal- bl Rat or ($
yin 04 .alOAm TEN TIaUSANO Dams
2., rico svr- agree+ n Pev m Co W—.V rnannr. Ean1eR rror" of $ 1.000.00
25 Ela .$.300.00 'awI m r bola++ I S mroeER t ge9 me — d doom ern
3a ao nLAnre d A e7 %00.00 ba fbwnang n a mots. w u, ma uiuw a0raw+O+a
Z7Cor —tin l FNA VA f nawmpfron ] Conf Ir Dead OIMr
M rTo PWnes Atpe.nwa 13 J 5 NOT —.V.n upas o. awe d W V. MV.1 (B Low/ b is, w vA~ WW4,-.)
3 A=.a oa dater •mairm worm+ w rn•'aa • PW of pal Ptadlase AC ft (ETlmo Pape r P.O. an b. a
30 DEED/HARKETABU TIrLF-' Upon DW" -6 W BUyw. Som doe den. t _„r£S;PLN wanalsy Dood
$1, P" n m lodua a w7. 0—.rl a mtloNpo Wa -tv d a
32 (A) Bwong Hal ♦trop ora tadnLaba SM L. Too"'ogLM": A Reanwa ml=V To a6• o' itprswnlsn d me "'Wvy wmnA
33 dt6sw taieae prO+ma'.: (G) Reew.mal d"-61 IqM w» Sae d 1Aaalerra: (D) Udey nln dTII-G- aason wtupf Wold
3o n6mrt wmT axr3elp mOOsrnane; (E) Rignm of dime a IOW- (u+asn It—iW, m VA"O m terw+paek
3s
36 (F) woo Nk" a opaaAad n w"tow 'K*d
37. TIrLE A EKAWNATION: Sabo w d, oo M A rgwd ems eM •oxTlonot d ms egmr.a. Mon n rimed It Oa To a W on
3B PRt tV ab." oe ,w a d® To n aoow .sada. mno.g brtma6.i6 — w eNrw ludT+'s Ltd as- woo ow ant
" po' q wR asaaamsna &ear vw to *..a a onnea moot d w rod d Apwrm to aan.rtlnol am aro f�Q Lq on+®M
AD M Mr to meds n o nm r demotion .rl.d H wN @"wool 6 o mega Geom, w.1 tow+ v bm moll evn oa.P d Baa a women
al, es dteToaA w M* BUeor d Scow 1 aoo L a mem We —00o Weil IM dayo oan Sae.'. WOO d a1U1 000i CO m A Imo
.2 A O.en. Paw'4,ts Moor,l wa lhN t. 0.= U W." — d tie W11 oo R d tD• •wT w" Ri amt wnPYt
V nm o hnmo dta P•oCoe ansa p."— tin PurC. Apnrfsa —.113M0 a tocol e m 6C''lso a peal a 6 rico. 6 purl W
tide a 51 mAxad =t tar d,. a. tr, me Ftad.m AOo.'sn 4I bo Wfand Iola A olaxn d noir mly atm+otn
e
u a. Wma-,metnd. os m m .4 ones mbroy AW t-,*~ To &W.. 8tryw ao sow 47-w a;;BUHV. r civ—to t d Forams.
.B AQmnao. Burr ag000 o Aaop, n o ami 10� n or M amaPe d M RPV Wo ape n yu of LI etmf6l d t9• l er (,folly
n. a +Ara a a m64s abA..d a n ro aaPoct n ole u n .alw'e aoavoaAl w moa, n o.nr • i aoerw acll Pdt.Y IR a. em. aamrolmdl
.B Pram 6.a o.ml.o uom Bup'6'axml d a Oa++'* L4e ea.tw mfm+@mae Gro r3 Gwm tIW 1Aa nti wm ors*wan tr AaXI po1Y
.g l m w1rF t
SO rl PaaY a arara'a. ata of W oIa ammala and a odrmq • r6a6ro ry veep pmol.'+ P016Y e • rK.Ia pd r . ane.d
INA. Mea » Pton6an b e. mow 6 pdmd
S1. REAL ESTATE TAKEtoy—
Si91W wool pm"� 1b M'n dAY—a' .abut41 _17yy at rano moosomm m ao w amltn n mo yet TE SC_...
N Son ow pr kpA~ b dy pl taatnp? 17By W. ' or am 1® a..4 pel4oa n me for to 88 - m IT. P. 0
Sa di Rorty des A dwvw. mo ow Tome .m plod ww. a Gretabm is Amato a » er a—+p dem GTA. on,•!a
55 osis ata ao pmytla n ui yAa fg..,B2..._ .4 b. aw _aIOH elpnrmatl clmdlmml n »seen 1g no ,ew •ems
GB bm NPM d rvl+to"teobw dAynm v Sher mow a Pr BU A al.mo $ Aran Wn er MM d Mored
57. LOtn d h ow a6.e marl B'hw •gap a pay am r,wloV bow" a ndMbnaww lrn +TIM Too, or ns " na PAlom
SB Nods Sae ro AgWgtl —W all Ml000r— daYw V 04 NtdA d %00"AM ad om Tocol
Yl SPECIAL AWMIAEMTS TOW o Dad Al to—:
m DUTEA AND SE'LLEA SHALL PROAATB AS OF THU DATE or aDSTNO J$ELA ER SHAti. PAT ON DAre op mosrgr roaMC at
m, 1pla.l aaeaa6nanto Conllid IT, Dmvmam won Ino tool allato 14ae duo aro olrable N M4 yon r CIo•'n9.
t2LOutrR SHALL„ ASSUwE_) SELLER SHALL PAY on tlo d daag t dto al.tlw Waimea iw7 AS d ti dais To dm0
TIi�ta pUTFA $HALL ASSUMfl SELLER SHALL PROVIDE FOR PaYVFM eo
OF tpef anrnmsm pnd. d
mtp n mor► d darty to
-ter-- �w
a nraanl6a eN horn tion [.Oarof w » Gey c4u l a aror Aomweo sAttma (Bse.'o P-om to ow " o HT Tow - olio
r$ a +Moe » wea.talmd LnotAe To sv tlfal,Ioa a Ya n —'oo W DVWI wo.)
g1�sUTER($N� SELLFJI SHALL PAT m deb d ddwle 6If 0WWW'a. 69M aro d V000l A00000 t DW—o d sn.m 6
fD. n a mltAT is a novo d m't des Our Mal ow n.l aAp Two oral Payodse n» pr illy ooAlnp Ar. tJradar ad am
(8 Wo,oadod a"•raYn.n pow-6twwwdt W r.-W.V.paym.o .A4m •old dh6wv Por1dN.
M POSSESSION: SAA. LII Otinw R'anOl of m. pmPw4' eO o® con • +rRmA wr alsnp
M Al ..'a1p, h'arlm}wo, as %=m m oA r Ar d, HOJd pooraua't OAA W t digs to by o_,, rAy aboT w W^ all naAAw
n. da PW o pRTawf 4orae/t V'o to— n d OAR (F OASM
ALL DEBRIS AND ALL pEIL^LydK'JPER
i P{IY NOT vagNDEO NCAL:W .Pm 6U Pm,Y w o— d
wei
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
71 Da:e1tom. nr ....
71 Pdpa 2 of . pyg-
7S SUBDIVISION OF LAND: 11 0. 'AA —,tuMa V raarIDAA A AUrarvmot d UM d sa DI SWy. SAN, PIAT pry As, ACdnaol aptsts
B W Maar a aR , 9a.AT..As APpdnti SAAR .vraw NA 49X1 dsPPraa d w NAI pm—y D M —A. Ie tM— o, tsu
T7. DA apppad b —.,.N n d Vu — d —
78 GENERAL WARRANTIES. SELLER WARRANTS THAT THE BURDINGA IF ANY. ARE ENTIRELY III THE BOUIOARY IDES OF TME
S PROM".. SELLER WARRANTS THAT THERE IS A RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY FROM A PUSUC RIGA OF WAY. THESE
SO WARRANTIES SHALL SURVIVE THE DELIVERY OF THE DEED OR CONTRACT FOR DEED.
BI.SELLEA WARRANTS THAT PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE PAYMENT w FULL WILL HAVE BEEN MADE FOR ALL LABOR.
C MATERIALS, MACHINERY, FIXTURES OR TOOLS FURNISHED WITNIN THE 120 DAYS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE CLOSING
83 DATE IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION OR AFFAIR OF ANY STRUCTURE ON OR 112FROYEUO7T Ty TIr
M PROPERTY.
BS SEVER WARRANTS THAT SELLER HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE FROM ANY GOMWM47AL AUTHORITY AS TO VIDLQION
BB OF ANY LAW, ORDINANCE OR REGULATION. IF THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT' TO RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, SELLER WARRANTS
97 THAT SELLEFI HAS NOT RECEIVED AM NOTICE FROM ANY PERSON OR AUTHORITY AS TO A BREACH OF THE COVERA I'm ANY
BE NOTICES RECEIVED BY SELLER WILL BE PROVIDED TO BUYER IMMEDIATELY.
80 SPECIAL WARRANTIES EXCEPT AS NOTED ON REAL ESTATE TRANSFER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT,
9Q SELLER YAARRAII15 THAT THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED Ia QTY SEWER AYES ONO CT' WATER P.YES CUM
91, SELLER ?"PANTS THAT ALL APPLIANCE$ HEATING, AIR CONDRIOMNG.'MRINO MO PLUMBING SYSTEMS USED ASID LEERED
92 ON SVD PROPERTY VOLL BE IN PROPER MpRgNG ORDER ON THE GnE OF CRDSWO, BUYER HAS THE ROW M INSPECT
93 PROPERTY PRIOR TO CIDS90 BUYER ACK ONLEDGES THAT NO OPAL REPRESENWgpIS HAVE BEEN MADE IN EITHER SELLER
94 OR AGENT(Sj REGARDING POSSIBLE PROBLEMS OF WATER w BASEMENT. OR DAMAGE CALISEO BY WATER OR ICE BUILDUP
96 ON THE ROOF OF n. ROPERry MID BUYER RELIES Y IN TWIT REGARD ON THE FOLLOWING $T BENT BY SEL EFL
SIS
SE.L•ER NAS HAS N P EIAD A WLi DNSOMQfi. NAS aHAS NQf HAD RiQQF, 'WALL OR f}7LyQ DAMAGE CHASED BY
W. R OR ROE BIRLDUP (A DmW b HAS. s Salls F DaDLtW WI dl IM ray Am.'s pDt4Ar EDc4IDVA A�rr. F ApytayAl Bl1w
A9 N rola0 Ab AXRPMO • NIM A XIM Fvtmr da tR m tt stamv. III AUAAAr In HAS NOT. ouvs, rafts Nwo, a Burs
99 —1 Mpmot d"PMD" ARNI"OV1AR WR Of S-RIN AAptsAAIY M FPM III tPD BUYER HAS RECEIVED THE TRUTH
on IN HOLING INSPECTION REPORT. IF REQUIRED BY MUNICIPALITY.
101, BUYER A SELLER INITIAL SV,anal 9dertq T w-�I(,�
102 RISIE OF LOSS: I ants a am I= o alne9A D Ir pm."v II/naAa /r m titl AM D• do d d-v.jb IW slot rrRRUab
Kb AIA IWralla,l, Hoa. Asvglw F a d Gay s IaA d IED MW a a SYI 10r pPpsW • dAlgAd d tAIY MtsOaa b Nara
AOA Ir '.vyD6 AVIA PUPtAM A"— enrol btm,W ry AIN .PAL, AI 86,w.Dcdn. A,d r,e m V PVI d WU,Ida o &W.
toff BM IC SOON Q— D Arps arW— of PuaaA AQ-1—
*B BUYEMELLER ARBITRATION SYSTEM:
IW. ANY C ABI OR DEMAND OF SEILERRISI, BUYERM. BAOKEM) OR /6ENT(S). OR ANY OF THEM, ARRIIO OUT OF OR REL.AIM
,M TO THE PHYSICAL CONDITION OF TR, PROPERTY I—. -MED EN TM!S ru_nL;LT_E '•^..IC'..^•
ROD LIMITATION CLAIMS OF FRAVO, WSREPRESEMATON. WARRANTY AND NEG rn NI SMALL 08 SETTLED BY ARBITRATION
110 P ACCORDANCE WITH IKE RULES, THEN P EFFECT. ADOPTED By THE AMERICAN ARBTRATION ASSOCIATION AND THE � 1
I It. MOANESOTA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS! THIS O A SEPARATE VCIWNTAAY AGREEMENT BETWEETI THE PARTES ANO
112 BROKERSWAGENTS. FAILURE TO AGREE M ARBIT RKM DOES HOT AFFECT THE VAIDR8 11
T/ OF THIS KO*t 6AmOIT.
