Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 04-06-1994HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA ((ii April 6, 1994 Meeting - 7:00 p.m. City Rall MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Ben Smith, Everette Ellison, Tom St. Hilaire, and Brad Barger. STAFF PRESENT: 011ie Koropchak. STAFF ABSENT: Rick Wolfstelier and Jeff O'Neill. WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, through a general consensus of Its membership recommends the Planning Coamission and the City Council consider the following: 1. Recommends the 180 -acre Klein Property located directly to the south of the Oakwood Industrial Park be preserved for industrial use; and 2. Recommends the Monticello Comprehensive Guide Plan, in Its entirety, be reviewed and updated by an independent' and impartial planner; and 3. Recommends the authorization of a long-range (beyond the existing city limits) land use study focusing on freeway access and transportation circulation. The above recommendations were made to ensure that the Comprehensive Guide Plan and the long-range land use study clearly support the objectives of the City of Monticello. "PR — 2,-94 W E D 1 4: 2- 0 P. ? 2 irN Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. L U A e A N P l A N N! Me • D E S I e N• MARXET R B S t A N C N MEMORAMUZ TO: Jeff O'Neill FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE. 27 April 1994 Rs: Monticello - Klein Emmerich - Oakwood Industrial Park Expansion FILE NO: 191.07 - 94.02 Enclosed is the conceptual expansion of the Oakwood Industrial Park. The access points are from Dundee and Oakwood Drive (County Rd. 118). The westerly access road from Dundee would be optional, and in fact, may not provide any substantive benefit. Suffering would be an issue on the east boundary with the school (along Fallon Avenue), as well as the transition between the Industrial and the Multiple Family. We have tried to make aura that the traffic patterns are not mixed in an effort to preserve the value of School Boulevard. However, this necessarily results in an additional access street to serve the maltiple family area. ThiN layout would push the Single Family area approximately 1, 000 Peet further south due to the depth of the Industrial area. The transition between Industrial and Multiple Family is still required. While we still believe that the original plan is more responsive to the realities of the City's future development, the attached layout would be our recommendation if the city determines that the preservation of additional industrial land is the better approach. The memo attached to the plan gives same details to the layout. C) F,P F: -2 7 -94 1.1E LT 3 4 : 2 *^ 0 T13309TOTNUORM TO: Stephen Grittman FROM: Bob Kirmis DATE: 26 April 1994 REs Monticello - Klein/Emmerich Mixed Use Concept (Chelsea Area) FILE NO: 191.07 - 94.02 Attached please find an alternative concept plan for development of the Klein property located south of the Oakwood Industrial Park and west of Fallon Avenue. The alternative is intended to make an allowance for additional industrial land use in the area. As shown on the attached concept plan, a southern expansion of the industrial park has been proposed with new lots being serviced by an internal loop street from Oakwood Drive and Dundas Road. in total, an additional 82.6 acres of industrial land have been proposed. Lots within the expansion area range from 2.8 to 6.4 acres in size. To be noted is that southerly street extensions into the industrial expansion area would overlay existing platted property within Block 3 of the industrial park. Thus, n resubdivision will be necessary to accommodate the extensions. Directly South of the industrial park expansion area, approximately 33 acres of multiple family residential development has been proposed. Such a use is intended to provide a logical transition in land use between industrial development to the north and low density residential development to the south. Multiple family use would be provided access from an interior loop street from School Street. such street overlays an existing United Power Association easement. Directly south of School Street, approximately 61 acres of low density residential development has been proposed. If you have any Questions or comments regarding this material, please advise. 106 PROPOSED LAND USES LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ® MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Q INDUSTRIAL -m• NEW STREET BUFFr- Alk 0001" I.. Goo, a ' A[LM ti Y d'I1ba b AP d W W Ab b OP r IbT b711Y r1Yrl1all d10� KLEINPRO.WK4; 05/02!86 d� ' KLEIWEAIMERICH INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - DRAFT • W YN FL09NN3 SOURCES DAr1Yyd E>O•.. C40 T-WWW T— e r , O N IOWI IOdn Ewadiel Em CWa SFIIm 0rMa1e SW M A CNWn Wln Sawn Na SM 11111 0.114 CIO LAWJ• 0­0 tlorluAY IMPRDVEMENT N S LAP SOAab 00A—I tl— tt— Pq Pq FddY Cm1aWo ITEMS DESCRIPTION T E COST i I— A— Atrb A— A— Rw AA O1 C_ I font 5n5wr O us.&10M1 TSI I Sib 0001 SlmmO I 0{000 {b 000 00 11700m1 Irnl Si. S.— I— I— b I~ IA l 1 5170000 i IIDp00 100.m0 I 110.000 I170,Om LAYNISM5_ Flan fruit b 117 W I 1170000: wD00 700000 110,000 {170000 IAMY 510 BIw From 117 A, —Y 25 L57 2 5700.000 6100000 t1m0m 12 UmmP T_ Wb Ut11U_FW LWI 1 1165 WO {15500 "Am 000 $11,000 69 SIO 0100 MA Im Trull W_ IT 1t0 Jr .A TWI 1 S79,000� W,200 620100 $12m {70= T_MAW 11710.4 bSN 5/11 5120M, {21,127 621 INS 621000 9.7,150 {120= 1 w 101 SM.SWa O- F1 117 Al 1 1270=1 1101,m0 9.m,0m 01m0 1270000 SG .G_ G­ 117 A,NA'Y 23 R7 2 S=ml SIm Om tlmm0 01pm {270000 FA Av Du bll / 101n 1 A== 1520m WOOD 00 00 11211000 Max mlm0 Wpm to m in— n—I—S_ I— S_ $1, 2WA—A",W' 11.0002018 621 I—f — OwYYpIrd sp- A taa01 SIi 0— DPwLV-6Pn IrY CRY nal ewrdbq J TOTAL 9.111171100 SM.= 9.1AA0 ats= IM SbApm $/71,00 "Am 1OKIm — 621110 6211100 51,111,100 ' A[LM ti Y d'I1ba b AP d W W Ab b OP r IbT b711Y r1Yrl1all d10� KLEINPRO.WK4; 05/02!86 d� ' COMp_1,e.151,�e �rG Et«Q115 GENERAL HOUSING POLICIES In Monticello, urban planning should be designed to promote high standards for residential development and help to assure the best possible living environment. 1. The Planning Commission, in coordination with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, will be advocates for reform of land use controls, increased housing funding, governmental and legislative changes, and in general, act to increase public awareness of housing problems and solutions. The Commission will evaluate the City's regulatory codes and ordinances to insure that these regulations provide maximum opportunity to develop a range of housing types at various income levels and permit utilization of innovative site development and construction techniques. 2. Attempts will be made to develop and implement affirmative programs for open housing. Open housing is housing that is available to all persons without regard to race, creed, color, sex, or ethnic background. 3. New housing areas shall be provided utilities as they expand toward the perimeter of the City. 4. Residential uses should be permitted to mix with commercial or industrial uses unless it can be demonstrated that the residential and non-residential uses will be in conflict. 5. Developments shall be designed to respect the natural features of the site to the maximum extent feasible. 6. Development proposals will be evaluated with respect to their potential effect upon adjacent and nearby developments and their effect upon the public welfare of the City and adjacent communities. 7. Developments must be developed according to well conceived plans that tend to unify and relate to each otherl developments that are c hodge-podge and ill-conceived w111 be disapproved. 8. Within the OAA, a density of 10,000 to 12,000 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit will be promoted in the areas of utility service contiguous to the present city and in those areae where central utility service construction is contemplated within five yearn. 9. Although anticipated densities in areas capable of utility service within five years may be designed at 10,000 to 12,000 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit, building permits ohall not be icouod for a density of more titan one dwelling unit per 2.5 acres with on-oite cover systems booed upon percolation tests. -44- 10. The existing density requirement (land area per dwelling units) as outlined in the zoning ordinance shall be continually reviewed to determine their appropriateness for adoption to changing times and conditions. 11. Appropriate urban renewal measures will be taken to assure maintenance of the existing housing supply in good to excellent condition. Suitable standards for structure and yard maintenance will be developed and enforced to help assure maintenance of residential neighborhoods in a sound condition. 12. All types of housing will be permitted including apartment structures, townhouses, and others, provided each is properly located according to the Comprehensive Plan, the site plans and structural quality (materials, workmanship, and design) are in accordance with the highest feasible standards, and each is in conformance with the provisions of the zoning ordinance. 13. where provisions for sanitary sewer are not contemplated in the near future (within five years), the density shall not exceed one dwelling unit per forty acres. The actual lots size per unit, however, may be as small as 2.5 acres subject to the provision of an approved individual on-site sewage system based upon percolation tests. i Single Familv Housing Policies 1. Home occupations will be permitted provided such activities are conducted in a manner which assumes that evidence of such occupation is not present. 2. Single family housing should not be allowed individual accosn t. major thoroughfares but will orient toward minor residential streets. Multiple Familv Housing Policies 1. Multiple Family Dwellings are recognized as being a worthwhile addition to the urban environment and tax base under conditions as established in the Comprehensive Plan and by zoning, subdivision, and other codes and ordinances. However, the Planning Commission will look with disfavor upon projects with design features that are considered inappropriatt, ouch an architectural designs that are incompatible with existing and proposed developments and unimaginative site designs. 2. Multiple Dwelling projects shall be encouraged to develop as 'Planned Units' with specific piano submitted for structures, architectural design, landscaping, circulation, open apace, recreation facilities, and any other features that may be proposed. -a5. I 3. Multiple dwelling projects should not cause the number of existing end/or approved public and private dwelling units in the community to exceed forty-five percent (451) of the existing single family building sites located within the City of Monticello. 4. Aesthetic considerations such as the architectural style and general appearance of any proposed multiple dwelling project will be a major consideration but will not be the sole justification for approval or denial of any proposed apartment building. 5. The Planning Commission will recommend denial of any proposed multiple dwelling project that falls within any of the following conditionst a. There is factual evidence to indicate that there will be a definite and significant depreciation of property values or detriment to single family residential living in the surrounding area directly attributable to the proposed multiple dwelling structures. b. There is factual evidence to indicate a potential hazard to the public safety or health that would not be present if the land were to be utilized for any other permitted land use. C. The proposed multiple dwelling project is of such poor quality and/or design that there is reason to believe that vacancies may be extensive in the future due to competition from more properly designed projects and such poor quality in structure end/or design will eventually lead to urban blight in the form of dilapidation, health hazards, fire, and safety hazards, and other throats to the public health, safety, and general welfare. 6. Multiple family dwelling developments shall access only to collectors or thoroughfares to provent an excess amount of vehicular traffic on minor residential streets. 7. where multiple family dwelling projects carve as a 'buffer' between single family homes and non-residential uses, on-site buffers or other design elements shall be considered as a part of the project to ensure a quality living environment for future residents of the project. 8. Multiple family dwelling projects will not be allowed to constitute a •spot zone'. An example of ouch a spot zone is a single apartment structure located immediately adjacent to single family homes and completely surrounded by single family dwellings. 9. Multiple family dwellings should be locsteA in close proximity to public open apace ouch as parka, playgrounds, schools, and similar uses. In lieu of this, the multiple dwelling project should include adequate open recreational space on the cite. -46- 10. Sites located along the Mississippi that are suitable in size and configuration should be evaluated and if tend to conform with the Comprehensive Plan, considered for the development of multiple dwellings. 11. Apartments should not be converted to townhouses or condominiums unless they meet all of the specific requirements of the zoning ordinance as it relates to townhouse and condominium development. Residential Oven Space Development Policies Residential Open Space Development (ROSD) are becoming a common method of combining several housing types at varying densities. Integrated into these projects may be minor amounts of non-residential development. The framework for these developments is privately, group owned open spaces. 1. Encourage ROSD under conditional use or planned unit development procedures. 2. When open space within an ROSD corresponds to open spaces in the Comprehensive Plan, ouch land should be made available for public use. 1. Privately held open space within an ROSD must be protected from future non -open space use through legal agreement between the owners and the City. 0. It shall be the policy of the City not to acquire small open space areae within ROSDs which do not conform to the open apace ` requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. S. Maintenance of private group open spaces in an ROSD shall be the ( responsibility of a homeowners association in each ROSO. If the homeowners association defaults on open apace maintenance, the City may order ouch maintenance and assess the benefited properties. 1 J i S M� .� -a7- COMMERCIAL POLICIES 1. Commercial development in general and successful retailing functions should occur both in the central business district and JyP the shopping center area contiguous to Interstate 94. 2. The Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other measures and procedures will tis modified in realistic ref.nonition of the needs of contemporary commercial enterprises and the need to properly control such enterprises at the local community level commercial development policy will not be rigid and inflexible, and neither shall it be indiscriminately permissive. 3. Adequate provision should be made for expansion of suitable areae for highway oriented commercial development requiring large acreages for use such as motels, auto and implement dealerships, and lumber and building supply yards. These uses should be encouraged to develop in new locations along Interstate 94 at Highway 25. -� 8. All major commercial areas shall be pre -zoned based upon the Comprehensive Plan. No areas shall be re -zoned to crnmercial use unless they are shown to be properly located in accordance with the policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan. 9. Boundaries of commercial districts shall be well-defined so as to prevent intrusion into residential areas; residential areas must be properly screened from the associated ill effects of adjacent and nearby commercial area. I -48- I C/O) 4. The location of new shopping areas should be justified by an adequate market study (market radius, customer potential, suitable location in the market radius, etc.) and consideration for the neighborhood, land use, and circulation pattern. 5. Commercial areae should be as compact as possible. Compact commercial areas are particularly advantageous for retail uses, as they concentrate shopping and parking. A community is benefited by reducing exposure to residential areas and having a better control over parking and traffic needs. For this reason, 'strip' and "spot* commercial development should not be permitted. 6. Highway oriented uses along Interstate 94 should be concentrated to the greatest extent possible so as not to waste prime commercial land nor spread the uses so as to nat be definable as a 'viable commercial area'. 7. Future commercial areae should be based upon the concept of the integrated business center developed according to a specific site plan and justified by an economic analysis of the area to be served. -� 8. All major commercial areas shall be pre -zoned based upon the Comprehensive Plan. No areas shall be re -zoned to crnmercial use unless they are shown to be properly located in accordance with the policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan. 9. Boundaries of commercial districts shall be well-defined so as to prevent intrusion into residential areas; residential areas must be properly screened from the associated ill effects of adjacent and nearby commercial area. I -48- I C/O) Central Business District Policies 1. The Central Business District along County Highway 75 and walnut Street should be further developed to de-emphasize through traffic in favor of emphasizing convenience and safety for the shopping public. Development of aesthetically desirable conditions should be accomplished through the addition of new paved surfaces, landscaping, better lighting, benches, fountains, canopies, and other street furniture to provide a more attractive environment for the pedestrian and shopper. 2. The downtown should be as compact and intensively developed as 1 i possible. 3. The retailing component should be tightly nucleated and all-weather connection (interior and exterior)betwe-en stores should be provided. 4. Consistent designs for street furniture, informational signs, street lighting, and landscaping should be developed to make the downtown appear more unified. The City will work with private enterprise to encourage consistency in other areas of appearance }! and design. 5. The major flow of vehicular traffic should be around the area not through it. 1 6. Pedestrian circulation within the downtown must be emphasized. Pedestrian access from parking areas to the retail center must 1 } be free from unnecessary conflict with vehicular traffic. 7. Adequate off-street parking should be provided to reach a satisfactory floor area to parking area ratio and paid parking i should be so located as to provide the greatest convenience to retail customers. The convenient location of custornor parking should take priority over employee parking. 8. Within the Central Business District emphasis should be given to creating additional parking rather than accommodating the traditional through traffic movements. 9. Parking needs should be solved on an area -wide basis and not an a sieo-by-site baoia. The City ohould play a strong role in the determination of the parking solution. 10. The core area should be surrounded by activities that complement those In the retail core, itself; ouch activities include institutions, oorvice Industry, automotive oervicea, medium to high density housing, and the like. INDUSTRIAL POLICIES 1. All land suitable for industrial develomment in the City should be zoned to preserve it for said use and to avoid needless harm to homes which might develop in potential industrial areas. Land used by industry is entitled to protection against residential encroachment. 2. Through proper land use planning, certain types of industry can be good neighbors with areas used for residential and other purposes; the type of industry, screening (green planting, fencing, ebc.), required building design, and other factors greatly affect the compatibility of such uses. 3. Industries which produce undesirable affects injurious to the public health, safety, convenience, and general welfare will be discouraged. 4. Excellence of site and building design will be a major factor in approving or disapproving industrial development proposals within the City. 5. Performance standards will be utilized to judge industrial proposals rather than the more rigid policy of judging industrial uses by types any industrial type use will be permitted provided it can prove compliance with standards governing smoke emission, noise, odors, vibrations, and the like. 6. Encourage design and development of industrial parks with exposure to Interstate 94 rather than scattering ouch uses indiscriminately through the community. 7. The City Public Works Division shall review, with respect to sewer and water use, the impact each particular industry has on those utilities and their expected life. -90- 0 r" COMMUNITY FACILITIES POLICY 1. Presently, the development of land for public facilities such as i parks and playgrounds is considered more important than the acquisition of such land. However, with respect to acquisition, land must be purchased before proper sites are usurped by private developments or high land prices make acquisition i unfeasible. It is a desirable goal of the City to balance j acquisition and development efforts. 2. All public facilities are to be developed according to generally accepted standards and the results of thorough study. 3. where feasible, private developers will be required to set aside a portion of their land for public use; where this is not feasible or desirable, developers will be required to contribute cash in lieu of land, with such money to be utilized for the purchase and development of recreational facilities. 4. School facilities should be fully utilized by making building and land available to the public for use when such does not conflict with normal function of the school facilities. 5. Ptivate developers will not be required to donate land for school sites. 6. Churches should have an ample site for building, landscaping, potential expansion, and off-street parking. Parking should be provided on the maximum design capacity. Churches should be located adjacent to a thoroughfare or collector street and have easy access to the area served. They should not be located on minor residential streets and in the midst of residential neighborhoods. 