City Council Agenda Packet 11-14-1988AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, November 14, 1988 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimm
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held October 24, 1988.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests and complaints.
4. Consideration of resolution awarding the sale of $1,100,000 in general
obligation improvement bonds.
5. Consideration of acceptance of Chelsea Road improvement project.
6. Consideration of replatting request - Fairway Court/Jay Miller.
7. Consideration of establishing new full-time clerical position entitled
Data Entry Clerk/Secretary.
8. Review of third quarter liquor store financial report.
9. Consideration of bids on used motor grader.
10. Consideration of purchasing NSP maintenance building on West County
Road 39.
11. Consideration of transferring a portion of Lot 4, Block 3, Oakwood
Industrial Park, to EM for resale to Northern States Power Company.
12. Consideration of using tax increment financing for the installation of a
storm sewer - Construction 5.
13. Consideration of authorizing Public Works Department to install Christmas
twinkle lights along Broadway.
14. Consideration of awarding logo development contract.
15. Consideration of setting a meeting for the purpose of establishing the
1989 salary/wage policy.
16. Consideration on participating in a task force to study public
transportation nceda within Monticello.
17. Consideration of fund transfers for 1988.
18. Consideration of reimbursing PSG for equipment rental to clean second
stage digester at wastewater treatment plant.
19. Adjournment.
MINI, : ES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CIT_'_' COUNCIL
Monday, October 24, 1988 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: Fran Fair
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the special meeting held August 18,
1988, and the regular meeting held October 11, 1988.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints.
No comments/petitions, requests, or complaints were made from the public.
4. Public Hearing on the Proposed Assessment Roll for Project 88-01B, East
County Road 39 and Dundas Circle. AND
6. Consideration of Adopting an Assessment Roll for Certification with the
County Auditor Covering Project 88-OIB and 88-02.
Mayor Grimsmo opened the meeting by asking for comments from the public
regarding said project. Charles Anderson asked for a clarification
._ -ft!.c .-t... .�.1 Whichuc. ...:
a U laLCtJ. CIIU LA
Lepak of OSM informed Anderson thatitis proposed that properties be
assessed on a unit basis rather than a front footage basis. Mayor
Grimsmo then read letters submitted by Charles Anderson, Leo Grey, Robert
Krautbauer, and Mrs. Hoglund. All letters outlined objections to the
proposed assessment. Krautbauer noted that the increase in the value of
his property is not commensurate with the assessment against the
property. Lois Krautbauer asked Council to continue the hearing to
another date, as she would like more time to analyze the formula used in
calculating the assessment. Arve Grimsmo noted that the burden of proof
regarding Krautbauer's assertion is on Krautbauer.
Ray Erickson objected to the proposed area assessment. Bill Fair
suggested that the City not employ the area assessment policy in this
case because the project was act in motion before the area assessment
policy was established. Motion by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Warren
Smith to not utilize the area assessment to recover costs associated with
the extension of trunk sewer and water, as the area assessment policy was
established after the project was ordered. Motion passed unanimously.
Alta Fitch asked if a portion of the assessment can be paid, thereby
reducing the annual payment. City Administrator Wolfsteller noted that
in order to streamline collection of assessments, the County requires
that assessments be completely paid or be paid as scheduled.
Council Minutes - 10/24/88
There being no further discussion, the public hearing was closed.
Motion made by Bill Fair and seconded by Dan Blonigen to certify
assessment roll for Project 88-18, East County Road 39 and Dundas Circle;
and adopt assessment roil for certification with the County Auditor
covering Project 88-01B and 88-02 with the understanding that the
assessment associated with property owned by Robert Krautbauer will be
deferred under "Green Acres". SEE RESOLUTION 88-47.
5. Public Hearing on Proposed Assessment Roll for Delinquent Charges. AND
7. Consideration of Adopting an Assessment Roll for the Certification with
the County Auditor Covering Delinquent Charges.
Mayor Grimsmo opened the public hearing and asked for comments regarding
the proposed assessment role. There being none, the public hearing was
closed.
Motion made by Bill Fair and seconded by Dan Blonigen to adopt the
assessment roll for certification with the County Auditor covering
delinquent charges. SEE RESOLUTION 88-48.
Consideration of Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications for 88-05
Pro]ect (Water Tower) and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids.
Gene Anderson of 0S9 reviewed said plana and sp-cificah!nn ttat
the project consists of the construction of an 800,000 gallon above-
ground water reservoir located on the South end of the 5 -acre site the
City purchased from Kenny and Susie Schultz. This project would consist
of the site grading and construction of the water storage facility,
including the controls, drains, accesses, and landscaping.
Dan Blonigen noted his concern regarding the impact of the higher water
pressure on older residences located at lower elevations. Staff
responded by noting that the pressure will be increased gradually and all
fixtures associated with reducing pressure are included in the project
costs. John Simola noted that he will be writing a policy for Council
review that will address potential problems created by the increase in
water pressure.
Motion by Sill Fair and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve the plans
and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids for the new water
storage facility. motion passed unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 88-49.
9. Consideration of Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications for 88-06
Pro3ect l'"Ater main) ana Authorizing Advertisement for Bias.
motion made by Bill Pair and seconded by warren Smith to approve said
plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids. Motion
passed unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 88-50.
Council Minutes - 10/24/88
10. Consideration of Change orders 44 and 45 on 88-019 Project (East County
Road 39) .
Public Works Director Simola reviewed the change orders noting that
Change order #4 involves the lowering of water main on Mississippi Drive
to protect it from freezing and the relocation earlier this year of
Charles Anderson's sewer and water services from t1he edge of his driveway
to the center of his driveway. The total cost of the change order is
$4,199.60. Simla went on to describe change order A5 which adds an
additional sewer service on the Dundas Circle project. The six -acre site
of Lot 4, Block 3, which adjoins the Dundas Circle project, was chosen
for the new site of well $4. At that time, it was determined that we
could sell off the westerly half of this six -acre site and still maintain
proper clearances for the municipal well. There were, however, no
services on the western half of Lot 4, Block 3, so it was decided to add
an additional service so we could sell that portion of the lot. Change
Order ¢5 involves the core drilling of the 15 -inch concrete pipe at that
location to provide for a sanitary sewer service connection. The cost of
this change order is $1,003.20.
Motion by Warren Smith and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve said
change orders. Motion passed unanimously,
11. Consideration of Approving Specifications for Purchase of a 1/2 -Ton Truck
far :tater Department.
Motion made by Bill Pair and seconded by warren Smith to approve the
specifications and authorize purchase of the new pickup for the Water
Department not to exceed the budgeted amount of $11,500. Motion passed
unanimously.
12. Consideration of Authorizing the Advertisement for Bids on a Used Grader.
John Simola outlined the need for the used grader and noted that the
existing grader must be replaced if the existing snow removal service
level is to be maintained. He went on to note that the 1989 budget
includes an ;.80,000.00 expenditure for a new grader. Arve Grimsmo asked
what the effect would be if the City did not have a grader. Simola
responded by saying that the grader is used extensively for ice and
hard -pack snow removal along Broadway and it operates on a full-time
basis during snow storms. Dan Blonigen requested that the City consider
purchasing an older unit in order to keep the price down.
After discussion, motion made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Warren
Smith to authorize City staff- to check the market place for used
machines, develop a detailed set of specifications and advertise for bids
for consideration at a later meeting. Motion passed unanimously.
13. Consideration of Authorizing Development of Temporary Clerical Position
Through the State or Minnesota 'MEED" Program.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill outlined a proposal to develop a
part-time/temporary clerical position entitled "Assistant to the Deputy
�. Relistrar Clerk". The proposed position will be funded entirely by the
Council Minutes - 10/24/88
State of Minnesota through the MEED program for a period of six months.
O'Neill went on to note that development of the proposed position is a
no—cost method for the City to supplement clerical resources which will
have a positive, indirect effect of assisting the City with the final
implementation of the computerized financial system. O'Neill went on to
say that the MEED program is designed to encourage organizations to
establish positions that provide training for individuals that meet MEED
qualifications.
After discussion, motion by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Bill Pair to
authorize development of Temporary Clerical position through the State of
Minnesota MEED program. Motion passed unanimously.
14. Consideration of Bills for the Month of October.
Motion by warren Smith and seconded by Bill Pair to approve payment of
bills for the month of October. Motion passed unanimously.
In other matters, Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that
some of the trees planted with the Streetscapes project have been found
to be slightly undersized and do not meet specifications. Council
directed staff to complete an inventory of trees delivered and negotiate
a cash settlement for delivery of trees that do not meet specifications.
There being no further discussion, meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
`tel
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
0-;L
J
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
4. Consideration of Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,100,000 in General
Obligation Improvement Bonds. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
On October 11, the Council adopted a resolution authorizing
Springsted, Inc., to prepare the sale documents for the sale of
$1,100,000 in General obligation Improvement Bonds to be used to finance
the water tower construction and related water main improvements. The
bids for the bond sale will be opened at the offices of Springsted, Inc.,
at noon on Monday, November 14, and Mr. Jerry Shannon of Springsted will
be attending our meeting to present the bids for Council consideration.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Award the sale of bonds as recommended by Springsted.
rf
2. Do not award the sale - this does not appear a Feasible alternative
IV, unless the Council is willing to reverse its decision on building a
water tower.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Assuming the bids come in at a reasonable interest rate and a
recommendation is made by Springsted, the staff recommends the bond sale
be awarded to the lower bidder. The City has already incurred costs
associated with this project for water main construction completed this
summer and will be shortly incurring cost associated with the purchase of
the property from Mr. and Mrs. Ken Shultz. Unless the project is going
I to be terminated, the bond sale should be awarded to provide the proper
financing.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the resolution for adoption will be presented at the meeting by
Mr. Jerry Shannon.
�AA
0
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
5. Consideration of Acceptance of Chelsea Road Improvement Project. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
It has been over seven months since the City Council has last discussed
this item, and a lot of progress has been made since that time to the
point where I believe it's appropriate for the Council to again consider
final acceptance of the Chelsea Road Improvement Project. At the
April 11 meeting, the Council tabled any action on a conditional
acceptance of the Chelsea Road Project and requested a written opinion
from the City Attorney as to his recommendations for acceptance by the
City. At that time, a number of issues had not been resolved concerning
ponding requirements, lien waivers, warranty bonds, and other item--
associated
temsassociated with the project. over the past several months, the City
staff has had numerous meetings with all parties involved, including the
school District and their attorney, Mr. Bill Block and Jim Boyle, along
with the City Attorney, in an effort to finally reach a position where
the road can be accepted by the City Council.
Enclosed with your agenda are copies of Mr. Hayes' recommendations of
April 22, 1988, concerning the items needed to be corrected before
acceptance. I have also included a copy of my original March 17 letter
and a follow up letter on October 3 which also summarizes the
requirements before acceptance. I will attempt to outline the major
.� that needed to be CQ,rPldtcd ii iJ CLe ucteupteu auiutiun a dilw for
acceptance by the City.
1. Pond Requirements. The present use of the ditches as a temporary
ponding measure is intended to be just that, temporary. The original
agreement with Mr. Boyle was for the construction of a holding pond
within the development which was never constructed; but a request was
made by Mr. Bill Block, Jim Boyle's engineer, to construct a holding
pond within the ditch right-of-way by widening out the ditch near the
area of the culvert and the central portion of the project. The City
staff still feels that this is going to be an inadequate ponding
solution, and it has always been our intent that this would be
acceptable only as a temporary measure and that adequate drainage for
the development would have to cccur off the right-of-way in the
future. As far as the City is concerned, the ponding issue should
not be a problem in that the City has a recorded easement for a pond
on approximately 2.3 acres of land that according to the City
Attorney, the City has the right to construct a pond within if it
becomes necessary. In addition, Mr. Boyle has signed a letter
granting the City the right to construct a pond within the casement
granted after a 90 -day notice is given if the temporary ponding
within tha ditches is determined to be inadequate. All parties agree
that the present ponding area would more than likely not be the best
location for a future pond] and upon the first development request
within Boyle's property, proper drainage will have to be resolved.
Basically, the City has sufficient protection with the recorded
easement.
-2-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
2. Final Grading, Turf Restoration, Seeding, and Gate valve Adjustments
within the Ditches. This is the last portion of the project that has
to be co eted by Mr. Boyle before acceptance. Mr. Boyle has been
in co act w th Menth Brothers out of Maple Lake for completing the
ne ry fi 1 grading, seeding, and related ditch work. Menth
rothe:s has indicated a willingness to complete the work at a cost
_aJ f $5,075; t a formal contract and performance bond have not yet
•`.��/Y n subm' ted. In lieu of an actual contract and performance bond,
�( Cit as obtained a release of the balance of the escrow funds
,cr the City is holding from Mr. Boyle which states that if the g
lltt n and restoration is not completed by June 1, 1989, the Cit e
the remaining balance of the escrow funds to complete th project.
The escrow balance at this time amounts to approximate) $10,900
which should be more than adequate to complete the proj t if
Mr. Boyle does not. Again, the City staff feels comfor ble w'
this arrangement as adequate protection for the City.
3. Manhole Adjustments. The last portion of the street project that
needed to be completed by Bauerly Brothers was the manhole
adjustments. This has recently been completed and acceptable to the
City public Works Department.
4. Lien Waivers.
A. baueriy erotners - A lien waiver tram Bauerly Brothers has been
received for their portion of the project covering the street
paving and construction.
B. L 6 G Rehbein - Rehbein filed a lien against the project in
October of 1987 contending that additional monies were owed on
the project. With this firm supposedly in bankruptcy, a lien
waiver would not be obtainable from Rehbein; but according to
City Attorney, Tom Hayes, no action has been commenced by Rehbein
on this initial lien that was filed within the one year time
period, and it has expired as of October 17, 1988. Therefore,
the City can accept the road without this lien being a problem.
C. Engineering Lien Waiver - Mr. Boyle's engineer, Bill Block, has
supplied a lien waiver for his services on this project.
5. As Built Drawings. Mr. Bill Block has prepared a set of as built
drawings for this project and submitted them to the City Engineer,
John Badalich, for his review.
6. Warranty Bonds.
A. A performance bond has been submitted by Bauerly Brothers for
their portion of the work. This performance bond takes care of
the warrantying of the street construction for a one-year time
period.
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
L 6 G Rehbein - With Rehbein being bankrupt, a warranty bond is
impossible to obtain guaranteeing the sewer line construction and
related work for a one-year period of time. The City staff has
discussed other solutions to the warranty bond for the sewer
construction that could be acceptable to the City to complete
this project without setting a precedent for future projects.
Normally, the performance bond has to guarantee the work for one
year in the total amount of the original contract. The project
cost for the sewer construction and related water services
totalled $140,000. It is obvious that Mr. Boyle is unable or
unwilling to obtain a performance bond in this amount, and the
City staff along with the City Attorney are suggesting that the
City consider accepting some type of letter of credit or
assurance for 10 percent of the project rather than 100 percent.
The staff's rationale for a lesser amount is based on the fact
that the project has been completed for over a year, and we
suggest that we could apply a policy whereby Mr. Boyle's project
or any other project that has been completed for over a year
could submit a performance bond for only 10 percent of the amount
of the original construction rather than 100 percent. By
establishing a policy that would apply to all future projects, a
precedent would not be set. During our numerous meetings with
School Superintendent Shelley Johnson, Jim Metcalf, and our City
Attorney, we proposed to the School District that they consider
guArantaeinv the s,�w,!r ^:u.____'= _ cf .k„ rrcjec r'er
this 10 percent formula. Because this is the final item that
needs to be addressed prior to acceptance by the City, the School
District has agreed to guarantee the sewer construction in the
amount of $14,000, which is 10 percent of the original
construction cost. The School District has been using the sewer
system since April of 19R8 when the Middle School opened, and
they have provided a letter of guarantee for a one year time
period, starting April 1, 1988, expiring April 1, 1989.
With the acceptance of this road being a topic of discussion for over a
year-end -a-half, no one more than myself hopes we can finally put this
subject to rest. Over the last couple months, the staff has been working
hard to get this issue resolved, and I feel we have a project that can
now be accepted and not set a precedent by waiving certain requirements.