IA THIS DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM 15 ONLY ENFORCEABLE IF ALL PANTIES AND BROKERSIAOENIS KNE AGREED
IIA ARDETAT: AD ACKNOWLEDGED BY'//III���WT71''AAtt�� BELOW.
,IS BUYEAEI SELLOySly7� LLSTPG CXARCKERACLENTt�-7N OELLpO BROIERIAGENT C
118 TIME OF ESSENCE TAn D N AIA As,Aa n Ste %M= ADAsI
it).ORiFE AGREEMENT. TIts PlAots Aq w nRpA, AIW ®Fed A lbo ord" WM,4. I IIMv,tsts M7w by IN, PRIM AIr AUNRRI
119 er A,An APAIrWA Odaast SeAr IIFc DVA. ArD AA)IadM oM atr arlaM P any Aps,am byrrAa BAsr ID Eula The PudtaA
I in Apss,tsA Gn M —RIAba dw n --M RRI br SAAR w BWR<
t31 ACCEPTANCE: Owm dtaA.mr R Its 4aA M IVa P"Ito Ags—, a sass, to Am{Wo ay SAM H N/RD AD" Ms Id
111, Mass a rgtoauu b ATA —"N% MG.— d Ya,NDM P1tlA n Ats PtRLs spsIPIA, —W /r Qts A astir D IAaAn Dr
t-�— A®aI Is Ad ANsor ROVy CIE D AM>ms 4 M Apsa TN WMY at IA LIN AIV mors Row as "a a Ir III boa's dllld
13 DEFAULT a COO s rlVrratsdA d • tDrAnsa a PPVAa hRNN , DC BYIO dit= D ATF d Ir AWRoIn O IMs s/t &RUtsP tsmlto
124 DAR PtAgAM Apae,Mn AIINYrtsa I%Aas AWA Rs, Dry as r R, by SAAM W Apl a /Its WAalss AAFam IMY ALOss,
125 Ta p— 00 - dA,— Aebr 8v,. d SOMI Is Ie'ON D — dnMORA b A blrAAdl d FII ApAllats V d to VA of ApA]rA
I'S psrbmlYKA d Ob IDD IaIC PrtN l Its P -h— ACI"' n a b w—URAy DD NIW poeWAy a D ACA I psbeaRJ♦ AIKa1
127. mn a IaNmtm .Von AD mIDM y1/ RU,Ii rg. d rlGda IVs
to AGENCY DRSCILOSURP' IAN GORHAM 4TIPULRFB ME OR DE D REAEBENTWOI
IM TAF IDLER IN THIS TpAdBACTICN. THE LISTING AGENT OR BROKER 911—
RE�QI�S�E qI
LM REPRESENTING THE SELLER IN THIS TRAMSACnOM. BUYER A SELLER INITII : &MAXI SAID S
10,11, Ir — d s 0.0". EDP /M ApA,UWA Ito Adblp I AAAA o pm vU M DA ww" b r. po s a s•
132. D• 1" bPAI D YMI/AO -4 p4Ady I— Its --URL awls W Oa VM" AA bD 0-
13:1 uYq,' py�p P
1]O
ty }•
I08
19.
178 IWI CY rryl H1GlV W ^ RNOII tllMi
ATI ItsA IS . uDAw MAroIrrD ODNTRACY IITYY[d w cAE AAm a -
tA0 ww AAs
0 ,OU /ESUM LIQLL 04 TU AI CONSW AM "PRONyata ARsOFCMIQMAL
El
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
The can weep w w usn_u. Atn— d
REALMRSe, rbeseoe Aetooeq, d AEAlMAS-
eyyrm an eawey . -V w d — s Coss d — loon.
I. Date 13 A rjST ....
2 Pope 1 Of s Pepea
1 RECEIVED OF DANIEL L. GOO -
a. Us Syn { F IVF RUNDRED Tppgd (I.. nn I
SCNEC a^H-NOTE as eam.tl money to be deposited upon o-sptams of Purchm Agmmem by W pWe% an or
a bion tn. neat bu.1— dry .Nr ORepenm In a bud account et neting Motor lots! s be niwrrad a Buys It Puma, -
7 AQ --.a .n
nal �pnd by Seller. S" — nw" d part prynMn b Me pWuns d the PrOo" bCJmd a
B Sm Add—
g, piYd MONTICELL Q." I wrr.NT Sad mbremm
TO leply abed nc 014 ] a 1 nuts r[rNTrm r n
11.
u 1"J'Am Pe bib" pnpdty U any —W W Sell. end tsee sm band m mad mm -r gnaw! Wis. mm alums and
13 Mee: 9" amn. mom adds Ween end aawenga: wWdaw oN0es. OOHS MI—WI w Baan and depery mm: C -Ped tighter,
W. awe end wm: pun" Rama waw Ixar1r. IYsealg dam " any bTanen tom 2".w urea d
IS I mon Mw wo). WOW o Corlebonng wita TnwL ebr frac c Water SofWwWN
OED I REINEDONE H hmmfl r
IS ere 40—MW mud gr lank ad cweon (d M,& POparry d Stew), swan Pam elum.d ,-trapn ants& able TV lobo
17 ad meq: BUILT-INS: denm3hM ga d=osap bath ovrDB=M warp Cock by dM.aa, tIt—on pea hoop are,
IB Ine.m: ATTACHED: Carp.ling: mlrron: gar,e, oda operon erre N mntnote: arrsb damctm; Malo serene, dopa end
IS hOsbtam AND: the foOwdng p.nontl properly: VACANT 1 AM
,M OMIEL L. GOEMAN (BUYER) 14 A L ICON Nr msw.r.
21.
22. 0 d .nr71 ODD" Sabo hr me ON apaod b 400 b Buy- b sen d: If
T1 MIITY-LVO THOUSAND AND HWI30—
2a. e14) Bu,- aWem b OW In Me bepwig mnnnw. Eamam rooter d S !00.00
25 W e 71.!00.00 Wash of w bales 17 OCTDIER 19PS w date d Cbwp, and
29 NW—d- '0' by Ar." in awdonm wnh OB aMWW aOdmdum
27. Car H.ai FNA VA N=tlar Gamma! 1. Deed Oiler NOME
2B Ttp PunYlne A'pewne'e t9 19 NOT •,hanunip. upon Me ab d andhw pDpwty 01 erdN- a 19, m Wowed adarmon.)
22 Albmw ars .0. Wddwde wnivl w node a purl d tlm Puttee Apeentere. (Enter page or peg. On ale 9
30 DEEOIYARKETABLB TITLE: Up., parwrwce by Ouvec Saps Shell dell,- a MAIMETIA F Warraray Dead
71. WW In My stoma If any. cwm pg mar/Able we. sUbiect b
32 IN ewlOng end inning Imp aainvic s ewe aro NdWW nguix m: (B) Rot mane nwep ID ua w npawmwt d de POP" etmw
31 WWW lwyaae ponnra: (L) RmeNatlm Of MM nuwetl dant by w Sm d M Wye®: (0) LnW and Mnaga —W-0 worm m b
34. nese wM mzwq awo olnonm JE) Rights of meta as fWkm (WOM spealled. r0 au4ea to werrun4 Naz
J.
30 61 Own (AWuel be epewn.d in w -1y: -LgNF
�-
V. TIRE a EXAMINATION: Saaw elle Adel a mmoOM, Orr aft fmmc o of Mile W--., brain a 4bom all maw • npbnd
3a pasty ODOW. Cents b dile b I.W. wOpw serves mesa b—,POMs W level Ropers Mrd sera end Isn l ed
30 psyng asmai anownwG Wry,- mea W Waved TO twmees drys ale n d abow b swnlmwl d Ips re =any -4—
40 Meeh Mora V. nye we
n ep p desrnd eelwd. O ey IKaedbn s o Ines Sets eMa/ rets 10 brim dIe hon neap d BUM. -Mien
al, Usotlemwa toIlmfy Bug d Sets. aWH,In a7 nese ter InWMWW a 1.'D Osis DDm S.W. —0 deudl Meeh dtom arents
aren bDIM Me o r� owapsbm.Md �A"F"enI emworq p m �Mls a no sum moves a G can o me tabs d
Ae me to armcled wahn w wm wmm w dm Pu'veds Apeenwe else M MA end w& d nue! d D.W. rye- cety ow m bw
rS b mms a, I -,-aloe, b w mIw and Malate rndsy OhM be retuvw b Who MW W Sone pts b Leal (mosso,-! d Rados
N AoedAwe• &AM epee b cap In peel a Im !) n ter N anOse d m pavan WW n W d e WXVWd d m d Me POP"
a, a abed a e m69w sorsa a s m armor d Oman Sdo'a Prpmpl a Coed. a BLW e e Vaso ash Pony lB w m ea RNnIll l
e0 pelpa pq aamr,Da upm BuWl nmw d e oun" 1,00 .eaeOo m Wnea w Ia Ddw90 pry,-,-Km bm ae pennO0010■0 a n Wnaer'e P.VV a ObI nee, aneW w e aMe" ten d ®rep a OeMM.Mrl' Wrap =,Z pbecy a O (teases pmw I. oras d
sa INRs eel pey Mo Im— It, as bras'■ wq).
91. REAL ESTATE TAXES
W Es pail w folk—:
&w- Bsea psy(pntalW eon" day r CW.UW I2VM tie, Moo ImI a>m blas dA end PMbe In Me Pr till
SS Sew am paµ ,eewe.d s eN a cbnrp5)�1ria.a M. nes etl sem Ylse dtl and womb it, tee yes to 04. n tee ek..a
S•. Me dmap Mea Y dsnged w retl sear ams DW SNI. II Parsed, be Owned to to — (Maya date Seas la -M
69 am ds and pay101a in w ION TO tie ed be RRARi 46r A,—mm amoto, nM®O
Me s 1, 89 Nd s
S0 tem as Pm or nawvrreewd dlLtArzon. Sabo ap®
eo Im Wow Is dorsa f � wN Pa Toraeanrvaea
97, poen d w reel ®s Owe Bug aper to oW arry rwrMvq bdu" d nwwenle w Was tool der Deets d l and Peysbte
SB NOdr Smr no, Apdela) oleo soar raprw¢em oorve ung er Whom d soasOsa rel ® ars
SO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS eNY m Die r Idly r
m E OP G
BUYER AND SELLER SHALL PRORATE AS OF THIS DATDSIAM f ELLER SMALLWY ON OA1L OF C{D9t tl asoawO d
al. ..... I tants candled w psymom soh the nal eelafe lues due and peyaae n the Ha d closing.
EL UYER SHALL ASSUME SELLER BMLLL MY m dm all deep all new SPKW aerulro wed a at w db d dowli;
my _MER BNALL ASSUYE'y SELLER SMALL PROVIDE FOR PAYMENT OF Wpedel semens Owe w of the del d atop tr
a.. yrowellwe r. ter Dean pdww W w Cay cuunom p oe-memo mati-a , CS -w'6 ov (man b o" Wo rum a fH paytwe m
fd erne n M soloed rows d tee mawnsnR p Im r IBOIIeed a Boyar's w10s )
m.egY[R BNAUiA S9UY BELLFP914ALL PAYmdmwda,.p any delanaO nW Mab e-OOlpeOel mssarw paFnredMlrJl•
B7. ower e a nae If w corp d tie wle ever Ilea bey nr Melo are dte era! P inae In ale Vel M .,v Ol-V end MIANIU a WIS Wry
e`
as uow w -w atm nee pMae r --m Md ms IMmF Me pMmwW d eht7l a w wwer p WtsS
m POSSESSION: Sae,- end dose passe"n d w pKv" M war Men A Hellas ahs cony
70 Al re-®, nplep e- aenmtelpn duw. NO tel Co. ryad prolwln gn W so Wan b d'I Mees OTy wee essrAY. We nmatl
71, ptt boy ts paws] perp Me IIlnw e d D. T4 rP "S I No
73. Se's Wpm a (,doss ALL DEWO AND ALL PLRSQNAL PROPENTV NOT WOLIJ :D HEREIN AOnr w ww" w noewl.al m
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
TA. Fag. 2 a I P"
TS SUHGViSTON OF iJ.ND: R tIM tau mla+Au+a a MAno a waRmlm d MIIa alvrGso try Se+aR Sear sneA FRAY Y sw.PlUvn rPantM
78 ALM P01aIn d neGA')AW 0�^M4M AOVI*aK SeVW +ArrmM Vr ta0A1 auvlp4M d RM IaM pOOMry p G POIA'A1A0 IIa taMl o wi
77 OA APpPMJ Iv -q - a RH I M a Oct10.
7B GENERA. WARRAMTTES; SELLER WARRANTS THAT THE BUILDINGS. IF ANY. ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BD OMW LMES OF THE �.