7. The City should not accept substandard lands such as swamps, power line easements, etc., for the development of park lands. Thin shall include lands laid out in subdivision plana. Open Space Policies Before delineating open space policies, a definition of the term is necessary. Traditionally, open space has been primarily defined as that area which is retained in or restored to a condition where natural systems predominate and which may be used for recreation, or preservatinn pnrposes. open apace was often regdzJed as a separate and contained entity usually under this ownership of a governmental jurisdiction. Recent trend* indicate that open apace, like the people it serves, is becoming more directly integrated with Ito surroundings. Becoming more a part of the total urban fabric, open space is being more closely integrated into the urban living and working environment. Because of this integrating phenomenon, many of the advantages and responsibilities of open apace are equally applicable to public and private lands. in the Sherburne County and Wright County area. It is important not to alienate the commuter. Although they may not shop during the time that they are commuting and working outside of the City of Monticello, they and their families may likely live in the Monticello trade areal and, therefore, it is important for them to have a positive attitude toward the Monticello Shopping District. To alleviate the problem, the City has worked with the County to provide a special 'park and pool' commuter lot. The park and pool lot is located between the Fbrd Dealership and Interstate 94 directly off Highway 25. The commuter lot is easily accessible by Oakwood Drive and provides more than 150 parking spots. This lot should be able to handle the growing number of commuters for many years. Considering the great success of handling the commuter problem along with clearing the way for greater consumer parking at the shopping areas, the City should continue the park and pool commuter lot. Because of ever changing transportation needs, the City is well aware that it needs a continuous evaluation and development program. one major project that will be affecting traffic flow within Monticello in the next few years is the upgrading of Highway 25. Also, with the refurbishing of Highway 25 will come a new four -lane bridge. It will replace the present two-lane bridge that links Monticello with communities to the north. Realizing the importance of travel along Highway 25 and over the bridge, construction crews will keep the roadway open as much as possible minimizing delays. Along with these Peet and present improvements, the City will continue to budget funds for the ongoing public works programs dealing with transportation needs. J. Industrial Development The City has in the past taken steps to encourage development of Its industrial potential. The policies of the Guide Plan represent the City's commitment to industrial development. The overall policy is one of encouraging industrial bane in the community for job opportunities so as to prevent the City from becoming simply a 'commuter bedroom city'. We feel that the strategic location of Monticello, being some forty-five minutes drive from the Twin Cities, offers the unique uppur LuniLy Cur persona who wish to be clone enough to the metropolitan area to enjoy its benefits, but not have to live in the metropolitan area. Industrial eiteo of the community have good visibility, public utilities available, and the community offers the necessary amenities to attract industry, including an excellent school system, an excellent hospital, a friendly environment, a strong shopping district, and complete City services. The City is well located with regard to nearby recreational amenities. -60- Industrial development is proposed in the Guide Plan for the area southeast of the nearest interchange between Highway 25 and Interstate 94, known as the Oakwood Industrial Park. In addition, the area directly east of the Oakwood Industrial Park and west of County Highway 118 is recommended for industrial development. The area north of Interstate 94 between Highway 25 and Washington is also recommended for industrial development because of exposure to Highway 94 and 25. Future industrial development should be governed by high development standards including construction codes, proper road access, adequate off-street parking, adequate loading space, proper site and architectural design, and adequate landscaping. These are not unreasonable requests to make of new development. Some marginal industrial developers may object to such high standards and therefore they may refuse to locate in Monticello. However, good industrial development will abide by such high standards if they are assured that other industrial development will abide by similar standards. The well designed and well maintained industrial park will maintain its value not only to the property owner but to the City. The City's consultants have met with the owners of the Oakwood Industrial Park and produced revisions in the original plat plan which will allow greater flexibility in lot size opportunities for 111 potential industrial developers. The Northern States Power Generating Plant has proven to be a good neighbor for the Clty of Monticello both in the sense of its tax base and its cooperation with the Community. Portions of the NSP land are utilized for recreational purposes near the Wright County Montissippi Park. The Guide Plan recognizes the need on the part of the City to maintain a good relationship with the NSP Plant. One of the features of the Guide Plan is the proposal to ultimately construct a full Interchange between Interstate 94 and County highway 75 to serve the plant directly off of the Interstate. This is recommended for two reasonst first, it will avoid unnecessary routing of traffic to and from the NSP Plant via County Highway 75 and State highway 25 through the center of the communityr secondly, from a safety standpoint, direct access to the freeway should be advantageous in time of major emergency at the NSP Plant (See Figure 10). h-11 11_� If the Interstate 94 interchange is constructed near the NSP Plant, industrial development potential will develop for the land near the interchange. Industrial development of the property to dependent upon the construction of the interchange. Norther type of development that is possible if the intersection is constructed is the usual Interchange -61- 0 commercial enterprises, such as restaurants, service stations, and quick stop stores. Considering the success and expansion of the fun market, this may be the most likely type of development. Transportation The road system of the City consists of various streets and highways, each performing specific tasks. Road systems are grouped into a number of different classifications for administrative, planning, and design purposes. The Federal Aid financing system, State -County -City's administrative systems, and commercial -industrial -residential -recreational systems are examples of the variety of highway classifications. These classifications usually carry with them a set of minimum design standards which are in keeping with the importance of the system and are governed by the specific transportation services the system is to perform. The principal consideration for designating roads into systems are the travel desires of the public, land access requirements based on existing and future land use and the continuity of the system. Four basic purposes of the street system are: 1. Expressways Provide for expeditious movement of large volumes of through traffic between areas of the City and within the region and not intended to provide land access service. 2. Arterial System: Provide for through traffic movement between areae of the City and direct access to abutting pcopertyl subject to necessary control of entrances, exits, and curb use. 7. Collector Systems Provide for traffic movement between major arterials and local streets and direct access to abutting property. 4. Local Svstemr provides for direct access to abutting land and for local traffic movements. The principal arterial of the region is Interstate 94 which connects the City with the Twin Cities forty-five miles to the southeast, and St. Cloud thirty miles to the northwest. The interstate system is a national system connecting Monticello with the state and the nation. (See Figure 8) State Highway 24 is the only intermn.:(atw arterial of the area connecting Big Lake and Buffalo. The Highway 24 Bridge crossing of the Mioaisippi River establishes Monticello so a crossroads of the region between Sherburne and Wright Counties. The minor arterial oystem includeo the County highways 75, 19, 117, 165, 118, and lbwnahip highways. Included is the proposed frontage toad oyatem which parallels the Interntate. The minor arterialo provide a grid notwork which ace appropriately located -62- and spaced within the community. The minor arterials provide interchanges as well as overpasses for the Interstate. They are the backbone of the City system providing service to the residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The Guide Plan proposes three new interchanges with the Interstate Highway. In the northeast corner of the City near the NSP Plant, a full interchange is recommended with County Highway 75 (Old Highway 152) and Orchard Road. This interchange will give the NSP Plant a separate access to the Interstate and the traffic of plant related vehicles will bypass the City. The second full interchange is recommended with County Highway 39 West where there is currently a bridge over Interstate 94. The third interchange is a half interchange at County Road 118 where there is presently a bridge. With the addition of a northbound on-ramp and a southbound off -ramp, this half interchange will complement the existing half interchange with County Highway 75 (Old Highway 152) one-quarter mile to the east. The two half interchanges will serve the function of a full interchange serving the properties in the immediate areas and as the southern gateway to the community. M overpass at Fallon Drive would also facilitate better movement between the north and south sectors of the City. The Guide Plan proposes several new thoroughfares which will flow along the new and anticipated commercial and industrial developments adjacent to the freeway. The objective of the remote frontage road system is to concentrate traffic serving the commercial and industrial areas on the eyetem of parallel thoroughfares rather than introducing the traffic into the residential portions of the community as is currently the case. These roads are recommended an remote frontage roads rather than frontage roads immediately contiguous to the highway. This is done because frontage roads contiguous to the highway are twice as expensive as other roads in the sense that they serve only one aide and improvements can be assessed to only one aide. Most of the remote frontage road system can be realized when the land is platted for development. By acquiring the land through plat dedication at the time of development, the City will minimize public expense (see Figure 10). One of the objectives of the now interchanges, the new bridqe crooning (pedestrian and toad crossings), and the remote frontage road system is to avoid the 'chinese wall' effect. The recommended crossovers allow a means of getting across the "chinese wall" witiruut Interfacing with the interchange traffic that would normally occur at a regular interchange ouch as that with Trunk Highway 25. The oe interchanges are dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. The bridge crossovers provide a cafe crossing on which local traffic can travel (pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) without being involved with the freeway traffic. As the community grown in the OIM, it is important that the community is closely related through the development of -' this system of perpendicular thoroughfares crossing the freeway '4 at regular intervals. ,.• i�l n j V VI CONCLUSION The Plan is a guide to the future. A city is built one piece at a time and the important thing is that as each piece is 'added to the City', it reflect goals of the Guide Plan and relate to surrounding development. By this method, the City will be providing the essential elements of a quality living environment. It is important to realize that agreement upon the adoption of a comprehensive plan is merely the first step in building a quality community. The most important phase is that of the continued application of the plan as development comes forth in the process of building the community. The plan is to function as a framework within which free enterprise and government can make the appropriate decisions, putting the right uses in the right places at the right time to build a balanced desirable community. This process requires constant review of individual -projects with relationship to the plan, guiding the developer, be they free enterprise or government, using the comprehensive plan as a reference to achieve the desired results. The objective, of course, is to create a community which is a desirable place to live, work, and recreate. This objective can be achieved by pursuing a policy of constant surveillance of development as it occurs. The comprehensive plan is thus a tool to assist the community in achieving this objective. Planning Commission Minutes - 3/3/94 Public Hearine--Consideration of amendments to the zoning man and to the. comprehensive elan for the Citv relating to rezonine of the pronerty known as 'The Evergreens." Anolicants, Kim Kiellberg, Kiellberg Inc. and Tonv Emmerich. Tonv Emmerich Construction Inc, Planning Commission member, Jon Bogart indicated that he would like to abstain from voting on this agenda item as he had a conflict of interest on this proposed request. Mr. Jeff ONeill, Assistant Administrator, explained the applicant's proposed rezoning request of residential land area currently known as 'The Evergreens" residential subdivision. Mr. ONeill, in his presentation, cited how the proposed rezoning dealt with our comprehensive plan. Mr. ONeill commented that if rezoning is allowed to occur as proposed, the applicants would propose to apply to the Monticello Orderly Aruiexatiun Board for annexation of the agricultural property known as the Klein property. Within the Klein property, the zoning at the time of annexation is A-0 (agricultural) with the applicants proposing to rezone that to R-2 as a buffer strip from the 1.2 (heavy industrial), transitioning into a major portion of the area being R-1 (single family residential). Within the proposed rezoning request, zoning is proposed to be changed from R-1 (single family residential) to PZM (performance zone mixed), B-3 (highway business), B4 (regional business), and BC (business campus) zoning districts. 0 Planning Commission Minutes - 3/3/94 Cindy Lemm then opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. Mr. Glen Posusta questioned why the curvy roads. Why not put a straight road through? Mr. Jay Johnson, partner with Tony Emmerich Homes, commented on the conflicts with the Amoco pipeline easement and the overhead electrical powerline easements. Mr. Glen Nemec questioned whether this is a developer- or city -proposed rezoning. If it is from the developer, it should be generated from the developer and not from the city. O'Neill noted that the request has been submitted by the developer with input from city staff. The proposed request shows a lot of B-4 zoning near the west edge of the proposed rezoning area. Why is there so much B-4 zoning here when we have a tough time keeping businesses in existing business buildings downtown? If we create more B-4 zoning would there be even more of the trend for vacation of buildings in the downtown area!: Where are there other communities that have experienced this type of zoning, either where it's been official to do the rezoning or where it's not worked in other communities? Mr. John McVay, representing the Industrial Development Committee, expressed the IDC's concern that there is not any area for I-1 (light industrial) or 1.2 (heavy industrial) zoning in the proposed zoning request. Mr. Al Larson, Housing and Redevelopment Authority Chairman, reconfirmed the HRA's position similar to the IDC's position of leaving room for industrial expansion. Mr. Larson commented on the number of industrial projects that have come into this community over the last 3 to 5 years. If that trend continues, the City could be out of some type of I-2 (heavy industrial) or I-1 (light industrial) zoning. The comment was also raised that the IDC had not had sufficient time to review this proposed rezoning plan in its entirety. Jay Johnson indicated that the land had been looked at for over 1 year and Kjellberg's land is not suitable for R-1 (single family residential). It is difficult to develop under R-1 designation due to easements existing on the property, those easements being Amoco gas pipeline and electrical overhead transmission nnwerlines. With there being no further comments from the public, Cindy Lemm closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and opened it up for any input from planning commission members. Concerns raised by the planning commission members were as follows: roadways should be used to separate zoning districts and the need for more industrial zoning There being no further input from the planning commission members, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Brian Stumpf to table the consideration of amendments to the zoning map and the comprehensive plan for the City relating to the rezoning of the property known as 'The Evergreens." Voting in favor: Cindy Lemm, Brian Stumpf, Richard Martie, and Richard Carlson. Abstained: Jon Bogart. A motion was also made by and seconded by to call for a public hearing on rezoning of B-3 areas located west of the Oakwood Industrial Park area from B-3 (highway business) to industrial and to call for a hearing on rezoning of the Lundsten property from 1-2 (heavy industrial) to 1.1 (light industrial). Motion carried??? V Planning Commission Agenda - 4/5/940 3. Public Hearing -Consideration of amendments to the zoning man and consideration of amendments to the Comorehensive Plan for the Citv relating to rezoning of the nrot)erty known as 'The Evergreens" and relating to establishing a comprehensive land use plan for the Klein oroDerty. Ant)licant, Emmerich/KieUberg/Klein. (J.0. ) G11►1�7 4. Public Hearing -Consideration of amendments to the zoning mat) of the Citv relating to rezoning of certain nrooerties from their current designation to the I-1 (light industrial) zoning designation. ADnlicanL Monticello Planning Commission. (d.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed zoning map amendments relating to the site formerly known as "The Evergreens", review the proposed land use configuration for the Klein property, and then consider making a recommendation on any possible adjustments to the Comprehensive Plan. As you recall, at the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal in detail and found that the complexity of the issues warranted further research and study. Therefore, the item was tabled. In the meantime, a community information meeting was held on March 30, 1994, and the Industrial Development Committee met to discuss the matter further. I believe all of the planning commission members were present for the information meeting; therefore, 1 will not review this meeting further. However, attached you will find a summary of the commence and questions provided to me during the meeting break. On Thursday, March 31, the Industrial Development Committee convened a special meeting to discuss the rezoning proposal for the purpose of providing a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Mayor Maus informed me that the Industrial Development Committee did not make a formal motion for approval or denial of the land use plan as submitted. Maus noted that there were a variety of comments, some in support and sonic against the plan as proposed. He did note, however, there did appear to be consensus that there is a concern about the transition between the existing I.2 zone and the Klein property. As you know the plan calls for multi -family residential up against the 1-2 zone which appears to be inconsistent with the goals of the 1.2 zone, which is to create isolation of the 1-2 zone. According to the City Planner, despite the fact that the 1-2 and R-3 land uses will be in direct contact with each other, the Planner has indicated that isolation can be achieved through proper design of the development Planning Commission Agenda - 4/5/94 area. With the proper extension of roadways isolating residential traffic from industrial traffic and through installation of berms, landscaping, and fencing, an adequate practical level of isolation can be achieved. It is understandable that some are skeptical that such isolation could be achieved and that we could ultimately be creating a negative situation for both the residential and industrial land uses. Between Friday, April 1 and the meeting time, I will be attempting to visit areas within the metro area where backyard transitions from heavy industry to multi -family has been achieved and, hopefully, I will get some direct testimony from individuals in the area as to the consequences of having the 2 zoning districts adjacent to each other. In addition to the information provided to you in the previous supplement and in addition to information provided to you at the meeting on March 30, 1 have attached 2 sets of information for your review. One includes a list of general goals that the City might have for itself regarding land use planning and utility extensions. In addition to identifying general goals, I have also identified 4 basic alternatives for configuring the land uses in the area. I then rated each goal in terms of each of the alternatives. At the meeting, I plan to review each of the goals in detail and also review the rating of each goal in terms of the 4 alternatives. During discussion, I would like the Planning Commission's assistance in goal identification and rating, etc. In addition to the rating system mentioned above, 1 have provided statistical information on how each of the alternatives as identified will impact the inventory of each type of zoning district. The table is self- explanatory so I will not discuss it any further. You will find the information quite interesting. 1 look forward to reviewing it with you in detail. The following is a quick review of the basic alternatives that I have identified for planning commission review. Of course, the final land use configuration may ultimately resemble a hybrid of one or more of the alternatives. Therefore, Planning Commission should not feel limited to selecting any one of the alternatives provided. ORIGINAL PIAN - ALTERNATIVE I This alternative simply leaves the zoning map and Comprehensive Plan as is. PROPOSAI. WITH PLANNING COMMISSION REQUFST - ALTERNATIVE 2 This alternative includes the proposal as submitted by Emmerich and Klein including conversion of B-3 (highway business) land to 1-2 (heavy industrial) uses in the area north of the Kjellberg property as identified in the Planning Commission request at a previous meeting. 1Z 0/6 Planning Commission Agenda - 4/5/94 PROPOSAL WITHOUT PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST - ALTERNATIVE 3 This alternative would be to accept the proposal as submitted by Emmerich and Klein but not include a rezoning of the B-3 (highway business) property north of the site. KLEIN4"USTRIAL ALTERNATE - ALTERNATIVE 4 This alternative identifies no changes to the zoning map but does call for changes to the Comprehensive Plan as follows: take the northerly 80 acres of the Klein farm and divide it into a 20 -acre section of I-1 (light industrial) land along the northern boundary and the remaining 60 acres would be designated as BC (business campus) land. B. ALTERNATCVE ACTIONS: DECISION 1-A. KJELLBERC REZONING Motion to approve zoning map amendments as identified in alternatives 2 or 3. Planning Commission may wish to modify either one of these alternatives under this motion. In the motion, Planning Commission may wish to identify the basis for the action in terms of the following: a. The motion should identify the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. As you know, the Chelsea corridor study is the general plan that the Planning Commission should be using when reviewing this matter. In terms of the Kjellberg property, the Comprehensive Plan identified the land being used for residential purposes. This is because at the time the plan was prepared it was thought that would be the only alternative for the site. If Planning Commission approves a rezoning of the site, then it should identify the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan accordingly. Some of the reasons for amending the Comprehensive Plan could be identified in the discussion of goals and objectives for the City as outlined in the attached table. b. The motion should identify the level of consistency with the geography and character of the area. J/O Planning Commission Agenda - 4/5/94 C. Potential depreciation of adjoining land values should be discussed as a criteria for rezoning. d. A demonstrated need for the rezoning could also be mentioned in the finding. Again, while reviewing this difficult and complex matter, please he keeping in mind the basic criteria above for rezoning property. If the Planning Commission selects this alternative, we should attempt to list the reasons for the rezoning in terms of the criteria listed above. Motion to deny the rezoning request. As with the alternative above, Planning Commission should identify specific for the denial. Motion to table the matter. The Planning Commission does have the option of tabling the matter further; however, there is a limit to the length of time that items can be tabled by the Planning Commission. For the meeting on Tuesday, I will let you know if the timing is such that the City Council must be making a decision on this prior to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission. DECISION I -B: KLEIN PROPERTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Motion to amend the Comprehensive Plan by specifically identifying the type of acceptable land uses for the Klein property. Currently, the Comprehensive Plan does not clearly define the acceptable future land use for the Klein property. In the motion, Planning Commission may wish to identify the acceptable mix of land uses and identify reasons supporting its recommendation. Motion to deny making any changes to the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Motion to table the matter. DECISION 2: REZONING OF PROPERTY NORTH OF KJELLRERG'S Motion to recommend approval of rezoning based on findings as identified by the Planning Commission during discussion. 2. Motion to deny rezoning. 3. Motion to table the matter. Planning Commission Agenda - 4/5/94 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: DECISION 1-A Stall' has no distinct recommendation at this time but looks forward to reviewing goals and objectives listed on the attached sheet along with statistics outlining inventory of various types of land. It is hoped that structuring the discussion will assist the Planning Commission toward establishing a recommendation on this matter. DECISION 1-B Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recommendation on the long term use of the Klein farm based on reasons identified during discussion. DECISION 2 Due to the questions that remain relative to the possible extension of Chelsea Road through the heart of this rezoning area, it may make sense to hold off on rezoning of the B-3 area until the transportation issues are resolved. With regards to rezoning of the Lundsten property, it may make sense to rezone this area to 1.1 due to the possibility of adverse secondary impacts that could be caused by I-2 uses. D. SUPPORTING DATA: List of goals and objectives and associated alternatives; Statistics identifying available land by type and impact of each alternative on land inventory; Copy of zoning maps showing each alternative; Copies of maps from Comprehensive Plan; Copy of resolution on Chelsea Area land use; Copy of map from public hearing notice (agenda item 1141; List of comments from March 30, 1994 meeting; Copy of Chamber of Commerce questions from March 30, 1994 meeting; Copy of V24/94 letter from City Planner. 5 00 LAND USE STATISTICS IMPACT ANALYSIS OF EMMERICH/KIEIN AND ALTERNATE PROPOSALS Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Property Zone Original Proposal Proposal Klein/Ind Plan w/PC request wo/PC reauest Alternate Klein B-3 0 0 0 0 B-4 0 0 0 0 PZM 0 0 0 0 R-1 140 133 133 80 R-2 20 0 0 0 R-3 0 27 27 0 BC 0 0 0 60 1-1 0 0 0 20 1-2 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 160 160 160 160 Kjellberg B-3 0 11 11 11 B-4 0 38 38 38 PZM 9 20 20 20 R-1 93 0 0 0 8-2 0 0 0 0 R-3 0 0 0 0 BC 0 33 33 33 1.1 0 0 0 0 1-2 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 102 102 102 102 PC/IDC Request B-3 40 0 40 0 B-4 0 0 0 0 PZM 0 0 0 0 8-1 0 0 0 0 R-2 0 0 0 0 R-3 0 0 0 0 BC 0 0 0 0 1.1 0 55 0 55 1-2 15 0 15 0 TOTAL 55 55 55 55 Summary o1 B-3 40 11 51 11 All three rezone B-4 0 38 38 38 areas PZM 9 20 20 20 R-1 233 133 133 80 R-2 20 0 0 0 R-3 0 27 27 0 BC 0 33 33 93 1.1 0 55 0 75 1-2 15 0 15 0 TOTAL 3171 3171 3171 311- EMACRES.WK4: 04/01/94 (0) Pagel IMPAC? ANALYSIS OF EMMERICH/KLEIN AND ALTERNATE PROPOSALS EMACRE S. WK4: 04/01/94 e�w 0 Page 2 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Property Zone Original Proposal Proposal Klein/Ind Plan w/PC request wo/PC request Alternate Impact of B-3 88 59 99 88 Alternatives B-4 0 38 38 0 City-wide basis PZM 44 55 55 44 R-1 283 183 183 223 R-2 20 0 0 0 R-3 27 54 54 27 BC 87 120 120 147 1-1 41 96 41 61 1-2 49 34 49 49 TOTAL 639 638 638 639 Summary R-1 283 183 183 223 R-2 20 0 0 0 R-3 27 54 54 27 PZM 44 55 55 44 Comm 88 97 137 88 Ind 177 250 210 257 TOTAL 639, 639 639 639 EMACRE S. WK4: 04/01/94 e�w 0 Page 2 RATING OF EACH ALTERNATIVE IN TERMS OF GENERAL GOALS GENERAL GOALS Rating in terms of meeting goal objective: 1=Worst 5=Best Allow efficient extension of utilities to service developable areas Provide attractive location for regional retail Provide sufficient variety of commercial land Maintain viable downtown Provide ample inventory of industrial land Provide variety of industrial land Provide ample inventory of quality residential land Provide balanced supply of land diff types of land Create separation of residential/industrial traffic Maintain Isolation of 1-2 areas. Where possible, create backyard land use transitions Limit common access where conflicting uses are separated by a roadway Encourage development of School Blvd to ease congestion at Hwy 25 Utitity system financing driven by development revenue void leap -frog devet pment/annexatlon Tissues nue Road system financingdriven b t development revs AX 1) zz,'�) EMGOALS.WK 1: 04/01/94 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Original Proposal Proposal Klein/Ind Plan with PC wo/PC Alternate Request Request 5 51 51 3 3 41 51 3 31 41 5i 3. 3 51 41 3 4 4! 3 5 3j 3! 3' 4 2 4) 4i 2. 4I 31 31 3 41 41 31 3 31 31 31 5 51 5� 5I 4 41 II 4) 4 4 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 3 41 41 4I 3 ole. VJ, Ok% j9 �i9 `i4: mete G00% 10V% Ddu ob\% Via' A _—Pu stud, `6sed peek A%egL too Mod 1 a C m I City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation StudIm, Proposed Land U s i n 'i R di I Q train tiunai uw coil Y ¢N d u ••✓ �.� nlydum, n¢nsiiy R¢uAenllJl � Nril;hbnriu,uA Cnnun¢ICIJI �/��/C�fL=� N, • ,I'gh n¢nilly RI.,II,¢nlwi ® ,egh—y ,:111,4„LIt,Ji 1 � R¢...h„.l,a, ,` tf¢Jv, G1111ntl wt �'f � �• 1'1 nn¢l1 (INI Ilt•v1.111,nlrnl 1 �'"/ \�/•�;� `� y Ser ir.i`tlhL( Q I. Ow A * Ste If -so lu-V10 % � I � I I 4� i 1 } RESOLUTION 92- 4 RESOLUTION ADOPTING CHELSEA AREA LAND USE AND CIRCULATION STUDY AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO WHEREAS, the City Council has recognized the need to update land use policies and prepare amendments to the comprehensive plan that will enable the Chelsea area to achieve its full potential in terms of commercial and industrial development without negatively impacting school and neighborhood uses. WHEREAS, the City Council has recognized the need to develop a plan for development of a transportation system necessary to support development in the Chelsea area. WHEREAS, in response to the needs above, the City of Monticello Planning Commission has been directed by the City Council to study and update comprehensive land use plans for the Chelsea area; and WHEREAS, the Chelsea area planning process included information gathered via a formal public hearing along with numerous informational meetings involving various agencies and City committees; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that it 1s in the best interest of the City to preserve a portion of the undeveloped areas in or adjacent to the city for industrial uses. NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED that the Monticello City Council, in agreement with the Planning Commission, finds that the Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study achieves the planning goals set forth; therefore, the City Council hereby adopts the Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study In full as an amendment to the comprehensive plan for the City of Monticello. Let it further beresolved that the City should plan to preserve land for industrial uses at the site of the Klein farm or at the "Evergreens" residential development site. Final location of the site for Industrial uses is to be established at such time that the viability of the Evergreens residential development project has been determined. Approved by the Monticello City Council this 24th day of February, 1992. Mayor City Admin strator - kl6 :. I - - - T4 hl';4WO -------------------- -- ------- !'Z S, 4 Consideration of amendments tothezoning map of the city o relating to rezoning f c:rtai-, properties from their cur ant designation to the 1-1 (light Mustrial) zoning designation APPLICANT: Monticello Planning Commission COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 31, 1994 MEETING relating to rezoning of property known as 'The Evergreens" and the Klein property 1. Creates a city within a city --how do we create a focus? Is it possible to do so? 2. If businesses follow the freeway, why would Target locate in Buffalo? (Hwy 55 is a death trap.) 3. The only interchanges are Hwy 25 and I-94 and the exchange to the east. Industry does not like to truck through residential areas. Why not keep the industry close to the interchange and put the residential further out? The Klein property fits into the Industrial Park. Over last 5 years, 58 acres were developed (?) as industry and it is suggested Monticello only needs 70 acres over 20 years. This is hard to believe. Promoting BC quality business and commercial, but lower quality housing. Is this in direct conflict? Quality industrial and commercial should require quality housing. 4. Don't you think it will be a big mistake keeping the Klein property zoned industrial for the long range planning? 5. * Focus on Downtown - specialty stores: Financing difficulties --how do you regenerate interest? venture capital? • New infrastructure? Interchange? Major regional complex; large anchor stores: will you be able to attract? • Hwy 25 improvements - concern about traffic on 85th T Concern about traffic on Hwy 25 --how can it he diminished? 6. Are we putting as much emphasis on developing downtown as we are on this project? 7. Why would you break up the industrial park? And where in the city would you put it? Why would you assume a shopping mail/center should or would be allowed to locate in Monticello? We have three major retailers within 10 miles of one another! Why would they locate on Hwy 25 versus 1-94? MA R31 COM. PCA: 4/5/94 8. I have personally contacted several hundred businesses to try to get them to locate in Monticello. With our present population growth we are still a long way away from major commercial growth. Who does the city or developers think will use these areas under consideration? (be specific) 9. If this goes through, how will it impact timing of sewer system? 10. Concern about buffer zone against heavy industrial. 11. Could most of the land between Chelsea Road and I-94 be changed to I-2? 12. Define I-1 and I-2 uses more explicitly. 13. Establish quality standards. 14. What was the reasoning behind the original zoning plan? If it was good then, why isn't it a good zoning plan now? 15. Residential zoning fits with school. Like some of the proposed changes. Discuss in detail where the industrial areas could be. 16. Frontage road should continue. 17. What is the traditional "planned" zoning type progression? MA U I COMYCA: 4/5/94 6� JAN -24—,P- ,•1 V F4 -: 3 9 l t1 1 Iy 1 .I L ISA Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Cj U R a A N PLANNI Nn - DESIGN• MAR K! T R E 9 E A R C M MEMORANDUM TO: Jeff O'Neill FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: 24 January 1994 RE: Monticello - Sewer Study Land/population Analysis FILE NO: 191.06 - 94.01 we have run a couple of projections for Monticello's population through the year 2020. The projections were based on State Demographer projections for Sherburne and Wright Counties. we also used past population figures in the City of Big Lake and the Townships of Monticello, Big Lake, and Hecker. Finally we used building permit data in the five local communities, and the Inventory of land use which you had conducted. The projections listed below are provided for slow growth and fast growth scenarios. Our "moet likely- estimate would be the midpoint projection, particularly` over the long term. The 2020 midpoint projection accommodates both the slower and faster growth periods which are likely to occur at some point in the projection 'window^. Projection Year 2000 1010 020 Slow Oruwth 6,070 7,310 8,340 Midpoint 6,360 7,680 9,480 Fact Growth 6,690 6,590 10,620 To these figures, we have applied a straight ratio of land use absorption needs. This is clearly an unscientific approach, but actually makes some intuitive sense, at least. The City's /Q traditional commercial role may change over time, but for Monticello, that transition occurred some time ago. The ratio of commercial land use to residential population is not likely c _ 7� I1h.,+o�n tUv,1C, d,n sea .Ce in,�e Oerl, AAAI RCA 1A./A 191, Obi jr a N- 2 4- 9 4 M O N 7] 4 0 a P _ 0 change drastically, anyway. Industrial land use is another tale, of course, since much of Monticello's industria:, growth is only superficially tied to any specific location. Low Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial *I Industrial i institutional (Non -School) Net Acreage Absorption Groes Acreage Absorption (Includes Streets, Ponds, Parkland, etc.) ACRES NEEDED (Cumulative) nu 2934 292.4 170 350 550 20 40 60 30 60 95 j 20 45 70 250 515 805 335 690 1,080 To these figures (the net acreage) we can back into some assumptions abcut construction activity. For co=arcial, assume one fourth of the acreage is building area. For Industrial, assume one third. For Institutional, one fourth also. For the residential numbers, we have assumed ten units per net acre on high density residential and 2.2 unite per acre for low density residential. Low Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional UNITS/BUILDZNG So. FOOTAGE 2999 29." 29.39. 375 du 770 du 1,210 du 200 du 400 du 600 du 325,000 650,000 1.039 mill 290,000 659,000 1.015 mill 110,000 220,000 325,000 Please call Cary if you need to discuss these figures. I will be back in town Thursday. Hope this helps. CIO Planning Commission Agenda - 3/3/94 Public Hearing --Consideration of amendments to the zoning man and to the comprehensive plan for the Citv relating to rezoning of the proaerty known as 'The Evergreens." Anolicants. Kim KieUberg, Kiellherz. Inc.: and Tonv Emmerich. Tonv Emmerich Construction. Inc. W.O.1 A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed zoning map amendment relating to the site formerly known as "The Evergreens," review the Chelsea Corridor Study to determine if the proposed rezoning is consistent with the study, and review possible impacts or associated future changes to the zoning map that could occur in the future affecting other properties neighboring the Kjellherg site. As you may know, in the late 1980'x, the Kjellberg site was zoned from agricultural to the R-1 designation in conjunction with a proposal to develop single family housing at the 110 -acre site. In conjunction with the housing development, it was planned that a sanitary sewer line would be extended to serve the cast mobile hume park with the goal of correcting problems with the wastewater treatment system at Kjellbergs East. Obviously, the Evergreens project did not proceed; and in the meantime, Little Mountain Elementary School was constructed, Cardinal Hills development blossomed, and the industrial park began to fill up. All of these forces acting together made the Evergreens site a logical place for industrial or commercial versus residential and made the Klein property a more logical place for residential development. In addition, the development pressure is resulting in a need for development of the School Boulevard roadway to help serve the burgeoning residential areas. As you recall, is 1991 die Planning Commission and City Council adopted amendments to the comprehensive plan in conjunction with the Chelsea Corridor Study. A copy of the study is attached for your review. It should be noted that whatever action is taken with regard to the Evergreens rezoning application, it should be done in a manner consistent with the Chelsea Corridor Study. As part of your findings, you should note that the proposed rezoning is either inconsistent or consistent with the Chelsea Study. Enclosed is an updated report from the City Planner on the zoning configuration proposed by the developer (Tony Emmerich). Please review the Planner's report carefully. 0 Planning Commission Agenda - 3/3/94 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve the zoning ordinance amendment as submitted. Motion to approve based on the findings as outlined in the Planner's report. Under this alternative, the Planning Commission is making a recommendation with regard to the zoning configuration of the Evergreens only. As part of the discussion, the Planning Commission will be touching on future zoning of the Klein farm. Please note that any discussion relating to the zoning of the Klein farm is preliminary since the Klein farm is located in the township. It is important, however, to discuss the future zoning of this property, as it provides the deveiopers of the Klein farm (Dave Klein and Tony Emmerich) with some direction as to the prospects for obtaining a zoning configuration that meets or does not meet his heeds. The developers will then take the preliminary opinion of the Planning Commission and Council to the Township for their review. The developer's goal will be to immediately obtain a joint resolution from the City and Township supporting annexation followed by a formal process of identifying the zoning boundaries to occur at such time that the property comes into the city. 2. Motion to deny the rezoning request. If the Planning Commission believes that the zoning ordinance amendment is not consistent with the comprehensive plan of the city, or if there is a strong feeling that the zoning amendment is not consistent with the character or geography of the area and so on, then the Planning Commission should select this alternative and clearly state it,; precise findings in the motion. 3. Motion to table the matter. If the Planning Commission is not comfortable with making a decision on this matter given the complexity and the long-term ramifications for the City, perhaps the Planning Commission would like to table it pending gnthering of additional information and public testimony. Planning Commission Agenda - 3/3/94 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the view of City staff that the present R-1 zoning designation does not make sense. The property is criss-crossed with power lines and gas line easements. It's adjacent to Highway 25 on the east, an industrial area on the north, and a mobile home park on the south. We believe strongly that the site should be used for a business use. The question then becomes, what is the proper mix of business uses. As you can see, the plan calls for a large portion of the property to be designated for commercial use, thereby creating an opportunity for development of shopping, etc. Perhaps the site will become Monticello's version of what's happening on the north side of Buffalo. The Planning Commission has to ask itself, is this what it wants for the City? Does the Planning Commission feel comfortable with a second city or second commercial area being developed on the southern perimeter of the community? Should the City be restricting this type of fracturing of our commercial bane? Would it ria be Letter to invest funds in rcdcvcicping the core areas in order to keep our commercial area as compact as possible? Or perhaps it is a lost cause to try to make space available in the core area for a regional mall shopping complex. If this is the case, then the proposal makes sense because it provides land area necessary for shopping malls that need lots of land and quick and easy access to the main road. SUPPORTING DATA: Planner's report; Proposed zoning configuration of the Kjellberg property; Preliminary proposal for zoning configuration of the Klein property; Recommendation from IDC Infrastructure subcommittee supporting the rezoning proposal; Resolution adopting Chelsea Corridor Study as amendment to the comprehensive plan. 0 F EB —=S-9? MO r1 I = :0 1 0 F . 0 1 7ANNorthwest Associated Consultants, Inc. U R 9 A N P L A N N f N 4 - 4 9 5 1 G ft - M A R X! T R 8 a H A R C N PLANNING REPORT TO: Jeff O'Neill FROM: Elizabeth Stoc)cnan 1 Stephen Grittman DATE: 28 February 1998 RE: Monticello - RleinjEa= rich Mixed Use Concept (Chelsea Area) FILE: 191.47 - 94.42 BACKGROUND Mr. Tony EIIanerich has submitted a concept plan for development of the Klein property located between State Highway 25 and Fallon Avenue south of the Oakwood Industrial Dark. The 171 acres is proposed as a mix or several land use types. The majority of the western portion of the site has been shown as commercial while the majority of the eastern site area is devoted to low density, single family development. There are also two areas of multiple family residential proposed, one directly adjacent to the industrial park and the other between tho commercial and single family areas. Additionally, a portion of the site has been reserved for a perk. Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Site Location Exhibit B - Concept Plan Exhibit C - Chelsea Area Land Use Plan Exhibit D Chelsea Area Concept Plan Exhibit E - Chelsea Area Zoning Exhibit F Recommended Land Use Option 1 Exhibit d - Recommended Land Use - Option 2 Exhibit H - Recommended Zoning 8 PEP -.8 -?d rl ON t z : t-+_ i+ ISSUES ANALYSIS Chelsea Area Study P . 0 z In 1991 a study was undertaken by the City of Monticello to determine the most appropriate lard uses for the area south of Interstate 94 and eas-. of State F.ighway 25 to the City limits. This Chelsea Area Study resulted in a conceptual land use plan for the region which was aimed at promoting positive lard use relatior_shipe, transportation patterns, and development opportunities. This concept, which was adopted and has been promoted by the City, is shown in Exhibit C. Land Use Review of the submim ed concept plan indicates that the commercial and residential land use types being proposed are acceptable, however, the arrangement and interrelationships of such to the surrounding area raises some concerns. The City's goal has been to follow the established land use and zoning criteria of the Chelsea Area Plan to the extent possible. However since completion of the plan, the Evergreens Flat has been abandoned and an expanded area for industrial development has been deemed necessary. Thus, two land use concepts have been prepared which are reflective of the Chelsea Area concept while incorporating the changes mentioned. Exhibit F shows a reduced single family land area on the west side of County Highway 117 which is instead being replaced by a slightly amended conmercial•.Industrial land use relaticnahip. Exhibit G, which is an alter. -&--e land use concept to Exhibit F, shows the extension of single family development further north on the east side of County 117 to take advantage of the available utilities in this location, whiles Maintaining the mult?•ple family land uses as a buffer zone from the industrial area. It is our opinion that the types of land uses proposed by the applicant will be more responsive to the cwm+unicy's needs when laid out in this fashion, shown. in Exhibit D. The City is willing to work with the developer to agree on a concept which is beneficial to both parties, without destroying the dove'cpers' original intent. The reasons for recoasending these changes are based an 1) the need to eorcentrate and Cocus cm. rcial development toward Highway 25, 2) the reed for expanded industrial land, 3) the need to provide medium and high density residential development in the community, while promoting mores than just a strip of land as a buffer between industrial and low density residential areae, 4) the need to provide high Quality single family lots which are located further from the industrial park and more appropriately aid in the integration of the mobile home park within the area, rather than segregating it by an adjacent commercial development, and 5) the reed to integrate park and trail areas within the residential neighborhoods, rathfer than providing a large block of land away from the central devs:opment areas, U P . a s The location of the zoning lines are not intended to be exact. Rather, responsiveness to these developer's site planning proposals may dictate precise locations. Street Circulation Review of proposed street configurations within the concept plan has shown that they are generally acceptable, although some improvements are recommended to improve the overall circulation pattern in the region. Kant -Beet coiiector Street, The layout of the east -wear collector street is generally in conformance with the Cielsea Area Plan, directly connecting School Boulevard to Highway 25, however, the intersection with School Boulevard should be in direct alignment with the existing right-of-way. Preataae Road. The submitted concept plan shows a frontage road which parallels Highway 25 from the mobile home park and then curves to traverse east along the northern edge of rhe site. Given the recommended layout of land uses, the continuation of this road to the east is not necessary; rather, the frontage road should provide for future extension to the north to maintain the configuration parallel to Highway 25. North-South Street. A north -south street ccnnection will be necessary from the east -west collector street, north to the adjacent property in order to provide frontage for the industrial lots proposed in the vicinity. This road should be located about half way between the frontage road and County Road 117 and should intersect at a ninety degree angle to the east -west collector street, thus allowing for a full intersection which also provides a main point of access to the residential land south of the collector. All remaining minor collector or local street patterns will depend on the layout of multiple family areas and single family residential lots. As has been appropriately done in the submitted concept, no direct lot frontage will be allowed and access points should be limited onto arterial and collector streets. RECONrdLYDATION Based on the review of land use and transportation issues discussed herein, the proposed lead uses have been found to be appropriate, however, it is recommended that the applicant provide a revised concept plan which is more responsive to the Chelsea Area layout and to the overall configuration and transition of land use types. Given the prepcsod land use configuration shown in Sxhibit D, the developer has the ability to provide a possible commercial mall, single and multi -family residential development as was origiaaily intended. G m x CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT U u.u..yr wr City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study Proposed Land Use newly R.Ikk..W 0 bufilulkww r.".11Y Rew.mIA x Ntisfkt-wd C--ci,l lash Dtmily RCSI.1-161 Mbk I k—e PAIk Ifih.ay Cww,cj,j iSI4 r R�IW.Ibl, IWI Ci cy of imo n t i c e I to Chelsea Area Land EXHIBIT ' v;j Lta ty of Monticello Em Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study Proposed Zoning R- tftlefamiy , 8-2tiiedGwixss DIS 1 n m m N 0 i L Njixj!