City Council Minutes 03-13-1989MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, March 13, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith, Dan
Blonigen
2. Approval of minutes.
3.
4.
Motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, and
unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held
February 27, 1989.
Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
None forthcoming.
Public Heari
Development
Authority.
- Consideration of ordinance amendment deleting Industrial
mission and establishing the Economic Development
Assistant Administrator O'Neill presented a proposed plan submitted by
the Industrial Development Committee to develop an economic development
revolving loan fund to be entitled the "Greater Monticello Enterprise
Fund" (GMEF). It was proposed that an Economic Development Authority be
established to operate the fund and assure compliance with the GMEF
guidelines. O'Neill went on to review the fund guidelines by reporting
that the purpose of the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund is to
encourage economic development by supplementing conventional financing
sources available to existing and new businesses. Through this program,
loans are made to manufacturing and industrial businesses to help them
meet a portion of their financing needs. The program is intended to be
used in situations where a financing "gap" exists and is not designed to
compete with lending institutions. O'Neill went on to describe risks
associated with the program, and he also noted five communities that have
successfully created new jobs in the community through utilization of a
revolving loan fund.
After the presentation, Council made inquiries regarding the program.
Shirley Anderson asked why lending institutions could not provide 100% of
the financing for development projects. O'Neill noted that bank policy
may prohibit full financing of a project if the project does not meet
certain criteria. This program is designed to supplement what the
lending institution is not able to finance. Warren Smith requested
additional information on revolving loan funds now in operation. Staff
was asked by Smith to develop five examples of revolving loan funds that
did not work in addition to the success stories that staff provided.
With this information Council would be able to avoid potential pitfalls
that this program may present.
After discussion, it was the general consensus of Council that this
program merits further study. Staff was directed to schedule a special
meeting for the purpose of examining the topic further.
1
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
5. Consideration of a rezoning request to rezone R-2 (single and two famil
residential) unplatted residential land to R-3 (medium density
residential). Applicant, West Prairie Partners.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the rezoning request and
informed Council of the recommendation to Council as submitted by the
Planning Commission. O'Neill informed Council that the rezoning request
was denied because the applicant failed to satisfy Section 22-d-5 of the
Zoning Ordinance which requires that the need for the rezoning must be
demonstrated. It was the view of the Planning Commission that sufficient
R-3 property is now available in the city for development and that to add
R-3 to the existing stock would not be in the best interest of the
community. The proposal to add additional R-3 land to the existing stock
troubled the Planning Commission in light of the strong shift in recent
years toward construction of multi -family units versus single family
units.
Jim Metcalf commented on the proposal and noted that West Prairie
Partners would not pursue the matter without community support.
Karen Doty cited sections of the City Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance in voicing opposition to the proposed rezoning. She went on to
request that Council adopt the recommendation made by the Planning
Commission.
Fran Fair thanked the public for information provided on this matter and
went on to note denial of this rezoning request should not be made on the
basis of input from neighbors, as neighborhood opposition is not a legal
grounds on which denial of a rezoning request can be made. It was Fair's
view that denial should be based on the Planning Commission finding that
there is insufficient need to justify the proposed rezoning. Dan
Blonigen concurred by saying that he in no way supports the rezoning
request.
After discussion, motion made by Fran Fair and seconded by Dan Blonigen
to deny the rezoning request, as applicant failed to satisfy
Section 22-d-5 which requires that a need for the rezoning request be
demonstrated. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Consideration of a conditional use request to allow a daycare -group
nursery in an R-2 (single and two family residential) zone. A variance
request to allow no parking lot hard surfacing, no concrete curb around
parking lot perimeter, and no landscaping requirements. Applicant, Peggy
Hanawalt.
Building Inspector, Gary Anderson, reviewed the plan for development of a
day care center as submitted by Peggy Hanawalt. In the request, Hanawalt
agreed to meet all terms of the conditional use request with one
exception. Hanawalt asked if she could delay installation of the curb
and paved surface for one season. Hanawalt noted that she would like to
have more money available initially for items that will benefit the
children using the facility. Mr. Catton of Monti Eduplay noted his
K
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
support of development of another day care facility in the community but
went on to suggest that Council treat businesses alike. He noted that he
was required to pave the Monti Eduplay parking surface at the time of
opening of the facility.
Staff noted to Council that if Council desired to grant a delay, the
applicant would be required to supply the City with a financial guarantee
that would assure the City that the parking lot would be completed within
a certain time frame.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to approve the conditional use request and defer hard surfaced
parking and curb requirements until September 11 1989. Conditions
associated with operation include all those listed by the Planning
Commission with the following additions:
1. Applicant must take measures to assure dust control prior to
installation of hard parking surface.
2. Signs must be posted which indicate that traffic must not back onto
the highway when exiting the facility.
3. A letter of credit or other guarantee must be filed with the City
prior to gaining occupancy of the structure for business purposes.