,S PROPERTY SOI P WARRANTS THAT THERE IS A RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THESE
BD WARRANTIES SMALL SURVIVE THE DELIVERY OF THE OEM OR CONTRACT FOR DEED.
A SELLER WARRANTS THAT PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE PAYMENT IN FULL WILL RAVE BEEN MADE FOR ALL LABOR,
82. MATERIALS. MACHINERY. FUTURES OR TOOLS FURNISHED WITHIN THE 120 DAYS IMMEDIATELY PRECEOMO THE CLOSMO
81 DATE IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION OR REPAIR OF ANY STRUCTURE ON OR IMPROVEMENT TO THE
SA PROPERTY.
05 SELLER WARRANTS THAT SELLER HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY Nance FROM ANY GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY AS TO VW WION
Be OF ANY LAW. ORDINANCE OR REGULATION. IF THE PROPERTY IS SUBACT TO RESTRICTIVE CMVINM SELLER WARRANTS
R, THAT SELLER HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE FROM ANY PERSON OR AUTHOWTV AS TO A BREACH OF THE COVENANT& ANY
Be NOTICES RECEIVED BY SELLER WILL BE PROVIDED TO BUYER IMMEDIATELY.
89 SPECIAL WARRANTIES EXCEPT AS NOTED ON REAL ESTATE TRANSFER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT.
9D SELLER WAPPMIIS THAT THe PROPERTY LS DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO: CITY SEWER CYESj�HO CITY WATER ONES LUNO.
91, SEDER VPARANM THAT ALL APPUANCES HEATING. AR CCNDTTONPBI. WIRING AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS USED M40 LCCATEO
92 ON SAID PROPERTY WILL BE IN PROPER WORKING ORDER ON THE OQE OF CLOSING BUYER HAS TIME RIGHT TO WSPECT
M PROPERTY PRIOR TO CLOSO4 SLIER AOONON IM)GES THAT Il5 ORAL REPAMENVITIONS MWE SEEN MADE 8f ETHER SELLER
94 OR AGEWM REGARDING POSSIBLE PROBLEMS OF WIATER IN EASEMENT. OR DAMAGE CAUSED BY WATER OR ICE OUED40
95 ON THE ROOF Of �Y AND RIPER RETIES SOLELY IN THAT REOARD ON 7K FOUCMAi'WEVFM M SELECT
8fl SFI FR HAS ^/!y`GA9 NOjJMAO A WET B.LSEMEM, AND MAS I AS NOT ROOF; WALL OR CEILING DAMAGE CARED TR
Bf. WATER OFj 8UIL OUP m MIP+r a HAS. MA SAAYF mplurlMm m EDA IAM FRAM AIM& IJ+ IIaAA AAAWYMM A =--N^) ALM
Be NA A9 N Ma WOMMa a Ir A AA, nMAM CN,- MsnlaaA. BT ANAII M M MAS NOT, Bar/ ROM 40MA/ m BuYM'I
OS PWT VIMMCOM+aI 0fA PIOPaHY Itl tls+a+MWFs ar $AmI axAlary tat baI h BNa MyMaMeA.) BUYER NAS AECOVED TIME TR UTH
ION IN HOUSING INSPECTION REPORT,.
0. BUYER A SELLER INITIAL &W%IF 0 BY
MUMOPALlTYSA%ANR ,
IOZ ASN OF I=: 8 RUM M MM pea a (MIIepI p BM pO0M1Y IaRl1AN Or dA� orad AFd OM CaA d Iy®Iq, b MY IaAaoN 4txAW10
101 IVa. w4adR %oa, artmWe a w d OW. M t d m NIM IIF m SAME A Rta pwAHY M OAA vW% m "A"Aw" I✓/ 1WTA0AC bW=
04 Dti OmV Pm RIO PaaIeIM A7AHIW% UId IMCITIA MA M .a), ■ BAW2 PWm. AIM aAINAM nYTA/ ANY m IIMIMa pan+.
10S DIM MAC S4tM A" a AIPI wcota I1lI If PKaIAM A9reMTra
NVLBUYERISELLER ARBITRATION SYSTEM:
W. ANY CLAIM OR DEMAND OF SELLERS), BUYCTSI, BROKERHSI OR aITFNTm, OR ANY Oe Yue-, RP't ND CL^ Cf CT TD.�..IG
TOA TO THE PHYSICAL CONDITION UR INE PROPERTY CMERM BY THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT (INCLUDING WITHOUT
109 LIMITATION CLAIMS OF FRAUD. MISREPRESENTATION. WARRANTY AMD NEGLIGENCE). SMALL 0e SETTLED BY ARBITRATION
no IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES. THEN IN EFFECT, ADOPTED 0Y THE AMEAKIAN AREA TRAP" ASSOCIATION AND THE
IIT MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS! THIS IS A SEPARATE VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTNER AMC
to BROKERSIAGEMM FAILURE TO AGREE TO ARBITRATE OOPS NOT AFFECT THE VALIDITY OF "" PURCHASE AGREEmew,
111 THFI 015P1UTB 0LU N SYS" IS ONLY ENFORCT!ASLE IF ALL PAR11F9 BRONERStAOENTS KIM% AGREED
IM I1R8TTRATEJ gf4 y;T(��N'M"��N—FIN,`�,F BY INITIALS BELONG.
ITS SUVEMSI;2��{L K— M`+ —GED
LISTING 8RO%EAW"O SEW. BROKERtAGCNT
INE TIME OF ESSENCE TW- A IF VIA AMMO N 0M PNIa1AAA AERRA�UM�
II7. Efi M A3AEEAP.NT. The Wms)OIPMRR. /M �.+YMO �IOb Mp MY aY1MMA a MCIaMFO PD'+T pF BM PRa Nd mNIN
Ila RM MAA,A A9'AMIIMA pAMeAT S.A. Mp arr. am IlVAIt AIlAA AN AOIM +CMI M aI AQMIIMIO tVFa�MI SAr AIIC ant The P1 wm
110 Aq-- EDI m IIORAMO IY-1 - —9 A9- bV SAM" Ila SWM
M AOCEPTANCE allA, Vprl,,NA Alp IRPTAa AIA R NmhAAA AaaMIMA M ALMA" p wmwm W SAftr R wVq AOFM AM W
1pT. %aII9 a IawaaDw b AIA OPlatata aAq>mYa a AanMmn NNCA r AR PleaMaA ApM+MR /alp R'A Al2r's M %bw b Ia/Ii a
I= a=,,,, b RIF eartlAM mwV MM b Altllee N a aDIaps THA CMAIV IT d D IMA MIO KIaI,m OW be Rao r Oti MFp WAI A d%m
I= OEF#= A M A HIMIAM M IF A ---W M P— MO NAIaIIL" HIM WbAA R Mtl a Iti FpaNpltO NIANMR. 5"' NKAT ArIMMM
124 am PKtRmM AljasllMa MIO m-A"M I,,Am nelwsw LIMY a wa-0 0/ :N ANO AOeIA, M Rtl N.M.NIMRf ILMI qpm
NQS The pl-MVI VW Ib 000— oO+al Blur a e d 8u ryR o IM+at OYOIga 1a A dMal a NM AD'NMM a a 81F IIa% d 1pKA4C
IQa PM'A'NnalVm a MA AIPAMI—. ppAOaR M PV— AW-- s b MIMA.MM Old %AMM PVAO a t b 41sm[ plbRrca fuI
127 Aural A mYWIIMYMO AAIA1 b nYIOa OW AN agM d CYT ■aAA
LD1 AGENCY DISCLUSURF• OMIEL L. OOEKH 'gTP1ULATES HE OR SHE A ANDPRESENTUIP13
Im THE IV 'A
BI flea TRANSAA.110m. THE USTtNO AGENT OR py''y_It�=' FIE OR SHE LS
C10 REPRESENTNO THE SELLER IN THEN TRANSACTION. BUYER A SELLAR INITIAL WA"M (.L. sAMT
tai, i, RM RN.IM a ALA P"—N. A AIA AP_ NIM A RKA o i Ap> 0 pNlO+aaa M PI.PAAV b O A P_ &d m oti
IST. RIA wm b.- a Imro A tAM mwv LIAR pr IIIMAM. IANnt r
m ,,r`AMA .10"UOM a11AnM n +/Mn0 wl�T
13A
1a1 �T ult — -11 w G... Ar�.wlf
In
Tae oa% a naAAI MQ.A'RH"�
IaH TMA O A lEOAIV MNpiNO DONI%ALT 0A7'MElM AUYETy AHO ICU -
i40 IAN M ALM IF YOU 091PM LEGAL 00 TAA AVIONX OONALU/ AN aNNIDMIAIA WAOFEAAIONAL
AUUENUUM TO
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
1. Dam IS A=Sl 1985
2. page 3 Of 3 Pages
I AddWduM to Pumnass AgMWMM towmaii PaPlea doled 19 It pertaining to the purttlaw
4. and sels of th* PrOPOTTy
a THIS Pmw. Ammvw IS Srcr m riez
7. igmma . I W FM 1— 9 Fall, I =or
5. THE — —M --S
9L A TINAFT MY FOOT SLOE YARD SIT aACK aETWM BUt LDI.GS 0- LOTS 2 & 3. %= )II L04A "Ti aLL0-
ill SAM SIDE YARD SET BACK ON LOT ). ELM 35 SKILL NOT CUMM, SEYENTIMN till FM.
ti SIE XTTAOiED PPCPCS^. APO LETTER CF MWI"Cm.
19.
11.
IS -6.111.9
C-cenian realty 5613
---------------------------------------
18/24/1 CITY Or 'MONTIM1.000 0
20, -
21.
22.
21 6*00 5 r. 1 3 q:Oq 190 5 S 6 a 070 639 r,.p
24.-
21
26
27.
2a
M
31.
12.
34.
T*NS It A MAW 0""d CONT WT INTIVIIN *UVERS *No Snitft
vou 011AMS MAL OR Us �CSMMIMKT A* AFMGMAYS ftoptszlcftt.
EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL
LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 35 LOWER MONTICELLO
ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH
1. APPROXIMATELY 5920 SQUARE FEET STRUCTURE.
2. WESTERLY SIDE OF BUILDING APPROXIMATELY 3' FROM LOT LINE.
3. ESTIMATED SPACE AVAILABLE FOR 27 PLUS PARKING SPACES
9'X20' EACH.
4. 20' WIDE INGRESS/EGRESS ROADWAY.
5. 5' GREEN AREAS.
6. PRIVACY FENCE WOULD BE RECOMMENDED IN ORDER TO PLACE
PARKING AS CLOSE TO BUILDING AS POSSIBLE AND PUT THE
MOST OPEN AREA BETWEEN PROPERTY LOT LINES.
LOT 3, BLOCK 35 LOWER MONTICELLO
1. MAXIMUM 17' SIDE YARD SET BACK IN THE FORM OF DEED
RESTRICTION TO RUN WITH THE LAND TO CREATE A 20' TOTAL
AREA BETWEEN BUILDINGS ON LOT 2 AND LOT 3, BLOCK 35
LOWER MONTICELLO.
2. LAYOUT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY TO INDICATE THAT A SMALLER
RAMBLER OR SPLIT FOYER STYLE HOME WOULD FIT NICELY ONTO
LOT 3 WITH BLIND SIDE OF EACH STRUCTURE TO EACH OTHER
CREATING A PRIVATE SETTING MOST CONDUCIVE TO THIS LIMITED
AREA.
3. SIDE YARD, FRONT AND REAR YARD SET BACKS ARE ALL MAIN-
TAINAD,E WITH THIS ARRANGEMENT.
LOT 4, BLOCK 35 LOWER MONTICELLO
1. ALL SET BACKS ARE MANAGEABLE ON THIS LOT WITH MOST
STYLES OF HOME. LAYOUT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY.
ti 5scm �y oYTh
_._. JA0N T i GC//o
33'
®i M
io n
Q . Q Q> Q
�3
Fo uRTN 5T.
a6 q0
L oT s r, �, 3, y 210-k 35
C' ;S'F% Or" G. �G � pr 5 a5 FT oC LdT/r�
Jblock S
7 Ac s
M
•
Qe,
rl
3A
ac^:gnwe
/r
/6
/7LL2
I /p
:, •, •::,
- i y
Y
' I
w
Y 7 b
Y,
u
•
J
� l iv nig x?y0?•y
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
10• Consideration of Request by Quintin Lanners to Reconsider Conditions Attached
to Acceptance of Kenneth Lane Improvements-Ritze Manor. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the previous Council meeting, motion was made to accept the utility and
street improvements along Kenneth Lane in the Ritze Manor Addition contingent
upon a recordable document being prepared that would notify potential owners of
the property of the backward sewer connection. The improperly installed sewer
connection was found during the final inspection when the sanitary sewer line
was televised.