(j Uses, 9 0°1 j,,.ECoMMEN,[D LAND USE OPTION MOI)ile vtorne Park t -ow Density Residential IM Industrial F-1 771 Multiple family Commercial Semi-PulJlic \\ J. ..... ......... ilii lit! it Ili RECOMMENG-J LAND USE - OPTION Low Density Residential I Multiple family V ( 1 Pei RECOMMENDED ZO..ING R-1 IDC - INFRASTRUCTURE SUBCOMMITTEE Thursday, February 24, 1994 PRESENT: Chairperson Dennis Taylor, Arve Grimsmo, Ken Maus, Brad Barger, Jeff O'Neill, John Simola, and 011ie Koropchak. RECOMMENDATIONS: The industrial design load recommendation for the Monticello Waste Water Treatment Study was to consider the existing wet - industries and for the addition of new wet -industries. B. The recommendation was to support the zoning request for Kjellberg property to the west of County Road 117 as presented (, and to support the conceptional zoning request of the Klein property to the south of the I-2 Zoning based on the f fa11oW!^;. t 1. Property owners in the I-2 Zoning are notified of the Planning Commission Public Hearing of March 3 in writing. 2. Screening inclusive of fence, berm, and tree plantings are constructed and maintained at the expense of the developer of the Klein property to the immediate south of the I-2 zone. 3. The City governmental units take an active aggressive approach to research and assist in the development of the Hoglund Property (I-1) therebye ensuring marketable I-1 land. 4. The City governmental units take an active aggressive approach to rezone the B-3 property to I-2 (west of County Road 117 [Oakwood Drive] and to the east of Cedar Road, and north of Dundas Road to an approximate line south of the Silver Fox) therebye allowing for a concentrated area of industrial zoned lands and ensuring the availability of I-2 land. C. Planning Commieeion will review the City Zoning or Ordinance as it pertains to the definition of pole barna and if allowable within the City. D. The Subcommittee tabled the discussion to consider the Chelsea Traffic Study as it relates to the safety issues at the Intersection of Chelsea and Oakwood Drive. The IDC will review the Infrastructure Subcommittee 'a recommendations on March 17, 1994. 0 RESOLUTION 92- 4 RESOLUTION ADOPTING CHELSEA AREA LAND USE AND CIRCULATION STUDY AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO WHEREAS, the City Council has recognized the need to update land use policies and prepare amendments to the comprehensive plan that will enable the Chelsea area to achieve its full potential in terms of commercial and industrial development without negatively impacting school and neighborhood uses. WHEREAS, the City Council has recognized the need to develop a plan for development of a transportation system necessary to support development In the Chelsea area. WHEREAS, in response to the needs above, the City of Monticello Planning Commission has been directed by the Cicy Cuum:il Lo 6Ludy and update comprehensive land use plans for the Chelsea area; and WHEREAS, the Chelsea area planning process included information gathered via a formal public hearing along with numerous informational meetings involving various agencies and City committees; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that it is in the best interest of the City to preserve a portion of the undeveloped areas in or adjacent to the city for industrial uses. NJW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Monticello City Council, in agreement with the Planning Commission, finds that the Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study achieves the planning goals set forth; therefore, the City Council hereby adopts the Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study in full as an amendment to the comprehensive plan for the City of Monticello. Let it further be resolved that the City should plan to preserve land for industrial uses at the site of the Klein farm or at the "Evergreens" residential development site. Final location of the site for industrial uses is to be established at such time that the viability of the Evergreens residential development project has been determined. Approved by the Monticello City Council this 24th day of February, 1992. Mayor City Administrator 0 ii'i'i'i'i ►i'i'i. WAWA• MONTICELLO Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study F rVp-,oa C �IDNc iIC. CITY OF MONPICHLLO CHEL.SBA ARBA IPMUSTBIAL PARK/ SCHOOL FACILITY LAN® USE PLAN JAN13ARY 1992 Prepared By: Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. 5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555 St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study INTRODUCTTON The City of Monticello, in the area south of Interstate 94 and east of Trunk Highway 25, has recognized a need to address the developing land use conflicts in the area. For several years, the area has been programmed for industrial development. However, within the past few years, the School District has constructed a middle school and a bond referendum, passed last year, will lead to an elementary school on the same campus. The school construction has led to a rapid increase in the interest in residential growth in the immediate vicinity. The resolution of a foreclosure on a large parcel directly south of the school campus has accelerated that interest. In addition, questions have been raised as to the appropriateness of existing base zoning, traffic patterns, and the City's ability to encourage high quality industrial development in the district. These and other issues have led to this study of the area's land use and related conditions. It is the objective of this report to develop a guide development plan, in the form of a Comprehensive Plan amendment, to resolve the various issues as identified, and integrate the plan into the existing planning framework. That framework includes utilities and storm water control measures underway, as well as the developed landscape. Several items have served to define the study area (shown in Exhibit A) in addition to the issues already raised. Initially, the properties which were under immediate development pressure provided a starting point for analysis. How these parcels were served by utility and transportation networks then expanded the scope of study. The general area of review grew to include lands from Trunk Highway 25 on the west, Interstate 94 on the north, County 118 on the east, and the City limits on the south. To be sure that proper transitions and connections were considered, study often "spilled over" onto adjacent lands for circulation and/or land use. One of the most significant of such parcels is the Klein parcel which lies between the school property and the Kjellberg development. Background and guidance for this project has been provided through several meetings with City Staff and various property owners, community boards, and commissions. The City's Comprehensive Plan has been utilized as a base for policy direction, together with comments from the groups who have reviewed the drafts. Since some of land included in the development plan in outside City boundaries, the City cannot enforce all of the specific recommendations of the report. However, these plans are designed to help guide the decisions on adjacent properties so the eventual development will occur in a coordinated and cohesive manner. 0 INVENTORY OF CONDITIONS A. PHYSICAL ISSUES (See Exhibit B) Physical features existing upon the land significantly impact the planning and future development of land use and transportation systems. If is for this reason that review of such issues within the Chelsea Study Area follows. Annexation. The study area contains and borders a number of designated orderly annexation areas. These areas have been designated to insure that City growth, urbanization, and the conversion of agricultural land occur in a well planned and orderly fashion. The land use plan should be coordinated with the designated orderly annexation areas so as to reinforce preferred urban growth patterns. Transportation. A City's vehicular circulation system, as it relates to and serves the surrounding land uses, is the component which makes an area functionally successful. The transportation system in the study area is complex and contains roadways of all functional classifications. The principal arterials in the area are Interstate 94 and State Highway 25, which generate traffic and draw persons into the City from regional, state, and out-of-state locations. County Road 75 (Broadway Avenue) is classified as a minor arterial and collects traffic from state and interstate roadways as a main connection to downtown and neighborhood areas. County Highway 117 and County Highway 118 are collector streets which primarily serve the Chelsea area by siphoning traffic from sub -collector and local streets to access arterial roadways. Chelsea Avenue is the only sub - collector street which serves the study area by joining County Highways 117 and 118 to provide an east -west community corridor south of and in lieu of Interstate 94. Numerous local streets serve the Chelsea Area to access individual lots from sub -collector or collector roadways. It is the local streets which present the most significant transportation problems in regard to safety, alignment, and intersection design. More specifically, Cedar Street, Marvin, and Sandberg Roads and Oakwood Avenue which are all located near the I-94/Highway 25 intersection, function as part of a frontage road system. The angular alignments and numerous access points from State Highway 25 and County Road 117 to these local frontage roads create safety hazards and difficulty in planning for future extensions, connections, and/or improvements to these roadways. Consideration must be given to the realignment of portions of these roadways to provide acceptable access, circulation and development opportunities in the future. N o Drainage—y. The study area is bisected by a natural drainageway which flows between County Highway 117 and Fallon Avenue. Sensitivity toward the natural feature should be incorporated within an area land use plan. o Trail System. In terms of area circulation, the preparation of a land use plan for the subject area should make provision for a pedestrian trail system. The trail system should be arranged so as to provide logical routes between destinations and, for the most part, should follow vehicular routes. The physical issues map, Exhibit B, designates potential trail system connections which coordinate with and complement the land use and transportation patterns in the study area. o Utility Basements. A number of utility easements overlay the study area. The land use plan and subsequent lot arrangements must be responsive to such easements in an advantageous fashion. B. zONING/LR= USE (See Exhibit C) Because zoning is essentially a tool by which desired land uses may be achieved, it will obviously be of importance in the preparation of the Chelsea Area Land Use Plan. In review of the areas existing zoning designations, a number of concerns have been identified which will need to be addressed. School Property. The School District parcel is currently zoned Single Family Residential. This district allows educational facilities by conditional use permit. The School District requested this zoning from industrial and commercial in 1991. A second issue, related to the school property which needs to be addressed, will be the minimization of conflicts between surrounding area industrial, commercial, and residential land uses and school facility/associated site uses. Heavy Industrial Uses. The majority of existing heavy industrial land uses are concentrated between County Highway 117 and Fallon Avenue south of Chelsea Road, although a small parcel exists to the west of County Highway 117. The architectural quality and levels of site design vary considerably between lots and businesses within this district. The area, as a whole, also lacks a singular transportation route which unifies and emphasizes entrance into the industrial district. Light Industrial Land. A significant portion of land zoned as light industrial exists north and east of the City's heavy industrial uses and extends across Interstate 94 to County Road 75 (Broadway Avenue). The location and orientation of this land use is generally well-served, however, a portion of the School District property abuts this light industrial zone. Even though the two land uses are usually compatible, careful consideration is necessary in order to minimize potential conflicts, provide buffer areas, and promote high quality light industrial developments. This study will address the possibility of the creation of a new zoning district which would both increase the site development standards, as well as decrease the intensity of the industrial use. With such a new district, the exact boundaries of the various industrial districts may change to better accommodate the transition between uses and development quality. Comercial Land. The study area contains a large portion of commercially zoned Highway and Limited Business District land along State Highway 25 and Interstate 94. Attraction of business from both arterial roadways and connection to the City's Regional and Central Business Districts •iia this interchange have made this area function successfully, despite several transportation problems. In addition, significant portions of this commercial district remain undeveloped and under-developed. It is for these reasons that the commercially zoned land to the east along Interstate 94 and County Highway 118 be reconsidered in terms of need and appropriateness. More specifically, the amount of land, as zoned, may be unnecessary due to the amount of commercial land remaining vacant in the State Highway 25 region. in addition, accessibility of this area from Interstate 94 and County Road 75 is inconvenient at present and construction of an interchange at County Highway 118 may not be warranted functionally or financially. Agricultural/Open Space. Two significant parcels of agriculturally zoned land exist within the study area. The first is located along Highway 25, just north of Kjellberg's Mobile Home Park (Exhibit D). A preliminary plat design of this area called 'The Evergreens" was completed prior to this study which proposed subdivision of the parcel for additions of single family uses. The 1st Addition has been final platted but remains unbuilt. The appropriateness of this land use in direct proximity to heavy industrial and commercial zones is questionable. This incompatibility and the fact that no construction has taken place necessitates reevaluation of the remainder of parcel in association with preparation of the land use and transportation plan for the Chelsea Study Area. Final determination as to the future of this parcel should be decided by the City at its earliest convenience in order to facilitate planning and development of surrounding areas. The second parcel of agriculturally zoned land exists directly south of the School District property and includes a portion of it, as discussed previously. The new owners of the 109 acre tract south of the school, Value Plus Homes, have recently proposed subdivision of their property for "R- 1, Single Family" uses. One initial conceptual plan drawn for the area showed varied sizes of lots focused around interior park and trail system components which connected to school and surrounding properties. Residential Planned Unit Development. A large tract of land zoned for Residential PUD uses lies east of County Road 118 WE Jason Avenue) and extends to the Interstate 94 and Burlington Northern Railroad rights-of-way. Platting and development of several additions in this area have taken place and represent a positive movement toward this type of residential land use in the City. Orderly Annexation Areas. As stated previously, the study area contains several orderly annexation areas which are necessary to reinforce urban growth patterns. The three moat significant parcels, as related to this study, are located 1) at the intersection of Interstate 94 and County Road 75 (Hogland property), 2) east of Fenning Avenue in the Jason Avenue/County Road 118 area (Schultz property), and 3) between County Road 117 and Fallon Avenue (Klein property). A fourth annexation area exists west of State Highway 25, which although not directly addressed in this study, will undoubtedly have an effect on the Chelsea Area and need to be coordinated with its land use and transportation components as development proposals west of Highway 25 necessitate this. Each of the orderly annexation areas are an important part of achieving the desired land use transitions and integrity between existing land uses. (0 P,EVELOPMSNT PLAN A. CIRCULATION PLAN In response to the transportation issues discussed previously, several changes are being proposed within the Chelsea Study Area to alleviate existing conflicts, and improve the overall circulation system as development occurs throughout the region. 92nd Street NE Extension (School Boulevard). The proposed extension of 92nd Street NE between County Road 118 and State Highway 25 will function as a collector roadway to provide the necessary east -west access in the City south of Interstate 94. The first phase of the extension is necessary to serve the School District property directly to the north. In addition, developers of a single family subdivision opposite the school property on the south side of School Boulevard will benefit from the access. As the extension of School Boulevard continues westward through the Klein property annexation area, more residential land uses of varying densities will be served before the roadway bisects commercial land uses and becomes part of the realigned Highway 25 frontage road system. The single family subdivision final platted and approved for the Kjellberg property has been accommodated in the extension of School Boulevard, however, changes to the associated preliminary plat may be necessary to respond to the changes in roadway alignment and surrounding area land uses. Exhibit D shows the subdivision layout and proposed roadway extension. This issue will be addressed further in the land use section. Highway 25 Frontage Road System. As discussed previously, the existing angular alignment and inferior intersection design of Cedar Street, Marvin, and Sandberg Roads in relation to State Highway 25 present safety hazards and traffic congestion problems. In order to alleviate these problems, realignment and extension of the roads are proposed. By providing a frontage road system which closely parallels Highway 25, existing commercial businesses have "equal" frontage and visibility while development opportunities are enhanced for the addition of other commercial lots. The alignment of frontage roads on both sides of Highway 25 is a safer alternative which limits access on the state arterial roadway by allowing shared curb cuts controlled at signalized intersections. Minimal extension of Dundas Road allows a positive connection to this system and provides 9 direct access through commercial and industrial land use areas. Sandberg Road, which currently meets Highway 25 only 1,200 feet from the Interstate 94/Highway 25 intersection, would be better designed as a right-in/right-out intersection which provides direct access from Highway 25 through to Marvin Road. In this regard, the necessary access is provided on the west side of Highway 25 while eliminating dangerous cross -traffic. Termination of Thomas Park Drive. Thomas Park Drive and Thomas Circle currently provide access to a clustering of commercial parcels which front along Interstate 94. Vehicles approaching this area from County Road 117 are faced with traversing a confusing intersection at Chelsea Road where Thomas Park Drive extends north from this point. Improper space for turning and stacking of vehicles creates a dangerous situation on County Road 117 as vehicles turning to go north to the Thomas Circle area must cross traffic as vehicles on Chelsea Road are trying to enter and exit onto County Road 117. In order to minimize vehicular conflicts at this intersection, it is proposed that Thomas Park Drive be terminated just north of the Chelsea Road/County Road 117 intersection. The elimination of this small portion of roadway will greatly reduce traffic congestion and conflicts at this intersection by forcing vehicles to use the Thomas Park Drive entrance further east on Chelsea Road. Access can be maintained to the Monticello Roller Rink and Joyners Howling Lanes, and then terminated immediately afterward. This solution provides the opportunity for a signalized or otherwise controlled intersection in addition to aesthetic improvements via landscape design and signage which designates entrance into the proposed industrial areas. A suggestion to be considered is shown on the Circulation Plan (Exhibit E). This design will alter the traffic pattern by allowing Chelsea Road to flow directly to Highway 25, bringing County Road 117 into °T" intersection. This alignment would better distribute the traffic, however, the County Highway Department is not ready to endorse the concept. As a result, the Concept Development Plan is drawn with the intersection as it exists. Fallon Avenue Overpass. The City of Monticello has expressed a desire to consider construction of an overpass connecting Fallon Avenue over Interstate 94 to the downtown area of the City. The positive and negative aspects of this concept need to be weighed against one another to determine its feasibility and necessity. O It may be advantageous to have an additional connection to industrial and commercial area, although Highway 25 and County Highway 118 serve the same purpose and traffic volumes may not justify it at this time. In addition, improved east -west circulation via the proposed extension of 92nd Street NE would expedite movement between Highway 25 and County Road 118 which currently have connections north of Interstate 94. Likewise, the improved frontage road system and signalized intersection at Dundas Road allow for relatively direct access from commercial and industrial areas to Highway 25 and consequent connection to the CBD. However, the positives of this connection are several. Fallon would serve as a second major north -south access between school campuses. In addition, traffic flow between the Central Business District and this "new" area of the community wou 1d be improved, strengthening the connection and helping t o reduce the barrier effect of the freeway. Also strengthened is the access tie between industrial areas on opposite sides of the interstate. This tie can help to mitigate truck traffic in the Highway 25 interchange area, as well as on County 118. The plan has been developed with the anticipation that the Fallon overpass will be eventually developed. County Road 118/Interstate 94 Interchange. The existing Comprehensive Plan identifies the need to develop access from the interstate via an additional interchange at County Road 118. Preliminary review of this idea reveals more potential adverse effects on the surrounding area than positive ones- For instance, limited visibility of land in this area from the interstate lessens its value for commercial us es. Furthermore, promoting commercial use in this area, separate from the City's main business sector along Highway 25 and into downtown, may be in opposition to City objectives. Although an interchange at County Road 118 may take pressure away from the one at Highway 25, the two existing ramps which provide access eastbound onto the interstate and westbound off of it, seem to adequately serve the local population and frequent travelers commuting between Monticello and the Twin City Metropolitan Area. The existing Comprehensive Plan pursues the interchange as an aid to commercial development in the study area. In fact, the primary advantage of the interchange, with respect to commercial traffic, is one of convenience based business development. The development plan has de-emphasized commercial and industrial land use in this area, however, due to the introduction of the school and the broad increase