Although there is still work that has to be done, the escrow funds
provide sufficient protection for tho City to complete the work if
necessary within the ditches, and the drainage question will eventually
take care of itself upon the first development. With the ponding
easement the City has recorded, the City Attorney feels we have
sufficient protection should that become a problem. with the lien
waivers provided by Bauerly Brothers and the performance bond submitted
by them, along with the guarantee from the School for the sewer portion
of the project, I certainly recommend that the City Council consider
acceptance at this time.
-4-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
J
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to accept the project as presented.
2. Do not accept the project.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As I noted, I believe we have reached the point where the staff is
comfortable with recommending that the project be accepted as proposed.
The only requirement that is not being 100 percent met is the warranty
bond for one year on the sewer line construction portion of the project.
The staff does not feel a precedent would be set if we only accepted a
10 percent guarantee from the School District for the sewer construction
in that a policy can be confirmed by the Council that this would apply to
all other developers in the future if a project has been completed for
over a year before acceptance has been asked for. The staff feels that
this is an acceptable compromise in this situation due to the fact that
the contractor, L 6 G Rehbein, has filed bankruptcy prior to submitting a
warranty bond. It is certainly my opinion that if we still require
1nO percent warranty bond for one year on the zwer construction, this
project will never, ever be accepted by the City. I believe it's best
for all parties concerned, including Mr. Boyle and the School District,
that the City accept the 10 percent guarantee from the School and accept
the entire project.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Mr. Bayes' April 22 recommendations; Copy of March 17 and
October 3 letters to Jim Boyle; Copy of the guarantee from the School on
the sewer line, Copy of letter from Jim Boyle releasing the escrow funds
if ditch work is not completed by June 1, Copy of guarantee from Jim
Boyle warrantying the entire project for one year.
IF
-5-
�Gyl?/ �JJIZ�G�
�Iy SO/0 1..?3S..v.,�'l.f...�� :(/•:��:� .�iol�.✓Lt1r:.�LxJonmB.il.i4 j6//Y�4cY.l..J,J69
Today is Friday
October 21, 1988
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
Monticello, Minnesota 53362
RE: Chelsea Rd
Dear Rick.
Executed and delivered herewith is the maintenance bond based upon the
agreement that the School District has agreed to and will provide a similar
maintenance bond in the amount of $14.000.00 plus dollars concurrently with
the delivery of these documents to the City of Monticello.
We have also executed the guarantee and conditional assignment of escrow
proceeds with the understanding that Mark Tenth Sod shall deliver a firm
Eontrac.:in the amount of $5015.n � -he r.«- _ ay`
0 -_ _ _.. .. y.aua co uormant
/ seed this fall and when work is completed this assignment shall be null and
void.
Sincerely.
Jim T. Hoyle
JPH/bb
% 05
Today is Friday
October 21. 1988
Mark Menth Sod
P.O. Box 273
Maple Lake, MN 55358
Ry: Chelsea Road seeding
Dear Mr. Menth
The City of Monticello requires a contract in the amount of $5075.00 for
the seeding an Chelsea Rd.
Please execute same and deliver to Mr. Rick Wolfsteller, the City Administrator.
Hopefully you can complete work with dormant seed this next couple of weeks
as we discussed by phone.
Sincerely,
Jim T. Boyle
Qf3-. Mr. Rick Uolfsteller
% (D
J
J
O GT-=0-1Js T MU i l
P . J 1
Z �ez
M.iNCP"CE No
r
MFAST A60R853:
1 EAST BopwOw Ar
� 711
POSTacr,ce Box 126
MONTIC 8LL0. MN 85382
{8121243.7895
/��;L✓�� ✓� 1
MINNEAPOLIS AND
ST. P.
/
.13 LINE: 427-7850
�n
si m itF: Tg�1�41�dITTAUk T
M.{
(40A-aa1-01
�
FAX NO.:
FKM:
R£':
OArE
COMMENTS:
NO. PACES:
UntudlK tuts PACtO
e e e e e e e seems of *pages e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e
Hulka LAv piict FAX NO- 6t2-295-3495
Note R you WC%M Oxy ROObjEN du'b's tuts tAx TQXWWISSia+ pteAS,E
uu us kmadtwtEty.
ft
MAi14 ENANCE BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT t:£, Jim T. Boyle and Beverly Boyle
of Scottsdale, Arizona, hereinafter called the Principals, as P:tncipals and Jim T.
Boyle and Beverly Boyle, hereinafter called Sureties as Surat:es. are hold and f:raly
bound unto the Cicy of Monticello, Minnesota, hereinafter called the Obligee. In the
penal sun of ONE HUNDRED SUENTY-SIR THOUSAND EIGHT HUNW ED SE.£NTY and no/100
(4116,810.00) DOLLARS to which paycent well and truly ca be made we do bind ourselves,
out and each of our hairs, executors, administrators, successor* and assijns jointly
and severally, firmly by chase pre*ants.
SCHEREAS, the said Principals entered into a contract wick the L 6 C
REHREIN, INC. dated November 18, 1986 for Chelsea Road Extension.
WHEREAS, said contract provides that the Principals will furnish a
ben! ::.._,:lonad co guarantee for the period of one (1) year after approval of the
final estimate on said job, by the owner, against all defects in workmanship and
materials which may bacone app'sranc during said period.
WHEREAS, the said contract has been completed and will be approval on the
14th day of November. 1988.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION Of THIS 081.11i,ATIO4 IS SUCH that if tate
Principals shall indemnify the Oblige* for all loss that Obliges may sustain by
1 reason of any defective datarials or worlca.anshlp which become apparent during the
period of one (1) year from and after Novambar 14, 1986, than this obligation shall
j
be void, otherwise to raaatn in full force and effect.r--�
Jirt I. BOYLE, Prino od`i?
„BE ERL BOYL P.
p IF
J11 T Ra,+O-��tYLE, Sure
�t{je
SEVER Y SOYLE./%Surecp/
I
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) / as
COUNTY OF Ur'
The foregoing ,ss executed before me this day of IiJGLC�%��jl
1988, by Jim T. Boyle and Beverly Hoyle, as p.Incipals.
Notary Pu�
STATE OF ARIZONA)\✓ J �
e s . RBBTN WUIFE
mar v�s�.._"
COUNTY OFa,-(a�'YmltdABCPAf77f►
JJ y
ThG7m,/ da
Me foregoing was executed before me �chiepC /—�dey of
1988. by Jim T. Boyle and Beverly Boyle, es Suret/i'es. /) 0 , )
AL
.>any NotFW ar Publ_SJc — / l/
yr OUiR► ((//
' `�' w eamm. 6w, ds. m. Im j3
GUARANTY 6 CO3DIT:ONAL ASSI=',E:JT OF ESCROW PROCEEDS
THAT Jia T. Boyle and Beverly Boyle do each hereby guaranty the
City of Monticello. Minnesota that the section 02575 of the Chelsea Road Extension,
according to its plans and specifications shall be fully constructed by Jure 1, 1989,
including, but nor limited to, ditch grading, additional black dirt, turf establishment
and gate valve adjustment, but if the same is not, all sums now held by the City of
Monticello for said protect .hall be haraby in^_tiediately and irrevocably assigned by
the undersigned to said City CO complsca said project as it deems fit, without any
claim by the undersigned, or any notice charaof whatsoever, any and all claims and
notices being hereby expressly waived.
��
Jim/T' Boyle
Beverly Bcyli
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
day of 1988.
Voary Publ /A I
U
Rom MR
WUWACUM
Im
0
l
J
�i/mi GIUUi�LP/
{ � jn/n �'.,�/era.:/ilnl.. ,iurli�-1(lt �rallrL:/p. .:L jni:n 3.i:.iv (O/i:`48J •.f.YS.9
Today is Tuesday
October 18, 1988
Mr. Rick Nolfsteller
City Administrator
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minn. 55362
RE: Chelsea Road Acceptance
Dear Rick,
This letter shall confirm our understanding of the balance of criteria for
acceptance of Chelsea Road to the City.
Ponding requirements ..... As we have discussed, the City shall keep an easement
of the more valuable Freeway frontage property until it is decided if another pond
is necessary. Obviously the more desirable site will be to the south, if a pond is
necessary, and if I don't complete the proper drainage within ninety (90) days the
Citv will have. the rtz;ht ' ±oval:p a;, aasaaant a„u cunscruct a pan¢. The present
easement would then come back to the property owner for the replacement.
Mr. Mark Month has prepared a bid for $5025.00 to complete the seeding require—
ments. You may hold this amount within our escrow until the work is completed.
Mr. Menth was asked to forward this contract directly to you.
I have told Mr. Block that we would pay him the balance that is left in the
escrow account and .he will then provide you a lien waiver for his engineering.
My understanding is that this letter of understandig is all the requirements
outstanding, and that the City will accept Chesson Road at their regular meeting
this next Monday, October 24, 1988.
cc: Mr. Bill Block
Mr. Shelly Johnson
'f.9. 2. 44wlixlel.
Sincerely.
Jim T. Boyle!
�iE� a� �onficello
price ar me P^.ere: (6171 295-"n7::
t:N Aam.uvaw, AMevo: (at -Z1 333-5739
Cc --ober 3, 1988
m:. jim Bcyle
Solo 'cast Shea Boulevard
Suite 0-:02
Scottsdal , AZ 95254
Re: Chelsea Road : =:ovement Project, Accecta-.ce C:ite::a
Dear ,nim:
Over the past month or so, have had a few conversations wi,—h
yourself -=_ca:d_-c the Chelsea Road r:veme^.t project and the items
needed to be cpmole:ed before acceptance by the Ci:y. Although it
appears that we nay be getting close: to accorptlishize this goal,
thought it may be appropriate to again briefiv outline some of the
conditions and issues that will have to be resolved before acceptance
by ,.he Circ. :n many cases, : an referring to :try letter of March 17,
1988, whereby many of tie same issues were outlined.
1. Ponding Requirements. :he present use of the ditches as a
temporary ponding measure is intended to be just that,
temoorart, until further development of your property.
Alt:.ough it has been noted by your enginee:, Bill Block, that
in al'_ likelihood the ponding and drainage system would be
located on the south side of Chelsea Road, the City will not
release any drainage easement- area we now have until a new area
is established or the adequate ponding and drainage
:equi:ement; are constructed. In lieu of a new easement area
or pond const:uc:ion meeting City requi:ements, the City would
request from vourself as pa:t of the acceptance of this
protect, a release from yourself and all interested pa:ties
from damages that may occur to surrounding property if the City
is forced into mining and constructing the appropriate drainage
pond on the present easement.
A !i -al grading, turf restocaticn, seeding, and gate valve
adtuscments within the di -cues. You have indicated that you
are in the process of cotaininq a cent:act with henth Brothers
for completing the necessary final grading, seeding, and
related ditcn worn. Although : believe it would be acceptable
to the City of Monticello if a contract is entered into with a
legitimate cont:ac:or, it should be noted that the ccnr:act
2°0 East 8rcacway • 4scntice(io. ISN 5=262-3245
~J oa
M:..: im Boyle
actoter
Page 2
must cover not only the seeding of the ditches but also include
4 inches of black dirt, fertilizer application, mulching
material, and adjustment of any gate valves vith"n the ditch
r"ght;f-way. ?hese requirements are per your project
specificat"ons and should to specifically addressed within any
contract presented. Zf this work culd not be colleted yet
this fall, suff"c-. nt escrow funds would be retained by the
City until the protect is ample=ed.
Manhole Adjustnencs. Bauerly Brothers has recently completed
adiustinq the aa.ho!es and are ac=eptable to the City of
Mont"cello .
Warranty Bonds and Lien Waivers.
A. rt is my understanding that Bauerly Brothers will provide a
warranty bond for the street paving for a one year period
of time and also provide appropriate lien waivers after
payment is made from the escrow funds in the amount of
Si,3a4.
?. _ to __n:e: aci rs, you havr indicated t. -,at the i.en
.-led by L 6 G Behbein against the project will expire in
mid-Cc_aber and no longer be valid. As part of the
acceptance criteria, I believe a letter from your attorney
should accompany any request for acceptance verifying
this.
C. Engineering Lien Waiver. We would also wish to have
Mr. Bill Block sign a lien waiver for the project to
indicate that he has been paid.
S. Confirmation by All Parties.
A. The City Engineer for Monticello must sign off that all
work has been completed per City standards. Mr. Bill
Block, as you: registered engineer on this project, should
also indicate that all work has been completed per plans
and specifications and provide a set of as builts of the
work completad.
Warranty Bond on Sawer Construction. Assuming that all of the
above coedit"ons can be met, the one last issue that remains is
the normal requirement of a performance warranty bond covering
the sewer line for a one year period of time. Although our
normal requirements are for a one year warranty bond in the
amount of the entire contract price for the sewer line, it is
passible that if this was the only issue left to resolve, the
10]
POP,
Mr. Sim Boyle
October 3, 1989
Page 3
i
City Council may accent less than the full amount of a normal
guarantee. The City staff has discussed the possibility of
recommending to the City Council that in any project where a
sewer and/or water line has been installed for one year or more
without being accepted by the City, a policy could be
established whereby the City in those cases could accept a
guarantee or letter of credit for possibly only 10 percent of
-
the actual construction cost. The basis for this
-
recommendation is that if no obvious construction failure has
-
occurred within one year of installation, the likelihood of a
failure or a construction problem is much smaller and,
therefore, a 10 percent guarantee could be reasonable.
The City has established a policy of televising all sewer lines
before acceptance, and it is recommended that you authorize
your engineer to hire a firs to televise the line as soon as
possible if you wish to have the City accept this project yet
this fall. If you would prefer, and yourself along with
Mr. Block authorize the release of funds for this purpose, I
can have our Public works Department engage a firm to do the
televising which is estimated to cost approximately $500.
From the information being supplied to me, it certainly aggears we
arcsga-:tag quoit clo-er to tho City accepting this road and utility
project: but I just wanted to let you know of all of the items that
have to coma together for this project to be acceptable yet this
fall. As soon as the items are all completed, I would be glad to
{�
have this acceptance as an agenda item for O3uncil consideration.
{
Should you have any questions concerning the above items or the
!
letter of Mkrch 17, please contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
City Administrator
.
RW/kd
cc* Chelsea Road Imp. File
John Simoli, PWD
PI
SMITH, PRINGLE & HAYES
r ., r�C,LL00•..cE ATTORNSIS •T Llw ..�r
207 SOUT" w,L.`.UT STaEET OLD COUP—OUSe BUILO.NG
P.O 60. 666 GREGORY v. SMITH_ ! D. 326 LO.ELL —EMUE
MO—CELIO. MINNESOTA 51392.066E GIRT L. V -GL9. J.D. HL. n EN, ....RSOT.L 5.3W
Tw O 163.10.
r9 TRO uwi i0. i� .i..)C Y,
April 22, 1988
Mayor and Council
City of Monticello
250 E. Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
RE: Chelsea Road
Dear Mayor and Council:
You have asked me to provide you with a written opinion with respect
to acceptance of Jim Boyle's Chelsea Road. As background I would
urge you all to review the letter of March 17, 1988 from Rick uolfsteller
to Jim Boyle and the letter from W. R. Block to Rick uolfsteller dated .
April 7, 1988.
First off, I believe it important that all contracts and agreements
enterea into by the City should be scrupulously adhered to. Parties
to contracts are entitled to have contracts followed to the letter,
absent extraordinary circumstances. In my opinion, financial inconvenience
is not an extraordinary circumstance.
Secondly, it is important to remember that all parties dealing with
the City are, generally speaking, entitled to expect fair treatment
from the City. Any time the City specially treats one person, it
raises the probability that other persons will also seek special advantages.
While circumstances may dictato the need for flexibility, care must
be taken to look into the future to see whether such flexibility alters
or establishes city policies.
Ponding. As I understand the situation current drainage for Chelsea
Road is inadequate. I hesitate advising the City to accept any project
that does not adequately provide for drainage. Why should the City
become involved in completing a developer's project? However, I understand
that both the City's angiaeering firm and the Public Yorks Department
believe that the ponding Question is of minor concern if sufficient
stops are t,ken to protect the financial position of the City with
respect to modification of the existing drainage system. The necessary
steps include the securing of easem6nts sufficiently broad to permit
the City to establish ponding away from the road. This casement should
also permit the City to mine and sell top -soil from the easement area
for its own use and benefit. A release from Mr. Boyle should also
0
page 2
be obtained for damages that may occur to surrounding property as
the result of the ponding system or activities related to the establishment
of the pond. Such easemeata and releases should be obtained and made
of record before acceptance of the road. All mortgage or lien holders
of the affected property must join in the easement release grants.