After the Council's action, Mr. Lanners expressed to rte deep concerns over the
Council's conditional attachment to the acceptance of the improvements as he
felt the requirement of a recordable document against this parcel will make it
extremely difficult to market the property in the future. In general, I agree
with his concerns and without trying to seem too biased in my opinion, I feel
sympathy towards Mr. Lanners concerns. As you will note in the agenda item
concerning this issue at the last.meeting, the City Staff recommended that
Alternative #3 was the best compromise in this situation. This alternative is
what Council adopted. To clarify, the City Staff, as servants of the City,
felt an obligation to recommend Alternative #3 to protect the City from any
potential liability. As we noted under the Staff Recommendation, as
individuals, with many years of working with Mr. Lanners, we would have liked
to recommend that the City accept the project as is, fully realizing the
backward sewer service cmuld posatbly be r liability _fact^: in the
Speeking for myself, I have dealt with Quintin Lanners for over 13 years and I
believe other Staff members would support me in this opinion that Mr. Lanners
has cooperated fully with the City Ordinances and requirements in all of his
developments within Monticello. Be may not have necessarily agreed with all of
our requirements, but he has abided by them. For this reason, I agreed to
place this item on the agenda for Council reconsideration.
The backward sewer condition would normally not have been a problem if
Mr. Lanners had obtained the proper bonding from hie contractor, S b L
Excavating. With a performance bond, S 6 L would have been required to repair
the service. Some confusion on the part of the City and also Mr. Lanners may
have resulted from the fact that S b L was working in the City of Monticello on
the 86-7 Improvement Project and Mr. Lanners was informed by S s L that they
did have a performance bond with the City already. After the backward service
was noticed during the televising of the sewer line, City personnel tested the
sewer line and the services by using our jet machine to see whether or not the
backward service would be susceptible to problems. During our tests, there did
not seem to be any problem with back pressure from this improperly installed
service. I had a conversation with Mr. Engelhart of Engelhart and Associates,
Mr. Lanners' Engineer on the project and he felt in his opinion that the
backward service should not cause a problem due to its location half way down
the street. Their are only four or five homes upstream from this location and
the amount of sewage that would be carried down the line seemed to make it
remote that any backup would occur. This was also confirmed in a conversation
with the City Engineer, John Badalich, who also felt there would only be a
C minor possibility that this service connection would cause any problems. I
believe John Simola would also agree that the likelyhood of something happening
Council Agenda - 4/12/88
is slim, although as I mentioned earlier it was the Staff's duty to inform the
Council of this slight possibility. Naturally, it is certainly Mr. Lanners
option to dig up the street and repair the service properly at his expense, but
the City Staff also feels this is unnecessary and would require patching of a
newly completed street.
Mr. Lanners has indicated he would be willing to take some additional
preventive measures on this sewer line connection including installing a
cleanout at the street and a check valve in the sewer service to prevent any
backups. The cleanout would allow the property owner or the city the
opportunity to clean out the service connection more frequently to insure that
no buildup of material accumulates due to the backward connection. Both
Mr. Lanners' Engineer and John Badalich felt this would be a minor cost item
that would add another protection for any problem that would arise.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Take no action to amend your previous action on acceptance and require the
recordable document.
2. Agree to accept the project including the backward sewer service.
3. Accept the project without the backward sewer service and require only a
document or notation on the building permit for this parcel that the City
accepts no responsibility for its adequacy.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
As I noted previously, I was a little reluctant to place this item on the
agenda in an attempt to reverse a previous Council decision. I felt that due to
Quintin Lanners past background in working with the City on development
projects and his reliability in meeting City requirements I would place this
before the Council for their consideration. It certainly appears that the
staff along with engineering consultants agree that the likelyhood of a problem
existing because of a backward connection is remota. If Mr. Lanners would have
obtained the proper bonding, there would be no question that his contractor
would have had to fix the problem. Although it would appear that Engelhart and
Associates was not involved initially during the sewer line construction as far
as inspection was concerned, if the City required an additional clean out and
check valve in the sewer connection, the likelyhood of any problem would be
easily remedied with minor maintenance annually. Possibly the question you may
want to ask yourself is, if you were looking to purchase a lot and a document
was recorded against the property which notified you of a backward sewer
connection and no city responsibility, would you purchase the property? I feel
that no matter how remote the problem is, this notification to a potential
buyer may result in this parcel being vacant for quit some time. If City
Engineer John Badalich is in attendance at the meeting, you may wish to seek
his input on this problem.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
J
Please refer to background information in August 22nd Council Agenda. J
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
Simple Subdivision Request to Subdivide (1) One Unplatted Lot into (2) Two
Unplatted Lots. Applicant, Tom Holthaus. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Tom Holthaus is proposing to replat his existing residential unplatted lot
into a platted residential lot and a platted outlot. The proposed subdivision
of this existing unplatted lot with the new lot that is left for the existing
house on it would meet or exceed the minimum lot square footage requirement.
The outlot that would be created by this simple subdivision request would meet
or exceed the minimum lot requirements also.
If the simple subdivision request is approved, approval should be contingent on
a separate addition being filed for this newly created simple subdivision. In
other words, an actual subdivision plat with one lot and one outlot within it.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the simple subdivision request to subdivide one unplatted lot into
two unplatted lots.
2. Deny the simple subdivision request to subdivide one unplatted lot into
two unplatted lots.
3. Approve the simple subdivision request to subdivide one unplatted lot into
two platted lots. By platting, the condition to tnis Deing piatted, we
eliminate the meets and bounds description for this unplatted residential
lot.
C. STAFF RECOMENDATION:
The proposed simple subdivision request for the land area to be subdivided does
meet or exceed the minimum lot area requirements. We do however suggest that
we only allow the simple subdivision to occur with this unplatted lot being
replatted into two platted lots of which would consist of one lot and one
outlot within this new subdivision.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed simple subdivision request, copy of the
site plan for the proposed simple subdivision request, copy of the ordinance
section in regards to simple subdivision requests.
C
�'4r•1J
ix+�.r
'
L J
•�—i='.e.r
wJ
rrpilwl�'—'
'—"
r. fr wwii
aur .a rww Y., /sea
octo6Eq. ro®�
SCAM{ INCH. SO FEE
1 FWIwUlM OM4
/{
�!
•
i w1 f»• rj to Iv..f fw pN .{ M fpr I.N W.Y Iwo N Mew
ark
1 / ,N
.1900*•.
11, I.riV ttt, by. It. r.y.i fs' 1. Ygy.4 www•r I.pM•
r.y .t iY pY..w1p. r{ fY Ur.U.r li w Ippt p{ 14
'�I
�j;b,
•f
•••
• U,r .1 4.,apY H4U Y {4 I.+r.1. ./ Ypuln., rIN H
D
''
_i
1 Wr..n1►a..Ur .fq pit ..rw4r .! Spp.Y i4.N, wl i4i
tt
`
' J
�i
i .rt. plawnip. pit f4—low, oorW.I pr..rWw. .l 14
LOT ,
'�'
Y U
BLOCK
!
}
i tM.r»Jr•IYtir YUway lll,i l.N 414 p.Y nly,Wy.1
E , w.Ylwmt
1,
'
!
—lot r,r a a a.Nuw nw{ atfw d Yl• s" ni pat
L
•,,.
Ibrt 4ltpi if�ll•.yY, /11.1 IIYt lt�ll',yti,
, I• �•'
}, , �
Ilii I.0 Y w1 arN.pW H IM I Mr. Intwl U� N' .y4,
Y.yNUW/r, 111.1 {W Y la Npi .i Ni"•'n•
rf.w.p,r
v..UY ».. » Iw .r -1.1 Y
a
r
q'
».1 n iwf IYtu{.
.0
Z2b
arr1JJJ1
i
} •
;
' i
1 .
•' Wo. fW .p.a. M» » ..rpt p. Isr
Y r
4•
OUTLOT A
�. (
.
•
rpar .e .pr
�
} ••
1
SKETCH PLAN
FOR
Ir(N{I[n1O, MINNUCIA
,
TOM {IOLMAUS
{UF!
t j
to �bdL'J Ld latte.
s"01vt910N lot Ln't tsa t d $ po4°tty
SIS ane us+Pl° ycc tio»Ss gnPls rci ° to
lots
R /d n go°X �' GStY o cm �pltria+l8 ,,
APPlioant.
•+- :`""''.: ;;`,-,`;fix , y.,..,, .i's"":•�.. `'�-.,;,_ •';•• _,,_,,.�- .
cz
••f 'Ky � t� b 7 �`r� �.iI. �+7'!'`•�n, „r'r..0 'i '1 �1. •'.: _�- - ...
1 j , - q 1 `� r�y: '• � �r t,•�1 ,... ,.,'�� �+ �.� rwlt r r s.r. �` Jv.-
•'.is:'"^^•m `�: � r .3.•� `."V,w�..."t•:••:..,,�1' � !'�:` �. t r "'V1:.;,� i j J j r' '1 t i i' � � ; r'1 •,';'�'k'..
� `� . 10,"''.•1�/rJ•. W,V:�: ' , �e.,,,�„f' ,'^i4•..' . "oi`"1'.�,�� .ter •� •��/r -•.: j.�
` �NO. 94
G •
6 44
.- � J
In addition, each condominium unit shall
have the mini-+= lot area for the type
of housing unit and usable open space
as specified in the Area end 8uildiag
Size Regulations of this Ordinanca. Such
lot areas may be cont oiled by an individual
or joint ownership.
(F1 In residential districts, where the adjacent
st-^actures exceed the mini== setbacts
established in Subsection (Cl above, the
mini--= sethack shall be t'%i_t/ (30) feat
plus two-thirds (2/3) of the dif_srgnae,
between thin—/ (30) feet and the set3ac)c
or average setback of adjacent str'actutes
within the sane block.
3-4; AREA ANO SUILOL"1G SIZE REG•JLI:IONS:
(A) PURPOSE: This section identifies mini -,um
axes and building size requirements to
be provided in each zoning district as
listed in the table below.
62S3IC_ LOT AREA LOT W=TH SUILOI1rG BE:GST
A-0 2 &exon 200 N/A
R-1 12,000 so 24
R-2 12.000 so 2%
R-3 10,000 ao 2
R-4 48,000 ' 200 1
PZ -R 12.000 so 24
iG-,hY;t.U4U au
3-2 N/A too 2
3-3 N/A 100 2
8-4 N/A N/A 2
1-1 20,000 100 2
1-2 30,000 100 2
1. The building height limitation in an
R-3. PZ -Y, 9-1. A-2, E-3. 8-4, I-1,
and I-2 zoning districts shall be
two (2) $Carlos.
2. In tuning districts R-3, PZ -m, 3-1,
3-2. 8-3. 3-4. I-1, and I-2, a (3)
three story building may be allowed
as a conditional use contingent upon
strict application of a requirement
that fire -extinguishing systems be
installed tAroughout the building.
1Rtqud.te4 a condo ,4onci u4t pttmit
baatd upon paoetdutte Ott aoVh in
and atgutatZd by Chapttt 22 ob this
andinanct).
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
12• Tabled Request for a Preliminary Plat Review for a Proposed New Subdivision
Plat. Applicant, Charles Ritze. (G.A.)
A. REFERL4CE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Ritze is back before you with his amended preliminary plat request
including some of the suggestions that the Planning Commission and City Council
members suggested to him. You'll note on the enclosed preliminary plat,
Mr. Ritze is proposing to create an outlot consisting of 17 feet in width in
the area north of this existing lot up near Mr. Reinhold Yager's outbuildings
set within Mr. Ritze's property. The basic change which has come from Planning
Commission and City Council suggestion is that he has entered into a purchase
agreement with the adjoining property owner to the west William and Kay Douglas
residence for additional footage to meet the minimum lot width requirements on
a public right of way. In exchange for this lot frontage acquired from the
side and rear portion of William and Kay Douglas' residential property has in
return given the same amount of frontage and side property along west River
Street. Mr. Ritze has also created the balance of the area that is not platted
to put into an outlot which is called Outlot C.
The preliminary plat for the proposed Ritze Manor Second Addition does meet or
exceed the minimum requirements of the Monticello City Ordinance in regards to
lot width, lot square footage requirements.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
1. Approve the preliminary plat for the proposed new subdivision to be known
as Ritze Manor Second Addition.
2. Deny the preliminary plat for the proposed new subdivision to be know as
Ritze Manor Second Addition.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The developer has met or exceeded the minimum requirements of the Monticello
City Ordinance for the creation of this single subdivision plat. Eventhough,
it may not be of the best design to create only two lots within this huge
platted residential lot, the developer has seemed to work within his financial
means.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed preliminary plat request and copy of the
preliminary plat for the proposed new subdivision to be known as Ritze Manor
Second Addition.
O Q
PROWRO PRELmINARYPLAT OP RITZE MANOR 5ECOND' ADDMON,�;!J-, 1
11 P91PARED !pR• CNAFLES PrZt Amp Or-1. S;M1! Y•WIL► RTSA7ELITLAL
•/a! r"D
• nC• 0 , Ii . I:; 1 1,11
ln•1't .�'.' •'++1 '; �, ' ! - -
111,la1.D!)N , I. S5 �x F J1
' i. _,f_ .• 1 t' f.�l„lk.�', (!�lfb � i t„S.y +1.• .. ... w. ...
wn.q..�• t`' � ''t�t7. '•' 1'�i{ �i� 1'�{I L':I M+MTC}.
' 1 :1n: r ' � � / 1+i •i .•'fM1 '�1 �� -{+'1 b•'�� ' r.!/W fl1 VAIN•'1 /l1•IIIiI WIYgI
,� ••,'. 1' r�r� � •,_--.+.�D'�as= V'a • �"f ntif�•l tt Z�: i3'i � {'! 1 �;• .t+
.. •� f 1 A"ice «il ;;t,� ! �;• 'j+`�'''jt .'
'• i Liv�r�'I4I�� ,..i •,r ,..: t3!'�•�� 1 i1 pal;:}}' '�
II �...r i • : 1 .
':�` ` /' i �\ .� •r .,.,,�✓ r+ �� ,�«w.::.. r. car a. meem 1.
w/rrt aAAGr.
•ili :� � :.� iii (._�J,vI •'ii a.I,'_ fr• ..I+II' I ' rRi r r, MI N
'~' � ,.. p1 '�• I"+ ` �'4 i }'� it".: I �� t"! 4+` {��i 4! IN C[t/Nr N [lOrA.
1.1 �r •!�•.t `�•y,,�.`r,M� � n j�ti" Z�% 1 ,..1 •!' ♦%1f,1'�''il''{��'•,I.
'i11; * /.w,w ��'.. f' .•` `� v+' •�� ~.�� • [�{� � ; •�i►E , t t I'� '1�t 1 `{i ,h�;• n '
1.,'.a2�J +1 is �.. ! ..vS.." r `�.J'`'4'• •� ,,.y.�`.� �1�•)I v t 1.1' , •^) 1 •1 !q• � '
LOCAi/ON IIIAP-
:R t1 11 1.. / . ! ( GI �, +" t . !�t d;i'j:; y�t.:t i is • 't' n
iii!! .+.• !, •. • 1 Ildl ti� fi'' 'Ar �� rI 'i`•� , .T;..,; d+1� � !r, , :. • . . I •a+' , /.
jj))(('' j! }r StT!' '*. 'y! !!#'” %T •! F .w..'.,',7 71 , . •I « �•� ! v;+,.ls, i 1 ; .
�. �{`� � ; T I l � •i..+ /• ! 1 , ..�'i.: iuJ �'.ii.,n' I .n • r /Y�Q '' � U�.r�� r.• : ' � � It � s.t q.•• 1' ewna.M .w.r.�s e�'.NI
._�._i-F._r. L,T '• .Y •i.q«J, eN , /• 4.f/ ,..,YF U..f• I,MI nw Yw1. •n •.f^ RF CI
it p1 /NIInIs F M 1'. vl1• Yr rywt. HnwIM�
• r” ,Sj,i (� •�+,, ,•w •�/' •••iArLIM11ANU SUtYE/WiS IJYC . we a+urnr•a.+F«mwelao unt•en a•t••
t ++ i _ • ' ' : aw tl+7 s tYf Fur wnla•.
� � , • ',C, •� Tb NUI Ip[vlfwlr, PD /D11/m
�y 1 • � • 1 • 1 • ! • .YONIICLIID, •fMM[]DfA
.'+ � j ..• 1 j + nut•11167tltf4 S7M eel�1 � Zs«.P,XY4-. _vrts ._ t.•.� ,
•-
t
i, d1othes line pole and vire.
2. Recreational equipment and vehicles.
3. Constriction and landscaping material currently
being used on the premises.
4. Ott-sttaat parking of passenger vehicles
and t--=!,3 not exceeding a gross eapacir'/
of nine thousand (4,000) pounds in residential
areas.
S. propane tar -U, fuel oil tanks, and other
ei=ilar residential heating fuel atarage
tanks which do not exceed 1,000 gallons
L•: capacity and shall not be located within
five (S) fast o: any property line.
6. Wood piles in which wood is stored for
fuel provided that not more than 10 cards
shall be stored on any property. A card
6:.3 6
11 ba 0' x ' x $'. All wood piles
shall be five (S) feet or more from rear
and side yard property lines and shall
be stored behind rhe appropriate set back
line in front yards.
7. Solar hosting systems.
Y*O RLQOIA��L*1T4:
[AI PMMSE: This section identifies minimum yard
spaces and areas to be provided for in sac'
zoning district.
Is] No lot, yard or other open spats shall be reduced
in area or dimension so as to make such lot,
yard or open space less than the minimum required
by this Ordinance, and if the existing yard
or other open space as existing is less than
the minimum required it shall not be further
reduced. 3h required open space provided around
any building or st-ructure shall be included
as a part of any open space required for another
at_-uctura.
ICI All setback distances, as listed in the table
below, shall be measured from the appropriate
lot lino, and shall be requirad mini=on distances.
front Yard Sid* yard Roar Yard
A-0 So }O SO
(" R-1 w 19 30.1
A-1 SO 10 40
A-3 30 1.0 30
R-4 30 30 30
p: -R leo Chapter 10 for specific regulations.
3':-M sae Chapter 10 for specific regulations.
8-1 30 IS :0
4-2 30 10 :0
In addition, each condominiva unit shall
have the Mini— lot area for the type
of housing unit and unable open space
as specified in the Area and Building
Size Regulations of this Ordinance. Such
lot areas may be controlled by an individual
or joint ownership.
(P] In residential districts, where the adjacent
structures exceed the -1-4— setbacks
established in Subsection (C) above, the
mini— setback shall be this,/ (30) feet
plus two-thirds (2/3) of the dlffersace.
between thirty (30) feet and the setback
or average setback of adjacent 3-:actures
within the same block.
3-4: AREA AND SOII,DING SIZE REGOLITIONS:
(A]
VURPCSZ: This section identifies mini=
arae and building size requirements to
be provided in each zoning diat:ict as
listed in the table below.
DISTRICT LOT AREA LOT W= TS BOI:DING BETGBT
-=
A•q 2 acres 200
rR-1 12,000'"' 80 2h } •;•H
- -•
R-2 = 12,000 .80 21,
R-3 --• .10,000 80
'- -
R-6 -•48,000 '� 200 1
pZ-R. _-02.000 r-80 _. 21i'
'
Pz-M' - 12,000 -.80 .- 2-
_
8-1. :M1 • 8.000 80 2
_
B-2 --N/A ^'100 2-
•
-8-3 - NIA ems. 100 • . - .� 2 ... r- s M �. ....
_
3-4 " N/A N/A -.. .. 2 -
1-1 ,. 20,000 -100 .. _ . .-• 2
-
1-2 • 30,000 ...loo 2
1. Ths building height limitation in an
R-3,PZ-K, B-1, 8-2, 5-3. B-4, I-1,
and I-2 zoning districts #hall be
two (2) stories.
2. In zoning districts R-3, PZ -M, B-1,
5-2. 11-3, 8-4, I-1, and I-2, a (3)
three story building may be allowed
as a conditional use contingent upon
strict 4pplication of a requirement
that fire -extinguishing systems be
installed throughout the building.
(Rgu.Zua a coed . onaC u4c peAmtt
baAtd upon paoccduncs act JOVA in
and acguUtcd by Chap;ca 22 o6 tJK4
ondixancc] .
C-]
(eI LOT AREA PER UNIT:
/ Singla Family 12,000 square
Two -Family 6,000 squares eet
Townhouse 9,000 square feet
Mobile Home 4,000 square feet
Multiple Family 10,000 square feet
for first Unit plus
2,000 sq. ft. for•.
each additional one
bedroom unit, plus
3,000 sq. ft. for
each additional two
bed --moa unit.
Eldarly Sousing 1,000 square feet
(The tot atea pet unit aeguiaement dot
townhouaea, condominim ma and planned
unit devetopmenta AaZC be caZ=L, zd
on the baa -44 of the tota.Z aaea in the
paojert and as contaottzd by an i.ndivi&wt
and jo.ult owne-tahipl.
(Ci UTILITY TRANS:T:ON ARILS: All areas in
which sower is not cu:rantly available
shall be designated as Utilit/ Transition
Areas. Ths minimum lot area of any platted
lot in such areas shall be two and ons -half (2h)
Any lot platted according to the
provisions of this subdivision, may be
roplatted provided that public sanitary
-. sever vill be made available and all conditions
-and provisions of this Ordinance are met.
ipl USSABLa oPE21 SPACX:_ Each multiple family
_ dwelling site shall contain at least five -- --- ° --
-hundred (300) square feet of useable open `-
space as defined in Chapter 2 of this
ordinance for each dwelling unit contained -
thereon.
(Ei EXCEPT:ONS: The building height limits
established herein far districts shall
not apply to the fallowing:
1. Belfries
2. Chimneys or flues
3. Church spires
4. Cooling towers
S. Cupolas and doses which do not contain useable space.
B. Llevator penthouses
7. Slag poles
B. Monuments
9. larapet walls extending not mors than
th:ae (3) foot atove the limiting
height of the building
10. stater tawera
11. Poles, towers and other structures for essential nervi
12. Necessary mechanical and alacttical
appurtenances
11. Television and radio antennas not
exceeding twenty (20) feet above
roof.
16. Wind electrical generators
(FJ No axcluded roof equipment or stractural
element extending beyond the limited height
of a building may occupy core than tJanty-five (25)
percent of the area of such rcof not to
exr.ed t_:' v, feet unless otherdise noted.
AGI M:::'IMU.4 FLCCR AREA PFn DWELLING UNIT:
I. ONT AND/OR TWO FAMILY OWELLI}7GS AND
TOWNHOUSES: The minimum floor arae
for such type buildings shall be an
follows:
(a) One Stor/ Dwelling -.9fi0 square !sec.
_ .. (b) Two Stor/ Dwelling - 750 square, feet per story.
(c) EXCEPTION: The min.Z ,m aquane
Jaotsge e,6 a ane -zany building
---may be aeductd is tb< aquatt
6eez i6 a garage is added w4th
az LuwL J36 aquane beet. to -
- no cane, hau+tueK, ahaU the minimum
- .-dinvuion o6 that garage be leen
than 14 Jett. --
__-._..R�..."2. MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS: Except for _ :
elderly housing, living units classified
as multiple dwellings shall have the
following mini-,- floor areas per
unit:
(a) Efficiency Units 500 square fest
(b) One ledroom Units 600 square feet
(c) Two sedroom Units 720 square feet
(d) More '..hen Two sedroor Units -An additional 100
square feat far each
additional bedroom
1. VXFt.L7 (SE:RcA C:TI.'ZN) ECUS:NG:
Living ,nits classified as elderly
(senior citizen) housing units snail
have the fallowing minimus !loos areas
per unit:
(a) Efficient/ Units 440 square, feet
(b) One sedraoe 5:0 Sentare fear,
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
13. Consideration of Council Chamber Renovation. (J.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Some time ago, Council directed staff to develop a plan for renovation/
remodeling of the Council Chambers. Since then, staff has solicited input from
an interior design specialist and received a proposal for a total Council
Chamber make -over. As you can see on the attached proposal, Interior View
Design Studio of Buffalo will complete the remodeling for the sum of $5,616,
not including chairs which range from $360-$407 per chair. Staff recommends
that Council postpone complete renovation but consider purchase of chairs used
by council members. Council is asked to review the following analysis, discuss
the matter and direct staff accordingly.
A MLYSIS
Carpet Replacement/Project Cost
Unfortunately, remodeling of the Chambers is an expensive proposition because
in order to create a contemporary interior, a perfectly good, but dated, carpet
must be removed. According to the interior designer, it will be difficult to
develop a contemporary interior if the carpet remains as the carpet color is
dated and it is impossible find matching wall coverings and chairs. By
postponing the remodeling, the City will get more use out of the existing
carpeting.
d� Potential Integration of City LOGO in Interior Design
The City is in the process of developing a LOGO which will likely include a
distinct color scheme. Council may wish to defer remodeling of the Council
chambers until the LOGO color scheme is established and then integrate the
color scheme and possibly the LOGO itself into the new interior design.
Need for New Council Chairs
As you are well aware, some of the council member chairs are wabbly and seem
eusceptable to collapse at any time thereby creating significant potential for
injury and embarrassment to Council members. All kidding aside, a case could be
made for purchase of council chairs of a neutral color in anticipation of
future remodeling.
B. ALTERNATI'JE ACTIONS:
1. Accept proposal submitted to City by Interior view Design Studio for the
sum of $5,116. (the design ideas and color scheme will be provided at the
meeting).
Current budget for this item is $2,200 dollars.
2. Direct staff to postpone renovation of Council chambers pending
development of City LOGO color scheme, but order Council chairs possessing
a neutral color that might blend into a future color scheme. Include cost
to renovate in 1989 budget.
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
Direct staff to postpone renovation of Council chambers and postpone
purchase of Council chairs pending development of City LOCO. This
alternative would allow the City to purchase chairs to match perfectly the
interior design selected. Include cost to renovate in 1989 budget.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternatives 2 or 3.
Page No.
of Pages
rII10yc11
INTERIOR VIEW DESIGN STUDIO
200 Central Avenue
BUFFALO. MINNESOTA 55313
(612) 682.3518
VROeos-1 sU eunTco TO
Citv of Monticello
iTNECT
fn+On( oat
I I
IlOa n.rE
9/2/88
CITY. STAR .no Je CoOE o9 :CC1T10.Y
Monticello, MN
.1C11ICCT I o.TE o• "s I
I :Oe v,.o"
��
W. ner QOT .Ubmn eb.ciliC:anOn\ anO .SI�m.IQ3 ter:
wallcoverings
— —
Lenon Sandblast 1-55, A000e Ex
FGA CC-612 (Green) -
S 366.12
Removal of burlap and Installation
1,016.50
_
S 1.382.62
i Carpeting
i
-'Hartford Cal rpet,"Commercial 40 oz.
'
Antron_.III. nylon. 0 19.99.-yd. ------.----..---------..---------_-.S
3,218.39_. _-
P
i
I —Removal of -existIng "ca rpet-8 installation -"' -'---- -- "'-'-'
"-'-1,016.50 -"
S 4.234.89
Upholstered Allsteel Chairs Quantity
1-9 S ' ea.
— Penta--200 Series-•P-231-------------- ---
Over 10
_360.00
-: = 345:00 ea.-'
upholstered--in Commercial vinyl_(see-sample)
Outer shell color - Taupe 515(see sample) -
_
Same chair fully upholstered Ouanti:y
1-9 5 407:'00-ea:
------.,.._........----.—._-�---- ------Over--lo-----392.0O
ea.
_.-_8-9 .weeks delivery _--__--__._-----_�--_--•
-- --
Insurance is carried by both installers.
I
IOfir,
P PropoeB hereby to fUTmsh material and labor — complete in accordance with above SoaclfiWbpnb, for the Sum of:
Sollars
cr ).
V.rmam to a mace a wf .-c
i!•tail down on chairs upon ordering, remainder due upon delivery.
i Total due upon installation of wallcoverings & carpet.
m .n �• ^u•1prr" pro e�•. •p•ufiN .Y sr• s N dem w -w•m•wuu .ulh0nlad
n nxeN� a •.v u,.•• •w• •n«•,yn a ewu, vv.. •os�ne.
0,1
)
/•�l
.enma e n e• ....'ea w�..ww ...mw amen •wa ..n ...... w Lbncmn
qq• a.w •wc.ee.• ,r,un�mn•, .n .\w•mmn cwunpm dew . n •.... we
�
. � nwe wr Qv w. pewee ,• um n,•, iwww . wou•n ...... we noir fhu dropout mar be
30
Iu .or•m •r• fvnr ce.«•e A-or•-uw • Cw.ewu,m near•.-•r -uh0rawn br u\ .I nbf aCC.p1.0 -nron
bav\.
L
-Nrrppta tl? of Proposal — rh• .bo.e
.ria cowuon\ u. unuacwn crib u. har•er .cc.oua. rou .r. wmon+.a 4.Snamw
to 00 tri. -br• as aoeGfleb. p.Ymar,t -,II b. mace .. outlined am—
s'poun
bcu of A[c.ot-Co:
W
j
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
14• Consideration of Dictation System Purchase. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Staff asks Council to consider purchase and installation of a centralized
dictation system from MARCO of St. Cloud, for the sum of $4,965. This request
stems from the recent demise of two of the existing dictaphones which has left
staff with only two working dictaphones. The configuration proposed places
dictation stations in five offices for individual use by Jeff, Rick, Gary,
011ie, and John.
Problems with Existing Equipment
All of the existing dictaphones are over 10 years old and are at the end of
their usefull life. As evidence of this, two of the machines have literally,
self destructed and are beyond repair. One of the remaining machines is
located in the Public Works building and the other is located at City Rall. At
the moment, three people, Gary, Rick and myself are sharing one dictaphone
which is not a workable situation as Rick is always pigging it.
Staff is recommending complete replacement of the existing equipment because
the remaining equipment is at the end of its usefull life. Furthermore, staff
recommends that Council consider replacing the existing system concept which
utilizes independent dictaphone units, with a central system that integrates
external dictation stations, with a central tape unit.
p
Central System Description
The central system configuration is designed to improve office efficiency. The
central system concept eliminates handling of cassette tapes as messages are
dictated over a phone line directly to a central unit. As many as four people
can be dictating at one time under this concept. The secretery transcribing
messages receives her input from the central unit which is located on her desk.
The Central system provides staff with the potential to dictate messages from
off-site via the telophone.
Please see the attached copy of a promotional brochure for a more complete
description of the system and how it works.
B. SYSTEM COMPARISON:
Central System
It is the view of staff that the higher initial cost ($4,965 versus $2,514) of
the central system is off -set by the lower long term maintenance cost and
higher productivity associated with the central system. Attached is a
spreadsheet which compares the cost of the two system concepts.
The Central system can be expanded at a lower coat per dictation station than
can the system made up of independent dictaphones.
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
Staff can dictate messages from points outside of City Rail. For instance, if
Rick is at a meeting in Buffalo and remembers that he needs to send a letter to
someone, he can exit the meeting and call-in the message.
Other organizations that have experience with the transition from independent
dictations units to a Central System have indicated that the change has been
positive to their organizations.
Central System provides information to secretary that can assist in managing
workload.
Independent System
The old adage is "if it aint broke, don't fix it. The existing configuration
has worked well in the past. There is no problem or overiding reason to change
other than the fact that an opportunity exists. Furthermore, there may be
operational problems associated with the Central System that we are not aware
of at the moment.
The up front cost of the system proposed which includes six independent work
stations is $2,514 which is about 60 percent of the central system.
C. ALTEPIWIVE ACTIONS:
1. Purchase Central System from MARCO for the sum of $4,965.
1, a. Direct staff to solicit for additional quotes for Central Dictation
System, as no other quote was provided by other companies for this
product.
2. Purchase "Independent" dictaphone units as outlined on attachment from
Chatter Office Products for the sum of 42,514. (Chatter provided the
lowest quote for independent dictaphones).
3. Postpone purchase of equipment and place the cost to purchase dictation
equipment in 1989 budget.
D. BUDGET IMPACT:
Funds have not been budgeted for this expense item, however the need for the
equipment is immediate therefore it is proposed that funds be drawn from
reserves to cover this purchase.
E. RECOM4tENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative 1 or la, above.
F. SUPPORTING DATA:
Cost comparison of Central versus Independent desk top systems, and copy of
central system promotional material.
2
Dictaphone
Simple Efficient Solution to
Work -Group Communications
Designed with multiple voice paths
for dictation by several authors and
the ability to transcnbe from multiple
secretarial focattons simultaneously.
The M VP dictation system. The cost
effective answer to work group
communications. Providing complete
compatibility with all Dictaphone
m crocasseae desktop and portable
units and the convenience of 24-hour
system access. any time. from
anywhere.
Speeds Output
Multiple voce path architecture
speeds document turnaround for the
busy manager or professional.
With the MVP dictation system. your
first letter could be transcribed before
you ve dictated your last.
Dictation and transcription proceed
simultaneously.
The MVP system serves as a direct
communications link between author
and secretary.
MVP
Dictation System
No Waiting
The MVP system with two modules
gives you the capacity of four voice
paths and access to the system from
many different locations.
Because of multiple voice paths.
three or even four authors could be
dictating simultaneously. No need to
wait.
Or assign a different work type to
each voice path. to separate your
dictation for increased efficiency.
The system orotects privacy. No
author can play back anthers
dictation.
MVP dictation system can handle
much of the groups daily communi-
cations -incoming telephone dictation
or messages. intercom. or instructions
to your secretary, as well as regular
dictation.
MVP system is designed to smooth
the flow of the groups communica-
tions. save time and minimize
frustrations.
Easy to Use
Dictation is as easy as—pick up. talk
Up. hang up.
No cas tette handling by the author.
Recording takes place in the MVP
unit. at the transcripticnisis desk.
To dictate. simply pick up the hand -
cot and start talking. All the essential
controls are in your hand. Theros
even a Lceeaal priority "hotline'
feature to make sure those critical
communications am handled accord-
ingly. When dictations finished.
Limply hang up.
Author input to the MVP system is
not only convenient and flexible. but
also designed to take up minimal
dc_k space.
may$ c.Lre-+Yt 1yi
Transcription Flexibility
In acd tion to transcribing directly
from the unit. the MVP dictation
system provides other convenient
alternatives...
Transcribe from an off -premises
location by accessing the unit
througn normal teleohone lines.
with a Dictaphone Teiscribe remote
transcription terminal.
• Transcribe from other locations in
your office with a Dictaohone
Thought Tank recorder remote tran-
sc.iction terminal connected to the
MVP system.
Transcribe cassettes from the MVP
system in any Dictaphone micro -
cassette desktop transcription unit.
You can tailor the MVP system to fit
your needs. keep work overload
under control. and speed output.
Even use the MVP unit to transcribe
dictation from other Dicaohone
microcassette recorders.
status Display
A Cisolay indicates each voice path's
current status.
• In Use
• Operator
• End Zone
• D (available for dictation)
• T (available for Transcription)
• P (priority dictation)
• Off line
Comoleto uo•to-date Information at
the transcriotionisla fingertips.
Modular Expandability
The MVP cictanon w/wem can
imcrcve your voice processing
effic:ency and turnaround now ...and
grc-rx as your nem Grcw.
Tho syctem is thorcugnly flexible.
it can be easily exCan(jed up to a
maxcmum of !Cur mCCuleo with eight
individual voice pars `Cr,:mul-
taneGua cic=!Cn, trnt:cr ci:cn.
+.ccu:ar exC3rcab1:1ty Meana
confidence in a dictation system that
can grow to meet tre ever mcreasmg
needs of the work Grcuo. Easily, add
author incut iccat:cno )r numcer of
tran,C'tcCcn:,r.
Expand tno MVP,yt�tem cimoly by
cccing mecc:eS. trio e :!_ed daft or
CCCtt:Cnal CICtOt:on Cr'rar.CCr(0VCn
redu:r4Ments ;.n caa:;�j arcmmo-
datQd'.wth Cho %I'vP,yGem.
Executive Communications System
The MVPcication system is designed
for convenient executive commune.
cations.:ihde away from the office, at
home. or on the go. Use it as a
message center, or phone in important
dictation.
Work generated in the fieid'rom
any Dimaencr.e microcassene
portacle recorder can be mailed or
expressed to mr :ranscnotion.
Eeuto ire system for teleonone
dictation. while 31 home, access the
MVP unit through a Dictachone Dictei
terminal. while traveling, call directly
to the system from any telephone or
transmitsiccation from arty D icmohone
poracle retorter to the MVP System.
Extended Capacity
Enhance the MVP system's recording
capacity. automatically, for longer
continuous dictation in the office and
extended access to the system while
cut of the office, at nignt, or on
weekends.
With the MVP optional "Auto-
iransfer' feature you can enhance
recoro.ng capacity without ever
having to touch a cassette.
After recording 30 minutes of dicta-
tion on your first cassette. the MVP
system will automatically Switch to a
second casserto for a full hour of
uninterrupted dictation while ensur.
ing that nothing ts:cst for trartscnonen.
Efficient Control
Secremnes can tranccr be from the
;yctcm virile dictation flows into any
of the unab other votco paths,
The MVP system allows for e3 --,Y
control Ci,vork flow within the unit,
it the fl:cx of a switch. without tp1Ch-
;nq a ca_.ew
i=,) --t arc easy
OICTAPHCNE ECiUIPMENT - COST CCMP4RISC44 OF CENTRAL VERSUS INOEPENNOENT OE~R
TCP SYSTEMS
MARCO - CENTRALICHA,iER
OESK TOP
SYSTEM I
SYSTEM
I
TOTAL COST (TOTAL
COST
UNITS (UNITS
OICTAPHGNE MNP DESK -TOP TERMINALS
I
THREE VOICE PATHS, 1 TRANSCRIBE PATH
g;,995 1
DICTATE TERMINALS/STATIONS
4 $1,240 II
TRANSCRIBE TERMINALS/STATIONS
I
1 $395 1
1 $429
DESK TOP DICTATOR (S)
I
1 $0 1
5 $2.295
INSTALLATION (Run wires)
$650 11
$0
LESS DISCOUNT
I
s0 I
LESS TRADE-IN
I
(EST.) $50 1
$210
(
TOTAL UNITS/NET COST
6 $4.230 1
.6 $2,514
COST PER STATION
I
$705 1
$419
FIVE YEAR MAINT COST
i
'$1,024 I (45/1UNIT) 1350
NET COST AFTER FIVE YEARS
$5,254 11
$3.864
COST PER STATION OVER FIVE YEARS
I
$876 I
644
90 DAY WARRENTY
I
x I
x
TELEPHONE CAPABILITIES (OPTICNAL) $735 I
TOTAL COST PLUS OPTIONS $4,965 1 $2.514
p
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
15. Consideration of Garbling License Renewal - Knights of. Columbus, (R.W.)
• : � er • 1�s
The Monticello Knights of Columbus Council is seeking a renewal of their
gambling license to operate bingo at the V.F.W. Club, Sundays, October through
April of each year. As with other gambling license applications/renewals, the
City Council has the opportunity to approve or deny the application, and if no
action is taken disapproving the renewal, the State Charitable Gambling board
will automatically renew the license application.
For your information, enclosed with the agenda you will find a summary of the
bingo operation receipts and donations etc. for the period March 1987 through
March 1988.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Gambling License renewal - State Gambling Board will
automatically renew.
2. Deny the application - City Staff will inform the Gambling Board that
license should not be renewed.
C. STAFP RECOMMENDATION:
The City Staff recommends that the bingo application for the Knights of
Columbus be approved as we are not aware of any problems associated with this
license. The Knights of Columbus has supplied the necessary statement of
revenue, prizes, expenses, and donations for the past year as established by
Council policy.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Gambling License Renewal and copy of revenues and expenses etc.
n
u
Charitable Gambling Control Board
as Rm N-475 Gtiggs-Midway, Bldg. For Board Use Only
V1821 UniversityAve. Paid Amr.
SL Paul, MN 55104-MO3 - Check No.
(612) 862-0555=
I % ". Date:
• •• - • 11W �r GAMBLING LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION
LICENSE NUMBER: • t-11591.612 I EFF. DATE: lillllll 1 AMOUNT OF FEE: {56.11
1. Applicant-LegaPName of Organization 2. Street Address
: ' ' t116Y1s aF tatanas cal6clt u2s 1a1TTcnlo '-' -•'• ( u6 2,tt lreeew,y •- --- -•- — -
9. City. State. zap - nx 6. County S. Business Phone
Roatlesl lo. 1I 16162 Yrigkt (612 129S-1191 a
S. Name of Chief Executive Officer 7. Business Phone
Tag Voql - - •w+
(5+-!1 -fie_»no
S. Name of Treasurer or Person Who Accounts for Revenues 9. Business Phone
Curt Andres t i • ffyt di) 7cc-471d
10. Name of Gambling Managert I. Band Numoer 12. Business Phone
1olert Rattlers S6NB185 las al •+oa-deo+
•13. Name at Estadl:snfeent Where Gambling Will Take Place 16, County 15. No. of Active Members
VFY Pitt 9111•, n6t(cella Yr(gbt 17!--, 1 cc
IS. Lessor Name • \' 17. Monthly Rent:
V111 past 1111
19. It Bingo unit be conducted with this license, pease specify days and times of Bingo.
D a Times DTimes Dave MmesSurr1V4 7 -nn a -A I _� - ( %
19. Has license Nor been: 0 Raveled Date' 0 Suspended Dur 0 Denied gale• '
20. Have Informal Controls been submitted previously? jp Yes _. 0 No (it *No; attach copy) _ Has cumin legs can Sled with the board? �_ "� O.Yes�: ($No pf'NO." attabh Copy) +- _
�.:. Nag Current Skaters been Sled with the board? Vol -':13 No Of 'No: attach coy)
S . - •. GAMBLING SIT AUTHORIZATION =
.._.. By my 119nal4L1 below: local law enforcement officers or•agents of the Board Are hereby atahortsed to anter upon the 1W, al my time, garnpmq to ..•.:. .
being conducea, to observe the dambling nd to enforce the law for any unaNhedM game at practice.: -
BANK RECORDS AUTHORIZATION .-":':, _• - ..."'"-
By my signature below, the Board ts hereby authorized to Inspect the bank recori of Ne General Gambling Bank Account whanevei mieess" to .:...
.fulfill requiramwlts of current gambling rules and law.- 1' _ . • •,yl • . ..- }'
.tee•.. -OATH
1 hereby declare Mat'" .. \�1'•a+-�. ,.'r
1. 1 4ave read this application and all Information submitted to the Beard: .:r�e:...e�
2. AJ information siubmided is true, accurate and complete: '•"�• �• , - _ �..,..w. �.. lav, �•r•-• - sc-y-,: r .A.. r
0. All other required Information hent boon fully dlectoaad:
6, lam the Chief ssecutive Officer of the Organization: ^ "w--_- -t'
S. I assume NO nespers, lity tar the fair end lawful operation at s9 activities t0 -be conducted; n1•••-+.+-+
S. 1 will familladZa myself with the laws Of the State Of Mlnnet0la respaCting gambling and Meg Of the bund and egr". 11 licensed. to abide by thou--•
laws and rules, Including amendments thereto.
27.Off;mal Legal Name of Organization Signature (Chief EAebudve Off cur) .. cats Title + -
Knighta of ColumbuG66825 � *.� �>p�, 8-18-81 Grand Knight
ACKNOWLEDOEMENT OF Ni LOCAL GOVERNING BODY '
I hereby acknowledge reellol of a Copy Of INS application. By Acknowledging receipt. I admit having been served with notice tat this application wR
be reviewed by die Charitable Gambling Control Board And It APOrOvad by the Board. wit become effective 30 ays from the date of receipt (noted
below), unless a resolution of the local governing body Is paned which Aoacnncally diWbws such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by
the ChAntabfs Gambling Control Bard within ao days of the below noted ate. - t. •
26, CJyiCOunly Name (Local Governing Body) Township: 11 site is located within a township, plans@ compete items 24
Civ; of Monticello and 25:
SignZtiye of Person Recewmg AOplcallon! . 27. 8ignalure Of Persian ReC@wmng Appleton
'..v L
ale w` /�' Dat@ Received (this date begins 20 ay pvrod) Tier.
Name Of ?arson Covering AppuplWn t0 LOCaI Governing Baby; Township Name
20hart d. fA11N1I—
CG-00C22-01 j&;87) While Cagy -good Can" -Applicant Pink -Local Governing gory
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS (Bingo)'
`Knights do not operate bingo 0 VFW Club during sumer months.
DONATIONS
Plaques - Free Throw Contest
Gross
KC - Youth Ed.
Net
State
200
Right to Life - Birth Right etc
Balance
Donation to Help Poor in Africa
Receipts
Prizes
Receipts
Taxes
Expenses
Donations
+ 2,798
03/87
S 4,220
5 2,604
$ 1,616
$ 162
$ 457
S 1,379
$ 2,416
04/87
1,572
972
600
60
184
---
2,772
05/87
--
---
---
---
-
749
2,023
06/87
-
__
-
--
---
---
2,023
07/87
---
»_
___
-_
--
350
1,673
08/87
---
--
---
--
--
--
1,673
09/87
-
--
___
-_
_-
_-
1,673
10/87
2,079
1,446
633
63
420
--
1,823
11/87
3,865
2,406
1,459
146
505
1,471
1,162
12/87
2,601
2,157
444
44
360
---
1,202
01/88
3,192
2,343
849
85
486
--
1,480
02/88
2,371
1,769
602
60
368
---
1,654
03/88
2,642
1,727
915
91
278
400
1,800
,424
s 7,116
s iii
s 3`,05
s" 4-,r4T
O
`Knights do not operate bingo 0 VFW Club during sumer months.
DONATIONS
Plaques - Free Throw Contest
S 39
KC - Youth Ed.
100
Chemical Free Grad. Party
200
Right to Life - Birth Right etc
365
Donation to Help Poor in Africa
1,000
RC - Student Loan
125
Misc.
125
Jim Campbell Memorial Scholarship Fund
125
Nuns Day 0 Met
73
Ad for Graduation - Orphan Child
17
Friends of our Little Brothers
108
St. Henry's Youth Group
75
Monticello Scholarship Fund
350
KC Scholarship Fund
50
St. Henry's Church - Blinds
148
Meals on wheels
147
Food for Life
200
Ed. Fund for Holy Trinity Church
100
Family welfare of India
600
Monticello Food Shelf
400
Tr11W
D
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
16. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for Modification ¢3 of Project Costs
for Tax Increment District 12. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Monticello Rousing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) having approved
Modification 13 for the Tax Increment Finance Plan District 12,' thereby
requests the City Council to set a public hearing for the purpose of
Modification 13. This in pursuant of the Minnesota Statute, Section 273.74.
Subdivision 4, the Tax Increment Finance Plan must be modified by the Authority
if, 1) increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; 2) increase in
the portion of captured assessed value to be retained by the Authority; 3)
increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of
additional property to be acquired by the Authority shall be approved upon the
notice and after the discussion, public hearing, and findings required by the
approval of the original plan.
Tax Increment District 12 (Metcalf S Larson) was established in 1983 as a
redevelopment district; modification 11 extended the district boundaries;
modification 12 acquired the Old Ford Garage; and the proposed modification 13
will acquire the Jones' Manufacturing (Alvin and Shirley Jones), the Monti
Truck Repair (Joseph and Clarice O'Connor), and the Stelton'a Laundomat (Ervin
and Donna Stelton) properties.
Modification 13 of the Finance Plan Budget will include the acquisition of the
three above named properties, relocation and moving expenses, demolition cost,
l and administrative costs. The proposed ir.9ividual purchase agreements to be
executed on or before September 30, 1988, earnest money of $10,000 with
remaining cash balance due on or before closing date of March 2, 1989.
Purchase price includes moving and relocation expenses. The bond issuance
would occur at the time the properties are sold to Broadway Square Limited
Partnership. Selling date expected in Spring of 1989. The bond issuance would
include the above budget cost, recapture of BRA expenses incurred by the
acquisition of the Old Ford Garage, and bonding expenses.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Set a public hearing for the purpose of Modification 13 for the Tax
Increment Finance Plan District 12.
2. Deny the setting of a public hearing for the purpose of Modification 13
for the Tax Increment Finance Plan District 12.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City Staff recommends the City Council to set the public hearing for Monday,
September 26, 1988, thereby carrying out the Statute process for modification
of a finance plan.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
17. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for Moving and Relocation Expenses.
(O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Under the HOD -Uniform Act, person(s) or business(es) whom undergo displacement
due to acquisition of property by a government entity are entitled to
compensation of moving and relocation expenses. The Housing and Redevelopment
Authority's proposed purchase agreement prices include Five -thousand Dollars
and no cents ($5,000.00) moving and relocation expense for each seller:
O'Connor, Stelton, and Jones. According to Mr. Tom Hayes, City Attorney, if
the HRA has a willing buyer and seller, and a fixed payment for moving and
relocation expense is agreeable, a HRA need only request the City Council to
hold a public hearing since taxpayer dollars are involved in the transaction.
Therefore, the HRA requests the City Council to set a public hearing date for
moving and relocation expenses incurred through the proposed acquisition of
properties within Tax Increment District 92.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Set a public hearing date for the moving and relocation expenses.
2. Deny setting a public hearing date for the moving and relocation expenses.
C. STAFP RECOMMENDATIONS:
(� City Staff recomwnds the City Council to set September 26, 1988, as the public
hearing date for moving and relocation expenses incurred through the proposed
acquisition of properties within Tax Increment District 02.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None
Council Agenda - 9/12/88
18. Consideration of Setting a Special Meeting for Purpose of Canvassing Results of
Primary Election. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
It is necessary for the Council briefly following the Primary Elections,
September 13th, to canvass the results of the election. The meeting would last
only a few minutes and has typically been scheduled either early in the morning
or late afternoon on Wednesday following the election. If any Council members
are unable to attend at a convenient time, three members would be sufficient.
L
MINIT:ES
REGULAR MEF.'ING - M0,7TICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, September 12, 1988 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen,
Bill Fair.
Members Absent: None
2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting held August 22, 1988, and Approval
of minutes of Special Meeting held August 30, 1988.