in residential development appears more appropriate toward the Highway 25 corridor and thus, the "need" for the increased freeway access at this point is lessened. PROPOSED LAND USE (See Exhibit F) In response to the concerns raised in review of the area's existing zoning, physical issues, and vehicular transportation, a Land Use Plan has been completed for the Chelsea Area. The plan represents a culmination of ideas from two Conceptual Land Use Plans which were previously prepared for this purpose and also reflects input received from City residents and staff. The following paragraphs summarize the elements of the plan, which is meant to guide land use and zoning decisions as development progresses in the region. School Property. The recent school rezoning to R-1 aids in the minimization of conflicts between school and surrounding uses by allowing only compatible land uses to occur adjacent to the school property. Residential land uses of varying densities surround the school facility on all sides except the north, where light industrial and commercial uses front along Chelsea Road. The abutting commercial parcel is of minimal size and proposed as a neighborhood retail location. The school property is physically separated from the commercial area by Chelsea Road. The adjacent light industrial land uses are aligned so as to back up the school property line. Setback distances and buffering materials can be set to promote aesthetic harmony, noise control, and safety between the light industrial lots and school uses. The school property is participating in the buffering effort to facilitate these goals. Heavy Industrial Land Uses. The Land Use Plan has retained the majority of the existing heavy industrially zoned land as such. Due to the number of vacant parcels and the newly proposed light industrial area to the east, the heavy industry will remain bound by Chelsea Road to the north, County Road 117 to the west, and Fallon Avenue to the east. Medium density land uses are proposed to the south of the area, with parcels from each backing up to one another to allow for a buffer zone between the two land uses. The perimeter configuration of the roadways acts as a buffer zone around the district to maintain the visual quality of the exterior, while outdoor storage and other heavy industrial activities are allowable on the interior. These types of land uses within Monticello are not only a necessity now, but will be sought after more and more as the City and Chelsea Area continues to develop. Planning for heavy industrial uses in this manner lessens the burden on the City and surrounding area uses when the need for them arises. Light Industrial Land Uses. Areas designated for light industrial land uses in the Land Use Plan include the same areas currently zoned as "I-1", Light Industrial, but extend eastward to include a portion of commercially zoned land north of the school property. In response to the issues of visibility and access from Interstate 94, and the vacancy rate of commercially zoned land along Highway 25, the addition of light industrial uses adjacent to the interstate and extension of existing light industrial uses seemed to be the most legitimate solution. As mentioned previously, the creation of a new zoning district for light industrial related uses is proposed. A need exists in Monticello for increased site development standards in areas of architectural quality, outdoor storage, open space, and landscape design. Entitled "B -C", Business Campus, this district imposes such standards on light industrial uses. The need is seen as an assurance to existing and new high quality developments that surrounding properties will be developed to high quality standards. In addition, the proximity to the school property encourages the "campus" development style here. Commercial Land Uses. After study of commercial land uses in the Chelsea Area, it has been ascertained that land currently zoned as Highwdy and Limited Business Commercial along Interstate 94 and County Road 118 appears to be in excess of what is needed in the Chelsea Area. As discussed previously, the land seems to be more warranted for light industrial land uses which typically do not require a high visibility location. In addition, access on and off of the interstate to County Road 118 poses questions of convenience, as does the feasibility of an expanded interchange at this location. In light of this, highway oriented commercial uses have been expanded to follow the proposed Highway 25 frontage road system and regional commercial uses have been recommended and contained in the area west of County (toad 117. Improved access to these areas has been proposed via the realigned intersection at County Road 117/Chelsea load and additional cross axis off of Cedar Street with connection to Dundas Road and County Road 117. The regional of land which is currently zoned for highway commercial izes would provide greater flexibility in the permitted uses and attract businesses which do not need a high visibility location. Medium/High Density Residential Land Uses. Within the Study Area, south of Interstate 94, no areas are currently zoned for medium/high density residential land uses. Consequently, conflicts between heavy industrial and single family districts are apparent. In light of this, steps have 10 0/99 been taken to eliminate and prevent further conflicts between antagonistic land uses in the Proposed Land Use Plan. High density land uses are proposed along the frontage road system which is planned to run parallel to Highway 25. This approximately 26 acres of land provides a transition between the highway commercial uses proposed adjacent to Highway 25 and the single family land uses east of here. Likewise, medium density land uses are proposed south of the heavy industrial district (Klein Orderly Annexation Area) as a buffer between the lower density single family uses to the west and south. Some discussion has occurred regarding the expansion of industrial land uses into this area from the north due to concern over ultimate "build out" condition on the other industrial zoned parcels. With the transportation system as designed, such a scenario would occur with appropriate screening and landscaping. This district would need to be designed with a interval focus and a perimeter screen to integrate the visual and trunk traffic impacts on area single family properties. o Single Family Land Uses. A large portion of land that is currently zoned "A", Agricultural -Open Space or that is part of the City's orderly annexation areas is proposed as single family land uses in the Land Use Plan. This area includes land directly south of the school property (Cardinal Hills preliminary plat) adjacent to 92nd Street NE and progresses west to include the single family subdivision proposed on the Kjellberg property. Low density residential uses would benefit from the 92nd Street extension through to Highway 25, proximity to the school facilities, and neighboring commercial uses. Residential Planned Unit Development. A large portion of land zoned as "R -PUD", Residential Planned Unit Development exists within the study area north and east of County Road 118/Jason Avenue (Meadow Oaks PUD). Land Use Concept One proposes to extend this district to the intersection of 92nd Street NE and County Road 118. High quality park and trail system amenities associated with residential developments planned as an integrated unit will complement the school property and surrounding single family land uses. Special Sites. A few specific sites have been highlighted here due to current development status. First is the Kjellberg plat, known as "The Evergreens". This plat was approved by the City over two years ago but was not recorded. Although the development plan accommodates the single family plat, higher intensity land uses in this area 11 may be more appropriate due to the proposed collector street and its intersection with T.H. 25. As a result, the implementation steps in the next section do not include this area, as the City is pursuing options to abandon the plat. Secondly, a local church has expressed interest in occupying a portion of the commercial property along Chelsea near County 118. The development plan shows land for this type of institutional use east of County 118. The plan was developed with the intent of reserving the most desirable commercial parcel for neighborhood convenience commercial. Location of a church on this parcel would erode some of that land, further limiting the commercial floor space potential. If the City believes the church use to be appropriate, we would recommend the parcel furthest from the intersection. 12 I0 SON SRX With the background presented in the exhibits and this report, a number of implementation steps are appropriate. First is amendment of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This step is important on two levels. As the guide to development policy, the Comprehensive Plan explains the rationale for various zoning decisions the City makes. Therefore, the base must be established prior to rezoning an area where a departure from current land use is proposed. The second level is reflective of the fact that some of the land is not ripe for immediate rezoning or capital improvement. This may be for reasons of development status, as with The Evergreens, or lack of development jurisdiction, such as the Klein parcel. The Comprehensive Plan can, however, provide for the future development of these parcels, thereby facilitating more immediate development decisions. The Comprehensive Plan amendment may take either of two paths. The City may choose to adopt the development plan as a land use guide, or it may adopt this report as an amendment document, which would accomplish the former option, as well as enforce the supporting text. Procedurally, either step is acceptable. The next step in implementation is to enact the rezonings directed by the Plan. As noted, certain of those rezonings suggested by the plan are not ready for enactment. As a result, the Rezoning Plan, Exhibit H, shows those which are being proposed at this time. 13 N City of Monticello Wright County, Minnesota 1ktdy Are 'a* 1. C (i I -se. .1 City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study P- hysicaI Issues Oldedy Amr,rlf- Alraf Potential Fedrsuirn I,aAsr•. / �/ -I / rf ,/� l `� � \ • � Nalual fha'nages.ay mrnl _ t :-,_—d j 111— A• i rff 1'ui4f n Ilrn Hr nly) 1 �� 14n�1e Ygr•frrlMwl � '/��� ' • L` .l .I. _} I / / 1 / qqq�� -�...- 1_knr 14 n, ulnly 1 I- AL6nlnrnl ,'/ter of �` ... b.0lu u•nl Inu•-'•.i i H -J I <<tc. - "X" ict \) Q7 ♦ til h.d 14unr1 Pmprlly000 I 00 •••• A A• MA ►AAA - pass .. ago ...S... a.u..awra— 'FF n /' \Irtp�rvg I•myrliy ••��+�N NrrJ Iw Addok.,aI d { 00 -WI, I Headway rn x S Cr W, City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Ci rculat ion Study 91 I: x i s I i n g I' Z o n i n g R- I S.& I amdy B.2 1 —wd B-6— It Rc Ik,il 6p uiq B Poamed IM,iI DrvcM.pnknl -f Ih hwa Ik,auirsf 6 Y RA I.kdl,k Ik.— PA I -I 1iglu 6iduakul \ M-) Ago 01-1/0pm Sp. e 1 2 Ik—y b'd-1-1 I'/ M li•,hwm— /u,—M—d 91 THE EVERGREENS - " r rao i 0 Phase One Final Hal Approved (No GrnslrnrclUun has Occurred) :Provide 92nd Slnvvl l'r\Crdleclur I xienliun I 1111111 City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study Proposed Transportation Ime,srale Freeway slate 14ghway�� 0 City of Monticello Chelsea Area Land Use and Circulation Study P I o p u s e d I a n d I I s c \\ I,�w Ih•nuly H-41 1'.1 ❑ELA Inll�liilx �n.,l Q `�'•., `� �1r,fx+n nrnlily Ifrl,arnlwl NriF;lilnxl+,nnl t•nnxn,v��al \ (I ll�hl,ll�vivl} H+•va.•nl,e! ■ fl�f;f,lv,,y t�,+nxt,r,, ,.,1 \\\\\\\\\WCL •` Abd,• i6xnr i'ari ® i+};M b„fi,lbi.d O ' 'y.�l� � IU•tutrnt�a: �` %�\ % I'I,� ,ril 14x1 nrl,•I��ixn,v,f ilr.rv} 4u4�liri�i E3 POA, C i t *y of Monticello "a cu Chet sea Arca Land Use and C i rcli I a t i of, Study ?41:Lwlzku Mi 1� Conceptual Area Plan ?41:Lwlzku Mi 1� C i t y of mo 11 t i c 0 1 1 0 Chelsea Area Land Use a tic] Circulation S t LI (I y Conceptual Area Plan Council Agenda - 5/9/94 t t. Consideration of contractine for assistance with building insaections. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND As you recall, at the previous meeting of the City Council, Council authorized City staff to develop a plan for addressing staffing needs within the building inspection department. As was noted in the discussion, the amount of workload impacting building inspections has increased dramatically in the last few years, which has required Cary Anderson to work well beyond a 40 -hour work week. It has also required that he take work home on a regular basis. As evidence of this higher workload, it should be noted that in 1993 the City collected more than $87,000 in building permit fees. The total cost to the City for inspection services on an annual basis, including salary benefits and transportation expenses, amounts to $50,000, or $24/hr. Council is asked to consider authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Paul Waldron & Associates Ltd. to provide inspection services to the City of Monticello on a temporary basis. Under the plan proposed, the City would be provided a certified, experienced building inspector to work under Gary's direction. The duties of this inspector would be limited to inspection of residential properties. Gary Anderson would contin ue to complete all plan review activity and would do all commercial, industrial, and institutional building inspections. Under the proposal, the individual hired through Waldron's firm would he paid on an hourly basis at a rate of $24/hr. 'Phis rate includes all expenses, including liability insurance and transportation. There is no charge to the City for transportation time to and from town. It is estimated that there is sufficient work to keep this individual busy six to eight hours per day through the month of september. I'aul Waldron & Associates Ltd. provides inspection services for a number of communities in the west metro area, including Watertown. Through my position as Administrator for the City of Watertown, 1 found Waldron s work to he excellent. I trust that his firm would serve the City well. BENEFITS OF PROPOSAL There ore a number of good reasons why it makes sense to contract out for additional building inspection services. Efficiency. The inspector assigned to Monticello will be completely trained in residentinl construction and would have complete familiarity with the Uniform Building Code. Training time for this individual will he minimal, thereby providing Gary with immediate assistance. 15 Council Agenda - 5/9/94 Contracting out inspection service buys the City time to fully analyze building inspections, planning and zoning, public nuisance enforcement needs, and gives us time to determine what level of staffing is needed to satisfy those needs. 3. The immediate need can be addressed without further delay. On the other hand, hiring a training student out of a technical college or carpenter off the street will take time. 4. Funds are available. In the past, it's been the philosophy of the City to charge building inspection services at a rate equal to expenses. Obviously, this was not the case in 1993, as the City has been making a considerable amount of money via the inspections department. Therefore, funds are and will he available to pay the additional short- term rost of hiring an individual through a private contractor. Of course, the amount of "surplus" revenue otherwise transferred to the general fund will be diminished. The main advantage to pursuing hiring rather than contracting for inspection services is the cost factor. It is likely that the City could hire a student out of a technical college for next to nothing for the first month of duty, and thereafter the cost would be minimal. The person hired could be brought on without benefits with the understanding that the job is temporary and that there are no guarantees that a full-time position would he awarded. This would he the least expensive option in terms of outright expenses: however, the expenses associated with the time that Cary will need to spend training this individual and following up on the work of a trainee reduces the desirability of this option. 13. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to authorize the City to enter into a contract with Paul Waldron & Associates Ltd. to provide building inspection services at Cite rate of $24 per hour. Under this alternative, it certified building inspector will he provided by Waldron to start with the City of Monticello immediately. Waldron understands that this is it short-term situation and that it is likely that the relationship with Waldron's firm is not likely to extend heyond it ti -month time frame. He also understands that it could be terminated sooner if the City hires it building inspector relatively soon. 2. Motion to deny requested contract for inspection cervices and direct City staff to begin the process of hiring an employee to supplement inspection services. 16 Council Agenda - 5/9/94 Under this alternative, City Council is not convinced that contracting out is the best idea and that it makes more sense to supplement building inspections through hiring a qualified individual or an individual that could be trained, etc. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is the view of City staff that although the cost per hour is high relative to the cost to hire a full-time temporary employee, the benefi is of contracting outlined above outweigh the added expense. As an alternative to hiring Waldron, it is suggested that perhaps the City could contact other private frons to see if we could obtain contracting services at a rate less than $24 per hour. Although there is a chance that we could find a firm to provide an inspector at a lesser rate, it is our view that $24 is a fair price, especially when you ennsider Ihat the individual hired will have a considerable amount of experience in building inspection and will have all liability insurance coverage protecting him and the City. Therefore, it is our view that the $24 per hour price is reasonable; however, we certainly could spend more time on this issue searching for a qualified firm or person who would do the work at a lesser rats. Finally, a closer analysis of our building permit fee structure may be warranted. According to Waldron, our plan review fees for residential development are far leas than the fees required by other cities; therefore, we may want to make an adjustment accordingly. It appears that in the recent past, we have been able to make a profit on building inspection services due largely to big fees generated by commercial development rind due to the hard work of our single inspector. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of letter from Paul Waldron outlining proposal. C�� XI -t Pt 17 03.9610. Q., en E 9ne99909990990 r.9J Paul A. Waldron & Associates, Ltd. 12225 - 62nd Street W9con%, Mlnnesole 55,387 (612) 446, 1786 May 4. 1894 City of Monticello Attn: Jeff O'Neil, Assistant City Administrator 260 East Broadway Monticello, Minnesota 66362 Dear Mr. O'Neil: An per our conversation on Tuesday, May 3. 1094, our firm IR interested in providing staff support to your Building Deportment under Mr. Anderson's supervision. 1 uirderatand that this is to be n one-time agreement to begin in Mav of 1994 still terminate five to six monthe Inter. Our firm will provide a certified lsulidit.tt Official to nonist in building field iuspoctious. Compensation would be by nu hourly rate of $24.00 per hour, We would be responsible for providing all our own bnneflLa and insurances. We also would provide si.aff support on a daily basis as needed by your building department. if au hourly rate to not acceptable, we sen provide stnff sapport for m six-motith period of not to exceed an B -hour work day, for $30,000. )n either case, hourly sr term, we will be absorbing the expense coats rot, mileage, car phones, fringe benefits, and itiout•nnce rovarages for the lonned staff personnel. I hope 1 have covered the general concerns within thio letter If not, please contact ma at your convenience. Sincerely. Paul A. Waldron, Nuiiding Official NAW/bw �1t Council Agenda - 5/9/94 n. Consideration of rezonine Outlota C and D of Meadow Oak Estates from R -PUD to R-1. (J,O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND For the sake of efficiency, I am submitting the agenda item presented to the City Council for the meeting of 4/11/94. As you recall, this item was tabled at the same meeting when approval of the original preliminary plat was tabled. If Council has found that the preliminary plat prepared by the Planning Commission is acceptable, then it is appropriate to take action on the rezoning at this time. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Previous agenda supplement; Copy of proposed ordinance amendment. is CO �e Council Agenda - 4/1V94 Consideration of rezoning Outlots C and D of the Meadow Oak subdivision from R -PUD to R-1. ADolicant. Citv of Monticello. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: If the City Council agrees that the R-1 design of the Eastwood Knoll is in harmony with the original PUD and the Council has selected a design for the preliminary plat, it is time to consider rezoning the site from R -PUD to R-1. As noted at the previous Council meeting, the Eastwood plat design meets all of the R-1 density, yard, and infrastructure design requirements; therefnre, the R-1 zoning designation is more appropriate than the R -PUD designation. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve the rezoning of Outlots C and D of the Meadow Oak subdivision to be known as Eastwood Knoll from R -PUD to R-1. The motion is based on the finding that the subdivision design of the Eastwood Knoll is consistent with the R-1 standards, and the design of the Eastwood Knoll is also consistent with the original intent of the R -PUD plan originally proposed for the Meadow Oak area. 2. Motion to deny the rezoning request. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative M1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of zoning map; Copy of proposed ordinance amendment. e,,v.rrewl,k ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MON (CELLO, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS THAT THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: Itezone Outlots C and 1), Meadow Oak Estates, from It -PUD (residential planned unit development) to R-1 (single family residential). Adopted this 9th day of May, 1994. Mayor City Administrator Ca`� Council Agenda - 5/9/94 13. Consideration of aoaroving oreliminary plat of the Eastwood Knoll_ subdivision. (J.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND As you recall, at the previous meeting of the City Council, Council was unable to take action on the preliminary plat of the Eastwood Knoll subdivision due to the fact that the Planning Commission tabled the matter. At the meeting of the Planning Commission on May 3, City staff presented a new design which was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission. The alternative selected by the Planning Commission was approved based on the condition that the best management practices and design techniques are used in designing the storm drainage plan. There were no objections to the new design from the area residents present at the meeting. The new plat design features some subtle changes to the plan that appear to accommodate many of the concerns voiced by area residents and City staff. The major improvement in this plan is introduction of an additional intersection that inhibits use of the collector road as it throughway. The plan also provides a connection between the two subdivisions that falls at a position west of the original alignment, which further reduces appeal of the collector road as a throughway. Under the design as proposed, there should be minimal or no impact on the existing Meadow Oak development in terms of added traffic. At the same time, the plan preserves the terrain of Outlots C and 1) and takes best advantage of the natural characteristics of the land and preserves the exclusive cul-de-sac lending to the elevated portion of the site. The only design standard that, this preliminary plat violates is the length of the cul- de-sac. Our general guidelines require that cul-de-sacs he 600 ft in length or less. This particular cul-de-sac exceeds this maximwn length slightly. However, it was felt by the Planning Commission that this additional length is acceptable due to the fact that lot densities on the cul-de-sac are lower due to the large sire of the lots and because connecting the cul-de-sac as a loop street would have required significant grading activity which would have resulted in it loss of numerous trees. Therefore, it made sense to adopt the preliminary plat as proposed. An aspect of the plan that was not discussed by the Planning Commission that Council may wish to review is whether or not to place a sidewalk along the connector road leading from Briar Oakes to the future park, or should the sidewalk or pathway he excluded from the plan with individuals gaining 19 Council Agenda - 5/9/94 access to the park via the roadway. Under our traditional design, the roadway would be developed to u 36 -ft wide surface, which provides significant room for pedestrians and bicyclists to gain safe access to the park using the side of the road. Due to the relatively low traffic volumes expected on this road, this is probably a safe and efficient alternative. Another alternative would be to reduce the width of the road to 32 ft and then introduce a pathway or sidewalk on either side of the roadway. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt the preliminary plat as presented by the Planning Commission. 2. Motion to adopt one of the previous plans presented. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative ill. Although the design process was somewhat tedious and excrutiating, it is our view that it was well worth the effort because the design now on the table appears to address almost all of the concerns of the parties involved. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of agenda supplement provided to Planning Commission for 5/3/94 meeting; Copy of preliminary plat of alternative selected by the Planning Commission. 20 Planning Commission Agenda - 5/3/94 Public Hearing Continued• -Consideration of oreliminary plat of the Eastwood Knoll subdivision. (J.OJ A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND At the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, Planning Commission reviewed revisions to the original subdivision design and discussed other design alternatives for development of Outlots C and D. As a result of the discussion, it was determined that the item should be tabled. Staff was directed to prepare a new design for the subdivision. The new design features a less direct route through the general area, thereby reducing the level of cut -through traffic. City Engineer Bret Weiss obtained input from Jon Bogart regarding this third option and has prepared a sketch plan accordingly. Subsequent to Planning Commission action, the City Council authorized City staff to solicit proposals from developers in purchasing the property outright. Any proposals will be considered at the City Council meeting on May 9, 1994. As you can see, the new plan shifts the connection point between Briar Oakes and Eastwood Knoll to the west. Making the connection at this location will have the effect of eliminating the exclusive cul-de-sac planned for the final phase of the Briar Oakes subdivision. Perhaps this plan could be improved by shifting the connection point slightly to the east, thereby saving the Briar Oakes cul-de-sac. This plan also places the collector roadway on the portion of the terrain where grades are the steepest. Although through traffic will be reduced because of the design, the through traffic that does use this road will be traversing significant grades on Eastwood Knoll. Finally, the design as shown does not eliminate access to Meadow Oak Lane. In fact, it could occur that traffic from Briar Oakes might find it preferable to use Meadow Oak Lane to get to the freeway access versus the collector road. This is because using Meadow Oak Lane i the most direct route to the freeway under this design. Planning Commission is asked to review the three basic designs proposed for the Eastwood Knoll subdivision and determine a preference. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve the preliminary plat of the Eastwood Knoll subdivision under the oriGrinal design. Planning Commission Agenda - 5/3/94 Under this alternative, the City will be assured of achieving its goal of creating an exclusive, isolated neighborhood. As a result, additional traffic impacts will be experienced by the existing Meadow Oak neighborhood. As a variation of this alternative, the connection to Briar Oakes could be eliminated, thereby maintaining separation as envisioned under the original PUD design. Under this alternative, the future connection of Briar Oakes to Eastwood Knoll would be eliminated, thereby eliminating any possibility of cut -through traffic traveling in either direction. Briar Oakes traffic created by 64 lots would enter and leave at one location; Meadow Oak/Eastwood Knoll traffic consisting of traffic generated by 52 lots would also enter and leave the subdivision at one location. This alternative is not consistent with the standard practice of providing at least two outlets from each development; however, due to the relatively small size of each subdivision and due to the potential of the road becoming a shortcut for traffic outside the development, it might make sone sense to select this alternative. This alternative will impact the efficiency of snow removal, bus service, and police patrol services by requiring longer travel distance between subdivisions. Motion to appruve the preliminary plat of the Eastwood Knoll subdivision following the Meadow Oak Lane "bvuass" desien. The alternative plan features the extension of the roadway from Briar Oakes extending through the site, thereby providing direct access to Meadow Oak Avenue and 'bypassing" Meadow Oak Estates. Under this configuration, additional traffic impact on Meadow Oak Lane will be minimized, and the roadway connecting the Briar Oakes area to Meadow Oak Lane through Eastwood Knoll can be constructed to a 36 -ft wide minimum, which is the City standard for this type of roadway. By keeping additional traffic out of the Meadow Oak Estates area, property values in Meadow Oak Estates can be maintained. The downside of this alternative is that the lots created along either side of the collector road on Eastwood Knoll will not be as exclusive as under the original design and will likely, therefore, fetch a lower Planning Commission Agenda - 5/3/94 price. This design will not affect the exclusivity of the lots on the Eastwood Knoll cul-de-sac to the west. Under this alternative, the City's goal of creating an exclusive neighborhood for the entire area is diminished; however, preserving the exclusivity of the original Meadow Oak Estates is maintained. As a final note, the City will need to acquire a lot along Meadow Oak Avenue for a through street. According to Rick, there is at least $25,000 in delinquent taxes and assessments against this property. He is relatively certain that the City can acquire it through the tax foreclosure process or through a direct sale of the property by Dickman Knutson to the City. As a variation of this alternative, the connection of the through street to Briar Oakes could be eliminated, thus eliminating the drive- through traffic and maintaining exclusivity. This would also result in creation of a separate entrance to Eastwood Knoll apart from the Meadow Oak entrance. From a marketing standpoint, it may be an advantage in creating a separate entrance, as it would provide the opportunity for placement of landscaping, signage, etc., which would assist in creating an attitude supporting higher -end housing. Motion to recommend approval of the latest subdivision design. Under this alternative, the Planning Commission prefers the latest design submitted by the City Engineer, which calls for shifting of the Briar Oakes/Eastwood Knoll connection point farther to the west, thereby creating a less direct route through the area, which achieves the goal of providing a through street while at the same time inhibiting or discouraging cut -through traffic due to the convoluted nature of the road configuration. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although the latest design (3) does appear to achieve the goal of discouraging cut -through traffic, it will also result in the loss of the Briar Oakes cul-de-sac. City staff is certain that the developer of the Briar Oakes subdivision would not support this alternative. In addition, we are concerned that under this design, Meadow Oak Lane will likely be used as the collector road, as it provides the most direct route from Briar Oakes to the freeway. Rather than recommending a specific design for the Planning Commission, City staff recommends that the following two goals be achieved with whatever design the Planning Commission selects. Planning Commission Agenda - 5/3/94 The first goal would be to make sure that design of the subdivision does not dump excessive amounts of traffic through the Meadow Oak Estates neighborhood. This goal would appear to eliminate alternative N1. 2. The design should not negatively impact the Briar Oakes subdivision design. This goal would appear to eliminate alternative 113 or require that this design alternative be modified. The subdivision design should incorporate the natural features of the site. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Site plans showing alternative #1 (original design), alternative 112 (bypass design), alternative q3 (eliminate Briar Oakes/Oak Ridge connection). I yr mCWTICELLO WRIGH' PUN7Y, MN tit ! j �; �taI•u ago uur aeverooxexr laoi +eR 111 / vL c' +� ?; , �+arnVSED asea toxrxc x -t r str xrru 'tJ n ur � D'.�G �" :,r.se.. 1 =s,•r'ar'F � 'ry N��{ �*,7.'�rr 'a� / "J 1G Y: )'t: •:n'm opv �-_v-` '�<'� ,,V^-�,°` s .': ,'i1_. ,.j ��_ n '_ �l'....i.•vao• a_ -.._rt.• ( •e,•'�f•- �rtt � '. .. �f 1 i!`. � »r e s�.......... r..> �jt..," _�f p I �'. t ..� •/f ♦.�-.r. / `,. `S 3 Ct.'1 h' r ... M".... , 'r r • ;v .ua w, a.u. i7 'rt` �•,i'- Irl ••i y�l�••� Yt.'? I _ iJ wr.ww ,uv ..r.0 j ter' y�ii'� /i 41,7•v- i,. .rt by 4 fit' "�' 't r • rJ - t - �r� a } N 1 } t"MIr" Lli. irw"1 Ff�y,�..4":.��E�'� ` , rs. �� � �'��'t 1� C" N`'\' tMtO� `� A'r , i.. = ' � i'',•. �.""" �,. ru H •CX r<.rJ ter,etc r� y r6w r�„r'nH- O it _ VICINITY MAP_ j dlZmAzlivie MEADOW OAK AVE. F a*; - 200 SCALE IN FEET Drown By, Drawing title Cosulf. I R G 0 CAWW.rwen 54 45 . gron rssvo�s . Dole' * cst4js. Ino. 3/20/94 an •.a "... C.M., ..r» 9.4—d It ones -4r+6 I A/ftevu-d;ue #L.b ,,8b,')aS5" tars;5►� MEADOW OAK AVE. 8rorn By. Drawing Title R G D • err.�en Dale: y.ron A Associates. ]no. �ylewn. V.11lwl. ..M...... l.,=rg '20/94 o r..e rw. c.r... �+.� ur••r. A w.. r n...q.gwa .w.•im ..u•»arn i $400 pe e / CuRve 0 200 4UU SCALE IN FEET Comm. No. 5445.00 Figure B ww.r.vr • /3 Council Agenda - 5/9/94 14. Consideration of reviewing nrouosals offered for purchase and develoament of Outlots C and D. Meadow Oak Estates. IR.W.1 A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND With the Planning Commission tabling action on the City's preliminary plat request for Eastwood Knoll at. their April meeting, an opportunity was available for the City to request proposals from other interested developers and builders who might want to purchase this property outright and develop it themselves. In light of this, I prepared an RFP that was submitted to all local realtors, along with developers who had previously indicated an interest in this property. Likewise, an advertisement was placed in the Minneapolis Sunday paper for two weeks and the St. Cloud Times requesting proposals be submitted to Lite City by Friday, May 6. Although there was initially a lot of interest in this property, only two proposals were actually submitted for further consideration. The first proposal was supplied by Value Plus Homes of Monticello. While their proposal did not specify an actual design at this time, they have indicated a desire to develop the property with upscale families in mind and offered the sum of $101,150 but with it provision that the City also provide and acquire 4 additional lots from Ultra Homes to be included with the property of Outlots C and D. In reality, the proposal does not appear to have much merit in that the City would be losing or absorbing over $213,500 in taxes and delinquent assessments on each of the 4 lots that Value Plus Homes is requesting the City throw into the purchase. As a result, the Value Plus proposal would require the City to kick in an additional $1:1,0110 in cash along with giving the land away for nothing. This proposal does not seem feasible at this time. The second response to the RVP was from S & .I Investment. and Finance Inc. out of Anoka. 'Their proposal would Ix to purchase the property outright from the City and develop it generally gas we had originally designed but. create 35 lots rather than :10. The result is that some of the lots do become smaller than we had originally indicated we would support. Their proposal would also be to connect the development to Meadow Oak Avenue as had been originally planned years ago, which may cause it slight problem in not disturbing the trees and current elevation of the property when constructing the road. The purchase price offered by S &J Investment was $104,000. This equates to $6,500 per acre for the 16 -acre parcel. As part of the review of the two proposals we received, the Council may also want to look at the cost of developing the property with the City retaining ownership and also based on our estimated cost for improving the property into a:10 -lot development. Enclosed with the agenda I have put together it quick summary of the development cost under 3 methods, with the City 21 Council Agenda - 5/9/94 trying to recapture its original investment of $164,500, the City recapturing only $100,000, similar to the offers being proposed. The purpose of this outline is to give the Council all idea of what I think the cost of the project would be if the City retained ownership and was to market the property ourselves. Options 11 and C more closely resemble the proposals submitted by S & J Investment in that the City would he attempting to recapture an amount of approximately $100,000 from the land. Option 11 outlines the $100,000 cost and also assumes that it would take up to 8 years to market all of the property. Under this assumption, the City would have to average $25,000 per lot over the 8 -year time frame. Option C also recaptures the $100,000 price tag but assumes that the property could he marketed in three years, similar to the proposal by S & J. if we were comfortable with this time frame, the average cost needed to be obtained would be about $22,800 per lot. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. After reviewing the proposals, Council could select the proposal submitted by S &J Investment in the amount of $164,000. Under this option, the Council would he selecting the proposal that would develop :35 lots. This proposal is creating it higher density than the Council had originally anticipated, and the resulting lots would not. be as large as hod originally been planned. 2. Council could select the local developer, Value Plus Homes, at a purchase price of $101,500, which would require the Council to purchase 4 additional lots from Ultra Homes to include in the package at to cost of $114.001) in assessments and taxes, resulting in a net loss aur $13,()(111 in cash. :I. Council could table any actio} oil the two proposals submitted and readvertise the development for sale. Under this option, the Council may want to consider approving a specific concept plan such as the preliminary glut approved by the Planning Commission and only offer that plat for stale. This alternative would allow all interested parties to be bidding on an exact product, that heing the preliminary plat the City had approved. 4. Reject all proposals submitted to date and proceed with the City developing the Eastwood Knoll plat las planned. Under this alternative, Clic Council would he indicating that the offers were not sufficient and that the City hits no choice but to proceed with its own development in an effort to recapture as much of the taxpayers money as possible. 22 Council Agenda • 5/9/94 Likewise, it would be assumed that the Council would then be approving the preliminary plat that is proposed on the next agenda item. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION In reviewing the proposals, it's quite obvious that the proposal submitted by Value Plus Homes would not be sufficient in that it actually costs the City money in addition to giving the land away. As far as the S & J Investment, this proposal appears to generally develop the site in accordance with our concept designs, although the tuts are still smaller than we had originally anticipated. As far as the purchase price goes, that is a decision the Council will have to decide if you feel approximately $100,000 is a sufficient offer for this property. One of the problems with an RFP proposal is that each developer or interested party may have a different idea on how the property should be developed. Because of this, there is some merit in tabling any selection of a proposal at this lire and possibly approving the preliminary plat design that has been recommended by the Planning Commission Lind offering this plat, for sale to the public. In this case, all interested bidders would know exactly what the City is expecting the plat to look like, and everyone would be on tin equal plaviag field. In putting together my estimate of the cost the City would incur if the City was the developer of this property, I think option B is a conservative estimate of the price we would need for each lot at $25,440 over 8 years. In reality, if the Council really thought it would take 8 years to sell 30 lots, we may want to consider developing this property in stages if we continue with Clio project ourselves. If we have any reservations of being able to obtain this amount of money over 8 years or you do not wish to become more involved in this development, I would suggest that we either negotiate further with S & J Investment or offer the Planning Commission's approved preliminary plat fur rile to the public. SUI'14)R'1'INt; DATA: Ilevelopmeat cost estimates; Proposals from S & .1 Investment and Value Plus Domes. G 23 DEVELOPMENT COSTS ESTIMATES ODTLOTS C AND D. WLADOW OAR: ESTATES •• Interest coots were calculated by assuming that it would take 8 years to sell all 30 lots and assuming that we sold an average of 4 lots per year. The interest was calculated on the City spending $475,000 for improvements, $20,000 for platting and miscellaneous, along with assumption that we would have immediately sold the raw land for $150,000 to someone else if we didn't develop it ourselves. • Includes 28% for indirect cost and 5% contingency. Also includes $16,670 for pathway construction. • Option (C) assumes Iota can be sold in 3 years. MOCOST.EST: 6/6/94 /,/ $843,000 (A) (B) (C)••• 1) Original cost of land $164,500 $100,000 $100,000 $ 25,440 (floes not include interest) -)ver next 8 years 2)• Street & utility impr. $474,360 $474,360 $474,360 the lots and sell all 30 lots to (based on OSM feasibility builders or developers within 6 report - March 1994) months, the ave. price needed to 3) Platting costs $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 4) Tree plantings, landscaping, $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 improvements drops to: entry signs, misc. $ 21,725 $ 21,725 5)•• Interest holding costs @ 5% $129,000 $118,875 $ 44,600 6) Est. for real estate sales S 55,200 S 49,950 $ 45,000 commissions if all lots were sold through a realtor @ 7% commission •• Interest coots were calculated by assuming that it would take 8 years to sell all 30 lots and assuming that we sold an average of 4 lots per year. The interest was calculated on the City spending $475,000 for improvements, $20,000 for platting and miscellaneous, along with assumption that we would have immediately sold the raw land for $150,000 to someone else if we didn't develop it ourselves. • Includes 28% for indirect cost and 5% contingency. Also includes $16,670 for pathway construction. • Option (C) assumes Iota can be sold in 3 years. MOCOST.EST: 6/6/94 /,/ $843,000 $844,680 $683,960 + 30 lots + 30 lots + 30 lots Need to ave. this price per lot $ 28,100 $ 25,440 $ 22,800 -)ver next 8 years NOTE: If the City would discount the lots and sell all 30 lots to builders or developers within 6 months, the ave. price needed to break even and recapture our original investment in land plus improvements drops to: S 24,080 $ 21,725 $ 21,725 •• Interest coots were calculated by assuming that it would take 8 years to sell all 30 lots and assuming that we sold an average of 4 lots per year. The interest was calculated on the City spending $475,000 for improvements, $20,000 for platting and miscellaneous, along with assumption that we would have immediately sold the raw land for $150,000 to someone else if we didn't develop it ourselves. • Includes 28% for indirect cost and 5% contingency. Also includes $16,670 for pathway construction. • Option (C) assumes Iota can be sold in 3 years. MOCOST.EST: 6/6/94 /,/ THE ALLEN COMPANY 2516 Fourth Avenue North Anoka, Minnesota 55303 Malcolm B. Allen (1923 - 1989) Real F,state Appraisal Service Malcolm B. Allen, Jr. (612) 421-4970 May 6, 1994 Rich Wolfsteller City Administrator City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362-9245 re: Proposal re: outlots C and D, Meadow Oak Estates Dear Mr. Wolfsteller: Please consider this letter to be the response of S 6 J Investment and Finance, Inc. to your Request for Proposals dated April 14, 1994 regarding Outlots C and D, Meadow Oak Estates. Our proposal contemplates an outright purchase of the site from the City. Attached hereto is an executed purchase agreement which sets forth the details of our offer. Also attached is an earnest money check in the amount of $10,000.00. Development Concept We propose to develop the Bite for single family residential uses, generally in accordance with the concept designed by the City. Attached hereto is a copy of a preliminary design concept that was prepared by our engineers. It contemplates minimum lot widths at set back of 90 feet. All lots would have building pads of at least 70 feet. Our experience indicates that 70 foot pads on lots with walk out potential will sustain upper level housing. We contemplate designing the project so as to maintain its current topography and vegetation as much as is possible. The concept indicates two access to the plat, but could accomodate and additional roadway to the south as is indicated if required. We would develop the site in accordance with all existing City requirements. We will supply all required letters of credit or would install all utilities and pay for them as completed, as the City prefors. Private installation may necessitate completing the project in two phases as the absorption period for the lots is projected to be 36 months. It is our intention to market the finished lots to a select, or group of select builders. Minimum square footages and prior approval of the house design by the developer would be required. We prefer to control the quality of the project contractually with our builders as opposed to with restrictive covenants. Develooer's qualifications Mr. Schmitt is the president and founder of S and J Investment and Finance, Inc. He worked for 12 years in the banking industry lending to builders and developers. After leaving the banking industry, he was employed with a land developer for seven years. During that time he was responsible for managing and funding for projects that totalled over 1,500 residential lots. in 1993, Mr. Schmitt left that company and began developing land on his own. In addition, he has formed a cooperative that makes construction loans to single family builders. Currently, S 6 J Investment and Finance Company is managing a 93 lot project in Brooklyn Park, developing a 54 acre tract in Andover and beginning an 88 lot project in Brooklyn Park. Mr. Allen is the owner The Allen Company. The Allen Company was founded in 1947 and serves as an umbrella entity that covers a variety of real estate related activities including appraisal, management and development. Prior to operating The Allen Company, Mr. Allen was involved in the private practice of law. Banking References Mr. David Bjerkness 227-0881 Minnesota State Bank Mr. Dennis Kudak 566-1600 Marquette Bank Brooklyn Park If you have any questions or need more information please contact either Steve Schmitt or Mal Allen at 421-4970. Thank you. Yours truly, Steve Schmitt attachments 0 8 z�s \ Po4e,)l,.t nuc - 9 Ti0 PURCHASE AND BALE AGREEMENT Date: THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT is by and between the City of Monticello, Minnesota ("Seller") and S & J Investment and Finance Company, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Buyer"). Seller and Buyer agree as follows: i. he Property. The property that is the subject of this agreement is located in Monticello, Minnesota and is legally described on Exhibit "A" hereto. 2. ZMrghase price. The total purchase price for the pro ert shall be One Hundred Four Thousand Dollars ($104,000.00), payable as follows: $10,000.00 by check as earnest money, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledge; $94,0000.00 cash at closing; The purchase price is based upon $6,500 per acre for 16 acres. In the event a survey of the property reveal it to be less than 16 acres, the purchase price shall be reduced pro rata. 3. Cloaina date. Closing shall occur on or before August 15, 1994. 