Easements. All easements deemed necessary or convenient by the City's
Public Works Department or the City's Engineers should be obtained
and placed on record before acceptance of the road. All mortgage
or lien holders of the affected property must join in the easement
grants.
Proq,ect Completion. All facets of the project should be completed
to the City's satisfaction before acceptance of the road. Appropriate
lien waivers should be provided to the City, whether or not payment
can appropriately be and is to be made from funds held in escrow by
the City. Payment from the escrow account should be made only if
expressly authorized by the escrow agreement of December 4, 1986.
The City's engineer, Mr. Boyle's engineer, and the School District
must all agree that the project has been completed to specification
(with the exception of the drainage, if that is the desire of the
City).
..ti:,atioallieu. Ai: ...:gatloa audror liens involving the road must
be satisfactorily brought to a conclusion or released. In lieu thereof,
a hold harmless agreement in favor of the City together with a letter
of credit from a government insured lending institution by Mr. Boyle
in favor of the City should be obtained to defray any costs incurred
by the City in defending its interest in the road. Presently L b
C Rehbein, Inc. has filed a lien on the roadway. Many sub -contractors
on the project have not been paid. While the City has not been directly
involved in the disputes, it is probable that if the road is accepted,
the City would be dragged into any litigation that may erupt. The
City should not be forced to expend any of its money in defending
such lawsuits. I would deem a promise by the developer to bear the
costs of the City's defense as inadequate without the letter of credit.
A letter of credit is the amount of $10,000 should be sufficient.
Warranty Bond. Mr. Boyle must provide the City with one year warranty
bonds on the project. For any part of the project that cannot be
bonded, the City may wish to consider a 1OI cash deposit or letter
of credit in lieu of a bond. The peculiar circumstances of this project
may warrant such a relaxation of development standards by the City.
However, a policy for future use of bond substitutes should be narrowly
drawn.
J
Con ts. Any costs associated with acceptance of the road of whatever
Thar -actor should be borne by Mr. Boyle, nod paid for in advance.
This includes document recording and deed fees and rainspaction coats.
J
0
page 3
Policy Conserations. There are several nonlegal policy issues that
I believe the City should consider in its deliberations on whether
or not to accept the road at this time:
1) What is the value to the School District and other members
of the community in accepting the road at the present time?
2) What interest, if any, does the City have in seeing that
all contractor and sub-concractor disputes are resolved prior
to acceptance of the road?
3) Is acceptance of the road at this time likely to contribute
to the improvement of the area and completion of the project?
4) Does acceptance of the road change any existing policies
of the city and if so, are the policy changes to the advantage
or disadvantage of the City?
5) {that detriments does the City and surrounding area suffer
if the road is not accepted at this time?
&espectfully submitted,
Thomas D. Hayes
TDH/as
I
D
D
r City o� /V/onfice�Co
a'ica of me Peone: (6t 27 29'_-27n
C;ry AC—nisVaror Mev o: (6r21 115-27.9
March 17, 1988
Hr. jim Boyle
5010 East Shea Boulevard
Suite D-202
Scottsdale, AZ 35254
Re: Chelsea Road :.�rovemenc Project, Accectance Criteria
Dear M.:. Boyle:
As you may recall, at the regular Council meeting of ;November 9,
1987, the City Council rejected acceptance of your plans for using
the ditches along Chelsea Road for temporarf ponding. The Council
and City Attorney asked that you address all other aspects of the
completion of this project prior to formal Council action on the
ponding recui:er•.ents. Since many meetings, letters, and
conversations have been held since this time, I felt it would be best
to refresh your memory as to where the City feels the project now
stands and what is necessary for cc=letion. The following are those
issaas as we sev it.
I. Ponding Reaui:ements
As discussed at some of our meetings, the City is
concerned about the use of the ditches for temporary
drainage. we informed you that at best the City, if they
did accept such a condition, would not release the ponding
easement, as it may be necessary to take steps to excavate
this area for ponding. This question was confirmed
earlier this spring when water came within a few inches of
overflowing the road. At one of our last meetings you
indicated that you were going ahead with plans to develop
a ponding area and ditch system on the southern portion of
your property that would handle the immediate needs of the
roadway ditches and address an area to be developed
in the
northwestern corner of your plat. we have yet to hear
f:cm you as to your firm plans for ponding or drainage.
2. Completion of the P:oiect
There are several items yet to be completed on the
project. The following is a list of those items.
C
250 East Eroadway • Mcnticeflo, MN 55362.92aS
Mr. .,_m Boyle
I
,".arch 17,
Pace 2
A. Final Grading of the Ditc.`.es.
When your earthworx contractor, 3usey Ctnstvuction,
pushed black dirt into the ditches, no care was taken
to fine grade those ditches beforehand. The ditches
had been allowed to sit for several =nths since
Rehbein cc-pleted the grading, and many areas
erasion had taken place which causes t=e grades to
charge. Prior w ary
,fu:z:eco addirLCnal wort,
di
-:: es wil_ have to ter ne graded and this grading
verified with the p:opcsed plans.
B. Turf Restoration.
After fire grading of the ditches as per City
standards and your ccoject ;Cecifications, the tccsoil
depth should be cnecxed to ver_f/ tnat zt is s inches
in thickness and free of debris and contains a Iiberal
amount of humus to support turf establishment. The
seed mixture is to be as sold by Northrop fling and
shall, contain 30 percent Fultsruccinell:adistans, and
30 percent Dawson Red Fesc,-e, and 30 percent Park
Kentuc%y and 10 percent Pennfinn Perennial
Ryeg:ass. This mixture shall be applied at a race of
120 lbs per acre. in addition, prior to application
of the seed, fertilizer shall be applied in all areas
within the right-of-way to receive seed at the rate of
200 lbs per etre. This fertilizer shall be 10-10-10.
After the fertilization and seeding,'^fpe I mulch
uci'_izing disc anchoring shall be applied. The area
thea shall be watered and guaranteed to grow for a
period of one year. 'Any washouts occurring during
that ,year will have to be corrected. It will be
necessary f.lr ycu to provide verification at the
proper ditch grading and turf establishment as done
according to specifications.
C. Gate valve Adjustaent.
There are numerous service and hydrant gate valves
located outside the pavement and in the ditches. It
is necessary for these gate valves to be adjusted and
they must be verified that they have not been damaged
during the grading operations.
D. Manhole Adjustment.
Many of the manholes were improperly adjusted by the
paving contractor, 6auerl7 'Brothers. Muerly Brothers j
J
Mr, aim Boyle
March 17, 1988
Page 3
v
was informed prior to the start of the Project the
correct method to utilize for adjusting the manholes.
During the paving operations, they were informed that
the manhole adjustments were incorrect. After the
Project, they were informed that the City would not
accept the manhole adjustments as constructed.
Current estimates are SZ00 per manhole for
adjustments. In addition, during the final grading
operations, many of the manhole covers may have been
pushed aside allowing numerous amounts of gravel to
find its way into the inverts of the manholes. A
recent inspection revealed that these amounts could be
detrimental to the service flew from the new school.
These manholes should be cleaned Prior to orenirg of
the new school. If allowed to remain, these materials
will find their way into the sanitary sewer lines; and
the removal at that tine of these materials will be
much more expensive. it should be noted that at the
time of our inspection, there were appreciable amounts
of cleaning materials in the sanitary sewer lines,
probably from operations at the school. It would be
necessary for anyone entering these manholes to use
proper ventilation and safeetards for wor!tzan
protection.
3. Easements
A. Revocation of the Existing Pond Easement.
As discussed earlier, the revocation of the existing
ponding easement would only cc.—jr if you were to
establish a new drainage easement and construct more
pertu►nent ponding or ditching arrangements.
B. 60 -foot school sanitary sewer Easement.
The City has no interest in this easement at this
time, as upen completion we would consider the
sanitary sewer running south of Chelsea Road to be a
Private service.
C. Additional Easement for School Sower.
During the construction process, the sanitary sewer
for the school was m£slocated for reasons which differ
between the school architect and your engineer,
Mr. Block. The school may wish to have additional
easements at this time for that portion located on the
southern boundary of your property.
Mr. Jim Boyle
March 17, 1988
Page 4
D. Maintenance of a Portion of the School Service.
If tate School D£st:ict wishes to have the City
maintain that portion of sanity r1 sewer between
Chelsea Road and the southern boundary of the Boyle
property, we would do so if an easement was granted
between that point along the southern boundary of the
Boyle property to County Road 118 for a future force
main correction.
4. Payment
A. We request that you settle your dispute with the
L a G Rehbein Company. As we discussed during our
many meetings, the most appropriate way to do so would
be to take the matter to court and put into escrow the
proper funds needed by the court system.
B. Baue:ly Brothers.
We ask that you settle up with Bauerly Brothers M
concerning the overrun, final pay-fnt, and ratlola
adjustments and/or the cleaning of the sanitary saws:
lines, if necessary, an escrow, fund may have to be
established for the completion of Bauerly's work.
C. City Supplied Topo Maps. t
The topo maps have cu rently been paid for.
D. B£11 Block and associates.
We would wish to have Mr. Bill Block sign a lien
waiver for the project to indicate that he has been
paid.
E. Busey Construction.
It is understood that Busey Construction has been paid
and the City has received a lien waiver from him.
S. Sign Of!
A. City Engineer.
The City Engineer moot sign off that all work has been
completed as per City standards.
1
ti
Mr. Jim Boyle
March 17, 1988
Page 5
B. Block and Associates.
Mr. Block must sign off as the registered engineer
that all work has been comp
leted as per plass and
specifications and provide as builts of the work
completed.
C. School.
The Independent School District must sigm off that the
road was completed as per their agreement.
6. Bonds
A. One Year Warranty Bond.
As we have discussed on many occasions in the past,
the City of Monticello requests a one—year warranty
bond for the amount of the entire contract to protect
the City against liability for any repairs on the
protect for a period of one year. We have suggested
possible alternatives to you would be in the form of a
leder of credit or -cm cthcr type of guarantee. At
this time, we have no indication whether the City
Council would accept less than the full amount. But
until we have a written proposal from you as to what
you can supply, we cannot take it back before the City
Council.
8. Lien Waiver Bond.
We discussed the possibility of escrowing funds or
providinq of bond for lien waivers if you cannot get
this project settled with the prime contractors and
obtain such lien waivers. Again, we have not had a
written proposal from you indicating how you would
solve this. The City of Monticello does not wish to
accept the road with any laces ends whatsoever. Your
letter of March 8, 1988, indicating that liens filed
on this protect would be subordinate to the intent of
the City establishing the right-of-way has been
forwarded to our City Attorney for his opinion and
rec0=-*ndation. Even if the Clel is not technically
responsible for the lien, the City may still. be forced
to defend itself and incur legal expenses relating to
the lien. As a result, the City may stili require the
lien issue to be settled before acceptance of protect,
0
Mr. Jia Boyle
March 17, 1988
Page b
or may require sufficient guarantees to cover any
legal expense the city incus. Again, a lette: of
credit for the amount of the lien may be a solution to
this problem.
7. Escrow Funds Remaining
As of March 15, 1988, the escrow, funds being held by the
City total $28,775.9.
I hope this summarizes our position for you. we wish to have a
comprehensive, complete, written plan from you as to how you will
complete the above items so that we mey take it back to the City
Council and get this project approved. If you have any questions, or
if we may be of any further assistance, please contact us.
ely,
Rick wolfs lien
City Administ:ator
W/kd
cc: John Simola, 74
John Badalich, City Eng.
Bill Block, Block i Assoc.
Sheldon Johnson, IDS 1882
Jia Metcalf, Attorney, IDS 1882
Arve Crimsmo, Mayor
File .
C:
M.1call & Zo,jo. '
A77ORNEYS AT LAW
P.O. a.. .6
34 Vftst Slow—,
Monticello.
JAMES G. METCALF
TELEPHONE
BRADLEY V. LARSON
1612! 2953232
METRO
{612} 421.3393
November 7, 1988
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
Monticello City Hall
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Mr. Thomas Hayes, Esq. FIE: Chelsea Rd., Monticello, NUN 55362
SUI71i & HAYES
207 South Walnut
Monticello, M14 55362
Dear Mr. Wolfsteller and Hr. Hayes:
L'Icicccd ple=c f=d .or your information and review, a copy of
the proposed agreenent on behalf of the Monticello Independent School
District.
If You have any questions, please call me,
Sincerely,
ME'I'CAU & LAPMN
�n^'�./
-
Mete
JCU:drm 411, Esq.
Enc losurell
PC: Sheldon Johnson
Mr. Rick Wolfstaller
City Administrator
Monticello City Hall
250 East Broadway
Monticello, IV 55362
October 26, 1988
RE: CHELSEA RD., MONTICELLO
Dear Mr. Volfstaller:
This letter will serve as a guaranty of a sewer line until April 1. 1989,
on behalf of Monticello Independent School District Number 882 in an amount
not to exceed $14,000.00 provided that the City shall first make an appropriate
demand on Mr. Boyle to satisfy any objections or work required under the Maintenance
Bond he gave the City, which Bond would expire November 16. 1988, slid further upon
the condition that if the School District is required to perform, that the City
assign all rights it has against Mr. Boyle so that if the School District is
obligated to pay hereby, that it obtains the right to obcain payment in a like
amount from Mr. Boyle.
This guaranty is made relying on the fact that the sewer line has been
televised and which indicated thac the line was correctly installed and that there
were no apparent problems with it.
dma
Sincerely.
MONT!CELLO 4ENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 0882
By:
,4"I.
•
held
�&I'n�h.10.1'uperinjcendant
.J
j
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
6. Consideration of Replatting Request - Fairway Court/Jay Miller. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Jay Miller is proposing to replat the fifth approved lot, that being
Lot 1, Block 5, Par West Addition, into two residential lots. By the
replatting of this existing platted residential lot, Mr. Miller is
proposing to build a 6 -unit townhouse on the south portion of this
existing platted lot, and on the north portion of this existing platted
lot he is proposing to build a 4 -unit townhouse building. Back in 1985
when Mr. John Sandberg platted this unplatted tract of land into a
residential subdivision that is now known as the Par West Addition,
Mr. Sandberg received approval to develop Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9 of Block 4
and Block 5, Lot 1, Par West Addition, into eight townhouses on each of
these lots. The total amount of townhouse units proposed to be built was
40 townhouse units. Mr. Miller is before you with a request to increase
this by an additional two units, which would bring the total number of
townhouse units within this Par West development to 42 total townhouse
units. As you can see by looking at the enclosed site plan, with the
proposed 6 -unit townhouse building proposed to go on the south side of
this lot, the proposed 4 -unit townhouse building to go on the north side
would have less than the minimum lot frontage as required under R-2
zoning, which is 80 feet of lot frontage at the building setback line.
It could still possibly be done having an irregularly shaped newly
created lot line to subdivide this existing residential lot. With the
building rectangular shape that is shown for the proposed 6 -unit and
4 -unit townhouse buildings, the developer would be cramped for space to
accommodate it with this size of proposed townhouse buildings. The
developer may have to come back with a different site plan showing how
the buildings could be reduced in size and still meet the minimum setback
and square footage requirements.
B. ALTER14ATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the replatting request to replat an R-2 (single and two
family residential) lot into two residential lots.
2. Deny the replotting request to replat an R-2 (single and two family
residential) lot into two residential lots.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As you will note on the enclosed site plan, the developer is running into
some problems trying to get the 4 -unit townhouse building along with the
6 -unit townhouse building on this lot and create some sort of subdivision
of this lot. There is sufficient land area to accommodate 10 townhouse
units. We would like to reaffirm the Planning Commission and City
Council approvals that were given back in 1985 for the development of
this unplatted tract of land, which is now known as the Par West
Addition. Within this approval, approval was also given that the entire
( property be zoned R-2 (single and two family residential) zoning.