Motion carried unanimously.
7. Consideration of a rezoning request to rezone R-3 (medium density
residential) residential platted land to R-2 (single and two family
residential). Applicant, Dan Frie.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Fran
Fair to approve the rezoning request, as all requirements have been met
that are associated with a rezoning request as outlined in Section 22-d
of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 170A.
8. Consideration of assessment appeal on 88-07 Project by Floyd Markling.
Warren Smith noted that it was his hope that the Country Club and
Markling would get together, and unfortunately this is not the case.
Fran Fair noted that this is a no-win situation for the City and that
further action will not result in bettering the situation. Consensus was
not to have a reassessment hearing on the project.
9. Consideration of ordinance amendment regulating dogs and other domestic
animals.
City Administrator Wolfsteller and Animal Control Officer, Patty
Salzwedel, reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments with Council.
Salzwedel noted that the current ordinance does not adequately protect
dogs or dog owners and that the provisions outlined in the ordinance,
including licensing and vaccination requirements, will benefit dogs and
dog owners. She went on to note that the ordinance does not call for the
licensing of cats and that cats are picked up only on a complaint basis.
3
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
Administrator Wolfsteller noted that a rabies clinic could be offered
with the program which would provide citizens with an inexpensive method
to gain compliance with the new ordinance.
Fran Fair noted her support for the ordinance. Shirley Anderson asked if
indoor pets need to be vaccinated. Salzwedel responded by saying that it
is probably good policy to have a pet vaccinated even if it is kept
primarily indoors. Anderson also asked if a job is being created by
adopting the new ordinance. Wolfsteller noted that no new job is being
created and that added duties associated with administering the program
will be assigned to Salzwedel and become part of her existing job.
Salzwedel went on to explain that the proposed ordinance allows the
Animal Control Officer to issue fines, whereas the existing ordinance
does not.
Warren Smith noted his support for the ordinance, as it provides the
Animal Control Officer the means by which barking dog problems can be
rectified.
Dan Blonigen noted the benefits of adding teeth to the ordinance and
added that staff should use discretion in administering the ordinance.
Salzwedel was asked by Smith under what conditions would a person be able
to walk a dog without a leash? Salzwedel responded by saying that
leashes should be required when the dog is being walked in an area where
there are people nearby.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Fran
Fair to approve said ordinance amendments. Motion passed unanimously.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NOS. 169 AND 170.
10. Consideration of adopting an ordinance grant
Wright Hennepin Electric Association.
franchise rights to
Administrator Wolfsteller informed Council that Wright Hennepin
Cooperative Electric Association provides electrical service to a small
part of the city of Monticello mainly on the east end of the city along
East County Road 39 and within areas recently annexed from Monticello
Township. As a result, as with other utilities serving residents within
the city, Wright Hennepin has requested a franchise right to utilize the
City's public right-of-ways for construction of their distribution system
and transmission lines.
Ken Maus noted the disparity in electric rates between NSP and Wright
Hennepin Electrical Association. Maus suggested that staff determine if
the City can use its authority to encourage expansion of NSP into areas
now operated by Wright Hennepin Electric Association. After discussion,
motion made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Fran Fair to table the
matter pending collection of additional information. Motion passed
unanimously.
4
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
11. Consideration of commuter parking lot status.
Tom Dolly presented information to Council which outlined the economic
benefit associated with development of the commuter parking lot for
business purposes. He also reviewed the configuration of a replacement
parking lot which is proposed for a location next to the Silver Fox
Motel. Administrator Wolfsteller noted that the current City policy is
to preserve the commuter parking lot because the lot is in a good
location for commuters; and by preserving the lot, the space is available
at such time that a loop access to east I-94 is needed. It was also
noted that this present policy is not cast in stone, as it may be a
number of years before the loop access will be installed. It, therefore,
might make sense to lease the property to a business for a period of
years in anticipation of a future use of the property for highway
purposes. Dolly indicated that a lease agreement would be acceptable to
the businesses looking to locate on the site.
John Simola discussed with the Council that the covenant on the deed
reads such that the City is currently in violation, as not all of the
site is used for a commuter lot at this time. Technically, the County
could at this time require turn back. In addition, we should be allowed
other public activities such as "Junk Amnesty Day" and other "special
events," as well as an information center or other highway purposes.
Tom Dolly also pointed out that his research shows that the City of
Monticello was singled out for this covenant and that other lands had
been turned back to other cities without such language.
Warren Smith noted that the City should keep its options open regarding
the site and work with the county in establishing a plan that is good for
the County and the city. The City should not shut the door on any
proposal to develop the property.
Motion made by Fran Fair and seconded by Warren Smith to request further
clarification of the restrictions associated with the deed submitted to
the City by the County to permit its current and other public uses and
continue to work with the County in the future for other potential uses
of the property as the need arises. Motion passed unanimously.