4. Taxes and Opecial Aaaenaments. Real estate taxes due and payable in the year of closing shall be prorated between Seller and Buyer. Seller shall pay all real estate taxes due and payable in the years prior to the year of closing. Seller shall pay any deferred real estate taxes (Green Acres, otc.) on or before the closing. Seller shall pay, on or before closing all special assessments pending or levied against the property. At Buyer's option, payment of all levied and pending special assessments may be made by Buyer agreeing to assume and pay said special assessments, with a correlating reduction in cash due from Buyer at closing. 5. purvey. Seller shall deliver all surveys of the property in its possession to Buyer with in 10 days of the acceptance of this Agreement by Seller. 6. peed/Marketable Title. Upon performance by Buyer, Seller shall deliver a Warranty Deed conveying marketable title, subject to: a. Building and zoning leve, ordinances, state and federal regulations; b. Restrictions relating to use or improvement of the property without effective forfeiture provisions; c. Reservation or any mineral rights by the State of Minnesota; d. Utility and drainage easements which do not interfere with existing improvements. 7. Title i Szamiaatioa. Seller shall, within a reasonable time after acceptance of this agreement, furnish an abstract of title, or a registered property abstract, certified to date to include proper searches covering bankruptcies, state and federal judgments and liens, and levied and pending special assessments. Buyer shall be allowed 10 business days after receipt of the abstract for examination of title and making any objections which objections shall be made in writing or deemed waived. If any objection is so made, Seller shall have 10 business days from receipt of Buyer's written title objections to notify Buyer of Seller's intention to make title marketable within 120 days from seller's receipt of such written objection. If notice is given, payments hereunder required shall be postponed pending correction of title, but upon correction of title and within 10 days after written notice to Buyer the parties shall perform this Purchase Agreement, according to its terms. If no such notice is given or if notice is given but title is not corrected within the time provided for, this Purchase Agreement shall be null and void, at option of Buyer; neither party shall be liable for damages hereunder to the other and earnest money shall be refunded to Buyer; Buyer and Seller agree to sign a cancellation of Purchase Agreement. Buyer agrees to accept an owner's title policy, in the full amount of the purchase price in lieu of an abstract. If Buyer is to receive such policy (1) the title examination period shall commence upon Buyer's receipt of a current title insurance commitment and (2) Seller shall pay the entire premium for such policy if no lender's policy is obtained, and only the additional cost of obtaining a simultaneously issued owner's policy if a lender's policy is obtained. ii S. RAaardous Materials. Seller warrants that there are no hazardous substances on the property as that term is defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act (MERLA). Seller shall deliver to Buyer within 14 days of acceptance of this Agreement copies of all soil test reports, Phase I Environmental Analyses, and other similar items related to the property in the possession or control of Seller. Further, Seller agrees to bear the costs of removal or clean up of any such substances on the property. 9. Nater Vella and Btoraaa Tanks. Seller agrees to remove or cap any existing water wells on the property as required by law. Seller agrees to bear the cost of removing any existing underground tanks and related soil clean up costs, if any. 10. Default, If title is marketable or is corrected as provided herein, and Buyer defaults in any of the agreements herein, Seller may terminate this Purchase Agreement and payments made hereunder may be retained by Seller. This provision shall not deprive either Buyer of Seller of the right to recover damages for a breach of this Agreement or of the right of specific performance within six months after such right of action arises. 11. Tule of 899en0e. Time is of the essence in this Purchase Agreement. Seller shall have until 5 p.m., May 31, 1994 to execute this agreement. In the event this agreement is not executed by the Seller as required in this paragraph, then this entire agreement shall become null and void and all earnest money paid hereunder shall be returned to Buyer. 12. Satire Agreement. This purchase agreement and any attached exhibits shall constitute the entire agreement between Seller and Buyer and supersedes any other written or oral agreements between Seller and Buyer. This agreement can be modified only in writing signed by the parties. 12. Possossioa. Seller shall deliver possession of the property not later than the date of closing. However, by execution of this agreement, Seller grants Buyer permission to enter upon the property for purposes of soil testing and other investigations reasonably necessary to facilitate development of the site for single family residential use. 14. Warrantl of Authority. The undersigned warrants that they are authorized in writing by the of Seller to execute this agreement on its behalf. The undersigned shall furnish a copy of his written authority to Buyer within a reasonable time of iii execution of this agreement. 15. Delivery of Documents.. Seller shall provide to Buyer within 10 days of the execution hereof, copies of all governing documents that control the sale of real property by Seller. 16. Acceptance. The parties agree that this agreement shall not be deemed accepted until Seller has complied with all of the corporate requirements of the Seller's governing documents, including but not limited to the approval of the City Council or Seller. XN WXTWE88 WHEREOF, the parties have entered this Purchase Agreement as of the day and date first above written. SELLER BUYER City of !Monticello S 6 J Investment and Finance Co by by�' J�+� Steven A. Schmitt its its President (codpa) iv 1'{ EXHIBIT "A° Outlot C and Outlot U, Meadow Oak Estates Wright County, Minnesota D)4 1120 S & J INVESTMENT & FINANCE, INC. 2510 - 4111 AVE. N. ANOKA, UN 553M 0 L L A n S 81001L200l o:0960009331: 57-21.0320 (s) EASTWOOD KNOLL PROPOSAL FROM VALUE PLUS HOMES INC. VALUE PLUS HOMES INC hereby proposes to purchase from the City of Monticello the.subdivision known as EASTWOOD KNOLL for the sum of S1Of,150,OD , paid in cash at the time of closing, Closing to be determined by an agreement between VALUE PLUS HOMES INC, and the City of Monticello an cow!nants, conditions, restrictions, developers agreement, and plat approval, but no earlierAlian September 1st 1994, As part of this proposal VALUE PLUS HOMES, INC would requne the City of Monticello to acquire Lots 3 and 4 Stock 2, Lots 1 and 2 Block 3. and the part of OutlotA south of Meadow Oak Ave„ to be Included together with OutbLs C and D in the proposed purchase price. It is the intent of VALUE PLUS HOMES INC. to develop this property withupscale families in mind Therefore In principle we aro comfortable with the City of Monticello's concept with same exceptions pednining to privacy, access points, and desigmrequirements It iv our intent to create a high quality and private neighborhood that would also blend well with the existing neighborhood. Therefore we would not want to see an access point into Briar Oaks Estates because we Joel privacy will be of utmost importance to the homeowner In this market Because of triday s variety of designs and difficulty In defining them we feel that the design requirements should be dictated by the market Therefore we have listed our targeted home buying segments justified by market research in this area, TARGETED HOME BUYINO SEGMENTS FOR EASTWOOD KNOLL SEGMENTS CHARACTERISTICSJDESIGN IMPLICATIONS YOUNG MARRIEDS WITHOUT Mature discretionary/dual income. Physically active: CHILDREN entertain often both formally and informally; indeoendent, do-it-yourselfers. Planning for future financial, career goals, family planning. Design implications: look of success, emphasis on the entry, indoor /outdoor relationships, Feature good wardrobe and storage space, combined living/dining room, master bedroom suite, den or family room, lots of usable space that is dramatic with plenty of decorating potential. YOUNG MARRIEDS WITH Under 35. child under 5, both spouses working. CHILD -Rain informally, amateur gardeners. focus on —.,d, planning on more children. Design implications: Emphasize kitchen, informal dining room, master bedroom, similar secondary bedrooms, family room with fireplace, large yard. MOVE -UP FAMILY The " mnnthly payment"group, Nonemployed "housewife" focus on casual and informal family activities, numerous interests, mostly child oriented. Design Implications: Emphasize kitchen, informal dining area, master bedroom, smaller secondary bedrooms, fireplace In family room, large yard. ESTABLISHED FAMILY Mating monthly payments comfortably, some discretionary income, approaching their economic and social peak, some formal entertaining, older children/toenagers, many interests, 3 -car family, prefer limited maintenance, Design Implications: Separate formal living and dining areas, den or formal family room, separate master bedroom suite, large secondary bedrioms, formal yard. 6) 0 Council Agenda • 5/9/94 15. Consideration of a resolution ordering plans and specifications for the Eastwood Knoll subdivision. Applicant. City of Monticello. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE; AND BACKGROUND This item wits also tabled at it previous Council meeting to allow the City Engineer to look at alternative designs for the Eastwood Knoll plat that would satisfy traffic concerns voiced by adjoining property owners. The proposed preliminary plat that has been approved by the Planning Commission was previously discussed in an agenda item that should have addressed the traffic concerns of Meadow Oak Estates residents and Briar Oakes Estate. Action on this item may not be necessary by the Council if a decision was made on accepting one of the proposals submitted for an outright purchase of this property in a previous agenda item. If an offer was accepted from S & J Investment or Value flus Homes, the City may not be involved in the actual development of plans and specifications nor constructing the improvements, Assuming one of the proposals to purchase was not, acceptable to the Council, and it, is the Council's opinion that the development should move forward, the resolution can be adopted ordering plans and specifications he prepared for the new design of the Eastwood Knoll subdivision. This would keep the project on schedule for possible construction yet this season, even if the Council continues with advertising and trying to sell the entire developin,ml, to other individuals. Bused air the preliminary feasibility report that OSM had prepared under our original design, it, is estimated that the street and utility improvements would amount to about $475,000. While the design has changed it little, I ))live continued to use this original estialate inn my calculations for determining tile cost if the City completes the project.. ALTERNATIVE: ACTIONS If the Council has approved the preliminary plat design and feels the proposals submitted for outright purchase were not acceptable and would like the project to move ahead, it motion could be made to adopt the resolution ordering that plans and specifications he prepared by OSM. 24 Council Agenda - 5/9/94 Under this alternative, the Council would be comfortable with moving ahead as the developer of this project while possibly at the same time continuing efforts to try and market the property as a whole to other builders/developers. If a reasonable offer was not presented, the Council would continue with it as a City project. If the property has not been sold but the Council is uncomfortable with continuing as the developer, the Council could table any action on preparing plans and specifications to allow staff further time to continue marketing efforts for selling the entire parcel. A determination could be made later as to whether the City would be preparing plans and specifications or whether it would be done through a private contract. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff does not have a specific recommendation on this item at this time due to the uncertainty over whether the preliminary plat has been approved and/or whether the Council has accepted one of the two proposals submitted for the outright purchase. If the Council is no longer comfortable with being the developer, it would he suggested that plans and specifications not he ordered at this time. If the Council has decided that it wants to see this development continue regardless of whether there is an outright purchase involved, plans and specifications should be authorized so that the project can proceed in a timely manner. D. SUPPORTING DATA Copy of resolution. 25 RESOLUTION 84 - RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the Council adopted February 28, 1994, a preliminary plat and associated public improvement feasibility report has been prepared by Taylor Land Surveyors and OSM with reference to the improvement of Outlot.s C and D of Meadow Oak Estates (Eastwood Knoll), and this preliminary plat and report were received by the Council on March 28, 1994. NOW, THEREFORE. 13E IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. OSM is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 2. The Council will consider the improvement of Outlots C and D in accordance with the report and will finance all of the cost of the improvement at an estimated total cost of $474,360. Adopted this 9th day of May, 1994. Mayor City Administrator Council Agenda - 5/9/94 16. Consideration of feasibility studies for realimment of Cedar Street at Countv Road 117 (East Oakwood Drive) and resurfacing of East 7th Street between Highwav 25 and Cedar Street. (J.S.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Two areas have been identified by the public works department as priorities for street improvements. The first one is the existing alignment of Cedar Street at East Oakwood Drive. In this area we have some reoccurring drainage problems, as well as an alignment problem that does obstruct the vision of drivers, especially trucks. In this area we have sufficient right-of- way for the realignment and regrading to correct the drainage problem. Since Cedar Street is a state aid road, we have the options of either using our street budget, state aid maintenance funds, or state aid construction monies For the realignment and correcting the drainage problems. The other priority area is 7th Street hetween Highway 25 and Cedar Street. This would also include the intersection of Cedar and East 7th Street. This street surface is in need of repair. The surface is broken up enough to require reconstruction rather than an overlay. It appears that the significant amount of traffic in this area, especially the trucks going in and out of FSI and Burger King, have resulted in a premature failure of the street. This street is also a state aid route, so again we have the same funding options as above. We have dedicated $40,000 for these projects in the 1994 street fund budget, and there is $40,000+ also available in 1994 state aid maintenance fund revenue. The unallocated state aid construction fund balance is expected to he $172,000 by July. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The first alternative would be to authorize the City Engineer to prepare feasibility reports for the realignment of Cedar Street at East Oakwood Drive and the resurfacing of East 7th Street to include the intersection of Cedar and 7th Street. The feasibility studies would include sketches of Clio realignment, street sections, and cost estimates. The cost of the feasibility studies would he considered as part of the engineering fees should the projects go ahead. The second alternative would he to only do one of the feasibility studies. Council Agenda - 5/9/94 The third alternative would be to authorize neither one of the feasibility studies. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City Council consider authorizing the two feasibility studies as outlined in alternative N1. Both of these areas have been recognized as priority maintenance areas. We may not be able to assess for the realignment of Cedar Street, as it is of general benefit to the community. We would, however, he able to assess a portion of the cost of the south side of 7th Street to the benefiting property owners such as Americ Inn, Taco Bell, and Perkins. The Council may also wish to look at the possibility of improving Cedar Street to the south toward the VFW. This section may also need replacement in the near future and more than likely a change to an urban section (curb and gutter). The VFW may or may not be in favor of assessments for replacement of the street. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of map indicating the two locations. 27 lr t 11411 �►� rY !r `� �r% � i�s J frill, a WIF AIM FRO FF re HIGHWAY IV, m Council Agenda - 5/9/94 17. Consideration of specifications for obtaining bids for contract mowing operations. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: In 1993, the City Council requested that staff look into the possibility of contract mowing as a cost-saving measure, or to put off the hiring of additional full-time people and the purchase of additional mowing equipment. In addition, there was sonic discussion over the mowing services the City uses to take care of nuisance violations of the city ordinance in that those services should he bid. In preparation for this, we reorganized the budget for 1994 to include contract mowing of the library, liquor store, and fire hall. This would also include litter pickup and miscellaneous trimming. The City would continue to do the fertilizing and maintenance of the irrigation system, buildings, and fixtures. We have put together a set of specifications based upon our needs for these sites and asked for hourly rates for additional services for nuisance violations of the ordinance. At this time we have not included contract performance honding requirements but have included insurance requirements where required by law and as recommended by Foster, Frunzen. Carlson, the Citv's insurance agent. A copy of the specifications is enclosed for your review. 13. ALTERNA'rIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative is to authorize the City to advertise for bids for mowing services to be returned and considered at Clio May 23 Council meeting. 2. The second alternative would lit not to advertise for bids but to have Cho City add additional man -power and/or equipment as needed to maintain these sites. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It. is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and City Administrator that the Council authorize advertisement for bids as outlined in alternative Nl to he considered at the May 23 Council meeting. 1). SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of Che specifical.ions for mowing services. 28 SPECIFICATIONS FOR MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA MAY 4, 1984 Prepared by City of Monticello MOWLAND.SPE: 6/6/94 017 INVITATION FOR PROPOSALS FOR MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA The City of Monticello will receive proposals at the Monticello City Hall, 250 East Broadway, until 10 a.m., Monday, May 23, 1994. All proposals will be publicly opened and read aloud. All proposals shall be inked or typewritten on forms to be supplied by the City. Copies of the plans and specifications may be obtained from the Monticello City Hall at 250 East Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota 55362. Proposals will be considered by the City of Monticello on Monday evening, May 23, 1994. The City reserves the rigiiL to reject wiy or all proposals or to waive any informalities in the proposals. BY ORDER OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO Rick Wolfsteller City Administrator MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 2 07 PROPOSAL FORM FOR MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA TO THE CITY OF MONTICELLO MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. The following proposal is made for mowing and landscape maintenance. 2. The undersigned certifies that the project specifications have been carefully examined and that the work sites have been personally inspected. The undersigned declares that the amount and nature of the work to be done is understood, and at no time will misunderstanding of the specifications be pleaded. On the basis of the specifications, the undersigned proposes to furnish all necessary apparatus and labor to do all the work and furnish all the materials in the manner specified to maintain the sites within the time hereinafter specified, and to accept as full compensation therefor the sums stated below. 3. Base Pronosal I. Site A: Monticello Library 1. Mowing, weeding, and trimming of weeds and grass to include litter and debris pickup and disposal for a per -time lump sum cost of $ 2. Litter and debris pickup and disposal separate from mowing operations for a per -time lump sum cost of 3. Hedge, bush, and vine trimming, cost per hour: $ 4. Fall complete cleanup of site to include disposal of all materials for a per -time lump sum cost of $ 11. Site Q: Hi-Wav Liquors 1. Mowing, weeding, and trimming of weeds and grass to include litter and debris pickup and disposal for a per -time lump sum cost of $ 2. Litter and debris pickup and disposal separate from mowing operations for a per -limo lump sum cost of MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 3 3. Hedge, bush, and vine trimming, cost per hour: $ 4. Fall complete cleanup of site to include disposal of all materials for a per -time lump sum cost of $ I1I. Site C: Monticello Fire Hall 1. Mowing, weeding, and trimming of weeds and grass to include litter and debris pickup and disposal for a per -time lump sum cost of $ 2. Litter and debris pickup and disposal separate from mowing operations for a per -time lump sum cost of 3. Hedge, bush, and vine trimming, cost per hour: $ 4. Fall complete cleanup of site to include disposal of all materials for a per -time lump sum cost of R, W. Additional Services by the Hour. Enclose separate sheet listing description of equipment and cost per hour at site, including fuel and operator. 4. The Owner reserves the right to award to the lowest responsible contractor as determined to be in the best interest of the City. 5. The undersigned further proposes to execute the contract agreement and to furnish satisfactory certificates of insurance within five (5) days after notice of the award of contract has been received. The undersigned further proposes to begin work as specified, to complete the work on or before dates specified. 6. In submitting this proposal, it is understood that the right is reserved by the Owner to reject any or all proposals and to waive informalities. 7. This proposal may not be withdrawn after the opening of the proposals and shall be subject to acceptance by the Owner for a period of thirty MW calendar days from the opening thereof. 8. If a corporation, what is the state of incorporation: 1 MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 4 j If a partnership, state full names of all co-partners: OFFICIAL ADDRESS: FIRM NAME: By Title By Title Date MOWLAND.SPE: 5094 Page 5 (/7 / CITY OF MONTICELLO MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICE BASE PROPOSAL - ADDITIONAL SERVICE IV, Additional Services by the Hour. HOURLY RATE AT SITE INCLUDING EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION OPERATOR & FUEL 3. 4. 5. 6. 9. 10. 11 12. 13. 14. 15. MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 6 Cl 7> SECTION I SPECIAL PROVISIONS INDEX 1.01 Descriptions 1.02 Designation of Parties 1.03 Insurance 1.04 Compliance with Laws and Regulations 1.06 Responsibility for Condition of Sites 1.06 Examination of Site of Work 1.07 Safety 1.08 Clean Up 1.09 Protection 1.10 Evaluation of Proposals 1.11 Approval and Final Acceptance 1.12 Method of Payment 1.13 Term of Contract MOWLAND.SPF: 6/6/84 Page 7 17 SECTION I SPECIAL PROVISION 1.01 DESCRIPTIONS a) These specifications cover mowing and landscape maintenance for three main sites, the Monticello Library, fire hall, and Hi -Way Liquor. 