-6-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
Also as part of this zoning, the developer, Hr. John Sandberg, was
granted approval to develop up to 40 townhouse units on Lots 6, 7, 8, and
9, Block 4, and Lot 1, Block 5, in this Par West Addition. even if there
is sufficient land area to accommodate up to 10 units on Lot 1, Block 5,
we are going to run into some type of a variance or variances to
accommodate a 6 -unit and a 4 -unit townhouse on this lot when split with
the two proposed rectangular building module units that the developer has
demonstrated on his enclosed site plan.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed replatting request; Copy of the site
plan; Copy of the R-2 (single and two family residential) zoning
requirements.
J
IF
-7-
-----------------
------------- -
--------------- I
r
',:','A replotting request to rjplat an
R-2 (.7ingle and two faqLily r GlMdentia
-7--into ILWO residential
:tZraLrwjy Co4xt/jay mi—mw J,li
am
7
9
F
I . Clothes line pole and vire.
2. Recreational equipment and vehicles.
3. Cant.-ucticn and landscaping matarial cs.-=early
being used an the premises.
4. .O-*f-straat parking of passenger vetliclas
and truc:a not exceeding a gross capacity
of nine thousand (9,000) pounds In residential,
areas.
5. propane tanits, fuel oil tanks, and other
si_iler residential heating fuel storage
tan)cs which do not e.:eead 1,000 gallons
in capacity and shall not be located within
five (5) feet of any proper ---7 line.
6. Wood piles in which wood is stored far
fuel provided that not mora than 10 cords
shall be stored an any property. A cord
shall be 4' x 41 x 81. All wood piles
shall be five (5) feat or :ore from rear
and side yard property lines and shall
be stored behind the appropriate gat back
lies in -*rant yaxds.
7. Solar heatiaq mystams.
- 3-3: YARD R£QUIR:N£:1TS:
(AI PURPOSE: This section identities minim= yard
spaces and•araas to be provided for in each
zoning district.
(a] No lot, yard or other open space shall be reduced
in area or dim&neicn Be as to make such lot,
Yard or open apace 10e8 than the mtaimum requited
by this Ordinancs, and if the asisting yard
or other Open space as existiaq is lass than
the minimum required it shall not be -*"-that
reduced. kn required open spaea provided around
any building or &tr•.ictura shall be included
as a part of any open space ra;uirad for another
stractura.
(CI All setback distances, as listed in the table
below, &hail be measured from the appropriate
Lot Lina, and shall be required minimum distaneas.
Front Yard side yard Rear Yard
A-0 so 30 so
R-1 30 10 30
r .-s 1) ,P ,y
R-3 30 30 30
R-4 30 30 30
P., -A Bee Chapter 10 for specific regulations.
PZ -M $ae Chapter t0 for specific regulation.
s-1 30 20
B -Z 30 10 20
10
(P
,% '
-4
In addition, each condominium unit shall
-
have the minicu= 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. '
(F) In residential districts, where tate adjacent
st_••ucturea exceed the mia,izis, setbacks
established in Subsection (C2 above, the
min+. -c13 setback shall be Chir -.y (30) feet
plus two-thirds (2/3) of the difference;
between thirty (30) feet and the setback
or average setback of adjacent st=sctu:as
within the same block.
3-4: AREA AND BUILDING SIZE REGOI,ATZONS:
(Al PURPOSE: This section identifies mini --am
area and building size requicagents to
be provided in each zoning district as
listed in the table below.
DISTRICT LOT AREA LOT WIDTH BUZ=LYG HEIGHT
A-0 2 acres 200 N/A
12.000 Bo 2U
Q-2 12.90 BO 2�)
R-3 )o;oo0 80 2
R-4 48,000 200 1
PZ -R 12,000 80 2%
PZ -M 12,000 80 2
8-1 8,000 Bo 2
8-2 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 30,000 too 2
1. The building height limitation in an
R-3, PZ -e, !-1, 8-2, B-3, 0-4, I-1,
and I-2 zoning districts sha11 be
two (2) stories.
2. In zoning districts R-3, PZ -N, B-1,
0-2, 3-3, 5-4, Z-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-eatinguLshtng systems be
installed throughout the building.
J (Requius a ccndi,;, ona,G u4t ptRnit
beaud upon p-tacad tei eat jouA 1n
and aep"ted by Cnapttt 22 06 t:Ui4
aadi.naxct! .
(8l
LOT AREA PER U:t:::
j
y
Single Family 12.000 square feet
Two -Family, 6,000 seuars feet
r--bwnhouse 5.000 scuare :esti
Mobile Home 4,000 square test
Multiple Family 10,000 square feet
for first unit plus
2,000 sq. ft. for-.
each additional one
barroom unit, plus
3,000 sq. ft. for
each additional two
bed -room unit.
Elderly Housing 1,000 square feet
Me L. -t area pea unit nequiumen.t bon
ZOWnhoaeea, condomuiimum4 and pGanned
unit devet:opmenta 4haLL be ca4cuCated
on zhe baa.44 o6 the to C Z aaea in rhe
pnoject and a4 eontnottzd by an im(,4v..du
and joiA t owneneh�pl.
(Cl
UT:' -:TY TRANS"a_:ON AREAS: Ali areas in
which sawar is not curreptly available
shall be designated as Utility z.aition
Areas. The mihinua lot area of any platted
lot in such areas shall be two and one-half (2y)
acres. Any lot platted according to the
provisions of this subdivision, may be
replotted provided that public sanitary
sower will be made available and all conditions
and provisions of this ora,.i%ance are mat.
(01
USEABLE OPW SPACI: Each multiple family
dwelling site shall contain at least five
hundred (500) aquas feet of useable Open
space as defined in Chapter 2 of this
Ordinance for tach dwelling unit contained
thereon.
(E)
EXCZiT:ONS: The building height limits
established herein for districts shall
not apply to the following:
1. 8e1f_ies
2. Chimneys or flues
3. Church apiras
4. Cooling tOweri
S. Cupolas and doses which do not contain useable space.
8. Elevator panthousas
T. Flag ;*Its
B. Monudanta
q. Parapet walls ext4ndinq not sore than
three (3) feet above the lisitinq
hater of towers building
to.weer mowers%
(IDO
4
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
7. Consideration of Establishing New Full -Time Clerical Position
Entitled Data Entry Clerk/Secretary. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Staff is recommending that Council formally establish a new clerical
position entitled "Data Entry Clerk/Secretary". As you recall,
establishment of this position has been discussed recently and
Council did include the new position in the 1989 budget. Based on
previous positive indications from Council regarding this position,
staff has taken the liberty to advertise for applicants for this
position in anticipation of approval of the proposed position.
As outlined during a previous Council meeting, the general clerical,
secretarial, and Deputy Registrar workload has increased along with
the growth of the community. At the same time, additional clerical
staff has not been added. One of the major objective measures of
this growth is the increase in Deputy Registrar transactions. Deputy
Registrar transactions have increased 35% in the last five years. It
is interesting to point out that the City population has increased by
almost the same amount in the last five years.
A summarized version of the job description can be found on the
attached advertisement for applicants. Staff will be looking for an
individual tnat has a well rounded set of clerical skills that
include a working knowledge of word processing, payroll processing,
and financial data entry. As you know, Vickie Bidwell has been with
the City six months as a temporary employee and has had the
opportunity to prove herself for the position being created. Her
performance and experience in operating the payroll system, word
processing, and financial accounting system gives her a significant
advantage over the competition. However, this does not mean that she
has a strangle -hold on the position. Staff will be reviewing the
applications fairly and closely giving due consideration to all
applicants and will strive to make a hiring recommendation based on
the long-term best interest of the City.
This request for establishment of this new position is timed well in
terms of preparing us for Lynnea's expected resignation in the next
few mmths. Lynnea has indicated that after her retirement she would
like to work a few days per month processing utility bills only. In
the short run, establishment of this new position, coupled with the
potential of utilizing Lynnea's services on a part-time basis for
utility billing processing, will have the net effect of adding a
Part-time position. I would like to emphasize that hiring Lynnea on
a part-time basis instead of replacing her with a full-time employee
is a potential future option only and may not be workable, therefore,
when Council considers establishing this new position, it should be
assumed that the net effect will result in an additional clerical
position.
-a-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
The starting salary for this position is dictated by the comparable
worth program adopted by the City in 1986. After adjusting for cost
of living increases in 1987 and 1988, the minimum salary for this
position is $8.95 per hour. It is our plan to establish a starting
salary slightly less than this amount and then increase the salary to
the base level after a 6 -month probationary period.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to establish the position of Data Entry Clerk/Secretary.
2. Motion to deny establishment of the position of Data Entry
Clerk/Secretary.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION -
Staff recommends alternative 1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of advertisement for position.
J
-9-
CITY OF MONTICELLO
DATA PROCESSING/SECRETARY POSITION AVAILABLE
The City of Monticello is now accepting applications for the position of
Data Entry Clerk/Secretary. Position is primarily responsible for
computerized payroll processing and supports data entry associated with,
the City accounting system. Position duties also include word processing,
public receptionist and general clerical duties associated with processing
vehicle license applications. Minimum qualifications include: High School
degree and computer data entry, and word processing training or
experience. Data entry experience associated with payroll and fund
accounting processing preferred. Starting pay for this position is
dependent on qualifications and will range from $8.50 to $8.95 per hour,
full benefits included. Application forms are available at Monticello
City Hall at 250 East Broadway, Monticello, or by calling 295-2711.
Applications will be accepted by the City of Monticello until 4:30 p.m.,
November 22, 1988 (resume optional).
1 `3
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
Review of Third Quarter Liquor Store Financial Report. (R.w.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Enclosed with the agenda you will find a copy of the third quarter
financial statement ending September 30, 1988. This report compares the
first nine months of 1988 compared to 1987 and the three months from July
through September. Liquor Store Manager, Joe Hartman, will be in
attendance at the Council meeting to review and answer any questions you
may have concerning this report.
To briefly summarize the financial report, sales for the first three
quarters of 1988 were up $46,000 or 5-1/2 percent over the same period
last year. The gross profit increased $33,000 or 20 percent over last
year's comparable time period, resulting in a gross profit percentage of
almost 23 percent. As far as off -sale operations are concerned, a
23 percent gross profit percentage is a reasonable and appropriate
percentage for our operation.
Net income for the first nine months totaled $84,000 from operations,
which is 9.83 percent of sales. Again, this percentage nearing
10 percent is a very adequate return for an off -sale operation realizing
that the City of Monticello has to be competitive with surrounding
communities and the metropolitan area to attract. n,atnmo.c, 4sually, t!^c
liquor store operations can expect to realize an operational net income
of an additional $30,000 to S40,000 during the last quarter of the year,
which would put us in the $115,000 to $125,000 per year profit range. if
these expectations occur, it would probably give us the best year ever
for this operation.
When comparing the year-to-date figures on this report for the first nine
months, it should be noted that in 1987 figures under expenses included
items for the parking lot improvement, the new sign, and landscaping
improvements that are not normally part of general operation expense.
This is why you will note a large difference in operational income
compared to 1987. The 1988 nine month figures are a truer representation
of actual operation income.
After review and discussion with Joe and myself concerning this financial
report, the only action that is necessary by the Council is to accept the
report as presented.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
copy of financial report.
fid
MOII:ICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
'
-
DALAHCI SIIEET
HUII.CIPAL LIO UOR STORE
.......................................................................
SEPTEABCG 30, 1980 AIIO 19J7
...........................................................
Asw.ETS
C119RCIlT ASSETS
CHAIIGC El1
1,000.00
f
1,000.00
CASH IH BAN.[ - CHECIt IHG
105,373.03
1,055.76
UIV L'6THENTS
.,:•,523.23
5••,096.13
HSI` CHECIC - RECEIVABLE
297.52
020.51
111VE11l6R1E/
115.051.59
103,211.'.'1
PRE PAIU I,ISURAIICE
7,269..0
--------------
6,629.13
.
TOTAL CUkRCI1T ASSETS
0
_._-_-
J
7.3,51•.55
-__--__.
1 657,613.06
4I,OPECTI
AM, COUIPHE11T
LAIII, 6
6,039.95
•
6,039.95
a
LU ILD111GS MD Ir1PRUVEMEHT9
103,069.47
151,671.01
�,I
PA NIt 1176 LO1
79,751.08
0,515.50
f
1'UkHITUkG AH[� FIRTUkL'S
50,805.]1
58, OB0. 31
AC M* UEY k. - BUILU 1110/
153,619.271
(••,507.751
AI:CUn LEPF-PUNK I TUI:E I FEATULE
/53,•72.74)1.8,•37.601
1
ACCUII. UL 1, L. - PA AI.IIIG LOT
111,630.511
17,013.001
"--""------
..............
TOTAL I'I,UPCCTI MID COMMIT
1
170,505.33
1 125,540.217
3O
TOTAL ASSETS
• 924 /0
•
=:
.....83,163.13
91L
MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIOUON
BALANCC SHECT
MUNICIPAL LIOUOR STONE
B CPTENB68 30, 1988 AfID 1907
._........................................................................................................................... .......a�
LIABILITIES AND EOUITY
CU1
2
6NS LIABILITIES
ACL'OIUtTB PAYABLE
SALES TAR PAYABLE
PA INOLL U/H - PICA
PAYROLL U/H - PCRA
ACCULICD SI Lit LEAVE L VACATIONS
441A, leg
APICA PAYAOI. P.
PAYROLL U/I1 - PEDBYAL
PAIBOLL 11/H - MEDICARE
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES
LO110-TLRH LIABILITIES
TOTAL LONG-TCRN LIABILITIES
TOTAL LIABILITIES
CUUITY
R CTA let CD EARN 11103
MEVCNUEs OVER BLPfiND(TURES
TOTAL CUUITY
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND COUITY
6 45,313.33
/ 41,533.00
7,847.33
7,339.35
49.03
(309.00)
17.75
7.46
1,650.96
603.53
000.91460.34
.GO
309.00
].I5
.00
--------------
--------------
• t5.693.36
• 50,154.77
--------------• .00
• -----55,697.76
• ?57 OG
110,741.54
--------------• 060.336.63
--------------
• ........•.....
--------------• .----- 00
• 50,154.77
• •07,354.00
49,657.66
-----------"-
• 733,007.66
--------------
• ..•.........47
MOnTICELLO MU141CIPAL LICIUDH
REVENUE A" 1) EXPEIISES
IIUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE
s..a...............s.....a...........a
FOIL THE SIX AONTHS AIID NIUE MOUTHS ENDED
......................s...........a.................-.............................-.I.........
CEPTEdDER
3u, l`Jb8 AND 1987
,.
1
CURBCtiT-PCRIOD
CUR -PD
(EAR-IO-DATC
'I -T-0
SAME-PD-LST-tR
PD -LIR
Y -T -D -ESS -YR
ITii-LT
621.90
AMOUNT
RAT 10
AAOUNY
PATIO
AMOUIIT
RATIO
AAOUNT
PATIO
SALCS
119.27
.01
.00
.00
.00
.00
2,215.02
.60
LIOUOI:
6 00,710.60
34.67 6
317,147.39
25.39
1 74.074.61
24.01 1
:03,069.05
35.34
BEER
197.114.63
60.24
5509,268.47
39.55
186,809.57
59.91
475.733.66
58.79
U 1110
36,739.14
11.23
97,771.89
11.43
38,341.70
12.30
100.602.06
12.43
OTHER MDSC
12,260.09
3.75
29,017.10
3.39
11.13«.50
3.66
27,343.93
3.38
MISC. tION TAXADLO SALES
1,114.91
.34
3,792.40
.44
3.070.20
.90
7,713,47
.95
DEPOSITS AIID REFUNDS
(655.91)
(.201
41,664.93)
(.19)
(2,b09.111
(.B0)
(6.264.97)
(.771
BOTTLE t.LVOIIT - MISC
43.40)
4.00)
74.41
.01
18.69
.01
83.03
.01
I.I6COUtITS
(83.39)
4.03)
(247.32)
1.031
(204.02)
4.07)
(1,133.231
4.141
TOTAL SALES
-------------
4 327,197.39
------
100.00 6
-------------
855,159.31
------
99.99
-------------
6 311,824.31
------
100.00 6
-------------
809,161.03
------
99.99
COST OF GOODS SOLD
4 4249,253.31)
(76.10)6
i65Q,49f.763
(77.00)
t t246,606.03)
(70.11)6
4646,009.96)
479.05)
GROSS PLOF)T
•............
t 77.944.08
23.02 i
......•_•_..
196, 6i 4.55
----..
22.99
..... .....,"
6 65,138.29
--"'•
:0.80 4
.............
163,071.06
......
30.14
OCHCRAL AIID AOId. EXPENSES
PCRSONAL SERVICED
SALARIES. REGULAR 11
fERA
MCDICARC WITHHOLDINGS
111SURAHCL, AEDICAL At40 LIFE
SOCIAL SECURITY'
111)EMPLO)HENT BENEFIT
TOTAL PCRCUIIAL SERVICES 6
SUFPLICL
A
H
OFPILC SUPME0 1 0.15 .00 4 16.03 .01 6 60.05 .02 4 235.10 .02
OENELAL OPCRAT1011 SUPPLICS 1.666.39 .51 4.670.02 .53 1,557.40 .50 3,917.30 .49
MAIHTEI)ANCS OF OLDS. SUPPLICS 10.00 .00 174.23 .02 75.00 .02 75.00 .0I
Minn EOU4PMlit 12.93 .00 11.03 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
TOTAL SUPPLIES 6 1,617.37 451 1 4.153.90 .51 9 1,701.43 .54 6 4.297.40 .53
1
16.960.94
5.19 6
53,227.43
6.11 f
17.123.29
9.41 4
50.673.94
6.26
621.90
.19
1,920.74
.23
600.40
.20
1.790.61
.22
33.84
.01
119.27
.01
.00
.00
.00
.00
2,215.02
.60
4,545.24
.53
992.14
.32
3,923.70
.36
1,099.09
.34
3,400.09
.40
1,021.59
.33
3,012.44
.37
6.03
•__••___»
.00
14.54
.v0
----
.00
.00
.00
.00
10,914.94
...... ..............
6.41 4
62,223.31
.-.....
7.10 1
39.7l6.i3
......3_ ._._._.._....
6a 1
58,400.77
....__
?.31 1
OFPILC SUPME0 1 0.15 .00 4 16.03 .01 6 60.05 .02 4 235.10 .02
OENELAL OPCRAT1011 SUPPLICS 1.666.39 .51 4.670.02 .53 1,557.40 .50 3,917.30 .49
MAIHTEI)ANCS OF OLDS. SUPPLICS 10.00 .00 174.23 .02 75.00 .02 75.00 .0I
Minn EOU4PMlit 12.93 .00 11.03 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
TOTAL SUPPLIES 6 1,617.37 451 1 4.153.90 .51 9 1,701.43 .54 6 4.297.40 .53
I 1
MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
RCVENUE AND ELPENSCS
MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STDI.E
.,......................................................................................c...........................................
COR TIIC SIR M(IITUS ANL NINE MOUTHS ENDED
SCPTEIIDCR
30,
1507 AND 1937
CURRENT -PERIOD
CUR -Pb
YEAR-TO-DATE
Y -T -b
SAME -PD -LST -IR
PD-LY'R
Y -T -D -LST -'TR
YTD -LT
AMOU14T
RATIO
AROU14T
RAIIO
MOUNT
RATIO
AMOUNT
RATIO
OTHER SCEVICC6 A14D CHARGES
PROFESSIONAL OCRVICC$ IAUDTT) 4
2.454.00
.75 •
3,166.00
.37
•
1,555.00
.50 f
1,325.00
.29
CGOAUNICA71011
100.64
.06
590.01
.07
391.34
.13
011.99
.lo
TRAVEL-COIIEERCHCE-SCHOOLS
.00
.00
231.80
.03
.00
.00
104.20
.0]
,ADVERTISING
306.20
.13
1,113.63
.25
381.60
.12
1,436.00
.10
INSURANCE. GENERAL
5,541.77
1.69
13,439.06
1.57
3.277.98
1.05
10.011.34
1.21
UTILITIES, ELECTRICAL
2,891.2]
.00
6.601.67
.75
2.451.33
.79
5.930.29
.73
UTILITIES. HEATING
.00
.00
750.96
.09
14.16
.00
513.26
.06
UTILITICS, 6 L U
63.41
.02
193.42
.02
09.53
.03
356.64
.04
MAINTCNANCE OP COUIPMENT
379.95
.12
1,116.00
.17
321.35
.10
3.315.15
.41
EOUIPME.IT
.00
.00
585.00
.07
236.73
.08
434.57
.06
bUCc, n2MDERSHIP, SUDSCRIPTION
.00
.00
.00
.00
200.00
.06
210.00
.03
TAXES AND LICENSE$
.00
.00
348.00
.04
.00
.00
94.40
.01
CAPITAL OUTLAI CUILDINO IMPR.
.00
.00
.00
.00
3,111.00
1.00
3.111.00
.30
GAR9AGC
411.00
.13
1,219.00
.14
100.50
.13
1.101.50
.15
UEPR. - ACOUILCD ASOCTS
4.106.35
1.28
12,559.05
1.47
39,615.35
12.70
44,319.31
5.18
6CCURITY
1.964.50
.57
1.864.50
.22
.00
.00
.00
.00
OTHER
60.00
.02
60.00
.01
......
----------•--
.00
.00
------
.00
.............
.00
.-----
TOTAL OTHER SERVICES L CHARGC59
.............
)0,551.04
------
5.67 1
-------------
43,119.93
5.30
•
+2,045.07
16.69 •
74,205.04
9.IU
UCDT OERVICC
TUTAL DEPT SERVICES 1
.00
.00 •
.00
.00
......
•
-------------
.00
.00 •
------
.............
.......
TOTAL GEHERAL L APIA. EXPE14SESS
.............
41,193.31
......
11.59 •
.............
111,397.14
13.16
•
73,493.71
23.57 •
136,193.2(
-IG.9]
TOTAL OPERATING INCOMC 4
36,750.77
11.13 •
81,267.41
9.57
•
(0,355.N)
(1. 66
26,007.77
3.2]
OUICR INCOME IC%PCIISCS)
INTEREST IUCOIIC •
12,727.33
3.01 t
31.620.00
3.70
6
11,179.20
3.59 1
23.227.29
2.G%
0T11ER INCOnc
199.28
.06
291.06
.03
279.03
.0e
414.93
.03
CALM 10110f911ORT
15.791.591
11.77)
15,937.791
1.481
(62.31)
(.02)
(76.92)
(.01)
10TAL OTHER IHCOMO ICRPCNSE$1 4
7.131.0]
1.18 •
24,074.15
-------------
7.03
......
•
-------------
11.395.11
3.64 •
......
13,565.82
.............
2.91
..---•
IIET 114CUnE 1
•------------
43,884.79
..•....... ..
---"'
13.41 •
.... .
110.341.56
•.. . .......
11.09
•... .
•
.....
3,040.46
......
.99 4
.Y- ..
49.653.66
.............
.-..
.`6.12
....
MUNICIPAL
LIOUOP.
iv90 1
NNTICELL0
OSS PNOr
IT DT PRO DUCI SOLD
For the Period
07/01/00
l0 09/30/00
............. ............................................................
Curtont -
Period
..........................................................
year- to - Det•
Sara-Porlod-Laal-tr
Tau -to^Data-L a•t-T'r
Awount
I
Arount
Y
Arour,t
7
A.. unt
I
L1000A SALiY
6
10.710.60
100.10 •
117,117.70
100.11 •
7•,071,62
100.]7 •
205,069.05
100.53
0 SCOU.IIS
1
03.391
( .101 l
217.72)
1 .111 1
201.02)
1 .271 1
1.121.731
f .551
COST OF SALES - LI0000
60,163.66
74.62
161.260.0]
7z 7!
7].73
.-....-------
60.187.8/
00.60
------ -------------
161,568.94
79.22
------
GROSS PROFIT
-----------
4
-
�0,lG7.53
------ -------------
25.30 1
52.639.95
14.]7 •
11. 48 J.7G
19.4D •
...... .............
17,377.88
]0.7U
......
DEUR SALES
.............
.97,111.67
...... .............
100.33
509,180.17
...... .............
100.73
106,809.57
)01.36
475,733.86
101.27
'CPItS Ar.D ECFUIIDS
l
655.911
t .73) 1
1,461.93)
( .731 1
],509.11)
! 1.741 t
6,741.971
l 1.33)
COST OF BALLS - DECD
154,022..8
79.07
107,739.46
80.33
-------------------
150.179.19
01.49
-------------------
384.746.70
al. U�
----
GROSS PROFIY
-------------
4
39.633.54
------ -------------
20.17 t
99,063.00
19.67 •
...... .............
31.121.27
10.51 •
...... .............
05,202.11
18.15
......
OIIIC SALES
.............
36,739.14
...... .............
100.00
97,771.69
100.00
30,341.70
100.05
100,602.00
100.00
COST OF CALL'S - EINE
23.906 34
65.29
43,099.37
61.51
21.233.11
63.!6
69.03.67
60.61
01,053 PROFIT
f
12,752.50
31.71 6
34,677.56
73.46 4
.............
11,006.37
3G. 54 1
...... .............
31,579.21
31.79
......
OTHER SALES
.............
12,260.59
...... .............
100.03
29,017.10
......
19.74
11.422.58
99.54
27,342.93
99.70
ROTTLC OCr UitT - nISC
1
7.101
l .031
71.41
.2G
.B.G!
.I6
07.03
.:10
CUST OF GALL'S - OTIIC•'
x.506.37
45.53
14.394.65
49.45
7.746.00
64.21
------ --------
11.797.51
�.. __
12.10
_.....
(.P,Oii P60r IT
-------------
6
.............
6,477.04
-------------------
54.47 1
...... .............
14,696.66
------ -------------
50.52 6
...... .............
1,095.27
35.79 1
...... .............
7,6]!.15
17.57
......
nlSC. RUN TAlADLL SALES
1.111.91
100.00
7,7!2.10
100.00
3,070.20
100.00
7.715.19
100.00
CUs - n15C. Nlllr TAT A DLL
1,31'!.27
110.15
_ •__•---------
1.957.61
1]0.5!
------ ------•------
7,390.15
110.49
....--' .......
7,156.05
96.44
_...._
URU:.6 PI'UF 1T
-------
61
202.32)
102.32)
l 10.151.1
10.13104
...... .............
1.160.72)
( 30.51111
...... .............
720.75)
1 10.691•
...... .............
259.;2
25!.17
3.36
......
TU tt.l. aA.L.
.............
327,101.26
755.22
535,372.11
537.53
711,001.64
111:11
010,200.22
500.!0
SLi..L .U_T U1 GALLS
34Y,23L 31
]36.76
635.4!4.76
743.34
:46,606.02
034. C5
646,059.96
373.95
TOTAL 66dLi I'RUrIT
•
7.030.13
918.16 •
•
•
164,110.26
1211.'
......0
.......
...... .............
..•... .............
...... .............
....03
v
GRADER BIDS - NOVEMBER 14, 1988
LAKE STATE EQUIPMENT
JOHN DEERE 7708-H
Year:
1987
Hours:
800 Max.
Gross
$88,500.00
Trade
$ 2,500.00
Net
$86,000.00
Scarifier Deduct
$ 2,200.00
ZIECLER
CAT 140G Year:
1983
Hours:
2,459
Gross
$91,500.00
Trade
$ 9,000.00
Net
$82,500.00
Scarifier Deduct
$ 11500.00
CAT 140G Year:
1983
Hours:
3,315
Gross
$88,500.00
Trade
$ 91000.00
Net
$79,500.00
Scarifier Deduct $ 11500.00
c
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
Consideration of Bids on Used Motor Grader. W.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As approved by the City Council at the October 24 meeting, City staff
prepared specifications for a used late model, 6 wheel articulated,
150 BP motor grader. After looking at the condition of some older units,
the staff decided to stay with a 1983 or newer model machine. We felt
this was necessary to stay within the realm of a clean, one owner
machine. The specifications are enclosed for your review.
You will note that we have pre -qualified the John Deere Models 770-A,
772-A, and the Caterpillar Model 1406. These model motor graders were
determined to be pre -qualified by demonstration to the City of
Monticello. Any of the other motor graders such as Gallion, Champion,
etc., would have to demonstrate and pre -qualify a particular model prior
to the bid opening.
we expect to stay within the budget of trade-in price of $80,000 with the
specifications as written. The bids are due in Monday, November 14, at
9:00 a.m. If the machine selected is one we have already inspected or is
near enough for inspection prior to the Council meeting Monday evening,
we will have a firm recommendation at the meeting. If, additional time is
needed, we will either make the recommendation contingent upon inspection
/ of the machine or delay the actual Council action to the 28th of
November.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to award the bid for the used motor
grader to the vendor supplying the machine in the best condition
which provides the best dollar value for the City of Monticello and
is within the 1989 budget.
2. The second alternative would be to make the above award conditional
upon further inspection of the machine perceived to meet tho needs of
the City of Monticello.
3. The third alternative would he to delay any action on the purchase of
a used motor grader until the November 28 Council meeting.
4. The fourth alternative would be to not replace the Austin western
motor grader at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATI0N:
Staff will withhold its recommendation until after the bid opening and
ample time to review the bids.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the specifications for used motor grader.
enm
SPECIFICN IONS FOR
ONE (1) USED, LATE MODEL„ 6 WHEEL ARTICULATED 150 RP MOTOR GRADER
FOR
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening Date: Monday, November 14, 1988
Place: City Ball
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Bidder's Name:
Address:
SPECIFICATIONS - MOTOR GRADER
ONE (1) USED LATE MODEL, 6 WHEEL, ARTICULAT'E'D 150 HP MOTOR GRADER
INVITATION FOR BIDS: Sealed bids will be received at the City Hall of
Monticello, 250 Fast Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota, until 9:00 a.m, on
Monday, November 14, 1988, for the furnishing and delivery of one USED LATE
MODEL ARTICULATED MOTOR GRADER as per attached description and specifications.
INTENT OF CONTRACT: Furnish and deliver to the City of Monticello one (1) USED
LATE MODEL ARTICULATED MOTOR GRADER meeting or exceeding the specifications in
this proposal. Bid price to include the cost of the machine (LESS trade-in of
one used unit), plus guaranteed 120 day FULL power train warranty.
BID BOND: All proposals must be accompanied by a certified check or bidder's
bon payable to the City of Monticello for at least 5d of the amount of the
proposal. Surety to be forfeited to the City of Monticello if bidder is
awarded a contract and fails to fulfill it. No bid may be withdrawn for a
period of 30 days after opening.
BASIS OF AWARD: Award of the contract by the City of Monticello may be based
upon the factors of machine condition, hours of use, appearance, price, total
ownership cost, resale value, delivery, parts service (availability, history,
and location), analysis and comparison of specification details, and past
experience of the City of Monticello shall be considered in arriving at the
decision of what constitutes the best bid.
The City of Monticello reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to
award to other than the lowest bidder if in its judgment the best interests of
the City of Monticello are thereby served. Only firm prices F.O.B. Monticello,
Minnesota, will be considered and bid must be accompanied by a certified check
or bidder's bond in the amount of 53 of the amount of Line 3 on the proposal
form.
DELIVERY DATE: he new machine shall be delivered complete to Monticello no
later than 4:00 p.m., December 16, 1988. If the successful bidder fails to
make delivery by December 16, 1988, the contractor agrees to credit the City
$1,450.00 per week or part thereof until delivery is made so that the City may
rent a motor grader comparable to the machine specified, or provide a
comparable motor grader as approved by the City.
MO'T'OR GRADER
This unit shall be a 1983 or newer model motor grader meeting the terms of the
following specifications, complete in all details with no more than 3,800 hrs.,
furnish all standard equipment whether or not specifically called for here,
except optional over standard or conflicting equipment is specified.
Pre-pualificatiens: John Deere Motor Grader Models JD770-A and JD772-A and
Caterpillar Model 1400 have been determined to be
pre -qualified through demonstration to the City. Any
other machines considered equal by the vendor will be
required to be pre -qualified by demonstration prior to
bid opening or the bid will be rejected.
Pre -qualification of a particular model does not exempt
it from being properly equipped as specified or meeting
the standards for model year and maximum tours of use.
6 Wheel Motor Grader Specifications
Page 2
MINIMUM SPECiFIG1^_IONS
Frame:
Shall be an articulated frame design, hydraulically
actuated 20 degrees left or right. Shall have
articulation indicator. Rear drawbar.