Motion made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair to approve regular
meeting minutes of said meetings. Motion passed unani.m usly.
3. Citizens Comments, Petitions, Requests, and Complaints.
Gary Schluender of Schluender Construction Company was in attendance to
discuss his concerns regarding the Chelsea Road Development. Schluender
noted that he had not been paid by the contractor for the project and
wondered what the City could do to assure that subcontractors be paid for
work done on Chelsea. Road. City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller noted
that the city had actually no role in financing of the project and only
held funds in escrow in the amount equal to the cost of the project
completion. As the project, was completed the funds in t*.e escrow were
released to the contractor. The City had no control over whether or not
the contractor then paid his subcontractors for the work done on the
road. He went on to note that this is an unfortunate situation for the
subcontractors, but it is not a situation that the City can correct.
Mayor Grimsmo noted that the best bet for the subcontractors that were not
paid for their work on the project would be to initiate a Class Action
Suit against the primary contractor for the work. City Engineer, Badalich
noted that there is about $10,000 remaining in the escrow fund that will
be needed to pay for portions of the project that are not yet complete.
d. Public Hearing for the Proposed Assessment Roll for the 86-7 Improvement
Project. Puolic Hearing for the Proposed Assessment Roll for the otter
Creek Road Re -Alignment Project.
Mayor-Grimsmo initiated the public hearing by noting a letter received
from Bill Malone regarding the assessment against his property at 602
Fallon Avenue. Mr. Malone stated that he did not feel that he gained
benefit from the street work or the utility work as his private utilities
were in place prior to the project. Mr. Malone also noted that the
boulevard in front of his property was not properly sodded after the
project. John Simola, Public Works Director concurred with Mr. Malone
that touch up work needs to be done on the sodded area and that the city
would act to correct the problem in the spring of 1989. Mayor Grimsmo
noted to Mr. Malone that the sewer and water utilities extended to his
adds value to the property. John Simola also noted the the sanitary
system that Mr. Malone operated included a drain field that was not
entirely on Mr. Malone's property. Bill Fair stated that a
0
Council Minutes - 9/12/88
growing community such as Monticello on occasion property owners will be
assessed for utilities that they do not necessarily need at the moment, L
however, necessary extension of the utilities and subsequent assessments
prove beneficial to the city residence in the long :un. Merrill Busch was
in attendance and noted that he had no objection to the assessment as
presented. The:e being no further discussion on the subject, public
hearing was closed.
5. Consideration of Adopting the Assessment Rol'_ for Certificat'_on with the
County Auditor Covering tie 86-7 Improvement and the Otter Creek
Road/Caunr/ Road 74 Intersection Improvement.
Motion made by Fran Fair to approve Resolution 88-27 (Otter Creek Road),
and Resolution 88-28 (86-7 Improvement/Fallon Avenue), which are
t
resoluions adopt '' -ng assessment roll for the 1986-7 Project and the otter
Creek Road Re -Alignment Project. Motion seconded by Bill Fair, motion
passed unanimously.
6. Review of Sheriff's Department Report on Cruising.
Mayor Grimsmo initiated the discussion by reviewing the steps that have
been taken to resolve the cruising problem. Ee noted that the extra
police patrol has helped a little and that the work of the committee
established earlier to find a solution to the problem has had some impact,
but the problem still exists. Con Johnson was in attendance and stated
his view that the time for studies has passed, and that the problem is
that must be done. It was his view that a
getting worse and something
tougher ordinance and more police patrol is needed. He asked that legal
action must be taken to correct this problem. Bill Fair concurred, it was
his view that a loitering ordinance should be established. Such an
ordinance would give the Sheriff's Department clearer authority in
controlling the problem. He went on to state that it will be important to
direct concerns and frustrations regarding cruising to county judges.
Mike Drayna reviewed his concerns regarding cruising and stated that the
problem is getting worse and that the individuals participating in
cruising represent an undesirable element in the community. Council
concurred that the problem is not just local kids, it seems to be with
adults coming into the community from outside. Don Hozempa of the Wright
County Sheriff's Department reviewed statistics outlining enforcements of
puolic'nuisance statue he used to control the cruising problem. In his
report, he noted that the public nuisance ordinance is difficult to
prosecute because a judge generally needs three complaints for each public
nuisance complaint. Hozempa reiterated the need for a tougher loitering
ordinance and that this ordinance would help keep kids off street and thus
selve to protect Streetscape investment. He went on to say that the
ordinance would likely be tested, but that such a test is fine, let's test
it. Finally, Hozempa explained that when individuals that participate in
cruising are in their cars, they can be better controlled.
City Attorney, Tom Hayes noted that some communities in the metro area who
have a similar problem, Anoka for instance, has a cruising problem that
..cy
0
Council Minutes - 9/12/88
recently became severe when the City of Hopkins passed a tough loitering
ordinance. Reyes supported the concept of establishing a loitering
ordinance, but noted that the County Attorney's Office may have some
difficulty in handling the case load. If this is the case, the city mey
end UD handling prosecutions associated with the loitering ordinance.
Furthermore, enforcement of the ordinance may require additional funds for
extra police patrol.
Fran Fair stated that the problem crust be addressed and that an ordinance
should be developed within 30 days. Cauncil member Bill Fair, stated that
a resolution to the County Judges would be appropriate regarding this
matter and that such a resolution would encourage the judges to treat this
problem seriously and that the resolution stems from considerable citizen
'input on the matter.
Al Loch was in attendance and recuested that the advisory body making
recommendations on the cruising problem be maintained, it was Mr. Loch's
view that the problem is growing and that he now is hearing reports of
prostitution. Motion made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair to
institute a loitering ordinance to be developed at soon as possible.
Motion included request for additional police patrol during cruising
hours. Motion passed unanimously..
7. Rezoning Request to Rezone a Lot from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to
R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential). If Rezoned to Repiat this
Residential Lot into Eignt Townhouse Lots and One Common Area Lot. If
Replatted, a Conditional Use Request to Allow u� to E:gnt _awnrouses on an
R-2 (Single and No Family Resicent:al) Lot. Applicant, Floyd Markling.
Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the
rezoning request as stated. It was noted that the rezoning is justified
given the surrounding land use and that the rezoning proposed does not
constitute spot zoning. Staff noted that there was no public opposition
to the proposed rezoning at the public hearing regarding this matter.
Motion made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve rezoning and
conditional use requests associated with development of eight townhouses
on the property formerly owned by Bette Orossnickle. Motion passed
unanimously.
S. Consideration of Accepting Petition, Ordering Feasibilitv Stud,
Preoaration or Plans and Spec,.:icat.ons, Acver:isement tor Bias, and
cai!:ng for Puoiic Hearing - Utility improvements for Fioyc Mar'kling
Sucdivision.
Rick wolfsteller noted that the developer has petitioned for the
improvements and in his position has noted that he will pay all
feasibility study and plans and specifications design costs associated
with the subject. After discussion, motion made by Bill Fair, seconded by
Dan Bionigen, to adot Resolution 88-32 Accepting Petition/order of
Feasibility Study, Prepare Plans and Specifications for Utility
Improvements for Floyd Marbling Subdivision.
Council Minutes - 9/12/88
Consideration of Offer to Sell Assembly of God Church to the City of n
Mont --cello. --L
Bill Fair reviewed the situation and noted that purchase of the Church at
this time may not be apocopriate as the city has not yet clearly
identified it's space needs associated with the food shelf/teen center,
relocation of senior building or the needs associated with neecing rooms,
etc. He also noted that we do not really understand the potential of the
structure, and at this tine purchase of the structure would be unwise.
Fran Fair concurred that we need more input from civic groups regarding
their space needs, etc. Warren Smith stated that the Church is not in an
ideal location, nor is it an ideal structure for city usage. Mayor Grimsno
stated that the senior citizens seem to be happy were they are and that a
civic center may not be an in a residential area; therefore, he
does not support the purchase of the structure. Bill Fair stated that
purchase of this structure may be worth looking at 30 days from now after
staff and council have had time to inventory space needs.
10. Consideration of Request by Quintin Lanners to Reconsider Conditions
Attached to Acceptance of Kenneth Lane Improvements-Ritze Manor.
John Badalich of O&M, reported that council may wish to reconsider it's
previous decision regarding this matter because the potential of problems
associated with the incorrectly installed sewer service are minimal. He
stated that a good maintenance program and the presence of five homes
upstream of the problem when combined will significantly limit the chance
of any problems with this incorrectly installed sewer line. In addition,
Mr. Lanners noted that he will install a separate clean out valve at the
property which should also contribute to correcting the problem.
There being no further discussion, motion was made to accept the project
without the backward service and require only a document or notation on
the building permit for this parcel that the city accepts no
responsibility for it's adequacy and require that the developer install a
separate clean out valve for this sewer service. Motion made by Dan
Blonigen, seconded by Fran Fair. Motion passed unanimously.
11. Simole Subdivision Request to Subdivide One Onplatted Lot into Two
Unplacted Loc;. Apnlicant, Tam Haitnaus.
Council reviewed planning Commission's recommendation that the simple
subdivision request be approved. It was also noted by city staff that the
proposed Seventh Street right of way through this area will be
incorporated into the plat of the property. Motion made by Dan Blonigen
to approve said request, notion seconded by warren Smith. Motion passed
unanimously.
12. Consider request for Preliminary Plat Review for a Pr000sed New
Sucolvision Plat. Applicant, Ciarles Ritze.
Applicant informed City Council that disputes regarding property lines
have been resolved between parties. It was noted that the only problem y
with the subdivision request was the need for a variance associated with
C-1))
Council Minutes - 9/12/88
the minimal frontage to Hilltop Drive was the consensus of Council that
the variance should be approved due to the hardship associated with the
unique land configuration, and due to the fact that without the variance,
the property owner is denied reasonable use of the property for
residential purpose.
Motion made by Dan Blonigen to approve the preliminary plat and approve
the variance associated with that plat. Motion seconded by Bill Fair.
Motion passed unanimously.
13. Consideration of Council Chamber Renovation.
After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to table further
consideration of Council Chamber renovation pending development of
community logo. At this point, development of the logo ensued. Council
developed a tentative list of members to serve on an advisory body charged
with developing community logo. Council directed staff to solicit input
on development on community logo from the individuals listed.
14. Consideration of Dictation System Purchase.
Staff reviewed the need for replacement of the existing dictation system.
It was noted that the existing system consisting of individual units is
over 10 years old, and experiencing continual mechanical problems. Staf!
recontended purchase of a centralized dictation system. Mayor Grimsmo
commented that the dictation system proposed would allow Council members
to call City Hall with messages and provide council with capability of
composing letters and memos from their hone telephones. Motion was made
by Bill Fair, and seconded by Fran Fair to purchase a dictation system
from Marco office supplies at the cost of $4,965. Motion passed
unanimously.
15. Consideration of Gambling License Renewal - Knights of Columbus.
Motion made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair to approve said gambling
license renewal. Motion passed unanimously.
16. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for Modification 03 of Project
Costs for Tax Increment District 42.
Motion made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve setting of a
public hearing for the purpose of receiving comments on Modification 43 of
project costs for Tax Increment District 42. Motion passed unanimously.
17. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for 7:00 September 26, 1988 for
the Pur?ose of Receivinq Comments On Relocation and Movinq Ex
penaeS
Associated with Modification 43 of Project Coats for Tax Increment 42.
Motion made by Bill Fair to adopt Resolution 88-33 Setting a Public
Hearing for Modification 43 of Project Costs for Tax Increment 42. Motion
seconded by Fran Fair. Motion passed unanimously.
0
Council Minutes - 9/12/88
18. Consideration of Setting A Special Meeting for Purpose of Canvassing !
Results of Primary.
It was the consensus of Council to have a special meeting for the purpose
of canvassing the primary results on Wednesday, September 14th at
7:00 a.m. Resolution 88-34 Setting Special Meeting of Purpose of
Canvassing Results of Primary.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jeff O'Neill,
Assistant city Administrator
012-1
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING OF MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday, September 14, 1988 - 7:30 a.m.
Special meeting of the Monticello City Council for the express purpose of
canvassing the results of the primary election held September 13, 1988 was duly
held at 7:30 a.m., Wednesday, September 14, 1988.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Dan Blonigen.
Members Absent: Warren Smith.
The special meeting was called to order by the Mayor and the City Administrator
presented the summary sheets of all votes cast in the Primary Election
including the special election question concerning the water tower referendum
bond issue. After reviewing the results, a motion was made by Fran Fair,
seconded by Dan Slonigen and asked to be carried to adopt the following
resolution.
RESOLUTION 88-34
There being no further business for the special canvassing meeting, meeting was
adjourned.
Respectfully,
Rick Wolfs eller,
City Administrator
RM