1.02 DESIGNATION OF PARTIES a) The word "Owner" and/or "City" as used in these specifications refers to the City of Monticello, Minnesota. b) Where the term "Contractor" appears, it refers to the prime contractor having direct contact with the owner. c) The word "Subcontractor" refers to any individual, firm, or corporation who has, with the approval of the owner, contracted with the contractor to execute and perform in his stead all or any part of the contract of which these specifications are a part. 1.03 ]INSURANCE a) No contractor nor subcontractor shall commence work under this contract until he has obtained at his own cost and expense all insurance required by this article, such insurance to be approved by the owner and maintained by the contractor until final completion of the work. b) Workman's Comoensation Insurance - The contractor shall take out and maintain for the duration of this contract statutory workman's compensation insurance and employee's liability insurance as shall be required under the laws of the state of Minnesota 1$100,000/$500,000/ $100,000). c) Public Linhilitv Insurance - The contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of this contract such public liability and property damage insurance as shall protect him from all claims for bodily injury, including accidental death, as well as from all claims for property damage arising from operations under this contract. The minimum limits which are required are: $.1500,000 for injuries including accidental death to any one person, and $1,000,000 for injuries including accidental denth resulting from one accident: property damage in the amount of not less than $500,000 per accident and the same amount in the aggregate. MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page �]� d) Automobile Insurance - The contractor shall carry automobile insurance on all automotive equipment owned, rented, or borrowed in the minimum amounts of $500,000 for injuries including accidental death to any one person and $1,000,000 for injuries including death resulting from any one accident. This policy must also provide $1,000,000 property damage coverage. e) Contractual Liabilitv Insurance - The contractor agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the owner, the engineer, and their agents from every claim, action, cause of action, liability, damage expense, or payment incurred by reasons of any bodily injury including death, or property damage resulting from the contractor's operations on this project. f) Owner's Protective Liabilitv and Prouerty Damaee Insurance - The contractor shall provide owner's protective liability and property damage insurance in the name of the owner, insuring against bodily injury and property damage liability, in the limits set forth above for which they may become legally obligated to pay as damages sustained by any persons caused by accident and arising out of operations performed for the name insured by independent contractors and general supervision thereof. g) Insurance certificates evidencing that all the above information is in force with companies acceptable to the owner and in the amounts required shall be submitted to the owner for examination and approved concurrently with the execution of the contract. In addition to the normal information provided on the insurance certificates, they shall specifically provide that: A certificate will not be modified except upon ten days' prior written notice to the owner. 1.04 COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONS a) The bidder is assumed to have made himself familiar with all codes, state laws, ordinances, and regulations which in any manner affect those engaged or employed in the work, or the materials or equipment used in or upon the sites, or in any way affect the conduct of the work, and no plea of misunderstanding will be considered on account of the ignorance thereof. The provisions of such codes, laws, or ordinances are deemed to be a part of these specifications, and the contractor will be bound by the provisions thereof. b) The contractor shall and also by a surety agree to indemnify and save harmless the owner and all of its officers, agents, and servants against any claims or liability arising from or based on the violation of any such law, ordinance, regulation, or decrees, whether by himself or his employees. MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 9(/,) c) If the contractor shall discover any provisions in the contract, specifications, or any direction of the City or inspector which is contrary to or inconsistent with any such law, ordinance, regulation, or decree, he shall forthwith report its inconsistence to the City in writing. 1.08 RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDITION OF SITES a) Prospective contractors are hereby advised, notified, and warned that the City of Monticello and its agents, employees, and servants make no representations as to the conditions of the sites for which bids are invited, nor any part or portion thereof, nor any installation therein of any nature whatsoever; and furthermore, the City takes no responsibility for any change in such sites, portion thereof, nor any installation of any type whatsoever therein contained between the time of initial viewing by the prospective contractor and the entry into a contract between the successful contractor and the City of Monticello. 1.06 EXAMINATION OF SITE OF WORK a) It will be required and expected that each contractor, before submitting a proposal for work required under these specifications, will visit the sites, make a thorough examination of conditions, take all necessary measurements, and thoroughly familiarize himself with all existing conditions and all of the limitations pertaining to the work herein contemplated. b) The submission of a proposal shall be considered assurance that the contractor has visited the site and made thorough examination of the conditions and limitations. 1.07 SAFETY a) Each contractor shall take all necessary precautions to protect life, limb, and property during the progress of the work and shall comply with all new and existing safety and health standards and laws. b) The contractor shall use every precaution to protect the public from personal harm. 1.08 CLEAN UP a) Upon completion of the work listed herein, the contractor shall remove all tools, equipment, debris, and unused materials from the site and the entire premises shall be left in a clean and workmanlike manner to the satisfaction of the City of Monticello. MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 10�/�) 1.09 PROTECTION a) This contractor shall exercise care to protect all site improvements and all other items of this character on and around the sites, including the building, assuming all responsibility and paying all costs for any damages caused by the mowing or landscape maintenance. 1.10 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS a) In evaluating the best proposal for the City, the following items will be considered: 1. Price quoted in the proposal. 2. Qualifications of the contractor. Evidence shall be furnished to the City that the contractor has the necessary experience, facilities, ability, and financial resources to perform the work in accordance with the specifications. 1.11 APPROVAL AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE al Upon the completion of the work herein specified, by the 30th of each month the contractor shall bill the City for the work completed that month. b) Before final payment is made for the work on this project, the contractor must make a satisfactory showing that he has complied with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Annotated 290.92 requiring the withholding of state income tax for wages paid employees on this project. Receipt by the clerk of the owner of a Certificate of Compliance from the Commissioner of Taxation will satisfy this requirement. 1.12 METHOD OF PAYMENT al Full payment will be made within 30 days upon receipt of billing and acceptance of work. 1.13 TERM OF CONTRACT al The contract will remain in force until October 30, 1994. The City reserves the right to cancel the contract with five (5) days written notice for failure of the contrnctor to perform in accordance with the specifications. MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 11 �� ` SECTION II MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE izi 11 *11 2.01 General 2.02 Scope 2.03 Response Time 2.04 Additional Work 2.05 Site Locations MOWLAND.SPE: 5/6/94 Page 12 17 SECTION II MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE 2.01 GENERAL a) Site Locations: Three primary sites are to be considered for this contract: 1. The Monticello Library 2. The Monticello Fire Hall 3. The City's municipal liquor store, also known as Hi -Way Liquor. All three of the sites are irrigated with pop-up sprinklers. All routine sprinkler maintenance is now and will continue to be performed by the City of Monticello. Should the contractor damage the sprinkler system, the City will repair it and bill the contractor. The Monticello Library site is bounded on the north by 4th Street, the west by Walnut Street, the south by the Burlington Northern railway, and the east by First National Bank. The Hi -Way Liquor store consists of an entire block area bounded on the east by Highway 2.5, the west by Walnut Street, the north by 5th Street, and the south by 6th Street. The Monticello Fire Hall is bounded on the east by Locust Street, the north by 5th Street, the south by 6th Street, and the west by a commercial auto restoration business. 2.02 SCOPE a) Work includes mowing and trimming of all grass and weeds at the site to generally keep the length from 2-4 inches. This may include mowing more than once a week during the heavy growing seasons to as little as once or twice a month in the slower growing or drier seasons. The mowing and trimming shall include weed removal from all green and landscaped areas. This service will also include litter and debris pickup from the entire site during the mowing operation. The contractor will be reimbursed on a per - time basis per site for this basic service. A schedule will be worked out with the Street and Park Superintendent regarding the initiation and frequency of service. Should the sites not need mowing and trimming service but litter pickup, the contractor shall be reimbursed on a separate basis for this when it is not included with the mowing service on a per -time, per -site basis. MOWLANRSPE: 5/6/94 Page 13 /7 The contractor will provide an hourly rate for trimming services for hedges, vines, bushes, etc. The contractor's hourly rate will include one individual and all the necessary equipment to accomplish the trimming of bushes, hedges, and vines as required. In addition to the routine services, the contractor will propose a cost for fall cleanup. This cleanup shall be a power raking or vacuuming to pick up all leaves and debris at the site. The City will provide a disposal point for leaves, grass, small branches, trimmings, and litter at selected points within the city limits. This contract is not to be considered all inclusive. The City reserves the right to supplement mowing, trimming, or litter pickup operations with its own forces at any time. 2.03 RESPONSE TIME a) The contractor will be expected to respond to a request for mowing services or to stick to a proposed schedule and shall not vary more than two calendar days from the schedule unless weather conditions prohibit mowing operations. Should the schedule vary longer than this period of time and the City find it necessary to contract for services to complete the work, the contractor will be responsible for any additional cost required above his contract price for doing the mowing by outside separate contract. 2.04 ADDITIONAL WORK a) The contractor shall provide a separate detailed breakdown of his equipment and hourly rates for the equipment and operators to perform additional work or other work outside this contract. Hourly rates shall be site hours. The contractor will not be paid for travel time. All of the additional work shall be bound by the same general requirements for insurance protection and indemnification as the work in the base bid. 2.08 SITE LOCATIONS a) See enclosed map. MOWLAND.SPE: 6/6/94 Page 14( / ?) 51 I r 1. AL. IL —'r-- ,[ •n rI .—. — .— rr .n s7 — _ _— [i re Ti — — — ti :: --- ti [n — —.i:' lf' it r• ;1 _ _I_ I_ _L tl_ 111 l .n I 1 (CO. Hyr( 75) 8 11 l ;j F,r �� —`— •,� Al- .1.._— _—_ [I n�o s Library 19 _.--. •• —. _ _. ,_I I Irl. .. ... .. '`I_—�[ �[.---5"_. �n .. __— a ,e [[ _— r... �__— _il_�%1, �R' _I7 Ire __c_ I�?r ...I .I. - •—II16i—.-1AFII— �. Fireholl ," ,,r R [i to ., 11 — to Vi 7te 71 _1 COUNCEL UPDATE May b, 1894 At the May 3 meeting of the Planning Commission, at the end of the meeting a member of the Clearwater Planning Commission introduced himself and noted that he was in attendance to learn more about how planning commissions operate. He informed the group that the Clearwater area is in the process of gearing up for a major development which consists of development of a large factory outlet center of 400,000 sq ft. This size is equal to over four Kmart stores. The facility will employ about 600. In response to this information, I called Steven Dombrovski of Suntide Realty Services, Inc., to find out why Clearwater was selected for the factory outlet mall. As you may know, there had been some speculation that Monticello might he a good location for such a facility. I wanted to know why Monticello was not contacted. Dombrovski stated that the Clearwater location is ideal and that they had been looking at this location for five years. The location is ideal because there is very little development on the south side of the interchange at Highway 24 and because of the presence of the river crossing. In addition, Monticello and the Rogers locations were too close to the metro area to be considered for a factory outlet mall. He noted that although a factory outlet mall was developed in Woodbury, which is much closer to the metro area, a number of problems have resulted from development of the mall at that location, which reinforced their desire to move to a point as far out as Clearwater. I informed him that Monticello's comprehensive plan includes development of a freeway interchange and that perhaps development of a large retail site could have spurred development of this interchange. Dombrovski stated that their time frame limitations required that a freeway interchange be in place and that they would not even consider a site based on a hope that an interchange could be established. In summary, he stated that Monticello was never in contention and there was nothing that could have been done to convince their company to establish their outlet mall in Monticello. CLEARWATER CROSSING OUTLET TO THE NORTH • CLEARVJATER CROSSING # 400,000 S.F. MANUFACTURERS OUTLET CENTER - 3 PHASES 4 TARGETED OPENING: MAY 1995 SERVING THE CENTRAL MINNESOTA MARKET 15 MILES TO ST. CLOUD - 50 MILES TO MINNEAPOLIS/ ST, PAUL * 3 MILLION CONSUMERS WITHIN 80 MILE RADIUS 0 DIRECT ROUTE TO/ FROM GREATER NORTHERN MINNESOTA RECREATION AREAS AND CANADA 4 LOCATED AT INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 94 AND MISSISSIPPI RIVER CROSSING TO HIGHWAY 10 0 OVER 30,000 VEHICLES PER DAY AT CLEARWATER CROSSING 4 EASY ACCESS -TOUR BUS', RECREATION. EHICLE AND BOAT! TRAILER PARKING NN QST-qWe 1� � � � r �" ��.� `{•'���=_; icy • 11..1\S1N13/ R1. O_ "- _- _,1 �,��{'!''., a sa m my ma OAD 7 PHASE ONE 1 PHASE TWO RRAI AMCTtp )C t t00• IC 1100' 3. ■[tA4 A, 111TA0. 10, a w, - 3.000 7Q, rt. [RA4 5. ■[TAY S.coo i0. !T 6. lRA4 )0' 1. IRAI [ [RAa to i Too' - to [ 100' - r. \RA4 ro [RAl lL \RALL 31 tnA a" 3.000 fQ. - I'm sq. R. Il. \RA4 1.000 lo. R. moo q. R. 23 u -1C !�, [!TAIL t roC 10' i 100' s. RR" A4 AN[tga To. [ too' 10. lRA4 B. tvA T1. lRA0. - l.No So. R. to [ too• - to. a Too• NN QST-qWe 1� � � � r �" ��.� `{•'���=_; icy • 11..1\S1N13/ R1. O_ "- _- _,1 �,��{'!''., a sa m my ma OAD 7 PHASE TWO Is. IfTAG k ItTALL )C t t00• IC 1100' So. R. A, 111TA0. 10, a w, - 3.000 7Q, rt. Tr, IRAQ S.coo i0. !T ' ID. alTA4 )0' "Z 3Q. RR.. to i Too' - to [ 100' - I,00o SQ. FT. 3.000 SQ. R. lL \RALL 31 tnA IC 10• i low 3.000 fQ. - I'm sq. R. to: t too' - to- a too' - 1.000 lo. R. moo q. R. 23 u -1C !�, [!TAIL t roC 10' i 100' - 3,000 7Q. R - 1.000 sq. FT To. [ too' 3.000 3o. F, B. tvA l0. 1 roC - l.No So. R. to [ too• - to. a Too• 1.000 SQ. R. ].Goo So. rt. Ir. 117- iJ. [RA4 m t Too' lC [100• - 1,000 IQ. R. to[ too• TOO' ).,coo $Q. n. I :[. aRAG lC 1 roC - 1.000 So. rt. to- a too- - 3.o0o So. R. ro, tRA4 lC [roo' 1,000 sQ . R. • a too' - TOQ..". 10' [ 100' 3,000 so R. 1.000 So. R. 11. 11TA0. I 11. t1TM AMCIIQ[ 3C 4 loo' TSO• [ TSC Q. - 1.000 f - JJ,Soo !9 Ft. R. 130• [ tso• - Q. 22.5110'c TOT.Y - aT,too sq. R. M/A - 1,103. R. M/A - >o [ I5C - IUtAL - J.rOr to. R. :.'°° '° R. 22.3 [0 SQ. ' I PHASE THREE i 1 11. IRA- 10.1 w - 7.000 3o. !T. NN QST-qWe 1� � � � r �" ��.� `{•'���=_; icy • 11..1\S1N13/ R1. O_ "- _- _,1 �,��{'!''., a sa m my ma OAD 7 Is. IfTAG k ItTALL )C t t00• IC 1100' 1.000 W. R. 1). ItTAG IC i 100' - 1.000 )Q. rt. Tr, IRAQ )C i too' - ).0oo SQ. pro' 5.000 SQ. FT R � RL lRA6 5). IRAs IC t roo' a roC - ).000 So. rt 1.000 SQ. !T . 51 [RAG IC 1 100' w 5,000 SQ. R. N. [RAG 43. [RA0. !0'1 roo' 1C i roC - l.Ooso. R. 1,000c so, ST. N. lETA0. IC S 100' - 1.000 SQ. R. i 50. [[TAG N. RRA0. IC i roo' W aroo' - ),000 W. R. 1000 to. R. N. tRA0. .cm 130' S 150' • 51.300 3y. R, tQTu - )[.soo sQ. rt. FUTURE DEVELOPMENTI f0. [RAG AMCIIOa AI.Y a 15).1' - 50.000 sQ. R OmrAa - w.00r t4• R. NN QST-qWe 1� � � � r �" ��.� `{•'���=_; icy • 11..1\S1N13/ R1. O_ "- _- _,1 �,��{'!''., a sa m my ma OAD 7 CLEAR"n'R CROSSING \ PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE C MASE- 22.6 ACRES 1MCLLWES PADS I _ RUgDINC - 132,11.0 SQ. Fl. A IKtW- - KO RtQ•0 - 1"I PROVRXD PHASE 2: MASE- 10.6 ACRES WRONG- 61,S00.0 SO. FT. FAR[ONG lot REQ'0- SSO PROVIDED 1 PHASE S: MASE- 12.0 ACRES WILDING - 70.500.0 SQ. FT. IMUM - SSS REQ -O- tlt PROVIDED , FUTURE: MASE- " ACRES tE1R.DONG - SO,Oo0.0 SQ• F1. A1R[WG - 250 REQ'O- NSN PIOVRXD TOTALS: MASES ONt-TMREE R FUTURE - S3.7 ACRES CLEAR"n'R CROSSING CLEARMTER CROSSINQ CLEARWATER CROSSING IS A JOINT VENTURE DEVELOPMENT OF SUNTIDE REALTY SERVICES, INC. AND CARLSON REAL ESTATE COMPANY, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA FOR ADDITIONAL LEASING INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: STEPHEN DOMBROVSKI, CMD, CSM DENISE CURRIE, CCIM SUNTIDE REALTY SERVICES, INC. INTERNATIONAL CENTRE •900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH - SUITE 490 MINNEAPOLIS, MFNNESOTA 55402 PHONE: (612) 333-3962 FAX: (612) 333-6938 CITY OF MONTICELLO MONTHLY BUILDING DEPARTMENT REPORT Month of April, 1994 PERMITS 8 USES Last 1 his Sam Monlr' Lest VeaThis Year PERMITS ISSUED Moms MAR Month APRIL Last Vaal To Call. To Date RESIDENTIAL Number 17 22 10 43 47 'valuation S649,100.00 5606.600.00 $529.00000 51,160.60000 $1,535,300.00 Fees $4767.36 54,375.71 54.092.20 $9,035.87 $11,067.95 Surcharges 5323,30 5295.30 $263.25 557755 $758.15 COMMERCIAL Number 4 7 4 a 13 VaNatlon $240.50000 $195.300.00 $61,300.00 572.30000 $467.300.00 Fees 51.88557 52.445,20 $63220 $76320 54,63737 Surcharges $119.50 $107.65 $30.40 $35.40 5242.65 INDUSTRIAL Number 2 3 1 2 6 Valuation $34.90000 $1.036.500.00 $3.000.00 512,00000 $1.074.90000 Fees $540,35 56.732.51 530.00 $138.00 $7,307.86 Surcharges $1745 $518.25 51.50 $600 5537.45 PLUMBING Number 10 12 9 18 27 Fees $24300 5318.00 $234.00 $45000 6678.00 Surcharges 5500 $6,00 $4.50 $900 513,50 OTHERS Number 1 2 2 2 3 Valuelbrl 5000 $0.00 $56.900.00 556.90000 $0.00 Fees $1000 $2000 $73902 $73902 $3000 SumNuiroe9 %ISO $1.00 $2620 _$28.20 _ $1.50 TOTAL PERMITS ;M 46 34 73 98 101 AL VALUATION _5921,500 QO f1636,40000_$65022pQoo.31.301,80000 13.077.500 00 TOTAL FEES_ _U44828 _ 13891,42 $5,727,4R $11,120.09_25LI6 III AL SURrHARGFS 546575 __5928.20 5327185 $656.15 $1.55325 CURRENT MONTH - _ FEES_ NUMBER TO DATE___ PEtIMII NAfUR �_ Num "nil _ GMrgo ValuatlorV milt _oar Lasl Veal Singlo Family 6 1A.053.91 $282.20 5976.40000 20 15 Duplo� O 0 ll Family 0 0 Cpnmmcml 0 0 Intlua11181 0 0 Roil Oarogos 0 2 Sq* 0 0 PL"ic Bkps 0 ? ALI EItA I IOW RF PAIR Dwollings 12 529160 $1210 $27,20000 24 23 Commacinl 7 $2.44520 $10765 $10,30000 13 8 In(Ar�1, M1 3 $6.73251 $51825 $1,030.50000 6 2 PLUMRINO All typos 12 $31800 $800 27 18 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SWre-.g Pool 0 0 Docks 2 $3000 $1 OD 13.00000 3 3 ICMPORARY PERMIT 0 0 UFMOLITION _ _. 2 --__ W00 51Sp, __aOQ _ __a.__ U IOIALB_ _ - _ __ __dt__i1 X142 __ _.$M?9._$T8364 00. 9§ _ - 73 CITY OF MONTICELLO INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT Month o1 April, 1994 PERMIT FEES NUMBER DESCRIPTION TYPE PAMEI1LOCA33 VALUA.DOft FEAMLL_SURCtlBflGE—PLUMBING_SUPCHARGE- §4-m9 Comwen restauram td-barlroStaurant AC Wls.de Pannersn 0,530 Cedar St _ _ _ _526,3W 00 ;260 45 $121 L5 $2400 $050 Q42240 D9molaun M store AC Holicav Sulmastdres. Inc 107 W In Street m oQ S1000 SO 50 , 942241 'Imam otllce addition At Re—ele Engs"nrto213 Chelsea Ra S67 500 00 $93 23 S3375 Q4.2242 Rcmovg 6 replace souse sjolno AD Verona 00ar1109 Heomgn Larg_ 52AQ0 09 3_2900 St OP }2? 00 8150 94.2243 House A aaraae SF Value Plus Hcmgs 5360 Staeiso Drrve 557,290.99 -40021 52Q 60 $31 OC S050 94.?2uHouse A aaraae JF 9aryl Heikgs'100 MISS451; o Of" $112JO 00 5615 55 S5Q 355 942245 Awalcm to aaraae AD Reinharcl Goerke/10 Fp,-?, Drive 2,090 99 520 00 5I W . 94-2246 Remove A redece souse vont siding AD Russell Ardersgnll54 Heilman Lane 51.509 09 515 00 SO 50 942247 Remove A reolace souse &Gina AD Lowell 6 %ov HaSS11,55_Heaman Lane S719Q0 00 12Q 00 !it QO 526.00 50 50 94.2248 Ream A remove ronen house $CiN AD Anlnony RowarV4K W 3rd St. 51 509.00 515 49 $95.9 525 00 50 50 942241 rouse ¢ caraoo CF P,asngn Builder; of SI Cld,-4 i6?7 Artar Oakes 811q f92 100 00_ 7_55 Si0 05 523 00 __5050 94.2250 HDuso A decade SAF Value_Plus Momes'S3?OaSlanin0 Orrva �53,�Og 00 11Q7 22 $2fj 75 94:251 Mouse A oaraoa SF Vplue Plus Homev54Q0 Falcon Avenue_ SN NO 90 1489 a 1 S2.Q 65 f54 00 So 5a X2257 IMondr remodel A Miss AC �dnpg0tio-B�la q HoMjaVl 107 Han Bhq 559,090 QD S42Q 00 Vfl N. $23 00 SQSQ_ 947251 Emdove0 toclllry addition At S1mnv_Fresn Foaos'296 W 4m SI. 5950,go0 00 SZ 369 S0 $175 W , 94.2254 House A garage SF Vitpe Plyl Mgmos 9351 Eider Lone $61 J QO Q9 $418 W S30 55 pasemeni tinisn AD Ilan Crawt9!d.9140 Tanngnr Cape $1,50000 }15 00 5059 ,Q+•221,5 942256 Romove aningies'mstall now, was/ AP 3orintnan A Heci Garliry 1324 W River $1 $1,50000 $15 CW 5050 942257 teat out 2 emir news Deck An Davin Frl4kW9370 Carlvarngck Coun_ 11592-Q9_11riq $050 523 OQ SD 50_ 64•22_43 Remodel ooautr Snoa AC Gail ('.old Salon E.crV onoLalp6 w. Br060way "WOO i!? p1 $2 Q9 $23 00 _A0 50 947259In eau 1 a.prdl Ill ligan iebina wim canogAC�amns RMlronra110NlOt E Oakwood Dr f20000_f1l_ f207 00 Stn on _ 842260 Interior_remodM AC Cly of Moro A11d/107 00aar 31. $15,000 DO }162 00 17:5 942261 _ House A osrao0 SF Value Plus Homest5511 FAICM Avenue SWSDO 00 $40747 $2925 94 2282 Demansn QuSl) AD Cry of MonICMI0213 E LM SI D 0D },o WA0 S 5(L 522 00 S1150- N.228] Ropes hie dam b�araye --AD_Llevdn A Mary Movon'J D Proine Rood 57,209 00 S91 M S7 60 $2401 $4 50. 942204 Install nasomem window AD Vinconl Malorrt 10 Craiy Lane St SW W j15 UG $050 94_2265 Baemmont finish A aect, All Kenn A 0�1e Naogwir�r 5379 Falcon Avonuo 57_000_Dj----j.30 Ut1 S150 94.2260 Basomonl unWmrso mit AC MonTicolW_Bip Lake HC9001107 Hon BW S47 000 Oq_$.39.5 C30 S73 50 _ 94_2267 H" A parayo SF Spender Builders Inc.27CR Oakwew Lane 586,0.0.0_00 S512L775 Sao On 942768 Cola sloaoo noalnon AI Au'w9FNI A 5Maren MrVFl11 DuMan Roaa $19 D00 00 }1911 OD ____A�5n 9� 2269 Cam dvm new Wmp isle% Ac Haioay_Sleuonsiwps, Inc .107 W 71n 5t Wow W $252 00 51500 942274 Rmool lowerlavol A0 Anlerony. gowar%4D0Werra SI f1.S00W }1S UU fin 50 , Dnc� wttn mmC AD Donnla A Patncie Btoeckmv9t27 Hlpnwar 25 NE, Lo1318 j1SOD_W�S ,942271 9!2272 Pa110 aDdt A hO1011 roAiae AD Mail Thei 56 Hnomnn Lane f2,�.�__A.2n CI 51 DD _ TOTALS $1,&18 x.00 if ii, 3�.1a t971,20_t}S1B.00 {8.00 PERMIT FEES YALUAZtOti—_P..E8M1S,SUBC2lA8fiERLUMBfNii-_.,x^UftGtf#ft0E PIAN REVIEWS 9+4241 IOlanpr OniCp aaaaaon _ AI Remmaie Engrtopmg'213 Chelsea Ro 94.2243 House 3 Carom Si valuer Pius Ho,,,0 ,5360 Stan'nq M, 94.2244 House A carom SF _ _Daryl H&k0aID0 Mississ�pP,Dr 94.2249 House A Caraoa SF I"MV100 Bu4C$rs 01 Si C ouc2527 Briar Oakes Biw 94.22.50 House 8 aarace SF value F',us Homesr5320 Stanmq UT 94-2251 Housri A Oafnca SF Value NUS HOMW5460 Fa"ti Ave 4+,_2252 InImot rem00el A Iinw AC MC(IM090•Biq Lake HOsplayi IQ7 Har( BIW 94.2253 Emolovee tacmty aomlw At Sunny Frasn F000a206 w 4In SI 94.2254 House A comae SF Value Nus HOmes9351 boor Lane 244261 House A Oaraw SF Value Nus Horrlos SSI t 1`01COn Avo, e+ -??K6 Baapment rmprOw3mtm{s _AC _MOMIU:00 B,9 H05¢t301.07 Hari 9M7 9+-226.1 HOusO Ajarape SF -La" SgiNer Bunaer9 lnc_127C2 Oakv Wrq 9< 2?66­COk1 .(72go aea3ltln At 9-'!!RHow 912269 Canopayo ,-pumLIsiaru 7m St $3296, VO 02 1 5§ §�.4 36 pB 72 -138 5! 527$.20 S2203.17 Ki 80 540_/5 5256 :`5 ;52 70 S 128 Be $163 1,10 TOTAL PIAN REVIEW 53,77D.WT TOTAL NEVE-1. UE- 11s,SM62