Engine:
Shall be manufacturer's recommended standard, current
production, 4 cycle, 6 cylinder, not less than 531 cu.
inch displacement diesel engine capable of producing 150
net flywheel H.P. @ 2200 RPM. Engine shall be water
cooled with year-round coolant, protected to
-35 degrees F. Engine shall be equipped with 24 volt
direct electric starting system, fuel priming pump,
voltage regulator, dry type double element, air clearer
with service indicator and automatic dust ejector, (50
amp) alternator, cold weather starting aid, full flow
engine oil filter, muffler, direct electric start system
in neutral position only. Full engine side panels,
removable, and capable of being locked. A block heater
shall be provided.
Transmission:
Shall be full power with planetary design for fast on
the go shifting; not less than 6 speeds forward and 6
reverse speeds capable of shifting from lowest to
highest gear without loss of RPM. Shall have
transmission lock to prevent accidental gear
engagement. Minimum 25 MPH in forward gear. Shall have
capability of inching for close quarter work with foot
pedal located in cab.
Differential and
Four Wheel Drive with the tandems having manual
Final Drive:
controlled lock --unlock differential driving all four
wheels through an oil immersed chain drive case.
Capable of using chains an all four wheels.
6 Wheel Drive:
6 Wheel Drive is not mandatory but will be accepted and
considered during award.
Steering:
Articulating frame, fully hydraulic double ram power
steering with pressure source separate from other
control functions in hydraulic system. Capable of
50 degree turn left and right without articulation.
Shall have power controlled leaning front
wheels—minimum 18" right and left and adjustable
steering console is preferred.
Weight:
The operating weight without attachments shall not be
less than 29,000 pounds.
Moldboard 6 Circle:
Shall be 14 feet one piece boxed Section, 24 inches high
and 7/8 -inch in thickness, with hydraulic side shift and
moldboard tilt. Circle must be capable of rotating
360 degrees and be supported with adjustable wear plates
and replaceable wear stripe.
6 Wheel Motor Grader Specifications
Page 3
Brakes:
Shall be air or hydraulically actuated, oil disc '
effective on all tandem wheels and each wheel having a
separate air system equipped with an air dryer to keep
system free of moisture. System shall contain audible
and visual warning in case of low air pressure. System
shall include a secondary braking system in case of
failure in the system.
Parking Brake:
Must be capable of neutralizing transmission and hold
machine on a 15 percent grade.
Controls and
Hydraulic system shall have hydraulic lock valves
Hydraulic Pump
in every circuit to prevent cylinder drift.
System:
Hydraulic system shall be protected by full flow filter
system with low pressure warning device. Console shall
tilt back and forth for operator's comfort.
Tires and Rims:
6 - 1400 x 24 tires mounted on 10" rims, tubeless
tires. Minimum 80% traction type rear tires, 80% front
tires. Rib type front tires are preferred.
Cab:
Shall be enclosed steel cab mounted on front half
stand-up height with built in RODS: completely
insulated for sound suppression and all season weather
conditions. Must meet noise level standards of
85 decibel average for 8 hours period. Cab must offer
operator full view of work area and moldboard and all
controls must be accessible from sitting position with
seat belt buckled. Seat shall be deluxe suspension type
with sponge rubber padding and backrest with seat belt.
The cab shall have a hinged door on each side and
facilities for locking open or closed. A slow moving
vehicle sign shall be installed on rear. Windshield
wipers and washers on all front and a rear. Shall have
a 40,000 B.T.U./hr heater with 2 -speed fan and defroster
fan front and rear. Windshield shall be adjustable—all
glass aTiall be tinted and mounted in rubber. Cab shall
have dome light and instrument panel lights. Cab shall
have one inside mirror and two large outside mirrors.
Insulated floor mat. A tool box shall be provided on
the machine.
Electrical:
Two (2) heavy duty diesel type batteries (172 amp)
conveniently mounted with sturdy hold-downs in metal
enclosure. Batteries shall be no more than 4 years
old. Electric horn and back-up alarm. Two cab -mounted
headlights, two front-moLmted headlights, rear -mounted
floodlight, two stop and tail -lights, directional lights
with P.C.C.— Plsshers and two moldboard lights and one
wing light. Furnish one (1) Whalen Superstrobe No.
SS -361 (Blue) on top of cab.
6 Wheel motor Grader
Specifications
Page 4
Accessories:
Fuel tank 75 O.S. gallons or largest size available,
rain cap unless stack angled to rear. S.M.V. Sign.
Gauges: engine hour meter, ammeter, engine oil
pressure, fuel pressure, engine coolant temperature, air
pressure. Electrical system warning indicator, engine
oil pressure alarm, hand throttle, and foot operated
accelerator pedal.
Snow Plow:
The plow shall be a V -type such as a Falls Model V-100
or equal with quick hitch.
Show Wing:
The wing shall be fully hydraulic without cables such as
Falls Model AFI12 or equal. An amber wing operating
light shall be provided.
Scarifier:
A complete forward mounted scarifier with no less than 5
teeth shall be provided. It need not be mounted if the
unit currently has the V -plow mounted.
Trade-in:
1963 Austin Western Super 200 with plow, wing, and
scarifier.
Warranty:
The vendor shall furnish a bonded full power train
warranty, if repairs are not complete within 72 hours
after notification, the vendor shall provide a rental
unit comparably equipped at no charge or pay the cost of
same up to $1,450 per week, including delivery and pick
up charges. In addition to the power train, the
warranty shall include electrical, but not bulbs.
Damage due to operator neglect or accident shall be
exluded.
Paint:
The paint on the machine shall be factory standard
yellow and shall be less than one (1) year old or in
excellent like -new condition with all proper decals and
warning labels (paintover of grease or dirt not
permitted). Provide two cans of spray touch-up paint.
Manuals:
The vendor shall provide a full set of operating manuals
and service manuals for the machine and accessories.
Bond:
The successful bidder shall provide a performance bond
in the amount of 508 of the bid to remain in effect
until the end of the warranty period (120 days after
delivery and acceptance).
Training period:
The vendor agrees to provide a training program for the
City of Monticello employees in sufficient scope to
assure efficient and economical performance and
maintenance of the machine.
`, 0)
6 wheel motor Grader Specifications
Page 5
Payment: Due to budget constraints, payment will be made no
sooner than January 2, 1989, or within 30 days after
delivery and acceptance, whichever is later.
Statement of Pacts: The vendor shall provide a statement of facts from the
previous owner of the machine, attesting to the hours on
the machine and its operating condition. This shall be
provided prior to signing of the contract. Invalid
hours or mechanical problems not rectified by the vendor
shall be cause for rejection of the unit.
Exceptions: If the unit bid does not meet specifications, list the
deviations below and include with proposal form. No
exceptions considered for make, model, year, or maximum
hours of use.
IM
,, G)
CITY OF MONTICELLO
{/ PROPOSAL FORM
FOR
ONE (1) USED, LATE MODEL, 6 WHEEL 150 BP ARTICULATED MOTOR GRADER
1. Make and model of equipment being bid, purchase price as specified.
MAKE: MODEL:
YEAR: HOURS: SN:
F.O.B. Monticello, Minnesota $
2, Trade-in Value:
MODEL: 1963 Austin Western Super 200
with scarifier, wing, and V -Plow $
3. Item i1 less Item 02 (Trade-in Purchase Price) $
1
4. Deduct for scarifier if not needed by City
at this time. 5
NAME OF BIDDER:
ADDRESS:
SIGNED BY:
X BID ACCEPTED:
BY:
TITLE:
(date)
ft
Council agenda - 11/14/88
10. Consideration of Purchasing NSP Maintenance Building on West County
Road 39. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
NSP's parcel is located directly west of the public works building on
West County Road 39. It consists of a 1-1/4 acre parcel of land with a
33 -foot county road easement across it on the south end. The building on
the property is of masonry type construction with a long and narrow
office area, 14 x 36, containing about 500 sq ft. A parts room with a
restroom contains about 720 sq ft; and the garage area is 38 x 36
containing 1,368 sq ft. The original building was built in 1955
according to City records.
We have been talking with NSP and their staff for several years about a
possible sale of their property or sale of the City's property, as both
the City and NSP were in need of expansion area. Our immediate needs are
for a home for the water and sanitary sewer collection departments. In
addition, the office area could be occupied by the Public Works Director,
the Street and Park Superintendent, and the Water and Collection System
Superintendent with some slight modifications. This would centralize
much of the information regarding city amenities and utilities. This
would also enable us to have a faster response time for contractors,
developers, and the general public regarding questions and issues
involving city services, public works, and utilities.
In preparation for this purchase, we placed $75,000 in the 1989 budget.
we estimated the value of the building and land at $65,000, and assumed
$10,000 would be necessary for some minor renovation to the building as
well as some additional furnishings and equipment needed for the water
meter calibration, maintenance, and storage area. The appraisal
performed by Jack Maxwell indicates the value of the NSP property to be
$74,000. In addition, I understand NSP has determined the value of their
property to be $75,000. The gap in funding could be pulled from the
various departments which would occupy the building, or we could do the
minimum amount of work necessary to got the water meter area up and
operating and budget it in the upcoming year of 1990 for any additional
renovation needed.
It should be pointed out as it has in the past that this building will
serve the needs of the water and sanitary sewer collection system
departments for many years into the future. It will not, however, add
any immediate additional storage space for the Public Works Department.
The only space that would be freed up is that of the existing office of
the Public Works Director and Street Superintendent and more than likely
would just become cold storage for general operating supplies or become a
meeting room heated occasionally. Sometime in the future, possibly the
early 19901x, we will be looking at adding on to one of the buildings.
NSP's building is situated such that it would be easily added on to on
the north end. In addition, the pole barn that the City has on the
northern extreme area of the site could be added on to the south
relatively easily. The existing masonry building for the Public works
Department is less adaptable to additions. In order to add on to the
existing public works masonry building to make it efficient, it would be
necessary to demolish the existing pole building next to it.
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is to purchase NSP's building and property on
West County Road 39 for an amount of $75,000, with the plans of
relocating the Water and Sanitary Sewer Collection System Departments
to those buildings in mid 1989 and centralizing the offices of the
Public Works Director, Street and Park Superintendent, and Water and
Collection System Superintendent.
2. The second alternative would be not to purchase the NSP building at
this time but to look again at the possibility of locating all of the
public works, including the Water and Collection System Departments,
to a site out in the Monticello Industrial Park.
3. A third alternative would be to do nothing at this time and continue
to utilize the fire barn portions of the Wastewater Treatment Plant,
portions of the Public Works Department, and portions of the
reservoir for the Water and Sewer Collection System Departments.
C. STAFF RECOP44ENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director, Street and Park
Superintendent, and Water and Sanitary Sewer Collection System
Superintendent that the City opt for alternative #1 and purchase the NSP
property. At this time, it appears the most cost effective way to
centralize those departments, increase productivity, and make all
departments and information more accessible to the public. The ideal
situation would be to locate all of those departments in a large, new
complex out in the industrial park. However, this would also be the most
costly, involving another large bond issue and possibly a referendum. It
appears to be more cost effective at this time to purchase the NSP
property, as it satisfies the immediate need and the needs in the future
for the Water and Sewer Collection System Department and allows for the
expansion of the Public Works Department on a central site. If someone
should come along in the future and offer a large amount of money for the
entire complex, the City then again at that time could look at the option
of relocating to the industrial park.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the appraisal prepared by Jack Maxwell of the NSP property.
J
-13-
October 7, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City Hall - 250 East Broadway
Monticello. Minnesota 55362
Re: Appraisal of i2SF property
lady and Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, I have personally inspected the Northern
States Power building for the purpose of determing its fair market value.
As a result of my inspection and investigation, I have determined that
the property has a fair market value, as of October 7, 1988, of;
SEVENTY-FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS
(274.000.00)
�L This report is submitted for your consideration, it describes the property
and the method used in arriving at the value determination.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
Maxwell, SRYA
�+ JEM1pkp
/Oi %f'�rioaduafn '✓n. � � F9,3; ..%�.t�c.� ..lGi:.wai.tm SS3�9 ��
0
COST APPROACH
The Cosc Approach to value is the estimation of present day replace-
ment cost, less accrued depreciation, plus the value of the land.
There are two concepts for estimating cost; the reproduction cost,
which is the cost of reconstructing the identical building; or the
replacement cost, which is the cost of replacing a building with one
.of similar utility, though not necessarily of the same design or using
the same materials. The replacement cost concept will be used in this
appraisal.
Size: 36' x 72' • 2.592 square feet
Replacement Cost: $32.50 per square foot
2,592 sq. ft. X $32.50 S 84,240.00
Depreciation:
Physical Deterioration: 40Z
$84,240.00 X 40Z - 33.700.00
Present Value: $ 50.540.00
Rounded to: S 50,500.00
Summary and Conclusion:
Value
of
the Land
$ 16,000.00
Value
of
the Building
50,500.00
Value
of
Site Improvements
7,700.00
Value
by
the Cost Approach:
$ 74,200.00
Rounded to:
S 74,000.00
I
I.
J
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
11. Consideration of Transferring a Portion of Lot 4, Block 3, Oakwood
Industrial Park to HRA for Resale to Northern States Power Company.
W.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Council is asked to consider the transfer of a portion of Lot 4,
Block 3, Oakwood Industrial Park co the HRA. In exchange for the
land, it is proposed that the BRA pay the City $21,200, which is an
amount roughly equal to the price the City paid for the property.
The RRA will then sell the property to NSP for one dollar and recover
its cost via tax increment financing. NSP plans on then utilizing
the site for development of a regional service center to replace the
facility it would like to sell to the City.
Staff is recommending the proposed transfer at the suggested price
for the following reasons:
The proposed purchase price is equal to the price the City paid for
the land.
The portion of the lot sold is encumbered by a gas line easement and
easements associated with the nearby City well and is thus not easy
to market. Despite the encumbrances above, the site is well suited
to satisfy the needs of NSP because much of the land encumbered by
easements can be used for parking or outside storage.
The proposed property, because of the encumbrances and associated
lesser value, can be "written down" to a dollar by the KRA. None of
the other properties in the industrial areas can be financed to this
degree utilizing TIP.
According to representative from NSP, this facility is likely to
expand significantly in the next few years. The proposed site
provides the opportunity for this expansion.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve said land transfer to the RRA in the amount of
$21,200.
2. Motion to deny said transfer.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed site or portion of Lot 4, Block 3, planned for
development; Map showing location of lot 4, Block 3.
-14-
-� ...`" � - � ''' •+� "`� "` IJP '� ��,� — _
_ ( + "��r`'i/ (,;((j${ f f 1(, a A( -•' J/,j., t 'yL.
t • 1, "�:) f, t� l � ��+'r. rt , t ' ^O �`"✓(� � •�`^•
...,,,�4".�,r,� f".�•�»:1 s" r7 F7•-� , , • r f e. t. � ) • ,..,yam t : s"; � s
`7�ri-r-,, i t/ ,• r� '��•.._ Q ';�] to+ ,+,,� , •i, .�s a 4;ti
N0. 94 d `
x'79 ` � , ,� � •` , . ��•�• � 1
NsPz� 4•„fe'2
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
12. Consideration of Using Tax Increment Financing for the Installation of a
Storm Sewer - Construction 5. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment Redevelopment
District ¢5 (Construction 5) was certified in 1985. :'he plan statement
of objectives were 1) to provide opportunities for development and
expansion of new business; 2) to provide erployment opportunities through
the creation of new jobs; 3) to provide opportunities for growth and tax
base; 4) to assist with street construction, sanitary sewer and water
main construction, storm sewer, and other public improvements to
encourage redevelopment in the area; 5) to encourage the development of
additional rental housing in the city.
The development activities included the construction of an 18 -unit
apartment building in 1985. District site description is Lot 1, Block 2,
Outlot A, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 1, Construction 5 Addition.
In 1987, the developer constructed an additional 24 -unit and 30 -unit
apartment building. The tax increment finance plan was amended and the
improvement budget was $93,000 for street construction, $100,100 for
storm sewer, and $65,500 for sanitary sewer and water. The total project
cost was $365,000.
Construction 5 (Gus and Gary LaFromboise) have presented the City staff
with their preliminary site plans for the final proposed activity within
this Redevelopment District 15. Their plans include the construction of
an 18,180 sq ft office warehouse, the construction of a 13,900 sq ft
office warehouse, a 5,600 sq ft mini storage, and an 8,400 sq ft mini
storage facility. The two proposed office warehouse facilities include a
total of 16 bays which would be leased out to new companies. The
proposed plan utilizes the total 3.17 acres of Outlot A, inclusive of the
50 -foot storm sewer (ditch) easement along the easterly boundry of this
lot (516.61 feet). The developers have requested the use of tax
increment financing for the installation of the storm sewer. Direct
developers cost which can be considered for the use of tax increment
'financing are excavating and landscaping cost.
The HRA reviewed the plan at their November meeting and tabled the item
until the City Council determines the long term benefit and/or need to
the community for the installation of the storm sewer. The estimated
market value of the proposed development is $1,174,728, with an estimated
annual increment of $46,696, based on now tax capacity rates, which is
more than sufficient to cover the annual debt service. Estimated
installation cost for the 60 -inch storm sewer pipe is approximately
$70,000.
-15-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
J
Pro's and Con's of Storm Sewer installation as Determined and Written by
John SLmoia
The proposed project would consist of extending the existing 60 -inch
storm sewer pipe at the intersection of Washington Street and Lauring
Lane southerly to the I-94 right-of-way and interconnecting this pipe
with two pipes which come from the drainage areas lying south of I-94.
This new 60 -inch pipe would parallel the existing sanitary sewer. The
storm sewer would be located approximately 15 feet west and south of the
sanitary sewer and approximately 8-10 feet above the sanitary sewer.
Once the storm sewer was installed, the ditch would be filled, the
sanitary sewer manholes raised, and the area could be blacktopped for
parking area.
Pro's
1. Installation of the storm sewer would result in a flat level surface
that may be more appealing to the eye than an open ditch.
2. Installation of the storm sewer would recover approximately 1/2 acre
of space which could be used for parking for the proposed project.
The space is currently not usable to the developer.
3. There is some speculation that the filling of this ditch would result
in a safer environment for nearby residents. However, since this
ditch receives water during only the most heaviest rainfalls, and
then for only short periods of time, it is not more of a safety
concern than Otter Creek, the Mississippi River, or holding ponds in
our parks. if safety were to be an issue, chain link fencing could
serve as an added safety measure. The City, however, has not fenced
other areas like this in and about the city.
Con's
1. The installation of the storm sewer would result in a higher
maintenance cost to the City of Monticello in the future. The
developer is currently responsible for mowing and maintenance of this
ditch area. The City would only get involved with a cleaning of the
ditch should it become necessary sometime in the future. if the City
were to have a storm sewer in this area, the overall cost to the City
of Monticello for maintenance over the years would exceed those of a
ditch system. During the early years, velocities would not be such
so the pipe would be self cleaning. During periods of heavier flaws,
the trapped solids then may wash out into the Burlington Northern
ditch or school property or it may be necessary to clean the
system. It is more costly to clean pipes than a ditch.
.Is-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
2. By installing a storm sewer in an area where a ditch currently
exists, one loses that land area for absorption of water into the
soil for replenishing the ground water.
3. Because of the close proximity to the sanitary sewer, the
installation of the storm sewer could hamper repairs or replacement
to the sanitary sewer system in the future. In addition, the
sanitary sewer manholes would be deeper than they are today and
provide a more hazardous atmosphere for the City employees during
inspection and cleaning of those sewers every three years.
4. At some time in the future, this storm sewer will have to be
replaced, along with curbing and parking lot. Bow much of the actual
replacement of the storm sewer will be paid for by the city in the
future.
5. The cost of the storm sewer project exceeds the value of land in the
area.
After the City Council determines the benefits and/or needs for the storm
sewer installation, the FIRA will consider the Tax Increment District
objectives, the previous developers benefits of the 1987 improvement
budget, and benefits of the present proposal (creation of jobs and
increase to tax base) to determine the use of the tax increment finance
and/or the budget cost.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. To determine the installation of the storm sewer as a long term
benefit and/or need to the community.
2. To determine the installation of the storm sewer as no benefit or
need to the community.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends if the City Council determines the installation of
the storm sewer as a long term benefit and/or need to the community that ,
the project be completed in 1989 as part of the tax increment finance
budget cost and not as a future direct expense to the taxpayers.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Map of the site location; Site plan will be presented
at the council
meeting.
/ , Q C`` L
w �
-17-
J••1t J ra __ -_ J � � aL i, .,
~•:� �„ •`',_ J �`':iy` •t��r., d•� yc ^ t^,� /, •l rvy� h.� c. .r' ._t ,. ^,
_ '' _ •-..;"y.��� // 'or Jam\' ! r � ri�,yf Z,j��'�— - - �-i�
?r 6 MILL SID`PR
C NS tk
OUTLOT�..lt10
'
sewer
1 i6 T 8 a kt PARK
PA PIN
jj <"
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
13. Consideration of Authorizing Public Works Department to Install Christmas
Twinkle Lights Along Broadway. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In conjunction with the Streetscape Project, the downtown businesses have
purchased twinkle lights and extension cords for the newly planted trees
along a three block area of Broadway. The installation and storage of
the lights may be handled by the Broadway businesses; however, in the
best interest of the long term maintenance of Streetscape trees, the
downtown businesses submit a request for the City Public Works Department
to install and store the twinkle lights and extension cords in the same
manner as the Chamber Christmas decorations are handled. John Simola
agrees that for the long term maintenance benefits to the Streetscape
trees, it would be best for the City to install and store the twinkle
lights and extension cords. The item is presented to the City Council
for approval because of the additional installation/dismantle time
required by City staff and because of the additional storage space
required.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the request for the City Public Works Department to install,
dismantle, and store the twinkle lights and extension cords for the
Streetscape trees along Broadway.
2. Deny the request for the City Public works Department to install,
dismantle, and store the twinkle lights and extension cords for the
Streetscape trees along Broadway.
C. STAFF RECOr41ENDATION:
City staff recommends the approval of the request for the City Public
works Department to install, dismantle, and store the twinkle lights and
extension cords for Streetscape trees along Broadway, with the
recognition of the additional hours required of the Public Works
Department.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the letter of request.
-1s-
„ovember 9, 1988
To: Monticello City Council_
':=a ::ontice'_lo *V.er.:ents 4,ssociation is a3'sinS the ::ortioei
Wforks Department if they would put up Christmas lights and este:9ion
cards in the trees in the 3 bloc's area of the ;treetscate project
also to remove them and sutipiy storage of the liy.ts. ,.a hoe t:.et
this could be done at the azo time the re* --I= Christmaa decorations
are put up and taken down. rs13tMaS liykts and extension cords have
already been purcnased for this project. B/ having the lity of
:Ionticell.o installing tam lights it would have a more uniformed look
rather than having each individual business doing it.
Thank you!
Sin ly, l
President
MOntieallo terchaats kasaCiatien
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
14. Consideration of Awarding Logo Development Contract. W .O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you recall, Council directed staff to organize a LOGO Development
Advisory Committee for the purpose of developing a community LOGO
that reflects values, images and vision associated with the City of
Monticello. The LOGO committee has determined that the best method
by which the City can accomplish its LOGO development goal is by
hiring a consultant to work with the Committee and other citizens in
development of a LOGO. In adddition to the recommending that a
consultant be hired for the task, the Committee would like to
recommend the firm Henning and Associates for the job.
-19-
The committee received five responses to the request for proposal and
interviewed four candidates. A table is attached which summarizes
each candidates response to the RFP. Only the response submitted by
Henning and Associates is included with this agenda item. Please
contact me if you would like to review the responses submitted by all
five firms.
A majority of the committee members were present for the interview
and the vote to recommend Henning and Associates was unanimous.
Following are reasons why Henning and Associates outshined the rest.
at
Henning and Associates appear most capable of connecting the
important process of defining community identity with development of
a City LOGO.
Henning and Associates will be capable of producing quality
promotional materials that may stem from development of a LOGO. Such
materials may include community information brochures, cornmunity
entrance signs and landscaping, promotional videos, etc.
If the City should decide to promote economic development through
target marketing, Henning and Associates has the experience and skill
needed to define and execute an effective marketing strategy.
!t
The initial not to exceed cost of developing a LOGO through Henning
and Associates is $3,650 which compares favorably to LOGO development
costs proposed by the other candidates. It should be noted that the
hourly rate charged by Henning and Associates is alightly higher than
the competitors. Therefore, the costs associated with future projects
is expected to be slightly higher.
BUDGET IMPACT
The 1989 budget includes $20,000 for the development of promotional
materials. The LOCA development is included as a portion of this
budget. If the LOGO project is completed utilizing Henning and
Associates, $16,350 will remain in the budget for development of
C
additional information and promotional materials.
-19-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to award LOGJ development project to Benning and
Associates.
2. Motion to award LOGO development project to one of the other
candidates.
3. Motion to halt LOGO development process.
C. STAFF REODMMENDATION:
staff and the LOCA committee recommend alternative 1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of LOGO development proposal submitted by Henning and
Associates; Copy of summary of responses to LOGO development request
for proposal.
-20-
LOGO DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL SUMMARY/INTE.RVIEW SCHEDULE/INTE.R/IEA AGENDA:
(
.HEOULED INTERVIEW TIME. THURSDAY
NOVEMBER 10, 1988 7:00 AM 7:25 AM 8:00 AM 8:30 AM **
PROPOSED NOT TO SCEED FIGURE:
Layouts and camera ready art:
Letterhead
Envelopes
Business Cards
Able to meet December 15. 1988 Deadline
LEONARD HENNING COMBINED MARKGRAF JAMES
FELDMAN AND SERVICES AND JOHNSON
ASSOCIAT'i5 WELLS
$5.000 $3,650 $3.500 $3,4SO $5.050
included included included included included
Included included included included included
included included included included included
included included included included included
yes yes yes Y S Yes
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT OF PRa61OTIONAL MATERIALS OTHER THAN LOGO:
Copy/Concept Creative Services 835 $45-$75 $40-860 $35 $80
Production Services. Keylining etc " $30 $40-$60 $30 $40
Admin support services NA $15 $20 $16 Not
Stated
1 .Subcontracted. billed at cost
^" James Johnson not selected fo^ an interview due to high cost. If nano of the four
candidates are acceptable. this candidate can be interviewed at a later date.
INTERVIEW PROCEDURE:
1. Welcane/Introductions: - Jeff
2. Candidates review proposals
3. Candidates review credentials, previous projects. samples of work, etc.
4. Question and snows^ session, some potential questions as follows:
- Describe the process you will use to develop LOGO concept.
- How would you describe your design style? What are your strong points?
- Describe experience you may have in designing signage.
If you wore in our place. whet would you look for in a designer.
A'"�,�(UlsOiy (.OMM•L�C� �P�/✓��4 (�T (,Q•�GTraM�CS
3� L tones i o� /fie /o/n•.a ,n
1
Henning & Associates
- '"'• '"� ••• t��� AD'�E7n5:r�0 S OESxir+
%: „�• 4024 Central Ave. N.E.
Columbia Maghts. MN 55421
(612) 781.8464
November 3. 1488
_ .Teff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
City of Monticello
*i Monticello, MN 55362
-+:-; Dear Mr. O'Neill:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your proposal
request. Henning & Associates has been providing comprehensive
advertising communications services to bUainaasea, organizations,
and municipalities for eight years. Collectively, our agency
104- represents over 60 years of experience in advertising and
marketing. We take pride in the level of quality that we can
deliver to each client.
Our services include strategic planning, art direction, writing.
graphic production of print media ads and marketing tools,
production of slide shows and video brochures, radio and
i television commercials, media and public relations services.
.M1
We have extensive experience in the development of complete
identity programs and promotional materials. In the last 24
""-u = months alone, our agency has designed over 30 logos for various
-clients. Our experience also includes the development of logos
::.
and promotional catumuniueian materials for municipalities
and economic development efforts. Some of the clients we have
worked with in those areas include.
Anoka County Business Assistance Network
" Anoka County Economic Development Partnership
City of Blaine
4 City of Columbia Heights
i o City of Coon Rapids
i City of New Richmond. WI
Coon Rapids Development Company
International Falls Small Business Development Center
Itasca Development Corporation
Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District
d1
rJ
(13
J
{ The work we have•done for Itasca Development Corporation (IDC)
i and the City of New Richmond, Wisconsin are perhaps most
i representative of municipal and economic development
communications projects we have conducted. We developed the IDC
logo, slogan, two brochures, a three-dimensional direct mail
program. and promotional video. All pieces were coordinated and
developed based upon the unique marketing goals and objectives of
IDC.
our work for the city of New Richmond includes design of the city
logo, signage design and waxer tower treatment of the logo
design, a promotional brochure and informational folder,
city newsletter, and slide show presentation. Some of these
materials are being produced at the time of this writing.
For further information with regard to our work, please contact:
Diane Gilmore
Itasca Development Corporation
501 N.W. Second Avenue
Grand Rapids, MN 55744
(218) 325-9411
Joyce Twiscol
City of Blaine
9150 Central Avenue N.B.
Blaine, MN 55434
784-6700
Jim Counter
Industrial Development Commission
City of New Richmond
C/o J.A. Counter & Assoc., Inc.
134 South Knowles Avenue
New Richmond, WI 54017
(715) 246-3811
The process we have utilized for these and other clients with
regard to the development of their logo involves on initial
meeting with representatives from the community. The goal of
this meeting is to gain information about the community and the
image the community would l.ke to project.
Five optional layouts are then developed for review. Once a
layout has been approved, a budget estimate outlining the costs
for producing the logo in camera ready form is presented for
approval. Please refer to the job schedule included for a
detailed explanation of this process.
•
P
f
!r —
pe feel that the time -line presented is reasonable and we could
,complete a first draft of the logo by December 15, 1988 as
-requested. You may note that we would not place any limitations
=on the use or reproduction of the final logo.
s
=Having worked with several communities, we are sensitive to the
design requirements of municipalities. A city logo must reflect
.,the values, ideals, and overall spirit of the cormunity. It must
be a unique reflection of the quality of people and lifestyle
=that each community represents. It must also communicarea sense
=of professionalism, pride, and progressiveness to chose outside
!the community with whom the city conducts current, future, and
:potential business.
i
:We look forward to the opportunity to put our talents to work for
:the City of Monticello.
'Sincerely.
tephen Hefining
/
: President
SH/tn �'
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
15. Consideration of Setting a Meeting for the Purpose of Establishing the
1989 Salary/Wage Policy. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
For the past few years, the City Council has met with the Administrator
in a special session to determine what would be an acceptable pool of
money to be used in creating increases in wages and salaries for the
non-union personnel. With the year 1988 nearing an end, I am looking for
direction from the Council on how you would like to proceed with
establishing a salary/wage review for next year. If the Council wishes
to continue with the concept of establishing a salary pool with general
guidelines adopted that the Administrator can use to prepare new salary
proposals, the last regularly scheduled meeting of 1988 would be on
December 12, as we usually cancel the second meeting due to Christmas.
If the Council would like to have a special meeting for considering
salary increases, the meeting should be scheduled at least a week or more
before the 12th to allow myself time to review and propose salary
increases for the individuals.
At last year's special meeting, the Council discussed the procedure of
granting merit/performance increases without specific guidelines being
established for those increases. It was the general consensus of the
Council at that time that before future merit/performance increases are
considered, a list of criteria should be established that outlines the
basis for an individual receiving an adjustment other than a cost of
living increase. This brings up the question, would the Council like to
establish a criteria list that can be used by myself in establishing or
recommending a merit/performance increase?
A number of different methods have been used over the years for
considering salary increases for the non-union employees. If the Council
is uncomfortable with continuing with the recent method of establishing a
cost of living adjustment plus an additional amount of money in a pool
that the Administrator can use for merit or performance pay, possibly
some other method can be used for considering salary increases for 1989.
The most logical other than what has been done the past few years would
be to strictly grant a salary increase based on cost of living index or
whatever across the board. This method does not reward any particular
employee for performance outside of normal expectations, but is certainly
the easiest to administer. On the other hand, I do agree that if all of
the merit/performance pool is automatically granted, it does defeat the
purpose of establishing a pool to be administered by myself. Any type of
an adjustment outside of a basic cost of living across the board increase
requires a judgment to be made either by myself or the Council as a whole
as to who should receive an increase. Basically, I am willing to work
within any guidelines you wish to establish; and we certainly can revert
to the method of a standard percentage raise or dollar amount across the
board.-�
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
I would prefer that if a special meeting is to be held, a week other than
the week of Thanksgiving, November 21 through the 25, be considered. I
plan to take a few days vacation that week; and with the holiday, it may
be best to set the meeting either before or after this time period.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Set a special meeting date to consider 1989 salary and wage policy.
2. Do not set a special meeting, but consider the 1989 salary
adjustments at a regular Council meeting.
C. STAFF RECO MENDATIdN:
As I noted previously, there were some concerns at the last salary review
meeting that the Council may wish to consider other methods of
establishing pay increases rather than using performance/merit
increases. Even if this is the case, it may be well to have a special
meeting or meet earlier than our regular Council meeting to establish
what policy you would like to use in the future. Regardless of what
method you would choose, I will prepare some information regarding
present and past salaries of the City employees and some comparable data
that might be useful.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
-22-
J
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
16. Discussion on Participating in a Task Force to Study Public
Transportation Needs within Monticello. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Duane Gates, Community Education Director, recently contacted me to
request the City Council consider appointing a staff person and/or a
Council member to become a member of a task force studying basic
transportation needs within Monticello. Mr. Gates noted that originally
a task force was established to investigate the possible needs of elderly
transportation services, and he felt that a City representative should
also be involved in this subcommittee, as possibly the local governmental
unit could be involved in receiving grant funds if available for
transportation needs of a community.
Although I'm not familiar with all of the details, Mr. Gates will be
present at the Council meeting to briefly outline the subcommittee's
role; and he will be able to further explain what information they have
gathered to date.
H. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Appoint a staff person and/or a Council member to become a liaison
with the Transportation Subco:mnittee.
2. Decline to get involved at this point without further information.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Since the staff is not familiar with all of the details concerning
Mr. Gates' request, we do not have a firm recommendation. Since
transportation needs of a community should be a concern of the City, it
may be appropriate to appoint a member to their committee to gather
further information as requested.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of letter from Mr. Gates.
-23-
Box 897
Monticello, Mn 55362
Nov. 9, 1988
Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator
City of Monticello
Monticello City Hall
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Rick,
The purpose of this letter is to request the Monticello City Council
to appoint a staff person and/or a council member to become a
liaison to the transportation sub—committee of the Monticello
Community Based Services Committee.
The individual or individuals appointed would be asked to review
information gathered to date regarding the transportation needs of
senior citizens and other residents in Monticello.
In addition, the representative (a) from the city would be asked to
meet with the transportation sub—committee as it gathers
additional information regarding this issue.
I will present at the council meeting Monday, Nov. 14 to answer
any questions the council may have regarding this request.
Sincerely, ✓�
Duannei D. Cate
DDG/me
e /�
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
17. Consideration of Fund Transfers for 1988. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
With the end of the year rapidly approaching, a few housekeeping items
should be approved by the Council concerning fund transfers to close out
unneeded construction funds and other transfers per the budget. Enclosed
as a supplement is a listing of all the transfers recommended for
approval prior to the end of 1988.
The following is a brief explanation of each transfer requested for
approval.
1. This transfer of $24,156.79 is requested to close out the surplus
balance in the 1971 G.O. Water Bond Fund and transfer this amount to
the new 1988 Water Tower Band issue. This surplus accumulated since
1971 is no longer needed since the final bond payments have been
made, and the fund can be closed.
2. A transfer in the amount of $7,900 is needed to eliminate a fund
deficit in the library fund that resulted from a non -budgeted heating
system renovation in 1986. Since we have not budgeted for this
previous expenditure, the library fund will continue to have a
deficit unless a transfer is approved.
3. As part of the 1988 budget, $76,100 was planned to be transferred
from the liquor fund to the capital outlay revolving fund for various
capital improvements.
4. This transfer of $9,603.44 is recommended to close out the
construction fund balance and transfer the amount no longer needed to
the interceptor bond fund.
5 & 6. During the construction of the NSP ballfield complex, for record
keeping purposes, all Public works Department labor and benefits
was charged to the park/Lout fund. As a result, a fund deficit
currently exists in the amount of $25,350 for these salaries that
were originally budgeted within the general fund for normal
operations. in addition, with the construction of the concession
stand and other various improvements during 1988, it is estimated
an additional $34,000 will be needed from the capital outlay
revolving fund to keep the park fund in balance.
7. The west County Road 39 project was primarily constructed by Wright
County but did require some contribution for City improvements. A
deficit balance of $1,549.71 still exists, and it is recommended that
in order to close out thia project, this amount be transferred from
the capital outlay revolving fund prior to the end of the year.
-24-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the transfers as recommended.
2. Do not approve the transfers.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend for accounting purposes that the above transfers be approved
prior to the end of 1988. Without official action, some unneeded
construction funds will have to remain on our books and some funds will
continually have a deficit balance unless a transfer is authorized.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
List of proposed transfers.
-25-
0
RECOMMENDED TRANSFERS - 1988
?
FROM
TO
PURPOSE
AMOUNT
171 G.O. Water Bond
188 Water Tower
To close out
$24,156.79
Fund
Bond
surplus balance to
new bond fund
Capital Outlay
Library Fund
To eliminate
S 7,900.00
Fund
fund deficit
resulting from
unbudgeted heating
system renovation
in 1986
Liquor Fund
Capital Outlay
Per 1988 Budget
$76,100.00
Interceptor Sever
186 Interceptor
To close out
5 9,603.44
Const. Fund
Bond Fund
construction fund
balance to debt
service fund
General Fund
Park/LCM
To partially eliminate
$25,350.00
Fund
fund deficit created
by previously
allocating Public
Works Dept, salaries -
NSP Ballfield Conat.
Capital Outlay
Park/LCMR
To eliminate balance
$34,000.00
Fund
of fund deficit -
(estimate)
Ballfield Const.
Project to date
(concession stand,
(etc.)
Capital Outlay
West County
To close out
$ 1,549.71
Fund
Rd. 39 Cost.
Construction Fund
Fund
deficit
0
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
18. Consideration of Reimbursing PSG for Equipment Rental to Clean Second
Stage Digester at Wastewater Treatment Plant. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROMM :
In August of this year after consultation with the City Administrator and
based on a $2,500 estimate, PSG hired Fergus Power Pump to pull thickened
sludge out of the second stage digester so the digester could be cleaned
and inspected. An inspection was needed, as the cover had shifted
several years ago breaking one of the balancing wheels. City operators
of the wastewater treatment plant had rebalanced the cover by placing
sandbags on one edge and reinstalled the wheel. We wanted to get the
digester down to inspect it, as well as clean it out to improve
operations.
Over the years of operation since 1981, City employees at the wastewater
treatment plant had hauled relatively small amounts of sludge. The plant
was being run by recirculating the sludge throughout the plant and
burning much of it up at significantly higher operational costs with much
more wear and tear on the plant. This continuous recirculation of sludge
did cause a problem which was not discovered until Fergus Power Pump
began cleaning the digester. Upon examination of the thickened sludge,
they found a 7-9 foot thick scum layer, or grease layer if you will, in
the digester. This digester operates somewhat similar to a septic tank.
If it is not mixed, the solids settle to the bottom, clear water or
supernatant makes up the middle section, and the grease and/or scum
floats to the top. If you do not clean out a septic tank periodically,
the scum layer gets so thick on the top that you can't possibly clean it
without removing the top section and getting at it to wash it down and
hose it down.
Fergus Power Pump was hired for two reasons. 1) the City nor PSC had the
proper pumping equipment to remove the scum layers 2) the City sludge
truck was inoperable due to an accident, and we had no transportation for
the sludge to the fields, thickened or otherwise. The bulk of the sludge
had been transported out earlier utilizing PSC's trucks, but they were
unavailable at this time.
Our contract with PSG calls for them to provide routine operations of the
wastewater treatment plant and labor and fuel to dispose of sludge. The
City is to provide the sludge trucks. In this particular case, it is the
requirement of the City to provide a truck and reimburse PSC for
equipment needed over and above the normal contract. Based upon a
breakdown provided by PSG, the City would pay $4,680 for the truck and
trailer rental, and 52,260 for equipment rental. PSC would pick up the
remaining labor portion of approximately $2,800.
PSC's operations of the wastewater treatment plant lessen the possibility
of such a thick scum layer developing in the future. Hopefully, with
proper care and maintenance, the scum layer can be kept to a minimum, and
PSC may be able to handle the cleaning of the digester without the rental
of expensive equipment. In addition, we expect to have our sludge truck
back in service within the next week so that this high rental cost would
not be a factor.
-26-
Council Agenda - 11/14/88
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
0
1. The first alternative would be to reimburse PSG for equipment rental
for cleaning the second stage digester in the amount of $6,940.
Payment of this amount would come from revenue within the sewer fund,
not from outside sources.
2. The second alternative would be not to reimburse PSG as requested but
to negotiate some type of settlement with them. This does not appear
to be applicable in this case, as the City staff has met with PSG on
this matter several times and have already negotiated to the point
where the City would not pay any of the labor for the disposal of the
sludge.
C. SfAPP RECOM NDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public works
Director that the City Council opt for alternative 41 and reimburse
Professional Service Group in the amount of $6,940.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of PSG's letter dated November 6, 1988.
J
-27-
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GROUP. INC.
11/6/00
Mr. John 5im0la
Director of Public Works
City ox MontLCvIllo. rN
Dear John;
P -* r your r*qu*3t, the lollow-2119 accCvL;J&ac
re-z-ent aigestor cleaninq. Due to timing requirements. F*rquW
Power Pump gave no vri*trwn brvakuown to PtZ ovspite rwqv,,stz by
u0th psii and thw City. the cnwrge was 5 133/hr. --Or 71 nu -Ars.
1hxa was broKen out over tl-.t phone by Ron Ukerctran 01 Furgur set
SJlydw 3.
Labor ($!3/hr.i r. tZ employees) x t7= huurs) » rsOGO
Tractor & Trailer (6651hr.) x (721 houru) S 4680
Hyarolic Unit 0 144C
winch k-ump 90 50/cay) x (6 day*) sou
Fuel %or nycrolxc unit vIca
lC pickup trucks) x (700 mi *a) x (6. 30/m-%) A, 420
Hydraulic unit was raqu.%rec as 25GO psi was utiva by tne winch
pump to break up and transport the scum blanket to the truck ( no
svni.Lar capability exists within the plant).
AY tnpse ch4rgos asw Ice maintenance of the digester and not &
routine activity, they are being accounted to the repair and
maintenance account. Also per your r*Qu*st, the ins&ce ox the
digester was also inspweted an* th# ballast wag In goon cona3,t&on
along with the Cover *no wells.
Very truly your*.
zg-C —
hvisit Mct4ulro
A.;C I JwhA MiCkotts
MantlCoijo, Walftwotor Treatment Plant 0 1401 Man Blvd. # Maqt1callo, MN 5W62 s (512) 222 r
0/
% -6 D?
CC UPDATE
November 10, 1988
Report on Water Pressure Problem of October 26, 1988. (J.S.)
At approximately 6:30 p.m., Wednesday evening, the 26th of October, 1988, the
City of Monticello experienced low water pressure. Matt Theisen was out of
town that evening, and I was at the Wright County Courthouse at a Solid waste
Task Force meeting. My wife received the initial calls and referred them to
Roger Mack, who responded immediately. Roger also notified Tony Strande, the
other employee in the Water Department, who lives in Palmer, Minnesota. Roger
was able to start one of the wells downtown and the system began building water
pressure around 6:40 p.m. The city had not run out of water, but many areas in
the city which were elevated or on the far reaches of the community experienced
very little, if any, water pressure.
Under normal circumstances, a lower water pressure would trigger the alarm
dialer at pumphouse 12 and notify myself, Matt, and Tony of an impending loss
of water pressure. In this particular case, the dialer failed to operate due
to a corroded terminal on one of the vintage mercury switches in the
pumphouse. In addition, upon restarting the system on manual control, one of
the other mercury switches which turns off the pumps automatically failed to
operate. It was later found that a repair technician had inadvertently bumped
this switch several weeks before and had not noticed it being slightly out of
place. Tony and Roger were able to manually operate the system on high
pressure shut-off until Matt arrived and diagnosed the problem with the high
level limit switch. The system began basic local automatic operation about
11:00 p.m. on the old mercury switches.
The existing telemetric system had failed to operate causing the original
problem. The reason for the failure was not diagnosed until Thursday morning,
when it was discovered that Richmar Construction, when working on the driveway
to pumphouse ;3 at apptoximately 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday evening, had cut the
telephone cables leading to the main control panel at the reservoir. The
operator of the piece of equipment had either not noticed the break in the
telephone wires or thought it of insignificant importance to report it. Once
the telephone lines were repaired on Thursday afternoon and a crosswire problem
in the cables taken care of, the system was back on line fully automatic.
Ia researching this failure of the water system, we have looked at how the new
system will operate and whether this same incident would cause a failure of the
new system. The answer is, yes it would. The new alarm system, as well as
total controls are telephone dependent and will be located at the reservoir.
Any severing of the telephone cables in and about the reservoir would take out
the entire system as well as the alarm. We are looking at the possibility of
keeping our existing alarm system at pumphouse 12 or adding radio controlled
backup for the alarm system, which would be installed at an alternate location
so that the possibility of severing phone linea in two locations would be very
remote. Since the water tower facility is out for bids at this time, such a
backup would be added as a change order to that project or to the pumphouse 13
project. We will have more information at an upcoming Council meeting
concerning this issue.
-R�
I
In the forefront with new ideas
Motorola is a leaner in the communications industry your proolems and maximize your productivity. the
with new ideas, technological breakthroughs and firsts. Radius Voice Reporter radio alarm isjust such a
We offer you high quality equipment ... backed by a system. it oc erateS in both simplex and long-range
total commitment to customer satisfaction ... to solve configurations.
Simplex
"Radius Voice Reporter"
System° ,
-RUSiui+iOKR RtpgrtK , RfrRer tr>�b WQtrl.
RRW.1...�nt raal0 alarm tiatlpl � btaoll raab p
MonrtMlO NOWrt raElO
t�r�r1
'Ramis
Long Range•
"Radius Voice Reporter"
System*
wrmn
C_
tr C poC
QOW0..4m
raOrMtar�O
A world of communications opportunities is waiting
for you at Motorola. Many communications systems
will pay for themselves in six months to two years.
support sovicea
wherever motrna aum, our amlwct
Is oaceea try iemce. In me uS, w
nave 900utnmzea am
copany
wn
oed cenren to aoamon Our
products are serviced avwgraut
the wona try a rv.ae nerw9ra Or
Company of autrwyaW ocemmclit t
onalwro WtW a omarwaliom
I u YOr.p.r01.�
#-o
Q
' Iraalo ooORr 4
u r.elo m
radio
Financing and license assistance are available. Service
is worldwide. Make Motorola your total communica-
tions system supplier. It will make a world of difference.
Motorola Is an Equal Employment Opponu ly/Aff!"aove Moon Employer
8 MOTOROLA
IlatB
100 V}vo.r"Ro+o'k^'r"d0lnwla
Il lfl )ar.11tay mu•r.wl�p.le r. 1M En lad
.ao RAG., Raaut v*K1 N'"111 aryl
VO[R 110& • Ye Aaaemal.f M 4MI IK
Of"? Momqu a+[.
\ \
� COUNCIL UPDATE
November 9, 1988
Purchase of Pickup Truck for Water Department. W .S.)
After the October 24 Council meeting, the City staff modified the
specifications for the new pickup truck for the water Department slightly to
accept more standard equipment and utilize a deduction for some of the options
should the vehicle come in over budget, which was $11,500.
We then solicited bids or quotes from the two local dealers, Monticello Ford
and Gould Brothers Chevrolet. The low bid came from Monticello Ford in the
amount of $10,532.02. Gould Brothers Chevrolet was a couple thousand dollars
higher. Upon checking into their bid, we were informed that they made two
errors in their bid, and if one would apply the two adjustments to their price,
their new bid would be $10,575.00.
Taking Monticello Ford's bid 'adding tax an license brings the total cost
of the vehicle up to $11,183.9 Since th as under the budgeted amount, the
vehicle was ordered from Montice
11 LL N��