12. Consideration of approving request for proposals on curb -side recycling
and authorization to advertise.
Public Works Director Simola reviewed the request for proposals prepared
by the advisory committee. After his presentation, Ken Maus wondered if
the City would generate sufficient compliance with the program on a
voluntary basis. Maus suggested that the City consider operating the
program on a voluntary basis to start; and if compliance is not what is
expected, then make the participation mandatory.
5
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
Simola stated that the voluntary programs are more successful with a
volume based garbage system where residents pay for waste pickup by the
number of cans. They then see direct savings by producing less waste.
Simola also stated that the proposed tracking system would be more costly
and troublesome to implement if done after residents have received their
containers. This information came from Jack Shelton and the City of
St. Louis Park.
Simola went on to note that participation will increase significantly if
the program is mandatory, and the cost to monitor compliance will be
offset by the revenue created by penalties. In fact, the penalties, even
if only 10 percent of the residents choose to not recycle, will help
offset waste pickup and disposal costs for the rest of the community, as
well as fund a prize incentive program.
After discussion, motion by Warren Smith and seconded by Fran Fair to
approve said request for approval and authorize advertisement. Motion
carried unanimously.
13. Consideration of approving specifications and authorizing advertisement
for bids for recycling containers.
Motion was made by Warren Smith to approve specifications and authorize
advertisement for bids for recycling containers. Motion was seconded by
Fran Fair and passed unanimously.
14. Consideration of adoption of Joint Powers Agreement outlining economic
development powers of the City Council, Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, and the Economic Development Authority.
Item tabled per agenda item #4 above.
15. Consideration of adoption of Greater Monticello Fund Guidelines.
Item tabled per agenda item #4 above.
16. Consideration of further action on the Monticello Celebrate Minnesota
Program.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council of the recent decision
by the State of Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development to
deny granting Monticello funds for the Monticello Celebrate Minnesota
Program. O'Neill went on to describe the financial implications of not
gaining the grant funds.
After discussion, it was the general consensus of Council to affirm
participation in the community entrance signage and landscaping and the
Robert Leathers play structure portions of the project. It was suggested
that the City take a second look at development of the Mississippi island
into a passive park area.
2
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
17. Consideration of Change Order #1 for Pump House #3, Project 88-01C.
Motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to
approve said change order. Motion carried unanimously.
18. Consideration of additional payment request by City Engineer - OSM.
City Engineer, John Badalich, outlined the circumstances leading to the
request for payment in excess of the original quoted amount for work done
on topographic maps. Badalich noted that OSM neglected to inform the
City when the scope of the project expanded and that additional costs
would be accrued.
Shirley Anderson suggested that maybe OSM will remember to contact the
City and/or provide an accurate quote if their request is turned down.
Fran Fair found it difficult to justify the change in cost. Warren Smith
and Dan Blonigen agreed. Ken Maus noted that we should be firm unless
there are extenuating circumstances; except in this case, no
communication was made regarding the change in circumstances.
Motion made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to authorize
payment to the extent of the original quote. Motion carried unanimously.
19. Consideration of gambling license application - Ducks Unlimited Banquet.
Council approved issuing license by consensus.
20. Consideration of authorizing final payment on County Road 39 Project,
88-01B, and Dundas Circle Project, 88-02 - LaTour Construction.
Dan Blonigen asked if sufficient funds are held back to assure full
completion of the project. Yes, was John Simola's response. Motion by
Warren Smith and seconded by Fran Fair to approve said payment. Motion
carried unanimously.
21. Consideration of authorizing cost analysis for upgrading streets in
Monticello Industrial Park.
Economic Development Director Koropchak reported that the Industrial
Development Committee views the existence of streets in the industrial
park with less than a 10 ton capacity as a detriment to economic
development in the community. From a marketing standpoint and
operational standpoint, it is vital that the streets have the capacity to
handle 10 ton loads.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to conduct a feasibility study outlining the costs associated
with upgrading streets in the Monticello Industrial Park.
7
Council Minutes - 3/13/89
22. Consideration of authorizing the Industrial Park streets not be posted.
Jay Morrell of M & P Transport reported on the Industrial Development
Committee recommendation to not post Industrial Park streets. He noted
that most streets were installed when the standard was 7 tons and
informed Council that the State of Minnesota raised that capacity of some
state highways simply by posting higher weight limits. He went on to
note that posting the roads as having limited capacity will hamper
efforts of the sale and development of industrial lots.
It was noted by Simola that in light of the possibility of upgrading the
roads, it might make sense to continue to post the roads, thereby
providing additional protection from damage which will result in a less
expensive upgrading program.
Motion was made by Fran Fair and seconded by Dan Blonigen to continue to
post industrial park streets. Motion passed unanimously.
23. There being no further business, meeting was adjourned.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator