The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Agenda Packet 11-27-1995AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, November 27, 1998 - 7 p.m. Mayor. Brad Fyle Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Cent Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the special meeting held November 8, and the regular meeting held November 13, 1995. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. A. Consideration of accepting a purchase offer for Lots 5 & 6, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition--WIHA Tools. 8 ((?&Ae -fA, $4.� sh.dy- r -A. / & rd 4. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. A. Request for Mayor proclamation declaring December 1, 1995, as World Aids Day. 6. Consent agenda. A. Consideration of a resolution adopting assessment roll for 10ein Farms, Project 9"2C. B. Consideration of a resolution adopting assessment roll for Cardinal Hills 6th Addition, Project 96-06C. C. Consideration of a resolution adopting the City General Records Retention Schedule for records maintenance and destruction. 6. Consideration of an amendment to the zoning map which would change the zoning district designation of Part of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace Addition, from R-3 to PZM. Applicant, Vaughn Veit. Consideration of an amendment to a conditional use permit which would allow fWl use of the Hillside Partnership mall. Applicant, Hillside Partnership. 8. Consideration of a request to subdivide a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace, for combination with the Hillside mall property. Applicant, Vaughn Veit. Agenda Monticello City Council November 27, 1995 Page 2 9. Consideration of funding a portion of the Chamber of Commerce community sign. 10. Consideration of establishing an escrow policy allowing home occupancy prior to completion of site grading and required tree planting. 11. Review of class °A" sludge alternatives and wastewater treatment plant cost estimates. 12. Consideration of sidewalk/pathway maintenance on Elm Street and Washington Street. 13. Consideration of bills for the month of November. 14. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICEL.LO CITY COUNCIL Monday, November 18, 1898 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault Members Absent: None Aq=sd of minutegg of he,1 ra meeting held October 23. and the :loll meeting held November 1. 1995. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD OCTOBER 23, 1995, AS WRITTEN. Motion carried unanimously. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 1, 1995, AS WRITTEN. Voting in favor: Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault. Abstaining: Shirley Anderson. Cron-aideratinn of nddinr, items to the n� ndn, Public Works Director John Simola requested that Council add to the consent agenda consideration of authorizing a traffic study for School Boulevard. Ci 7. g com n /petitions. requPats- and mm lain None. Congent agenda, Mayor Fyle requested that item 5C be removed from the consent agenda for discussion. A. Consideration of nurchnging$ng detector for wastewater treatment 1&=. Recommendation: Authorize purchase of a Neotronics minigas 4 -gas monitor for the wastewater treatment plant at a cost of $1,840. B. Cnngidoratinn of adnptinng develnn^ent nm"rn nt and approving final plat of tho Kloin Fnnmg Pontaa reaidentiaL lannad unit dgypIngment. Recommendadon: Approve the final plat and adopt the development agreement for the Nein Farms Estates. Approval is subject to execution of the development agreement. Page 1 0 Council Minutes - 11113/95 Consideration of autho 'zine cooripletion of n trnf£ie studyfor�ool Rn3ilAvard. Recommendation: Adopt a resolution authorizing completion of a traffic study for School Boulevard. SEE RESOLUTION 95-64. A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY SHUtLEY ANDERSON TO APPROVE ITEMS 5A, 5B, AND 51) OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED. Motion carried unanimously. �br-r-rlr- ,, , Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that on August 28, 1995, City Engineer Bret Weiss reviewed the draft of the comprehensive sanitary sewer study. The purpose of the study was to determine whether or not the properties owned by Tony Emmerich and Orrin Thompson Homes could be served by the existing city sanitary sewer systems. The study also included an analysis of city-wide sewer capacity issues. At that time, Council was asked to review the document only pending Rather study of a sanitary sewer system that had capacity to serve a potential industrial area to the northwest of the community and additional study of the redevelopment of the sanitary sewer line along River Street to provide a better understanding of how the city might stretch the capacity of the interceptor sewer line. O'Neill explained that after fi:rther study, Jon Peterson of OSM completed the updates to the plan, noting that there is sufficient capacity to handle future industrial park areas. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO ACCEPT THE COMPREHENSIVE SANITARY SEWER STUDY AS PRESENTED. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing. City Administrator Rick Wolfstellor noted that the proposed assessment roll includes accounts receivable bills which are delinquent more than 60 days and would be certified to the county auditor for collection on next year's taxes if not paid within 30 days of the public hearing. There being no comment fbm the public, Mayor Fyle closed the public hearing. Page 2 Council Minutes - 11/13/95 AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE DELINQUENT CHARGES AS PRESENTED. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95-60. Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing. Assistant Administrator O'Neill noted that although the project was not entirely complete, it was far enough along to establish a fairly precise final coat, and adopting the assessment roll at this time would enable the City to collect payment of assessments in 1996. City Engineer Bret Weiss reviewed the project costa totaling $198,054.96, with trunk sanitary sewer and water charges to be collected at the time of hookup. Public Works Director John Simola requested that Council consider allowing the benefiting parties of this project to pay the 1995 hookup rate until June 1, 1996, since the project ran later than expected. There being no comment from the public, Mayor Fyle closed the public hearing. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE SOUTHWEST AREA UTILITIES EXTENSION, PROJECT 95.01C, AS PRESENTED. MOTION INCLUDES ALLOWING HOOKUP AT THE 1995 RATE UNTIL JUNE 1, 1996. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95.61. Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing. City Engineer Bret Weise reported that the project was initiated to provide an outlet for the Meadow Oak pond while also serving the Dillard Avenue area with increased storm water capability. In addition, Qillard Avenue was reconstructed, which improved eight lines and restored a Woad that was near the end of its usefW life. Pago 3 (;Z,) Council Minutes - 11/13/95 Weiss reviewed the project cost, noting that the construction cost amounted to $341,839.86 with an indirect cost of $101,606.98 for a total project cost of $443,446.84. MN/DOT contributed $50,000 toward the project, and the City will carry the cost of pipe oversizing, for a total assessable amount of $301,188.91. Using 162.63 assessable acres, the per -acre cost amounted to $1,852. The street reconstruction assessment was calculated at $7.88 per lineal foot for residents along Gillard Avenue, with the Township's portion amounting to $7,423.17. Weiss also noted that after concerns were voiced by Gillard Avenue residents regarding bike traffic, a bike shoulder construction amount of $3,134.55 was included in the calculation noted on each assessment notice; however, Council may delete that portion of the project if the residents are not in favor of adding a bike shoulder. Weiss explained that Council could include an additional 160 acres of undeveloped township property to the project area, which would reduce the per -acre assessment to $1571.32. He also noted that $3,600 in liquidated damages was deducted from the contract due to the extended time period for completing the project on Gillard Avenue. Concerns were raised by some residents that their properties would not benefit by the amount of the assessment; some felt that since their paroels did not experience water problems, there was no benefit; others felt the cost should be borne by the Meadow Oak development. Questions were also raised as to why the project wasn't constructed a few years ago when initially discussed by the City. Weiss explained that when the Meadow Oak subdivision was initially developed, the storm water was to drain into the 1-94 right-of-way and through the ditch 33 system; however, after the developer agreement had been executed, the county would not allow the water to drain into the ditch system. Weiss reiterated that the project serves the entire area, including increased storm water capacity for the Gillard Avenue area, and was not meant to solve water problems on individual lots involving initial grading of the parcel. The following residents submitted formal written objections to the proposed assessment: Victor and Barb Hellman 155.061-002020 156.061-002070 155.061-002090 166.061-002110 166.061-002130 Jeff and Colleen Nelson 1.66.061-002030 Rosamond Sandusky 155.061.002010 Page 4 Council Minutes - 1 V13/95 Richard and Ila Cordes 156.061-003010 Patrick and Joann Olson 165-080-005020 Warren and Cindy Pederson 155-061-002100 Joan Pogatchnik 155-045-004100 Richard Busch 155-061-002080 Rod and Karen Norell 155-061-000010 155-061-001020 Jennifer Bauer 155.045-004080 John Gurney 155-061-002050 Corey and Kimberly Hellman 155-061-002140 Mayor Fyle closed the public hearing. It was suggested that perhaps the $3,500 in liquidated damages should be utilized to reduce the street cost for the Gillard Avenue residents. In addition, Council discussed deleting the bike shoulder portion of the street reconstruction. A show of hands by Gillard Avenue residents indicated that a clear majority preferred that the bike shoulder be deleted from the project. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO REDUCE THE PER -ACRE STORM SEWER COST TO $1,571.32 BY INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL 160 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED TOWNSHIP PROPERTY IN THE PROJECT AREA, TO USE THE $3,500 IN LIQUIDATED DAMAGES TO REDUCE THE PER LINEAL FOOT COST TO $6 FOR THE STREET RECONSTRUCTION, AND TO DELETE THE BIKE SHOULDER PORTION OF THE PROJECT. MOTION INCLUDES A CAPITAL COST OF $170,000 FOR THE ADDED 160 ACRES, WITH THE DEVELOPER OF THE AREA RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY COST OVER THAT AMOUNT. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95.62. Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing. Public Works Director John Simola reported that after neighborhood meetings were conducted and it was found that the project would not go forward on its own, the Council ordered the project after requests were made by residents for City involvement. Original estimates on the storm sewer improvements for the Maplewood Circle area were $7,170 for construction and $1,434 for engineering and administration, for a total of $8,604. Council had previously indicated that the City would cover the administration and engineering costs. The project was awarded to Fyle's Excavating, with the final project cost totaling $7,003.69. Page 5 0 Council Minutes - l V13/95 Residents from the Maplewood Circle area stated that the City should be responsible for the project cast, as it was their view that the drainage problem should have been corrected at the time the area was developed. Julie Henrichs requested that someone from outside the City of Monticello review her lot because no work was performed on her property. Public Works Director Simola noted that the City would be glad to review the property with an engineer of Henrichs' choice. Councilmembers noted to residents that the City participated in the project at the residents' request and that the final project cost was $3,000 less than the estimate. The following residents submitted formal written objections to the proposed assessment: Barbara Hamilton 166-059-002110 Julie Henrichs 166-045.003040 Richard Jarvis 165-045-003030 Mayor Fyle closed the public hearing. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AS PRESENTED FOR THE MAPLEWOOD CIRCLE STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS. Voting in favor: Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst. Abstaining: Brad Fyle, as his company was involved in the project. Motion passed. SEE RESOLUTION 95-63. 11. ('o mid ra ion of n m ndmnn . n n mn ilio nl .m�y+rmi w i h wo ld nllow :ll umn of Lhe Hillmide P rtn rn i nmp 11 ApAli nt. i118idn P rtn rs in• : TTS It was the consensus of Council to table the zoning map amendment, conditional use permit, and simple subdivision requests as requested by the applicant. Pago 6 a.► Council Minutes - 1 V13/95 13. Review of 3rd quarter liquor store financial report. City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that for the 3rd quarter of 1995, sales have increased 7.8% over the same period last year. The gross profit from sales has also increased approximately 8%. Operating income for the first 9 months was slightly above the original budget projections. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO ACCEPT THE 3RD QUARTER LIQUOR STORE REPORT AS PRESENTED. Motion carried unanimously. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the Planning Commission has been reviewing issues relating to downtown and riverfront improvement; and in an effort to help develop community involvement, the HRA is sponsoring a visit by Theresa Washburn, a downtown redevelopment specialist, on Thursday, November 16. Washburn will be touring the community and will present ideas for design and what local residents can do to participate, organize, and encourage redevelopment. The 7 p.m. meeting will be open to the public, and O'Neill noted that the Economic Development Director had widely publicized the event through the schools, the newspaper, radio, etc. This was an information item only, no action taken. Public Works Director John Simola reported that the fire department advertised for bide on a 1976 Chevrolet 1 -ton equipment stepvan and received only two bids, with the highest being $863. Simola requested that the Council consider transferring the stepvan to the street and park department for an amount equal to the highest bid. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO AUTHORIZE TRANSFER OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S EQUIPMENT VAN TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AT A COST OF 8886. Motion carried unanimously. Pago 7 (D Council Minutes • 11/13/95 City Administrator Wolfsteller reported that this item was tabled at the previous Council meeting for further research. He noted that additional quotations ranging from $19 to $100 per chair have been submitted, and staff requested direction from Council as to what type of chair and price range was acceptable. The current council chamber chairs would be transferred to the public works department. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO PURCHASE 60 CHAIRS AT A COST OF $40 EACH FROM GOLDEN VALLEY FURNITURE. Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Pyle. Abstaining. Tom Perrault, as he does business with Sam's Club. There being no lhrther business, the meeting was adjourned. Karen Doty Office Manager Page 8 0 Council Agenda - 11/27/95 At the October 9 Council meeting, the Council was asked to consider reducing the sale price of one of the lots remaining in the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition for a subsidiary of a local industrial business that had expressed interest in relocating a separate facility to this site. The City's asking price for the 1.8 -acre lot was $32,915. The Council was asked to consider reducing the lot price by a formula that was tied to wage and salary covenants that would be part of a development contract. The original proposal would have reduced the cost of the land substantially to where the Council did not feel it was warranted. The Council did pass a motion that reduced the asking price for Lot 5 from $32,915 to $30,000. The reason for the reduction was that it was the consensus that it was better to write down the cost of the land rather than establish a TIF district. The Willi Hahn Corporation lues now presented a purchase agreement for the Council to consider for purchasing both Lots 5 and 6 of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. These are the two remaining lots that the City has owned, and the business is now interested in acquiring both lots for future expansion purposes. The current asking price for the two lots has been $64,475. This is broken down by Lot 6 being priced at $32,915 and Lot 6 at $31,560. The proposal presented is offering $56,500 for the two lots, which is a reduction of $7,976 from our asking price. The Council will now have to decide whether this offer is acceptable or whether a counteroffer should be made. The Willi Hahn Corporation is proposing to initially build a 10,000 aq ft building consisting of 8,000 aq ft for warehouse space and 2,000 sq ft of office space. At this time, the type of construction has not been determined, and we do not know if it will be a concrete or metal structure. TIF financing has not been proposed for this project at this time, and it is anticipated that no additional public financing would be involved. As I noted earlier, the Council had previously offered to reduce the price of one lot that originally was priced at $32,915 down to $30,000 if TIF assistance wasn't necessary. This would have been an 8.8% reduction in the price; and if this was applied to the two lots, this would have reduced the price to approximately $58,800. Council Agenda - 11/27/96 Council could accept the purchase offer of $66,600 for the two lots remaining in the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. If the purchase agreement is not acceptable, the Council could make a counteroffer. (e,,r•. 0, G/,SL c ; I /1 -3i -9t C- STAFF RECOMMENDATION; The two lots in question have approximately 3.3 acres, which is approximately an asking price of $19,600 per acre. Previously, the Council felt that this price was reasonable when comparing other available land nearby. The staff is certainly in agreement that it may be better for the City to write down the cost of land rather than establish a separate TIF district because of the penalties involved through loss of state aid; we do not have a firm recommendation on the amount of reduction that would be appropriate in this case. The staff has not received any confirmed plans on the type of building design (concrete vs. metal) that will be proposed, and thus it's hard to place a dollar figure on construction design at this time. The Council had previously autho►ized a reduction of 8.8% when this company was considering just one lot; and if you would like to apply this same offer to both lots, you could counter at $68,800. In any case, I believe the corporation would like to acquire the land before they proceed with further financing options. Map depicting location of the two lots; Copy of purchase agreement. 4ar_ qdc { _ �`'', \ -- EAST f 822.76-- 97. 5 -ORA INACE AIVD,* Ural" la" 3 J (b It WES r C, 5 2 w4rsr 75 goq ow-NAer AND oc� c - z wEsr 690.00-- STANDARD PURCHASE AGREEMENT �7� 1__ RECEIVED Of 1,!(_;��l"t O✓1 �W( _ rN aM1m�fe Q��.�X�/1C.0 alsf--,�-fOY��Q1L-[.+.� Dow]Is It, G �LI/� n R•rrvY nnrw.ry b M hgrtnrtl Inn rvrl Eufrr,lS] EM ahrn N(CpiMK! ,n M1,EI YMwn d lylmp bunt lona•]] ��+fellSvr__�b_m J,l en/rl.m and MYnvn/IO�r IM pnc�.1. d IM ermfn �)yny�p��/pfFFI at It-I__t✓ .�—r �IVG�¢L�Gf/-�J,O/ J locawl w ISneet Ar.f.al , �'/ , Cdy.f .1)U'l'tjcaO_ .County of _(rr•• '� Slnaal•Wresa. lMudntp as wenn. anruoa ora non. en spm reraowa wa/a ,nfwn aa.m bora, arrrrrtpa, wraps, ]leen, Muth [Wiwn Iravmae b.o."roe], •hec Im vne toroth wanhth nArrrlh'rq Im sollwaw Nnw,MnngaMem.InrmidlutV, BUILnmadonmp nMetronle ed nhw..0 doss perapa door opens, ywlh m,nnla, www aotrwtw, ,stew bll. ns -I I ora , ngtallod cant auto IF AM 6NwnNw. 0arhaYe byoad, Ir.sh ,wmpwtn. arnMal mnklop slat, mnrwMrw mien tweo Ian, m-rolrcpn, maaled c.rowxq H ANY, lr en nn Wanton r a. IM M—t d SdNr ante at.n IM Idlow.tp nt, o oopw -.O �)'Vd= anof whcnMop" SlW has the dit sold to 8Id rNsumd a�� y..n ewer gsaa To m n IN Idbwrnp muurr E.melppOay d a _(or�F? 's' •w a.SO,Sap cash onmbalwe �Lh_/.5�— 994—.theen.nd-uV.anlINWW- d a Y Ilnannnp as follnwa ame S.6fSe /rf�-tJac.�Ee LtnLe,lt _4tJ.0 ., ,5— azi AIIaCMd M __ a001Mnre wllren w. rn•ea • p.rl d IM q.Mrrres IS TO prwrmar[.b eww. 6•IM eW-Tp as _ab,.anrw.J W-en"D..a To M tared nM llo—, dwry.--"Vmaslrabl. lea To IM p-- wrblan pal w IM ta-N a.ttpgn] M fllu"N wa ronea lww od-- Slna aM frMral raprlvlm] 171 14arCvn reWmp moat p mpoMrrora d lM Pwrxan w+lnu. .0-- Ipl.dwa ponum 171 Iln.rvnwn o1 any mlrur.h n m,nwa rpn] to IM Stan d Mwn]M. 111 VIdW ane barn.pa aaemlml worth rb ra ntnl.r. wan pamnt wrWroMrprtla 191 Rghn d IaMma d a.ry REAL ESTATE TAMES S.awl loon -/_z, 12lN.ra Burst a. gaaawr G/171Ndla.n mss ora p.yabb inlM vaso 19 !S S.W-u, pn -/�.2 / 1 h/ -M wa 13—W- In pau—'y Q / 12-0 arnaYbrrwn d —W .avaamwna nu ata oar.nl.m 1N,aar IB%J _f411e1 q-toCC?��-onIN eastulclos"Y soacul as—Mwae.ne pan" Busn, stall soy non M sod paYabla m IN year IB 1-1 and airy uros a w snontru d cp sI annunnunanppayaMa dwrelrah ora ntmnna SnIMr wwlama Inn uan bnr aM p.yada m 1M real l9 _9_y _ awn M _ —il/ _ _ nprwnna r4aearllan Nmlha SMIs, rb BMNr'. Apan1 rrlMn am raprpwmlalren ooll[Mhrt9 tM arnp,ea d Iapa IYI afial. non WARRANTIES Slltar wwrann That hullduga, a arta wa -,aft wale 1N ownewy I— of IN yrwrnn 8alw wwrann that .n a10T,.r,en.Nad,para.x[aldd,oarp, wrlagan0qumdrV uYOnaltandarIM P.rs,Oa. w.Mplow wak.V d. ond.n.Icbary Buyer Ns, rpnl w lmperl p.mra.a ora to cbautp 9uyar anll aanh Mmfaf /hwmR a M/Iso aaoansa IIW an a o -as nawuq sore.. h Yrr. Oro.�c,,parOwlwrhrrp nein papa wnlutp pbrbaa. Clda.tp 6.1w rywtm. Itwtfn p--w•e mmi to car torso h waw O Yn U n0 IT IN pamtn .la daaroyaa a autanntl.N ,mrrnp d a Iva a arty alar — bat.. IN tInsutp grnntelll stun hacoma nalI erre -3.0— IN ap aluY M raurte.0 b Buys, PDBBEBBION Sens, .pan adnn rpaae]]vtrra nlw .i dotty 1paso Aa mtneaLn try wa al.etrrNY..tan.lanw.ennpn,Ir,apl.nelan.a paroWnw.wnmpn r.net.n.a.n nK Iu,Iwq .sd es.il�. Sold apron wrengyl al blhn dna al pwlonW pgsnrrp mchd.a lwa+rhnn IN panuanbrbllr"m Wwl / TITLE A EXAMINATION Salty WWI.wnnm a vamtahte Irrru Mw azaptwtca d IN, snot larnn an Manan d tale, n a wrpatn,a Pmol t Abanan cend,ee to Me Ip lrc4rea peps,.aarctna mtwrrq yntnalnu. tilata aM faawal lueprrnl] uta Nn Buys, ='I N allowr,a 10 branleu data agar rrtreml for nalanlwr d Ino ora m.lrrp arty ogeclrpn w�ticn autl M nwY n wruutp n deenraa wawad Il arty daecunnaa mutt 6-C-arM,M TOP120 rSrytun 10d dM mulm.la. Mrl1 tpran 11 ulb.pwrwrnnwwr 1" reprw ad a . tr .Tons dA .1 <ar.clron d t114 and .rnnn i0 drys stow yrrmnt nu,ra Io Bwn IN panus ah.h pdnm IM gnwr'W cc0Mrtp 1pnurn tl lnbrnrol rnrwYad--g"0stay. ho To IN- . and WlactutINpr N'tfndad a lwq w,a or town d Burs, rndn.r ooh ahaa M hath In Qynwpn Mnnrow m IN aM, uttl canna mwrr stall M raatem Ip Burs, DCfAUII IIlxl.nmwln.tbw ncpranao wwlMn.eatm...b Bww Maunan •rrydlN q.mm.wa Nrin 6aM mar lwm.ulalN r,prwwr,rrtt warty tan u,rrwvr al p.ymuna ntwar fl,wwarrle al.Itl N rwaman48nuw wa Apwtt n INn raspnc son mlwnn mw qty. nllusagpwlrWlupnumalrtpolN aaawrta Mwyl fhaptvnan sttalr,w bN+raa tour party ddv rgnd,wnu aa.0 n-nwfnrwa. d llm.peenr.rM.pmreldlhd apaerrranlnmTiwmnal.a ora l^1.'m nC caaparna ewlama cpnxlurtr.e Mlltur urmama alts, urn r,pnlnlal,Mnen InlNavenl DuY.1d.t.ullam hlspllplm•n.l OIINJorma 011nn A9r.amenl aMNolKepl Ca WIDI1 .e,.nd rlpn the Ouyw pursuoa t0 M!IA 589 21 Ina I.rmrnanpn prloa Non M thuly 150) d.ya a. pnmul.d UY Sandm—a of MSA 559 21 ACCEPTANCE Blhp wana.nbe era tlW-11Th Inn ml. ro auq.n 1st a2W... N S.InI w w.xp Apam ro b Iran a raapprra,py pr .er'eurn al." W —, aaewa .'es- as .narwa Ip 1M n1— moat AOCMCr DIpClOaU11E aapbin M as ally N aapraaaaaap P. M W. IT-0so.a, TM naM aper an Iwolw alpmelatn M as also M rap--" R1. saMr 4 ata bIF-11. �i..na.ttw.at bl 1�n. wamlm.. nr.p Tnu q..m.nl aM Ic w M n IalMprcawWonlMlwmaarel 6rLLFR. _ - _ _ _ ___ . SELLER _ - _ ___-_ _ _ _ BAYER D. nnat, d al pspwa erre eCNa a1•a M ,nada w t1wdl- of Cnrpont _ _ . - - 8alwv Apwtf Abb am - - . - - - - Co. . 2p 3 THIS IS,A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. IP NOT UNDERSTOOD, SEEK COMPETENT ADVICE. PROCLAMATION le WORLD AIDS DAY 1 DECEMBER 1996 WHEREAS, the global spread of the HIV infection and AIDS necessitates a worldwide effort to increase communication, education, and preventative action to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS; and WHEREAS, the World Health Organization has designated December 1 of each year as World AIDS Day, a day to expand and strengthen the worldwide effort to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS; and WHEREAS, the World Health Organization now estimates that 18.6 million people have been infected with HIVand that more than 1.6 million of them have developed AIDS; and WHEREAS, the American Association for World Health is encouraging a better understanding of the challenge of HIV/AIDS nationally as it recognizes that the number of people diagnosed with HIV and AIDS in the United States continues to increase, with an estimated 1 in 260 Americans currently HIV positive and over 441,628 AIDS cases reported (as of December 31, 1994); and WHEREAS, World AIDS Day provides an opportunity to focus on HIV infection and AIDS, caring for people with HIV infection and AIDS, and learning about HIV/AIDS; and WHEREAS, World AIDS Day 1995, 'Shared Rights, Shared Responsibilities" (a) urges the world to protect everyone's rights to HIV/AIDS prevention and care, (b) recognizes that everyone shares the same human rights regardless of their HIV status and (c) emphasizes the shared responsibilities of individuals, families, governments, and the international community to promote prevention. Now, therefore, I, Brad Fyle, Mayor of tho City of Monticello, do hereby declare 1 December 1996 as World AIDS Day and urge all citizens to take part in activities and observances designed to increase awareness and understanding of HIV/AIDS as a global challenge, to take part in HIV/AIDS prevention activities and programs, and to Join the global effort to prevent the fLrther spread of HIV/AIDS. Proclaimed this 27th day of November, 1996. 4 Mayor Council Agenda - 11/27/95 Final project coats have been determined for the 1Dein Farms improvement project. As this project was a major part of our $3.9 million bond issue, it is also important that the assessment roll for this project be adopted by December 1 so that it can be placed on the taxes starting in 1996. As part of the developer agreement with Tony Emmerich, a public hearing was not necessary, and the Council can simply adopt the resolution authorizing the assessments to be certified. Enclosed with the agenda is a copy of the finance plan that the City had prepared and used as part of the development agreement when this project was initiated. This particular project was more difficult to determine assessment amounts pertaining to the ]dein Farms development in that some of the costa incurred in this project were to be picked up by the City for overeizing or were considered think expenses. While the City was initially picking up some of the trunk charges, the 80 -acre (Dein Farm development was also going to be charged the area trunk charges for water at $626 per acre, sanitary sewer at $1,250 per acre, and storm sewer at $1,660 per acre. These area charges would be applicable to phase I of the lDein Farms development and also the newly -approved (Dein Farms Estates project. To summarize, total assessments and area trunk charges being assessed against platted parcels will amount to $1,527,950. In addition, the developers will be responsible for reimbursement of $172,694 for site grading that will not be assessed to each particular lot. In the fhture as Outlets B, C, and D develop, additional charges will be levied against the property for trunk area fees for the water, sower, and storm sower charges. These amounts have not been calculated at this time and will be applied at the time the properties are developed. Staff intends to meet with Tony Emmerich on Monday to review the assessment worksheet that we have prepared, and we do not anticipate any objection to the amounts proposed. From the Council's viewpoint, the resolution should simply be adopted allowing the staff to finalize the assessment rolls for particular properties involved in this project and allow us to certify the assessments to the county auditor by December 1. This is in accordance with the developer agreement and meets the schedule anticipated during our bond sale. As an added note, the total project cost relating to this u Council Agenda - 11/27/95 development that will be picked up initially by the City for oversiAng and other related coats will be $268,116. It is anticipated that most of this cost will be reimbursable to the City in the future as trunk fees are collected. The City oversizing expenses also include a 20% share of School Boulevard between County Road 117 and Fallon Avenue that is included in this project COSL Council should adopt the assessment roll for the lGein Farms project as proposed in the amount of $1,527,950. The actual per -lot assessment will be calculated prior to certification to the county auditor. V- STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the staffs recommendation that the assessment roll as indicated on the updated finance plan be adopted for certification to meet our December 1 deadline. The staff does not anticipate any problem in reviewing this information with the developer and feels comfortable in preparing the final assessment roll to meet the deadline. Copy of assessment worksheet; Copy of resolution for adoption. RESOLUTION 96 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT 95-02C 14LEIN FARMS DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice fully given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the improvement of the lGein Farms development with sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, bituminous streets, curb and gutter, and appurtenant work. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessments, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 10 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 1997, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.6% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1996. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid assessments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 16 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. Adopted by the City Council this 27th day of November, 1996. Mayor City Administrator A 14 0.1 KLEIN FARMSISCHOOL BOULEVARD ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET TAKEN FROM UDPDATEO FINANCE PLAN if To7 ni. /js re rrm" 4,r- Lo fAk-e &A IL r,+t , /,379,401 TDTAL A Sse$T wftf Ft - 74w o K 446.+ c� y s / y 9, SD l � rfr4c AS+4ss a a /, si7, 9so InTAL. -m at A: d DftEelly — r -A G�itl�p 171, 49y —P -ML C04Y fAf4ofc Fos. Ouasfilial Graf two, IT sA8 orr o rr •.ru.� ... r.�r ID., w.r trr o.�r Iw-b ---. G-- Y.•. D.._. Ilwu IIYu tbD »O b0 I, Yew t+.e. 1¢u.ltta taDvt>dlr 1+. n �.+ Itrr+1.»,rw rm tm ra rm em am tao a+t a+ an n web.—.un • I r m sobmlD.mr I nt■II Inrr Drrn •....ut—rr tm.+s •m.+m n»m• W n+r1 tbnt mm T++,•/Yr•IwIDi»»rMr rtt»ntl� /Yer n•ttl IrmeD n�0 0 rr•1r•r V ta.tT iD.QI nII+n O m. Wl+r am nu. wr.r mm mm mm latmD wm D D a.rt... Harr na+n nuke r mm ma mm n..trt+ r m m.o smo •++.w D D >ti+.� m+d 191 /ntYa ■ ms. ma Item •uvl.r.r+ wem na a nml 1)Da nm m alnq ■+ia,r n»r nri+ n.aa nnr ars ■ nnai /n30 nra .x•rtw r -t _� tit�rrr A � nns• IRM W t+•VI n Il.n■ SMA+�rW M n na Cdl •OItIYYP +.mgr n n n n n n r n Y,r�•aO r ■ Y !b•t1.•.w Y.•a1.M•r Ir.q MTD mi 111 ar nit, IIO. n,q MMI A N•fY.A+b llt•,rr plq ■ mal p.n n.Dt tl ,n nlq nDn /++■t 9bt y,rtib,+)•tm»tt• dr I++.m YIO■ I,+w M.r. n.w a0■ nt•t m.w ]el A••IIr,1»b+n •t••r m,n r+a altar /n)■ Ian, nal ..w ■IS tanl 9•, Y•Ilir�tl•bw Om •0l'tD a+lr•In..r+tl•o.r .oda anr•o,—•ewtr••m•wm and wb1 ww ma L+N I;,n nw ns rff Iua, nen• +».. IJ.DwI na u�l I tr. ■=� ■ mwl nta1� /u 101 Inn. Inml n■tn� I,en+l tlen• .ac•r.�w w tqt _...._ nDn na n/a Irw Irm /w tan+ Iron• -...argl■ all On �tw..crrq �I , Q9 MII Int allI .,» _ +,r r+lI .+nk n+tn 1 4a,nl nInw� I s■� niys t-lt� InqDnn( nP• ■�r� Ia11 I 0 • D•ttwe ArIY+m• • Om,IOD•'•0 •tl•0• C b Otrip•r• 41r^m ■r• fa• h. IOH Sur�m�.ey if To7 ni. /js re rrm" 4,r- Lo fAk-e &A IL r,+t , /,379,401 TDTAL A Sse$T wftf Ft - 74w o K 446.+ c� y s / y 9, SD l � rfr4c AS+4ss a a /, si7, 9so InTAL. -m at A: d DftEelly — r -A G�itl�p 171, 49y —P -ML C04Y fAf4ofc Fos. Ouasfilial Graf two, IT sA8 Council Agenda - 11/27/96 5a. Consideratlon of resolution adopting assessment roll for ...lin 1 Hilla Sth_ Addition.-Prdeet 96.OBC. (R.W.) The final project coat for the Cardinal Hills 6th Addition improvement project consisting of sewer, water, storm sewer, and bituminous streets for 32 residential lots has been calculated allowing the City Council to adopt the final assessment roll for collection on next year's taxes. This improvement was part of the large $3.9 million bond issue we sold earlier in the year, and in order to meet the debt service requirements of the bond issue, we had anticipated assessing this project prior to December 1. Although the final bituminous lift has not been placed on all of the streets within this project, the total cost has been estimated at $368,662, of which $46,750 will be paid directly by the developers for site grading, leaving $309,802 to be spread as special assessments against 32 residential lots. This will amount to an average assessment equaling $9,681. A public hearing on adoption of this assessment roll was not required, as the developers waived the public hearing requirement as part of the development agreement. Value Plus Homes has been informed of the project coat and resulting assessments that will be levied starting next year. Council should adopt the assessment roll as presented in the amount of $309,802.24, with equal assessments of $9,681.32 placed against each of the 32 lots in the 6th Addition. This alternative will allow the assessments to be certified yet this year for collection on the 1998 taxes. It is the staffs recommendation that the assessment roll be adopted as proposed allowing us to meet our time table of certifying the assessments by December 1. The developers have been made aware of the final project cost and resulting assessment roll, and the costs are in line with expectations at the beginning of the project. Summary of project coats; Assessment roll; Resolution to be adopted. RdFOSEO CARDOl L WKIS STH ADDMON FRUL PROJECT COSTS FOR ASSESSMENTS NOVEMBER 22, 1995 OSM PROJECT NO. 4&92.60 %-wacPo4 Kadfee suavada8 S278.778.55 Site Gmdmg (Pud by ) (S 46.750.00) Eamineming Send= OSM - deign fea S 17.40214 OSM- ooumxt oa (10/31" S 40.49241 j 0SM - rnmsining tnmuacdm S 4.6" z OSM - mp Wdaft S 40M Braun - w7 mating S 2,308.00 Viking pipe cervices S 75&00 City - Wspxtlaa S 331.10 3�6.iW6S Sp bW,cd S 2.020.18 Moody's S 666.88 KeaaedylGmva $ 42273 Advadsement for Hide S 35U6 S 3.461.17 MUccUancons Taylor Survcy (mylm) $ 26.00 Lttaest Can (to 11405) S 2.748.30 City Admioisntive Coate S 444891 (lacludiog Assmmmt Roll). $ 77 V 1- TOTAL PROJECT COST s .JOqAGIM m �osxs - Pum/.. 1 660 I NOV 22 '95 10:15 OSM PPLS. pN CARDINAL IEI-IB STH ADDITION P.2 u FINAL PROJECT COSTS FOR ASSFST WIM P77 y 2% NOS V, L993 OSM PROJWT NA 4892.60 Z; fQ, s 300 � •b � w ll�l1 coon Kad3ec Bzavaft a S278.778.SS Site 8 (Paid by ) (S46.750.0 Eno ea ee SecAm OSM - design toes 17.40L14 oSM- 000smxdm (1091/93) oSM - romeiniog C=Suwlao d/S' 40,49241 Z2,r16) ASM - mea opdaau8 300 Bram - no teuiag $2,308.00 vilong pipe savioes /s 75&00 aty - insomian � 331.10 S 66,897:63 44 oiu Sb Spdngued $ 2020.18 \ Moody'. $ 666.9. \I Keanedy/Gmvee S 42273 Adverdsemmt for Bids S 351-M ---_ -S 3,461.17 �sJlrsa�t Taylor SWM (mYlats) Intetrat Cou (to 11/t8/95) City Admisietrsdve costs (3 0 o D (Including Assestneat Rou).''% TOTAL PROJECT COST a lwszeaaerrn.�a p vy ��:/ A S 26.00 S 748.30- CITY OF MONTICELLO PROJECT 95-W ASSESSMENT ROLL CARDINAL HILLS V IMPROVEMENTS Annual Installments: Method: Interest Rate: Interest Due From: let Inatallment Due: Purpose: Financing Source: Ad Valorem: Amount to be Assessed: ASMTROLL.SUM: 11/22/98 10 years Equal Principal, declining interest 8.5 percent November 27, 1998 Q3 rfaXaadditinnsil) 1998 Sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, curb, gutter, and bituminous streets in Cardinal Hills V Addition. 1998A G.O. Bond 8329 $0 ! 30`"4 v 11/22/95 CARDINAL HILLS V ASSESSMENT ROLL Page 1 Improvement Project 195-06C PID Number -------------- Lot Block Addition -------------------- Amount ------------ Owner ------------ 155-088-001010 --- 1 ----- 1 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-001020 2 1 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-001030 3 1 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-001040 4 1 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-001050 5 1 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002010 1 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002020 2 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002030 3 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-086-002040 4 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002050 5 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002060 6 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002070 7 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002080 8 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002090 9 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-002100 30 2 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-003010 1 3 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-003020 2 3 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 55-088-003030 3 3 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 35-088-003040 4 3 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-003050 5 3 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-003060 6 3 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-004010 1 4 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-004020 2 4 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-004030 3 4 Cardinal Hi119 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-004040 4 4 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-005010 1 5 Cardinal Hills Sth 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-006010 1 6 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-007010 1 7 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-007020 2 7 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-007030 3 7 lardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-007040 4 7 Ordinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus 155-088-007050 5 7 Cardinal Hills 5th 9,681.32 Value Plus TOTAL 8 JUq ,"uJ.ia 305, ?.-75 i G 31 OU RESOLUTION 88 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT 884)6C CARDINAL H11-1 8TH ADDITION WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice fully given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the improvement of the Cardinal Hills 5th Addition with sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, bituminous streets, curb and gutter, and appurtenant work. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessments, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 10 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 1997, and shall bear interest at the rate of 8.5% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the Drat installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1990. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid assessments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. Adopted by the City Council this 27th day of November, 1995. Mayor City Administrator 66i, v Council Agenda - 11/27/95 Council is asked to consider adopting the entire City General Records Retention Schedule for maintenance and destruction of city records. The purpose of the retention schedule is to allow destruction of non-essential records and to permanently maintain storage of essential records. In September and October of 1990, Council adopted only six sections of the retention schedule, including an internal office policy which listed specific records in each section that were authorized by the City Administrator for destruction. Those records not identified for destruction in the office policy are maintained permanently until further notice. This system has worked well in the past, and it is recommended that it be continued. Since adoption of the six sections of the retention schedule, 128.5 cubic feet of records have been destroyed, which has provided additional city hall storage space for the past 5 years; however, the basement has again reached its capacity for storage, and it is proposed that the entire retention schedule be adopted so that additional records may be destroyed. If the Council adopts the entire retention schedule, the City Administrator and Office Manager will expand the internal office policy so that records authorized by the State for destruction but which are still needed by staff would be maintained for a longer period of time. Hopefully by adopting the entire schedule, additional basement storage space will be made available. Adopt the resolution adopting the entire City General Records Retention Schedule. If Council selects this alternative, the resolution and notification of adoption will be sent to the Minnesota Historical Society for their signature, which will then authorize staff to begin destruction of records. Do not adopt the retention schedule. If Council selects this alternative, staff will soon need to investigate either off-site storage or the microfilm process, as the basement has reached its storage capacity. Council Agenda - 11/27/95 C_ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council adopt the entire retention schedule as noted in alternative #1 so that additional storage space can be made available in city hall. The City Administrator and Office Manager will review the schedule and revise the internal office policy to include all sections of the schedule prior to the destruction of any records. D_ SUPPORTING DATA Copy of resolution for adoption; Sample page of the retention schedule; State of Minnesota information regarding the retention schedule; Copy of notification of adoption form; Copy of records destruction form. Due to the length of the records retention schedule, only one sample page is included in the agenda packet; however, the entire schedule is available for review at city hall. RESOLUTION 95 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE WHEREAS, Miu eaa►_o ffiakulpu, Chapter 138.163, reads as follows: 'It is the policy of the legislature that the disposal and preservation of public records be controlled exclusively by Chapter 138 and by Laws 1971, Chapter 629, thus, no prior, special, or general statute shall be construed to authorize or prevent the disposal of public records at a time or in a manner different than prescribed by such chapter or by Laws 1971, Chapter 629, and no general or special statute enacted subsequent to Laws 1971, Chapter 529, shall be construed to authorize or prevent the disposal of public records at a time or in a manner different than prescribed in this chapter or in Laws 1971, Chapter 629, unless it expressly exempts such records from the provisions of such chapter and Laws 1971, Chapter 629, by special reference to this section; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Administration, along with the League of Cities and a task force made up of city officials from around the state, have developed a general records retention schedule for cities; and WHEREAS, the classification of records as herein described are included in the above-mentioned records retention schedule; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Monticello City Council does hereby adopt the entire City General Records Retention Schedule developed by the Minnesota Department of Administration as attached hereto and made a part of this resolution. Adopted this 27th day of November, 1996. Mayor City Administrator SG k SECTION: ADMINISTRATION RECORD TITLE/ ITEM DESCRIPTION ................................................ CITY GENERAL RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE RETENTION ARCM- DATA PRACTICES PER 100 IVAL CLASSIFICATION STATUTE .................................................................................................................. ADMDO100 ABSTRACTS S CERTIFICATES OF TITLE: ADM00200 AFF104VIT OF MAILING: Certified list of property ouuer■ ADM00300 AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATIONS GENERAL NOTICES: I.e. fw I , ioprovement projects, job openings, asaesseant hearings ad liquor ticerrne* ADMOO400 AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATIONS, Ordlrtarces and Resolution ADM00300AGENDA PACKETS CITY COUNCIL: Complete record of In1orAMtlon relevant to city council root Ings ADMOD600 AGENDA PACKETS MISCELLANEOUS: Various Boordo, Comlasiona, Committees B Courcile, I,A. Flaming B Zoning, Parke t Rec, Traffic S tramp. etc ADND0700 AGREEMENIS TRUST: Docusonte relating to property the city has acquired through demotion or u.l It. ADM00300 AIRPORTDEVELOPMENT/PLANNING: Includoo ■imtos of airport comlasion, costslttee and major report e, and plain Ing docuurnto ADMOD900 AIRPORT OPERATIONS/WIINTENANCEI ADMOT000 ANNUAL REPORTS: City or departrontel ADM011O0 APPOINTMENT FILES: Lists appolntai*nto of Irdlvlduale b/ mayor and or board, or council to venous boards, coommiaaiors ud comewitteas ADMO1200 ARTICLES Of INCORPORATIONi Length of Chnership N Public 6 N Publ lc 6 M Public Pernonent N PibtIC P*rtManast or "'t 11 trarsf*r to Stet* T Publk Archlvea for Selection and d1.pos ltion Perronmt N Public Perenment M P'bllc PerMamnt or until tram for to State y Public Archives for soles I, on Ord dlapooltim 6 M Public Porstanentor until tram for to State Y Public Archives for eat" tion and dlnpwltim 2 after appointed period M Public/private NS 13.43 retain persAsnmtIV or until transfer y Public to Stall Archives for aOlectlm and dlepo*Itim CCTV GENERAL RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE Purpose of the General Records Retention Schedule The purpose of a records retention schedule is to provide a plan for managing governmental records by giving continuing authority to dispose of records under Minnesota Statutes 138.17. This Cary General Records Retention Schedule establishes minimum retention periods for city records based on their administrative, fiscal, legal and historical value. It lists records series common to cities and identifies how long to retain them ibis schedule was originally developed by the Minnesota State Department of Administration, Data and Records Management Division and the Minnesota Historical Society, Division of Archives and Manuscripts in cooperation with members of the League of Cities, and was funded in pan by a grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission. The revised schedule was updated by city clerks and officials representing the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA) and the Association of Records Managers and Administrators (ARMA), Twin Cities Chapter. Adopting and Using the General Schedule 1. To begin disposing of records according to the general schedule, you must notify the State Archives Department of Minnesota Historical Society that your city has officially adopted the schedule. The enclosed form, 'Notification of Adoption of Cry General Retention Schedule,' is used for this purpose. A city that has adopted the previous version of this general schedule does yQl need to notify the Minnesota Historical Society that it is adopting this revised edition of the General Records Retention Schedule for Cities. It will be assumed that cities which have adopted the previous version will now utilize this revised version. 2. You may adopt the schedule even though your office may not have all the records listed on it. We recommend that you adopt the entire schedule. However, if this is not possible you may adopt individual sections. 3. The Minnesota Historical Society will sign and return the Notification form to you. You will then have the authority to dispose of your government records as indicated on the schedule. 4. Compare the records in your office with the records listed on the schedule. Retention periods listed on the schedule represent the minimum leneth of time that you must retain your records. Once that retention period has been reached, you may either destroy or transfer the records to the State Archives, as indicated on the schedule. If you need to retain some records series longer than the listed retention, you should establish an agency policy for those records. �G Records identified on the schedule as archival may not be transferred to a local historical society, museum, public library, or interested individual without the specific, written permission of the State Archivist, Minnesota Historical Society. The retention stated on the schedule applies to any form of the record (paper, computer tape or disk, microfilm, optical disk, electronic media, etc.). However, if you decide to change the form of a record (for instance, you microfilm a paper record) 3= may not be authorized to din= of the ori ' record. If you are considering changing the form of a record, contact the Minnesota Historical Society, State Archives Department, 612 297-45M 7. Data Practices Classifications are effective as of the printing of this Retention Schedule. Because data practices issues change regularly, dassifications ma have change For current information on data practices, consult Minnesota State Statutes, Chapter 13, or call the State of Minnesota, Department of Administration, Public Information Policy Analysis Division at 612 296-6733. Destruction Reporting After you destroy records according to the general schedule, send a report to the Minnesota Department of Administration and the Minnesota Historical Society (M.S. 138.17, Subd. 7). Use a copy of the enclosed "Records Destruction Report' (RM -00065) for this purpose. 'This report may be submitted annually or as records are destroyed. Records W on the General Schedule Records not listed on this schedule cannot be destroyed without submitting either an 'Application for Authority to Dispose of Records' (PR -1) or a'Minnesota Records Retention Schedule' (RM -Mg). The PR -1 form is used to request one-time authority to dispose of records. A reproducible copy of the PR -1 form is enclosed. Since an approved PR -1 gives you authority to dispose of only those records listed on the form, we recommend that you use the PR -1 only for obsolete records (records no longer being created). For ongoing authority to dispose of records not listed on the general schedule, complete a 'Minnesota Records Retention Schedule.' 'Itis form can be obtained from the State Department of Administration, Information Policy Office, 612 2%-6979. Duplicate Records This retention schedule concerns itself only with the city's official record copy and the retention periods assigned reflect that. It is each city's responsibility to identify the official record copy and to identify when to destroy any other copies of Identical records, after they have lost their legal, fiscal, historical and adminiatradve value. Duplicate copies should 1141 be retained as long as the official record. Normally the retention period on duplicate records will not exceed two years. Category Desnitions Record Series Description: A record series is a group of records clustered together because they all relate to the same topic and have the same retention period. Retention Period/Statute: The retention cited is the minimum amount of the time a record must be kept. A munber potted atm e,& 14 nets ten yaom If mm*s or dcgo are nrearrt the aspy n$ dbpW SNA e,& 6 nsorde or 30 days. The stated retention does not include the year the record originates. For example, if Record A is filed by calendar year and it has a retention of 3 years, the disposal date for 1985 records is January, 1989. Statutes listed here cite specific retention periods for the records series. Archlvab If a Y, meaning yes, appears in this column these records are eligible for transfer to the State Archives Department in the Minnesota FTistoncal Society after the retention period has expired or when the agency no longer has need for them. Contact the State Archives Department of the Minnesota Historical Society at (612) 297-45M or fax (612) 2969961 for information on how to transfer archival records. Data Pnnfices Odom This phrase refers to records classified by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act or other state or federal laws The classification system includes: public, private, confidential, nonpublic or protected nonpublic. More than one classification may apply. Data Practices Statute: This phrase refers to the statute or law which cites the data practices classification of the record series. 5GE Minncson Feral Sudety State Arehim Department Mmaescia History, hates 345 Kellogg Hcalevmd west V St. Paul. MN 55102.1906 (612) 2974502 Fox: (612) 296-9%1 NOTIFICATION OF ADOPTION OF CITY GENERAL RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE 1. Complete this form and swd the original and 2 copies to the Deputy State Arclimist at the above address. 2. Dem of records aooutding m the genas! chedole b NOT pamitoed MM this form is dped by the NGnnesota Histmkal Soday. City Telepbme (mebtde an code) Shen Addnm City. Zip Cade 'Ibis is to 00* the Mimesata Hiurniml Society that the dry named above has ofCially adopted the Mme= City Goncral Records Raccum Schedu (revised 1994). Cities aro advised to adapt the entim aebedok. If this is not passibb, mdi xhW use= may be adopted (r the approprial alma.) ❑ The City adopts the entire sohedulc E] mm City adopts only the falbwmg sections: OFmmdWAoo Ucft ❑Ataesrioy ❑Piro ❑Permits t Liemro ❑A -.M Oma* Unices On-idqaZ-* ❑emm QH.Wq and Redndapmrm Att bWW C3pmk Slay •Police Ecce sic Dewetop— Amhatty ❑Bttldiul hrspectims C3H— nomce C3Mic Wale Ory Of 01tecarO Mmemcal ❑COWWWArecumts Olay Qlnilities ❑Coutts OLktta Store Qtrtnl smistlo ❑FJmiom ❑Para! Rmetion QWrots Mtn �we arciy o91w1(ptm) jsi�e a city offic.t u. The halm -aa Historical SWW y0°► NodFattim of Adoption of the City General Reomds Retmtbn Scheduk You are smhortaed to stain and dispose of rma 1 as indimted on the rcbedtrle. ro L 08% wt®u mmiw soda 0s C DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION RECORDS DESTRUCTION REPORT lnfbrmtlon Policy Office Public Information Policy Analysis Division 320 Centennial Office Building 638 Cedar Stied Department of ; M Sl. PaulN 33133 AcIndrdotruflan (612) 246-6979 INSTRUCTIONS 4. Re" can be vAmilted annually or a records are destroyed. 1. Prim or type all information. 3. Send the original of this report to the Records Managemeal 2. Use this form to report records destroyed under authority of a General Program at the above address. Records Retention schedule or an approved agency retention schedule. 6. Send a copy of this report to: State Archivist, MN Historical Soddy, 3. Report only records that are physically destroyed, trot records MN History Cerner, 343 Kellen Blvd. W, qt Pxnl, MN 53102.1906. tmnsfered to the Minnesom Historical Society. 7. For edditloal space, use reverse aide. Agency Person Reporting Destruction Date Report Submitted Address I City. Zip Telephone ( ) General Schedule Name Section of Schedule Item No. Inclusive Dam Quantity or Agency Schedule Where Record as Usted on Record Title Data Destroyed (Cubic Number (e.g. 'City is Listed Schedule (use same title listed on schedule) Fed) Gen. Sch.' or 197-1231 ' ' VOW ML CHART TO DCTBRMINS CU IIC VERT 3 x 3 Card -0.1 Told Ctft Fed 4 ad Card -0.2 Destroyed (inehrde 3x9Cud -0.) recrds UUW Printouts 1 -1.23 on belt) Letter Size Drava -1.3 Record Center Box -1.0 Legal Size Drawer •2.0 12"x Isla 10' 4' Letter .2.) Tmnsflr Cue -2.3 0heiving heMnp 4' Legal -3.0 24' x 16'x 11' 0 Most of the City Council members are familiar with recently land use decisions relating to the development of the Hillside mall. The action requested by the applicant stems from previous decisions relating to this property. Specifically, on February 28, 1994, the applicant failed to obtain sufficient votes necessary to get the zoning approval needed which would allow expansion of the PZM site and subsequent construction of additional parking necessary to accommodate the expansion of a restaurant within the mall. However, the developer was able to obtain an amendment to the conditional use permit which allowed the expansion of the restaurant in the mall subject to a number of stipulations and conditions. One of the conditions required that 9,100 aq R of the space available for occupancy within the mall be left vacant for the purpose of maintaining parking capacity matching the existing capacity of the parking lot. This option was selected by the City Council at the request of the Hillside Partnership. The attorney representing the Hillside Partnership suggested that by leaving 9,100 sq ft of retail space vacant, the site as it now exists could accommodate the restaurant use along with existing uses on the site. He also noted that this alternative would allow the restaurant facility to be established, which would result in a better understanding of parking demand and patterns. He went on to note that this practical information regarding parking demand would be usef it when addressing full utilization of the structure at some point in the future. It is now nearing two years since the conditional use permit was awarded with the stipulation restricting use of the facility. The developer is now requesting that the original request, which was denied in 1994, be brought up again for reconsideration so that the building can be put to full use. The specific request that the developer is making today is identical to the Planning Commission's recommendation to Council in 1994. For your information, I have copied excerpts from previous meeting minutes and agenda packets regarding this issue. Please review this for additional detail regarding the site. Motion to approve an amendment to the zoning map which would change the zoning district designation of a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace Addition, from P,3 to PZM. Council Agenda - 11/27/95 Under this alternative, the lower section of the property would be merged with the Hillside Partnership property, which would result in a land area sufficient to accommodate future parking spaces. This alternative could be selected based on the finding that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the character and geography of the area and that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan. If the Council selects this alternative, then it can allow the intensification of the use of the Hillside mall site through development of the retail space that has been left unoccupied. This motion could be based on the finding that the proposed amendment placing PZM/parking behind the R-3 uses will not result in a negative impact on the R-3 uses. This is because the conflicting uses can be adequately separated by differences in grade and via landscaping. This is the recommendation made by the Planning Commission in 1994 and is also the recommendation made on November 9, 1995. Motion to deny the request for rezoning as proposed. City Council could select this alternative based on a finding that the proposed rezoning is not consistent with the nature and geography of the area as was the finding by one Councilmember in 1994. As you know, approval of a zoning map amendment needs a 4/5 vote of the City Council. In 1994, the vote was 3 in favor (Anderson, Fyle, Maus) of the rezoning, 1 abstention due to a conflict of interest (Patty Olsen), and 1 vote for denial (Herbst). Herbst's opposition was based on the finding that the placement of the parking at the location proposed will encroach on the R-3 property to the rear and could have a negative effect on the residential uses, thus the rezoning is inconsistent with goals set forth in the comprehensive plan. Staff concurs with the Planner's analysis and the previous recommendation by the Planning Commission, which basically supports the concept of allowing the rezoning to occur as proposed. The rezoning request does not appear to significantly impact the adjoining properties. Under the proposal, the two districts will be separated by grade changes, and it does not appear that the lower area (PZM) could be effectively used with the higher R-3 side without extensive grading. In addition, the conditional use process is in place, which requires landscaping and screening of parking areas and thus gives the City some measure of control in mitigating conflicts between the Council Agenda - 11/27/95 residential use on 7th Street and the commercial use proposed. As you will note on the conditional use permit as recommended by the Planning Commission, there are conditions listed that are designed to assure harmony of land use between the multi -family and the intensified mall use. February 28,1994, staff report to Council which includes previous Planning Commission recommendation, comprehensive plan excerpt, Planner's report, and area map; City Council minutes of 2128/94; Correspondence from developer, Application. 10 74 Council Agenda - 2/28/94 4. Consideration of an amendment to the zoning map which would change the zoning district designation of a portion of Lot 4. Block 1. Lauring Hillside Terrace Addition. from R-3 (multi-familv residential) to PZM (performance zone mixed). Anolicant. Vaughn Veit. (J.OJ A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: In conjunction with the proposed establishment of a restaurant at the Hillside mall (otherwise known as Sixth Street Annex), Vaughn Veit requests that the City allow rezoning of a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, from its present zoning designation, which is R-3, to P&M. The rezoning is needed to accommodate additional parking needed for a proposed restaurant replacing PJ's Pizza. As you recall, some months ago the City Council approved an amendment to the original conditional use permit which allowed establishment of PJ's Pizza. As one of the conditions of operation, the developer was required to guarantee that an additional 18 parking spaces would be developed in the event that the parking demand created by PJ's Pizza warranted additional parking. As it turned out, the parking demand never reached a critical point; therefore, the additional parking was not required. The present request differs from PJ's Pizza in that the entire restaurant space will be used for seating and kitchen facilities, whereas the PJ's Pizza proposal used much of the space for arcade machines. Additional parking needed under the new proposal amounts to 56 parking spaces versus 18 parking spaces under the PJ's Pizza proposal. It is obvious that the existing site cannot accommodate 56 additional parking spaces; therefore, the parking area must be expanded onto adjacent property (Lot 4, Block 1). In order for parking to occur on Lot 4, Block 1, it must be rezoned to match the Hillside mall zoning designation. At their special meeting on Tuesday, February 22, the Planning Commission reviewed the case and recommended that the rezoning be allowed to occur but limited the rezone area to the perimeter of the additional parking needed in conjunction with expansion of the restaurant use. In addition, it was required that the lot lines be adjusted so that the parking lot area would be combined with the Hillside mall property and taken away from Lot 4, Block 1. The developer was present at the Planning Commission meeting and was satisfied with the Planning Commissions recommendation. Please review the Planner's report for additional insights into this matter. Council Agenda - 2128/94 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve rezoning request contingent on realignment of lot lines. which would result in the additional parking area being added to the Hillside mall site. This alternative could be selected based on the finding that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the character and geography of the area and that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan. If Council selects this alternative, then it can consider intensification of the Hillside mall site through development of the restaurant facility as proposed. Please note that the City has received no formal objections from the neighborhood regarding the rezoning proposal. Motion to deny request for rezoning as proposed. City Council could select this alternative based on a finding that the proposed rezoning is not consistent with the nature and geography of the area. Perhaps City Council does not like the idea of the parking area encroaching into the rear area of the lots originally intended for multi -family development. Perhaps there are conflicts between the parking area and the mall site that could arise. Alter reviewing the excerpts from the comprehensive plan, perhaps Council feels the proposal is not consistent with the plan because of the encroachment into the multi -family residential area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff concurs with the Planner's analysis, which basically supports the concept of allowing the project to expand as proposed. The rezoning request would not appear to significantly impact the adjoining properties. The conditional use process is in place, which requires landscaping and screening of parking areas and thus gives the City some measure of control in mitigating conflicts. As you will note under the conditional use permit as recommended by the Planning Commission, there are conditions listed that are designed to assure harmony of land use between the multi -family to the south and the intensified mall use. D. SUPEORTINC DAT&: Excerpt from comprehensive plan: Planner's report; Area map, &'a 60me r COMMERCIAL POLICIES v 1. Commercial development in general and successful retailing functions should occur both in the central business district and the shopping center area contiguous to Interstate 94. 2. The Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other measures and procedures will be modified in realistic recognition 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 areas 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 I Interstate 94 at Highway 25. 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 areas should be as compact as possible. Compact commercial areas ace 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 no as not to waste prime commercial land nor spread the uses no as to not be definable as a 'viable commercial area". . 7. Future commercial areas 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 ace& to be served. B. All major commercial areas shall be pre -zoned based upon the Comprehensive Plan. do areas shall be re -zoned to commercial use unless they are shown to be properly lw:ated 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 ar000) residential areas muni be properly screened from the annoclated !11 effects of adjacent and nearby commercial aeon. -48- T -JE T: 1 7 0 F . .J = FACNorthwest Associated Consultants, Inc. U R 9 A N PLANNING • DESIGN - MARK 9 T R e S C A R C II rYMNIORAINDUNI TO: Jeff O'Neill FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: 22 February 1994 RE: Monticello - Hillside Partnership - Sixth Street Annex Parking Expansion FILE NO: 191.07 - 94.05 This report outlines the procedural steps necessary for the expansion of the parking facilities for the Sixth Street Annex Shopping Center. The proposed parking would be located on a parcel adjacent to the current shopping center, however it is currently a separate lot of record. The most desirable processing is to permit a subdivision of the now parcel and recombine the parking expansion area to the existing parcel containing the shopping center. Once this is accomplished, the zoning of the newly split lot. would need to be addressed, since the parking expansion area would still be zoned R•7, Multiple Family Resideatial. There are two opLions for the City to pursue. The entire parcel, prior to subdivision, could be zoned PZM to accommodate the shopping center's parking, or the PZP4 sone could be extended only as far as the newly created lot line. In the latter case, the remaining land not being utilized for parking would stay R•7, consistent with the land uses on the surrounding lots. if the PZM zone were extended to encompass the entire subject property, future land uses would be controlled by the Comprehensive Plan. To the extent that the primary gurrcundina lard use is multiple family residential, the City would have adequate controls is place to restrict any expansion of ccmmorcial u0os. to F E D- 2 2- 9 4 T U E 7; 16 O P . 0 It would not appear that either proposal would have distinct advantages over the other. Whereas the PZM designation would infer other potential land uses beyond multiple family, any such use would be subject to public hearing and extensive review. This review would also occur if the R-3 designation were retained, but a landowner proposed a zoning change to allow a different use. This review would not occur, however, if the landowner proposed to construct a multiple family project under the R-3 zoning's permitted uses. Regardless of the zoning on the residual parcel, this proposal would appear to be positive in that parking supply has been an issue in previous reviews of the Sixth Street Annex. it could be expected that without additional facilities, parking will continue to cause problems for occupants of the center. (PE I / c lit d i4 MALL SITE otA KALL ..1 NEWIPA SIT 0 RE20NE T L A URING 2 % 1 9 — jol, ima,4 7 TH --79--m L " 1 . 16500 f 1001 R st 9 a i/es ea /7 40 4s HIL SIDE fi /0 4' 3L+ ` Council Agenda - 2/28/94 u 5. Consideration of an amendment to a conditional use Qermit which would allow expansion of an existing restaurant in a PLM (performance zone mixed) zone. Applicant, Hillside Partnership. (J.O. ) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As noted in the previous agenda item, Hillside Partnership requests an amendment to their conditional use permit which would allow intensification of the use of the Hillside mall through development of a restaurant replacing PJ's Pizza. The new restaurant proposal results in the need for an additional 56 parking stalls. It is proposed that the parking spaces be located in the rear of the structure as proposed under the attached site plan. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the conditional use permit with a number of conditions as noted below under alternative #1. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve conditional use permit which would allow intensification of the restaurant use at the Hillside mall subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall provide a parking, grading, and drainage plan supporting development of an additional 56 stalls. Prior to the City granting an occupancy permit to the new restaurant, the developer shall obtain written approval of the parking, grading, and drainage plans from the City Engineer. 2. The developer shall not be required to install the parking area prior to occupancy of the restaurant; however, a financial guarantee and associated agreement shall be established that would allow the parking lot to be installed at the discretion of the City and at the full cost of the developer. 3. The portion of Lot 4, Block 1, needed for parking shall be split away from Lot 4, Block 1, and added to the Hillside mall property. 4. Prior to the City granting occupancy of the restaurant, the developer shall provide a landscaping and screening plan that 1 meets the requirements of the City as approved by City staff. !o G Council Agenda - 2/28/94 5. To improve security, windows shall be installed in the rear of the structure facing the expanded parking area to improve visability of the parking area. 6. All other conditions as noted by ordinance. The motion to approve the conditional use permit is based on the finding that the expansion completed with the required conditions will result in a use that is compatible with the area and will not result in the depreciation of adjoining land values. Although on paper the site falls far short of the parking requirements (56 stalls), the Planning Commission felt that it was prudent to not require that all of the parldng be installed prior to opening of the restaurant. It was felt that the 40 open stalls in the rear that currently exist might be sufficient and it was worth the risk to allow the project to proceed as is on a test basis. At the meeting on the 22nd, the developer noted that he has no problems with meeting any of the conditions identified by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission was somewhat concerned about security and crime problems in the rear of the structure. As you know, the rear of the building is isolated from a public right-of-way and protected fiom view, thereby creating some questions about security. The following steps have been taken or will be taken to improve security in the area. 1. Tree cover on Lot 1, Block 4, was removed. 2. Additional lighting has been installed. 3. Under the conditional use permit, windows will be open to the rear, which will give restaurant management and patrons a view of the area. 4. Additional traffic in the rear of the building may result in additional security. 2. Motion to deny conditional use permit as requested. G� Council Agenda - 2128/94 This alternative should be selected if the developer is unwilling to meet the conditions as required by Council. Vaughn Veit has indicated that he supports the conditions as noted under alternative #1. Perhaps Council will find additional alternatives that Veit may not be willing to support. If so, this alternative should be selected. If Council selects this alternative, it should make a clear finding of fact as to why the conditional use permit as designed has been denied. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff supports the recommendation of the Planning Commission, which is to select alternative #1. We are somewhat concerned that the "proof of parking" area or a portion of it will need to be constructed immediately and that perhaps parking problems will be evident soon after the facility opens. On the other hand, it does appear to make sense to hold off on development of the parking until it is clearly known that the parking is truly needed. If the developer is willing to tie up the land for parking and provide the City with an agreement and bond necessary to install the parking at a later date at the City's discretion, it appears reasonable to withhold the requirement that the parking be installed immediately and just see what happens. In conjunction with expansion of the parking area, the landscaping and screening on the perimeter of the site will need to be extended and blended with the existing site. As a final note, the developer has complied with all previous conditional use permit requirements. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of site plan showing proposed parking expansion area (not delivered as of 2125). (O.V 4 I Irw p.. -ow -- 7 .. -ow --17 Council Minutes - 2/28/94 4. Consideration of an amendment Lo the zunhw man which would chanee the zonine district desienation of a oortion of Lot 4. Block 1. Laurine Hillside Terrace Addition. from R-3 (multi -family residential) to PZM (performance zone mixed). Aunlicant. Vauehn Veit. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that in conjunction with Lite proposed re-establishment of a restaurant at the Sixth Street Annex, Vaughn Veit requests that the City allow rezoning of a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, from its present zoning designation UW) to PZM. The rezoning is needed to accommodate additional parking for a proposed restaurant at Lite Sixth Street Annex. According to the city ordinance, an additional 56 parking stalls will be needed to accommodate Lite new restaurant facility. There is not enough room on the Sixth Street Annex parcel for the 56 spaces; therefore, the spaces must be developed off site on an adjoining parcel. O'Neill reported that at a special meeting on February 22, lite Planning Commission reviewed the case and recommended that Lite rezoning allowing parking area expansion he allowed to occur. The Planning Commission recommended that the area rezoned be limited to lite perimeter of lite parking lot expansion area. In addition, it was recommended that Lite lot lines be adjusted so that the parking area would be combined with Lite Sixth Street Annex properly and taken away from Lot 4, Block 1. Council discussion focused on site plan issues relating to parking. There was a concern that restaurant customers would not park in Lite rear of the facility as proposed under Lite site plan and, as a result, parking problems would then be created in Lite front of the building and along Cedar Street. Brad Fyle noted that we should be very careful not to approve a site plan or rezoning that would result in on -street parking on Cedar Street. Ken Maus noted that he has a problem forcing people to the rear of the facility. In response, it was noted by Judy Leming that the rear of the facility would be modified to include glass windows and double doors to encourage people to use the rear entrance of the facility to enter Lite restaurant. John Purmort, owner of Lite Depot in Elk River and owner of cite proposed restaurant, indicated that the restaurant includes on -sale liquor sales. He noted that no minors are allowed in the restaurant after 9 p.m. without a parent or guardian. The restaurant features a Ground Round type menu. It will employ 30 part-time residents. It is hoped that lite restaurant will become u gathering spot after spurting events. PurnnurL also noted, us he has done in Elk River, that he plans on becoming involved in Lite community and will be sponsoring various youth athletic programs. 6K Council Minutes - 2/28/94 After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Ken Maus to approve the rezoning request contingent on realignment of lot lines which result in additional parking area being added to the Sixth Street Annex. Motion based on information contained within the City Planner's report and on the finding that the rezoning is consistent with the character and geography of the area and is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Voting in favor: Brad Fyle, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Abstaining: Patty Olsen. In citing his reasons for voting against the rezoning, Councilmember Herbst noted the potential negative impact on the mall tenants that could be created by parking conflicts between restaurant parking and retail shop parking. Herbst also noted that the proposed parking area located toward the rear of the facility will encroach on the residential zone to the rear and could have a negative effect on the residential uses. The boundary of Uig district as proposed will not be well defined and will result in intrusion into the residential area, which is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. At this point in the meeting, John Cries, representing the Hillside Partnership, requested Chat Lite City Council cunsider approval of the conditional use permit allowing expansion of the Hillside mall (item 5): 5. Cunsideratinn of amendment to it conditional use nx:rmiL which would allow exuansion of an existing restaurant in a PZM (oerfurmance zone mixed) zone. Auolicant. Hillside Partnershiu. In his proposal, Cries suggested that the Hillside Partnership would be willing to allow a portion of the Sixth Street Annex to remain vacant in order to keep Clio parking stall requirement at a level that the site, us it now exists, could accommodate. Cries suggested that by leaving 0,100 sq ft of retail space vacant, the site as it now exists could accommodate the restaurant use along with the existing uses on site. It was noted that this alternative would allow the restaurant facility to be established, which would result in a butter understanding of purking demand and patterns. This practical information regarding parking demand would be useful when addressing full utilization of the structure at some point in the future. Clint Herbst indicated that the alternative proposed is a good solution as long as the developer is willing to leave a portion of the building vacant. Rick Wolfsteller was concerned that lite short-term solution as proposed will not solve the problem and that it was unrealistic to expect that the developer would be supportive of leaving 9,100 sq ft of building vacant for any length of time. It is likely that as soon as a Conant is interested in filling Lite space, another amendment request to Lite zoning ordinance will be forthcoming. 610 u a Council Minutes - 2P18/94 After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve a conditional use permit allowing expansion at a restaurant in a commercial mall in a PZM zone. Approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1. 9,100 sq ft of space available for occupancy within the mall shall be 'Dakt left vacant for the purpose of maintaining a parking demand that matches the existing capacity of the parking lot. 2. To improve security and to create an appealing entrance point, windows and double doors shall be installed in the rear of the 9 structure facing the parking area. 3. Additional lighting shall be provided in the rear of the facility to improve security. Oo#t 4. Parking along the front of the building shall be limited to 16 -minute parking only and signed accordingly. QO! 5. All other conditions noted by ordinance and muted in previous conditional use permits. Motion to approve the conditional use permit based on the finding that the expansion of the restaurant is incidental to the commercial use of the structure and is acceptable in a PZM zone when operated in a commercial mall setting. The operation of the restaurant, under conditions as noted, will result in a use that is compatible with the area and will not result in a depreciation of adjoining values. Voting in favor: Clint Herbst, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus. Abstaining: Patty Olsen. Absent: Brad Fyle. Shirley Anderson was concerned that the absence of Brad Fylo would have an impact on the validity of the vote and requested that stats research the matter. GM FOSTER. WALDECK. LIND b GRIES. LTD Arrm[ ETS ..o COUMSt1OU .T Iw+ V Tory A. Fonc. 2300 MCTrorou+.w Ccr+•[ Tro+r. W. w..occ. 333 Sour. Scvcw+w ST.9- Pc+cw E. L... Mlwrurou•, M-1— 55.02 Jo..R. G....1612) 375.1550 R.,,. E. $ow.cc.r FIu1(812) 375-0647 J. -.[T M. e.0 [• D—. J. Lc A.— 100 E.yT C[.T— A—UC 81".. M. PCT.".. ST. MK..C4 M1ww[[PT. 55376 ST[v[w E. To..cr[ 18121 x97.3099 G. J*vu. Hc[1T Fo 1812) 497•]639 Jc..1.c. L. wo. May 24, 1994 P..". J. D..c. R—tv "' 111,r*q2RW Mr. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Re: Hillside partnership and Minutes of February 26, 1994 City council Meeting Dear Mr. O'Neill: Thank you for sending me a copy of the February 28, 1994 Council Minutes. In regard to those minutes, I have the following comments: 1. At the end of item 4 at the top of page 3 of the minutes, you have recited reasons given by Mr. Herbst as to his negative vote on the rezoning. It is my opinion that the last sentence contained in that paragraph relating to the boundary not being well defined, the intrusion into the residential area, and the inconsistency with the comprehensive plan were not mentioned by Mr. Herbst at the meeting as part of his reasons for voting against the rezoning. 2. In regard to item 5 which appears on pages 7 and 8 of the minutes, I made it clear that the suggestion for obtaining the conditional use permit by leaving space available was only a temporary solution until the zoning issue waa resolved. It was obviously not a permanent solution and was only intended for purposes of obtaining the conditional use permit until there was a reconsideration of the denial of the zoning amendment. In addition to the changes in the minutes, I would encourage you and the City to find an acceptable solution to the situation that door not involve leaving a substantial part of the shopping center vacant. From all practical and legal standpoints, the ..•0..1•. 4[...[o ro P—"- .. w..caoa. wa[o.n...e ml—.. & \' rezoning of the lot as requested by the applicant is not inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Also, the terrain and accessibility to the part of the residential lot to be used for parking would not be practical. Damages to the applicant for leaving the shopping center vacant will escalate and thus it is important for all parties concerned that either the number of parking spaces required at the center be changed or that the zoning amendment allowing additional parking space be granted. I would hope this matter could be worked out. I look forward to hearing from you. 5/1 y r EuS JRG/kls , cc: Mr. Vaughn Veit Mr. David Lenhardt 0 v. CITY OF MONTICELLO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 (612) 295.2711 PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION Planning Case a I n• • r� 1 Check Requested Action: _ CONDITIONAL USE - $125.00 + all necessary consulting expenses* _ ZONING MAP/ TEXT AMENDMENT - $250.00 + necessary consulting expenses' _ SIMPLE SUBDIVISION - $50 _ SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - $250 _ SUBDIVISION PLAT - S300 + $100/acre up to 10 acres; $Macro after 10 acres + expenses. City will refund excess of per -acre deposit _ VARIANCE REQUEST - $50 for setback/3125 for others + nec. consult expenses' _ OTHER - Fee $ • NOTE. Necessary consulting fees Include cost to have City Planner analyze variance, rezoning, & conditional use permit requests at the rate of $75/hr. The need for City Planner assistance is determined solely by City staff Applicant Name: Hillside Partnership, a Minnesota 4eneral partnership Address; 14000 Veit Place, MN 55374 Phone: Home: Business: 612/428-2242 property Address: 510 Cedar St., Monticello I.ngal Description of Property: Current Zoning: (Lot 4 R31 Proposed Zoning PZM Lor 4 • Blod. I t Subdivision: Laurino Hillside Terrace Addition Other. unplatted Part of NW1/4 of SEI/4, Section 11, Township 121, Ranqe 25 Describe Request: The reflueat is to cha_eaa the reoonina on part of Lot 4. Block 1. Lauring Hillside Terzace from R3 to PZM. This part of Lot 4 would then he available to the parrpt lmrnted in the NW1/4 of the SEI/4 which is a shopping center for additional perking. The portion of Lot 4 to he rezoned is not practically usnable with the upper part of Lot 4 because of the terrain. This ).ltermaLlOneproffiaAf uta applicant on this form is true and correct parr Q- Date Property Owner Signature Date Applicant Signature (if applicable) VCUSSAM.APP: 2/081185 (CONTINUE ON BACK-) Date Received/Paid: Ao -,4 3 -7d`- Receipt Number: /,?9-5-9 Public Hearing Date: FOR ZONING MAP AMENDbIENT ONLY: Proposed Zoning: PZM FOR SIMPLE SUBDIVISION ONLY: She of parcel to be divided: SPP at+Achadd r v-. WR SUBDIVISION PLAT ONLY: Size of Parcel to be Platted: Acres Name of Firm Preparing Subdivision Plat Street Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Fgii Yl-9pii,1 ft -Please 9denbifj'ehewniQue 9bPe rb! esnd{lionsor kardeh9� d�a4eoei 4Letyaedfiee g*entirtg a wasim eer-►herdshiP -4P*oPertrn si4WI>weesorehapeToreiceptioaal- tapogrephiebrxnter�eaditieres eonebFneeavitlre0riebapplientiencfthermr"cerdirrence rest ititramptio.- - tff9cidaerwhen-uwfzhlg-the'pereeH"-a manfw4asteweey-andaegOrvermissiblcwItitirrdre distrieNn which d a iet-ieioeated.- continued from front... was previously approved and recommended by the Dlannipg commission, in total the request is for an amendment to the__Conditional Use Permit, ;Lmendment to the Zoning Mao and a simple subdivision. That Dart of Lot 4 to be rezoned is the North 100 feet. AoDlicant or000ses that the Parkin lot on Iot 4 not be constructed until the City determines that it is needed under some criteria. IIII�gIgIq�11pq11111111H1�H1��Iq�111q11111q�11q HIIq/H11Hq�gIgH��111H1111H1�qq1• HH11• ��• (For City Use Only) COMMENT&: VCUSSAM.APP: 2108//08 6 Council Agenda - 11/27/96 mend or the_1 . (J.O.) As noted in the previous agenda item, Hillside Partnership requests an amendment to their conditional use permit which would allow utilization of 9,100 aq R of available retail space which has previously been withheld from use due to noncompliance with city parking requirements. Under the site plan as proposed, the additional parking spaces needed to meet code would be located in the rear of the structure. The parking area would be constructed at such time that it is demonstrated that the need for the parking spaces exists as noted in the attached outline of the conditions associated with the permit. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve the conditional use permit which would allow full use of the Hillside Partnership mall subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall provide parking, grading, and drainage plane supporting development of an additional 66 stalls. Prior to the City granting an occupancy permit to any of the retail area previously off-limits, the developer shall obtain written approval of the parking, grading, and drainage plana from the City Engineer. 2. The developer shall not be required to install the parking area prior to occupancy of the now retail area; however, a financial guarantee and associated agreement shall be established that would allow the parking lot and associated required landscaping to be installed at the full discretion of the Planning Commission at the full cost of the developer. 3. The portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace, nooded for parking shall be split away from Lot 4, Block 1, and added to the Hillside mall property. 4. Prior to the City granting occupancy of the unused retail area, the developer ahall provide a landscaping and screening plan that meets the requirements of the City as approved by City staff. Council Agenda - 11/27/95 5. All other conditions as noted by ordinance and included in previous conditional use permits issued. 6. Parking along the front of the building shall be limited to 16 - minute parking only and signed accordingly. 7. Additional lighting shall be provided in the rear of the facility to improve security. The list of conditions above combines recent Council and Planning Commission suggestions. This is the recommendation made by the Planning Commission. Motion to deny the conditional use permit which would allow frill use of the Hillside Partnership mall. This alternative should be selected if the City Council does not approve the rezoning request and thus make land available for the proof of parking area. C. STAFF RWOMMRNDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendation made by the Planning Commission in 1994, which is alternative #I. We also agree that it would be premature and potentially wasteful to require installation of the added parking spaces at this time. It appears that peak parking for the restaurant use is opposite peak parking for the retail uses, which so far has resulted in ample parking capacity. It will be interesting to see if adding 9,100 sq R of retail space will create parking problems. It is our view that alternative #1 and the associated conditions will not result in a negative impact on the adjoining residential area and, thus, the plan is consistent with the character of the area and comprehensive plan. Seo previous agenda item. 12 Council Agenda - 11/27/95 )n of TA dnedLe . iJ.O.) If the City Council approves of the concept of allowing the lower portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace, to be used for parking in conjunction with the Hillside mall, then it should support the proposed subdivision. If, on the other hand, the rezoning and conditional use permit request are not approved, then this agenda item need not be considered. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONg: 1. Motion to approve the request to subdivide a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace. Planning Commission selected this alternative. Council will be asked to consider approval only if the other two items are approved. It is likely that the applicant will withdraw the request to subdivide the property as proposed if the rezoning and conditional use permit requests fail. 2. Motion to deny the request to subdivide a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace. This alternative is not likely to be considered under any circumstance because it would not make sense to deny this alternative if the conditional use permit or zoning ordinance amendments aro approved; and if they are denied, then the applicant will likely withdraw the request, and the item will not be under consideration. r. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #I. n. SUPPORTING DATA: See the previous two agenda items. Council Agenda - 11/27/96 Consideration of funding a portion of the Chamher of Commerce Community sign. (J.0.) A REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Council is asked to consider contributing $2,600 (1/4) toward funding the community sign and $1,100 (frill amount) toward the cost to run electricity to the sign. The request for the City contribution stems from the fact that the sign will feature a third side showing a map of the city. The map outlines pathway routes, city parka, and places of interest. There is certainly a good justification for City participation in this community effort. As you know, Council granted approval of the placement of the sign at the proposed location a few weeks ago. At the time that it was brought before Council, due to a misunderstanding, staff was not aware of the request for funding During the process of reviewing sign design and location, there was some concern by the Parks Commission that the sign would not complement the existing park area. Support for the sign by the Commission developed later when it was noted by the Chamber Sign Committee that the sign could be three -sided, which provided the opportunity for placement of city information (map) on the side of the sign facing the park. In summary, the Chamber of Commerce finance plan is as follows: Sign cost $10,000 with expense distributed as follows: Chamber of Commerce - $2,600, Lions Club - $2,600, Rotary - $2,600, City - $2,600. The Chamber requests that the City also pay the cost to extend electrical service in the amount of $1,100. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONQ: 1. Motion to accept participation in the sign funding plan as requested or a portion as requested by the Chamber of Commerce as follows: Chamber of Commerce • $2,600, Lions Club - $2,600, Rotary - $2,600, City - $2,600 + $1,100 (br electrical service. If the City Council believes that We project merits a City contribution as proposed, then this alternative should be selected. This project certainly has merit from a community/city standpoint and will provide the City with benefits as follows. The reader board will be used by many nonprofit organizations and will serve to reduce the use of temporary signs throughout the community. The City itself will be able to use it (for a fee of $10) on occasion to advertise City events and projects such as junk amnesty day, special mectings, etc. Finally, the presence of the community sign in the "old downtown' portion of the 14 Council Agenda - 11/27/96 city could be a small but important step in promoting future long-term efforts to revitalize the downtown area. Participation in the funding program would send a signal to the communty that the City wants to be part of the effort to revitalize downtown. The Parka Commission reviewed the matter, and some members indicated that they supported the project but did not have funds earmarked specifically for the project. On the other hand, Commissioners also recognized that the 4th Street Park hooey rink coats came in under budget in an amount approximately equal to the requested amount. Motion to deny paying any portion of the installation of the sign. If Council does not believe that the benefit of the sign to the City is equal or greater than the cost, then this alternative should be selected. 3. Motion to fund 1/4 of the cost of the sign with the cost of the electrical expense incorporated into the total cost. Total cost to the City would be $2,776. Under this alternative, the Chamber would need to find a way to fund 3/4 of the electrical expense, which could possibly be spread between the Chamber of Commerce, Lions Club, and Rotary. We believe that it is a good project for the City and thus deserves financial support. Therefore, staff supports alternative Y3. It is our view that the cost of the electrical should be spread evenly to the organizations involved in funding the project. Excerpts from various meeting minutes. TO: Monticello Parks Commision June 15, 1995 FROM: Larry Nolan Subject: Monticello Chamber of Commerce Proposal I met with Cindy Johnson, John McVay and Bill Enders concerning a proposed kiosk to be located in the small park near the Chamber of Commerce Building in Downtown Monticello (see attached sketch). The kiost would be constructed of aluminum and be painted to blend in with the Monticello Logo and the existing old bridge railings. The "changeable copy" area would be available for non-profit organisation use to note up -coming community events. The Chamber of Commerce (Cindy Johnson) would coordinate use of this space. The Monticello Logo, Changeable Copy and the top of the kiost would be back -lighted. The back of the three aided structure would have space available for pormanent city information, such as a map of the city showing :ks and major community buildings etc. The details of this would bo worked out i?xth the Parks Commission. The idea is to have a quality structure that provides information on Monticello and near term events of interest to the public driving through our community. The Chamber of Commerce is looking for our reaction and support. Larry Nolan CC: Monticello Chamber of Commerce Parks Commission Minutes 6/21/95 Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reported that the Chamber of Commerce is requesting the park board review a pylon sign request. The sign would be used as an information reader board for community groups. There would be a fee charged to use the board and that would be paid to the sign company to change the messages. The Commission was supportive of a community reader board. However, there were a few concerns with the proposed location; motorists trying to read the board and delaying traffic, it would look cluttered, the utility pole is blocking the view, and it would be hard to read. It was recommended that Larry Nolan would represent the Parks Commission at the next chamber meeting that the sign locations discussed. He was given authority by the Commission to give the Chamber the approval or denial on behalf of the Parks Commission regarding location and design of the reader board. Page 4 46 Council Agenda - 9/25/95 The Chamber of Commerce, along with the Lions Club and Rotary, are proposing to place an information kiosk/reader board at the Chamber of Commerce office site. City Council needs to review the proposal because the property is owned by the City. The main purpose of the sign is to provide information regarding community events and activities. The duty of changing reader board messages and maintaining the sign will be the responsibility of the Chamber of Commerce. Design and location issues have been reviewed and approved by the Parks Commission. See the attached information for more about design, size, and sign location. The structure meets the definition of a pylon sign and is in compliance with city code requirements for signs. Motion to approve placement of information kiosWreader board at Chamber of Commerce site. Motion to deny approval of information kiosk/reader board at Chamber of Commerce site. Staff recommends approval. The sign meets code requirements. It provides a valuable function to the residents of the community. The Chamber of Commerce is funding it with assistance fiom other community groups and will be maintained by the Chamber of Commerce. There is some concern regarding possible vandalism of the sign at this location. However, this concern is not significant enough to justify denial. If maintenance of the sign becomes terribly difficult or impossible due to vandalism, the sign can always be removed. R11PPf1RTING DATA: Drawing of proposed sign; photo of proposed sign placement. qCOOO Council Minutes - 9/25/96 14 lb. Conr+ide_ratinn of aant of an information kiosk at rhambpr of Commerce niHae sil& The Chamber of Commerce is requesting permission to place an informatimi Wosk/reader board at the Chamber of Commerce cfce site. City Council needs to review the proposal because.the property is owned by the City. The main purpose of the sign is to provide information regarding community events and activities. The duty of changing the reader board messages and maintaining the sign would be the responsibility of the Chamber of Commerce. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY CLINT LWBST TO APPROVE PLACEMENT OF AN INFORMATION I40SII/READER BOARD AT THE CHAMBER OF COMNW= SITE. Motion carried unanimously. � L' i MMI 1 � i CHANGEABLE-) COPY P•t•U•5� i+ AA1t3SU'�% RANDY S. SALO rays +w w wwew.Bs Ii 612.87. " +50 w - f 17. . zh Parks Commission Minutes 10/18/95 5. Update nn the rbsimber sign av tom n Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, explained that the Chamber of Commerce assumed somehow that the City was going to pay for one-third of the new sign being erected at the Chamber site for non profit organizations to advertise events. City staff was unaware that the Chamber of Commerce expected a donation other than minor assistance with sign base placement. According to Cindy Johnson, Monticello Chamber of Commerce, the total sign cost is $10,000 so the City's share would be $2,500. Johnson added when the sign company contacted the City regarding the layout of the map she thought the price was discussed. She expressed her apologize that there was a misunderstanding but was hopeful the Parks Commission would agree to the cost because the sign is ready to install. The Commission discussed the series of events and at no time could anyone remember a cost to the City being mentioned but agreed that at this paint there were not many choices to take. Because of the $2,500 amount needed to pay for the sign, this item would need the final approval from the City Council. Chairman Thielen and Jeff ONeill agreed to talk to Mayor Fyle and explain the situation. Page 2 96 Council Agenda - 11/27/95 Consideration :.Noy ImM snowing home occupancy prior to completion nf Rite grading and mquired tree pJantin A R F .RF.N F AND BA .K .RO TND; As you may recall, in late July City Council was asked to consider establishing a policy which would allow final occupancy prior to completion of required home site grading and landscaping improvements. On July 24, 1995, the City Council adopted an escrow policy on a preliminary basis and directed City staff to mail the proposed policy to builders for input at an upcoming meeting. Some months ago, City staff followed up on Council action by submitting the policy to builders in the community. As a result of our discussion with the builders, we are proposing some modifications to the policy that will benefit both the builders and the City. As you recall, the need for a policy allowing final occupancy of a home prior to completion of site improvements stems from the need to occupy homes during winter months when it is impossible to complete site grading and tree planting, etc. The purpose of the policy is to set up a system that provides the City with assurance that important site improvements will be made after the City has allowed final occupancy of the home. A perfect example of the type of problem that this policy is meant to head off is the Maplewood Circle problem. As a result of City staff meetings with builders, and as a result of additional research on practices by other communities, staff suggests that we eliminate the requirement that sodding/seeding and driveways be in place prior to granting final occupancy. We are also not requiring that funds be placed on deposit with the City guaranteeing that the sodding/seeding and driveways are properly installed. For these types of improvements, we plan on making a notation on the permit granting final occupancy, thereby leaving the responsibility for final completion of these items up to the builder, the home owner, and the mortgage company. After closer review of actual problems associated with yards and driveways, we began to believe that it is a rare occasion when a yard or driveway is not completed within a reasonable time. Therefore, it is the view of City staff that requiring a deposit for these items that aro nearly always completed anyway is overly bureaucratic and reduces our efficiency. Furthermore, failure to complete lawn improvements or driveway improvements will not necessarily result in a significant negative impact on adjoining properties. On the other hand, as we all know, it is very important that the grading of each site be done properly because of the impact on adjoining property. It is important that trees be planted as Council Agenda - 11/27/95 described by the ordinance; whereas we can be relatively sure that lawns will be established, we are less sure that a homeowner will follow through with required tree planting. Based on the reasoning above, it remains our view that the City require a deposit prior to final occupancy for builders that seek such prior to completion of grading and planting of trees. Attached you will find a policy statement which outlines the system in detail. As you will note, there are two separate deposit schedules, one for the summer period between May 1 and October 31, and the other for the winter construction season which extends from November 1 to April 30. The purpose for having two separate fee structures is to discourage the use of the escrow option during summer months. It is our view that for the most part, work should be completed prior to final occupancy during summer months; however, we do recognize that on occasion due to rainy weather, it might not be possible to complete all improvements prior to occupancy of the home. Therefore, the policy provides an option for the builder who, for one reason or another, isn't able to complete all site improvements prior to occupancy during summer months. For occupancy requests during the winter months, the deposit amount is relatively modest; however, there is a provision that requires that a larger deposit be made in the event that the grading required is relatively extensive. Please see the escrow policy statement for further detail. Motion to adopt the escrow policy statement as proposad. Under this alternative, the City Council is satisfied with tho policy allowing final occupancy prior to completion of all site improvements. Motion to deny adoption of the escrow policy. If Council so desires, it could be stricter with the builders. It could require that all sodding and seeding be established and/or could require that all driveways be established or that an escrow be established guaranteeing such as noted above. City staff does not support requiring escrows for these improvements because there simply aren't enough problems to justify the administration of an escrow policy assuring lawn and driveway completion. City staff has done a considerable amount of work in development of this escrow policy. The policy results fVom almost eight months of off -and -on discussion amongst City staff with input tMm builders. We have also Council Agenda - 11/27/95 �l received input from a number of other communities, which all seem to approach the problem somewhat differently. The winter construction season is here, and we believe with the adoption of this policy, we will be in good position to grant final occupancies prior to completion of site improvements while having assurance that site grading and tree planting will be done properly as required by ordinance. Proposed policy and associated office procedure statement; Policy adopted 7/24/95 on preliminary basis; Excerpts from previous Council agendas and meeting minutes. is CITY OF MONTICELLO ESCROW POLICY STATEMENT RESIDENTIAL FINAL OCCUPANCY/SITE EVIPROVEMENTS It is the City's policy to deny all residential home site occupancy permit requests until such time that the grading and tree planting have been completed with the following exceptions: A. The City will grant final occupancy under the condition that a cash deposit is made to the City for each incomplete site improvement in accordance with the following tables. May 1 to October 31 Grading $2,000 deposit or 1.6 times the cost (whichever is greater) Trees $ 126 Re -inspection $ 36 Other $ As necessary B. During the times of the year that site completion is impossible there will be an escrow required to ensure an inspection is scheduled when the items are completed. November 1 to April 30 Grading $ 760 deposit or smout equal to cost (whichever is greater) Trees $ 126 Re -inspection $ 36 Other $ As necessary There will also be an additional $36 fee for the reinspection necessary to demonstrate that the work was completed properly. This fee will be paid at the time that the escrow deposit is made. The Building Inspector will not be inspecting each unfinished site improvement item as it is completed. One inspection should be scheduled when all of the items are completed and the deposit will then be refunded within 21 days without interest, except for the re- inspection fee. It is the intent of the City to retain the funds as an encouragement to the builder to complete the work on a timely basis. It is not the intent under this program to use the funds to complete the installation of the improvements if they are never completed. E6CROWPOL: 11/20196 1 O A CITY OF MONTICELLO OFFICE PROCEDURE ESCROW DEPOSITS 1. The Building Inspector will record on the final inspection sheet that an escrow is required according to the adopted escrow policy. 2. At the time the certificate of occupancy is created, the Building Inspector will record on the certificate that an escrow is required. The DST will complete the escrow deposit form and attach it to the certificate of occupancy. 3. When the certificate of occupancy is picked up, the depositor will sign the escrow form, and the form and the deposit will be paid to the finance department. Finance will record the proper information on the escrow form and provide the depositer with a receipt. A copy of the certificate of occupancy is filed in the building file, and the escrow form is filed in the escrow folder located in the supply room cabinet. Finance then deposits the escrow deposit. 4. DST will schedule a reinspection when the builder calls to say that all escrow items have been completed. 5. Building Inspector will inform DST that the reinspection has been completed and is acceptable and that the escrow amount can be refunded, except for the reinspection fee. 8. DST will retrieve the escrow form, complete the appropriate information, and give the form to the Bookkeeper. 7. Bookkeeper will issue the refund check within 21 days of the reinspection date, record the appropriate information on the escrow form, and return the escrow form to the DST for filing in the building permit file. The refund check will be issued to the original depositor only. 8. Any discrepancy regarding who is going to perform the work must be settled between the homeowner/buyer and the builder. EscBowimo. Haim Pago 1 1 City of Monticello ESCROW DEPOSIT - CONDITIONAL OCCUPANCY Property Address: Building Permit #: Depositor -'a Name: Mailing Address: Signature of Depositor: Bebladahle (101.22013) Grading ('see policy) $ Trees ($125) $ Other $ $ Subtotal Refundable $ Nnn•reffundnhle (101.34204) Reinspection Fee ($35) $ Other $ Subtotal Non-refundable $ s•s•s.s.s.s••s.♦ss.....•s.•s..•s.s..s..sss....ss•.u..••.s..••.•s....•ss....s• Date Received: Receipt A: Total: }t Re -inspection date: Date Refundod: Check Nr. Total: FMWW.00: I I MM p Cd P CITY OF MONTICELLO PRELIMINARY ESCROW POLICY STATEMENT It is the City's policy to deny all residential home site occupancy permit requests until such time that site improvements are completed with the following exception: F.X ..PTION: A. In the event that weather conditions such as frost or wet soils over a prolonged period or other unique site conditions out of the control of n p o` the builder prohibit completion of site improvements, the City will I� grant final occupancy under the condition that a cash deposit is made to the City for each incomplete improvement in accordance with the 5 following table. O aye d Grading $1,000 minimum deposit n ��\•"r Sodding or seeding $ 600 C Driveway $ 600 Trees $ 126 Other $ As necessary B. If a builder desires to obtain the final occupancy permit prior to completion of any of the improvements above, he must first demonstrate that unique conditions exist that prohibit completion of the project prior to final occupancy. If this point can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector, then the City will grant occupancy if he/she provides a cash deposit as required above. The City will deposit all funds and refund the money without interest only at such time that the work is completed. C. There will also bean additional $60 fee for the reinspection necessary to demonstrate that the work was completed properly. This fee will be paid at the time that the deposit is made. Once the reinspection is done, the City will refund the appropriate amount. The City will make one inspection of all the site improvements that are yet to be completed and will refund only the total amount of the deposits. In other words, the Building Inspector will not be inspecting each unfinished improvement item as it is completed. As an exception to this rule, on a case-by-case basis the City may inspect grading prior to placement of sod. D. It is the intent of the City to retain the funds as an encouragement to the builder to complete the work on a timely basis. It is not the intent under this program to use the funds to complete the installation of the improvements if they are never completed. If it was our goal to have funds in hand to complete the improvements, then the deposits should be much higher than listed. O ESCROW.POL: 7/21/96 Council Agenda - 5/221950v� Consideration of adontinQ nolicies Governing arantine a final occunancv permit prior to full completion of site improvements. (J.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: City Council is asked to review the following general policy ideas regarding granting of final occupancy permits for new homes prior to full completion of site improvements. The need for the policy statement stems from problems that the City faces from time to time associated with allowing people to move into homes prior to full completion of site improvements such as site grading, seeding and sodding, driveway improvements, and tree installation. In the recent past, the City has fallen short of its goal of making sure that all improvements are completed prior to allowing occupancy; and on frequent occasions, we have had difficulty in maldng sure that some of the improvements are completed on a timely basis after occupancy has occurred The problems that we have faced include incomplete grading plans that have resulted in long-term storm water drainage problems. The Meadow Oak Circle situation is a prime example of a problem created due to failure in making sure all site improvements were done properly prior to final occupancy. Up to now, the City has been granting conditional occupancy permits with a notation that certain improvements are not completed. We have left it up to the mortgage company and builder to establish an escrow fund to assure _ completion of the improvements. Unfortunately, this level of security has not been sufficient to guarantee proper completion of improvements. Quite frequently, the escrow flmd gets released without any inspection by the City, which results in improper completion of grading plans. The most significant reason why it is difficult to get all site improvements at the time of occupancy is due to weather. Obviously, it is impossible to complete all site grading and install sod and trees, etc., when homes are occupied during winter months. Similarly, during summer months, if it is a particularly wet time of year, certain improvements must wait. The following strategy is suggested as a means to curtail the problem. 1. It will be the City's policy to deny any occupancy permit request until such time that all site improvements are completed with the following exception: log Council Agenda - 5/22195 EXCEPTION: In the event that weather conditions or other unique site conditions nut of the control of the builder prohibit completion of site improvements, the City will grant final occupancy under the condition that a cash deposit is made to the City for each incomplete improvement in accordance with the following table. Grading $1,000 minimum deposit Sodding or seeding $ 500 Driveway $ 500 Trees $ 125 Other $ As necessary B. If a builder desires to obtain the final oavpancy permit prior to completion of any of the improvements above, he must first demonstrate that they are unique conditions that prohibit him from completing the project prior to final occupancy. If this point can be demonstrated, then the City will grant occupancy if he/she provides the cash as required above. The City will then take the cash and deposit the funds and refund the money only at such time that the work is completed. C. There will also be an additional $50 fee for the reinspection necessary to show that the work was done. This fee will be paid at the time that the deposit is made. Once the reinspection is done, the City will refund the appropriate amount. The City will make one inspection of all the site improvements that are yet to be completed and will reArnd only the total amount of the deposits. In other words, the Building Inspector will not be inspecting each unfinished improvement item as it is completed. D. It is the intent of the City to retain the funds as an encouragement to the builder to complete the work on a timely basis. It is not the intent under this program to use the funds to complete the installation of the improvements if they are never completed. If it was our goal to have funds in hand to complete the improvements, then the deposits should be much higher than listed. Motion to adopt the policy as outlined above regarding granting of final occupancy where all site improvements have not been completed. ' D is Council Agenda - 5WA5 Under this alternative, City staff would use the general description noted above as the guideline in granting or withholding occupancy permits. Also, this policy would apply to residential developments only. Motion to deny the policy as outlined above. Under this alternative, Council is not satisfied with the policy as noted above and perhaps wishes to take stricter measures or finds that the problem is not a serious enough concern to warrant'the measures noted. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the policy as noted. We have found that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. It is very important that site plana be developed properly in a manner consistent with grading and drainage plans, otherwise we will be faced with long-term drainage problems that are very difficult to overcome once a neighborhood has developed lawns established, trees planted, fences installed, etc. It is our view that requiring a fairly hefty deposit will discourage builders from seeking final occupancy until all site improvements are completed. But at the same time, the deposit is not so great as to become a burden to the developer that seeks occupancy during the winter months. Finally, Paul Waldron has reviewed the policy as proposed and noted that it is similar to policies successfully used by other cities. None. J0 G Council Minutes - 5/22/95 Assistant Administrator ONeill reported that the City has had difficulty in the past making sure that site improvements such as grading, driveway improvements, tree installation, and seeding/sodding are completed on a timely basis in residential developments after allowing occupancy prior to such improvements being completed. The most significant reason for not completing all improvements prior to occupancy is weather; however, he also noted that many home buyers wish to complete site improvements on their own after occupancy. The City has been granting conditional occupancy permits with a notation that certain improvements are not completed, and the mortgage company and builder have been establishing an escrow fund to assure completion of the improvements; however, often the escrow fund is released by the mortgage company without inspection by a City official, which sometimes results in improper completion of grading plans. O'Neill asked Council to consider establishing a City escrow policy to help ensure that site improvements are completed properly. He noted that requiring a deposit and reinspection fee for incomplete items may be one way of encouraging improvements to be completed prior to occupancy. Dave Klein, a local builder, supported the idea of an escrow but noted that escrowing funds with both the City and mortgage companies would be very difficult since the amount could be as high as $4,000 for each home and results in doubling up of the security. 10ein also requested that any escrow policy adopted affect only new permits and not be retroactive to homes already under construction. O'Neill suggested that the topic be discussed with the City Attorney to investigate ways to require a city inspection prior to release of the escrow by the mortgage company. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to continue with allowing conditional occupancy permits until the subject is discussed with the City Attorney. ioµ Council Agenda - 7/24/95 Ill As you recall, a few months ago Council reviewed a proposed policy regulating and addressing issues relating to allowing final occupancies for home sites prior to completion of site improvements. Attached is information from the previous meeting which outlined the issues and problems associated with granting final occupancy prior to full completion of home site improvements. The last time Council reviewed this topic, Council received testimony from Dave Klein requesting that the Council reconsider adoption of the policy because the policy required funds to be placed in escrow prior to granting of final occupancy. It was his concern that the builders would be negatively impacted because both the City and the mortgage companies would be requiring deposits for guaranteeing completion of the same items. Klein was concerned that this situation could hurt the cash flow of his business. Subsequent to this meeting, rve had further discussions with Dave Klein and have been informed by him that mortgage companies are willing to release the funds necessary to complete site improvements if they are informed that the City is requiring a deposit assuring that said improvements are completed; therefore, there does not appear to be a situation where builders will suffer from a doubling -up of escrow requirements. Klein, therefore, has softened his view on the proposed city policy and actually supports the concept of establishing an escrow requirement prior to granting of final occupancies. At the previous meeting, staff was also asked to review the issue with the City Attorney in more detail. I have discussed the topic with Weingarden, and he is supportive of establishment of the policy as attached. Motion to grant preliminary approval of the policy as proposed and direct City staff to send the policy to builders working in the community with a notice of a public hearing on the policy. Under this alternative, City Council would adopt the policy on a preliminary basis but withhold final approval until review of the policy with builders under a public hearing setting. Under this alternative, City Council will get additional input on the policy prior to implementation. 1OZ Council Agenda - 7/24/95 `1 2. Motion to adopt the policy as proposed and provide the builders with a notice that the policy will take effect on all homes with construction beginning after August 15, 1995, with one exception: No final occupancy permits will be granted under any circumstance for home sites when final grading has not been completed. Motion to deny approval of the policy as proposed. V. STAFF R OMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1 or •2 with modifications as desired by Council. D. SI.r r .n.,.lfi DATA Agenda item from May 22, 1995, meeting; Copy of proposed policy. is IO -r Council Minutes - 7/24/95 Assistant Administrator ONeill reported that staff has prepared a proposed policy regulating final occupancy for home sites prior to completion of site improvements. The proposed policy would require funds to be placed in escrow with the City if the budder can demonstrate that a hardship exists which prohibits completion of the project prior to final occupancy. An additional $50 reinspection fee would also be required. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY CLINT BERBST TO ADOPT POLICY ON A PRELIMINARY BASIS ONLY AND DIRECT CITY STAFF TO MAIL THE POLICY TO BUILDERS WORKING IN THE COMMUNITY FOR INPUT AT AN UPCOMING MEETING. Motion carried unanimously. ioK Council Agenda - IV27/95 t t . Review of clang "A" sludge alternatives and wastewater treatment v plant cost es mates, (j.S.) A F.F .R .N F AND BA •K .RO 1ND: As discussed at the November 8 meeting, ammonia testing of Sunny Fresh's and the City's wastewater indicates we may be able to downsize tanks and aeration equipment for the SBR process at the wastewater treatment plant. This could help us reduce costs. The Council did have a preference, however, to keep the tanks with the larger capacity as to the Facilities Plan Addendum. We met with Sunny Fresh Foods on Tuesday, November 14, 1995, and discussed holding them to a lifetime permit limit of 3,000 pounds of BOD per day or allowing them to go beyond that by paying oversizing of portions of the wastewater treatment plant. Consequently, HDR would like to present the City Council with new information regarding estimated project costs and also three different processes to achieve class 'A" sludge, specifically an exceptional quality class "A" sludge. Previously, HDR had recommended the heat pasteurization process as a final step just before storage or loading out the sludge for hauling. All our class 'A" processes do not include sludge dewatering but provide future space for it to be completed in the future. Our applied sludge currently is in the 4% to 5% range of solids (95% water). Phis heat pasteurization would be a total kill process which would render the sludge inert. The cost of this process was $888,000. HDR has learned, however, that it would be best to do the heat pasteurization process ahead of digestion rather than afterwards, as a total kill not only kills bad pathogens but also the good pathogens. They have indicated that sludge should not be totally free of good pathogens, as it could be a residence for other pathogens or organisms in the land and could cause those pathogens to grow and re - inhabit the sludge. However, if the pasteurization process is completed before digestion, all of the bad pathogens are killed and only the good pathogens in minute amounts exist at the end of the digestion process. It is my understanding that this pro -digestion heat pasteurization process would also produce a class "A" exceptional quality sludge but at a slightly higher cost of $798,000, with a yearly operational cost of $10.600. HDR would also like to present now cost information on the ATP process, Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment. This process is an aerobic pretreatment process done in reactors prior to the digestive cycle similar to the pre- digestion heat pasteurization but at lower temperatures. This process, with the tanks or vessels being constructed outside of a building, would cost approximately $984,000, and has a yearly operational cost of about $7,000 per year. The last option HDR would like to discuss or present involves thermophilic anaerobic digestion occurring within our existing digesters. This process would use our existing digesters but convert them to different Council Agenda - 11/27/95 temperature operations. Although this type of operation has not been perfected, studies done in Iowa show it to be extremely promising. To determine whether or not it would work on our waste activated sludge would cost $8,000 to do a study. Additionally, the projected construction cost would be $762,000, but this process would have a yearly operational cost of $29,200. .RNAT A .TIONS: The first alternative is to continue along with our option of heat pasteurization but switch from post digestion heat pasteurization, at a cost of $666,000, to pre -digestion heat pasteurization, at a cost of $798,000. This would leave our sludge still containing minute amounts of good pathogens so that when it is applied, it would not become a residence or be invaded by undesirable pathogens. The undesirable pathogens would be driven out by the small colony good pathogens. The second alternative would be to select the ATP process, Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment. This is done in tall cylinders or vessels placed outside any of the buildings. These tanks would be located in the interior of the plant yard area so as to try and reduce their visibility. The cost of this option would be $984,000, significantly higher than the original option presented in the Facilities Plan or its modification as presented in option Ml. The third alternative would be to select the thermophilic anaerobic digestion process currently being studied in Iowa. This would require us to spend $8,000 for a study, which would be completed in two months; then, if applicable, a construction cost of approximately $762,000, with the highest yearly operational cost of $29,200 per year. STAFF F..O F.NDATION: Since class 'A' or exceptional quality class "A' sludge involves some relatively new technology in the United States, and even HDR appears to be in the designtlearning modo, it is difficult for City staff to give a recommendation on this issue. Consequently, staff withholds its recommendation until HDR has presented the options to the City Council and staff at Monday night's meeting. There are also some issues regarding the form of proposals or bidding the different alternatives that should be discussed. D. SUPPORTINn DATA: Copy of various memos from HDR regarding treatment plant costs and class 'A' sludge alternatives. 20 TO John Simola. City of Monticello , < From Scott Wallace, HDR hi Copy Bob Peplin, HDR Chuck Keyes, PSG Date November 14, 1995 Subject Revised Treatment Plant Costs Sunny Fresh Industrial Loadings Class "A" Sludge Treatment Alternatives The Facility Plan as finalized identifies a three basin sequencing batch reactor (SBR) treatment system as the preferred alternative. Three 100' x 100' x 20' basins were proposed at a projected cost of $5,030,000. Since the completion of the Facility Plan, the City of Monticello has completed a 7 days of hourly sampling at the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and Sunny Fresh Foods. Based on this information, Sunny Fresh may be under -reporting their loadings to the City by 58%. This has the impact of changing the SBR basin size and equipment costs (see attached memo regarding Sunny Fresh cost impacts). Two basic options have been presented to Sunny Fresh Foods for the new WWTP: I . The City will enforce the permit limits for Sunny Fresh of 2,000 Ib/d (1995) and 3,000 Ib/d (2020). This will likely require independent sampling and analysis. A fine structure should be imposed to make permit violations prohibitive. This would allow the treatment plant to be built as currently planned (8,100 Ib/d of BOD), but may limit Sunny Fresh to loads under what they are currently discharging in some cases. Three 88' x 88' x 25' basins would be constructed (to minimize site arca) under this scenario at a projected construction cost of 54,755,000 (see Table 4-3A). Expand the treatment plant to accommodate current Sunny Fresh loadings (3,275 lb/d) and projected future load increases (4,912 Ih/d). This will require changing the Facility Plan currently under review by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) and the current WWTP design. Increasing the capacity of the treatment plant while complying with the City's 304 Ih/d BOD effluent limit will increase the construction costs of the WWTP by an estimated $272,000 and will result in an annual operating cost increase of approximately $18,670. Three 100' x 100' x 25' basins would be constructed under this scenario at a projected cost of $5,088,000 (see Table 4-3B). HDR has also received additional process information and equipment pricing which affects the Class "A" sludge treatment alternatives (see attached memo on Class "A" sludge alternatives). HDR had originally proposed a heat pasteurization process at a projected construction cost of 5666,000. This was a post -pasteurization process. Due to reinfection problems with post - pasteurized sludge in Europe, this has been changed to a pre -pasteurization process (pasteurizing y:%O1projW3124W1ke=r wtCosuevl.doc /'A- Revised Treatment Plant Costs Sunny Fresh industrial Loadings Class "A" Sludge Treatment Alternatives Vl in front of the sludge digesters). This increases the projected construction costs to 3798.000 (see Table 8-9). HDR is no longer recommending heat pasteurization as a preferred alternative. HDR has also been working with CBI Walker to reduce the price of the Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment (ATP) option. This alternative was originally priced at $1,526,500, and is now priced at $984,000 (see Table 8-7). The ATP alternative offers the advantage of a process guarantee from CBI Walker and could easily be fast -tracked. The ATP process has the highest construction cost of the Class "A' sludge alternatives now under consideration, but has the lowest operating cost. Payback of the cost differential between ATP and the other recommended alternative, thermophilic anaerobic digestion, would occur in 8 to 10 years. HDR hes also been working with Dr. Richard Dague at Iowa State University on Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion. This is an experimental process which has been developed within the last year. It is currently being tested in the laboratory and at three wastewater treatment plants. Thermophilic anaerobic digestion offers the City a relatively low-cost option for Class "A" sludge. Because of the limited experience with this process, a laboratory test o using Monticello's waste activated sludge is recommended. This study could be completed by Dr. Dague in approximately two months at an estimated cost of $8,000. The projected construction cost for this alternative is $3762,000 (see Table 8-9A). Table 12-3A summarizes the SBR and Class "A" sludge options as compared to the budget outlined in the Facility Plan. y:WlprgJt0812401111tme=ttosuevtAm 1 I6 P-1). Cosa R. Somalia Puny. - Table 2 a Raw 6awapa Forte Man Jana 12') - Table 48 Headwork. Eeup—a (run a0upmeru 6.5 MOO) • Table 7.2 Ihadwon. BWd.V - Table 3.2 Treatnnm P— .s: ae0uancbly Be" Reactor - Tabla 43 (Facnlly Plan) asauanclrg Banh Raactor - table 4-3A (Rawl"M fla t—i g Oalch A—tow - Table 4-M (R.A"d) Admellalr.bon Bworg Di4ntecbOn (Chwaim—Dochlonnauon) • Tads 6.3 0" Comm •Tebl. 7J Cla.s A Sbrrlpa Trs.MWW Neal PasburN.lbn • Tat" 0.0 (FUMIV PMn) Aatublc Ih—cpNaO P7ebealmsm (ATP) -TaW S-7(RSMsed) ThwIncoNlb Able Dgntl n - Table 04A (rens) tpum Gema. DWMal, Cbaa A • (Table 6.12) Construction Cmt Subtotal (wsh 1516 combgmcy) Mowat—. Ilanorg 5 hsur .. 6% t'rgnoamp M-wo., 1», Cmurucbon), 16% -- Fertmar.g 1)1 t"If TabA _JA Project Cost Evaluation City of Monticello WmtawMw Treatment Facilities F.clnly P III, Frsah Expanded Sy Fnah b..sllne Sry Fresh ba.allm 6umly Fresh E.pmftd 6uury unn eal 3} 100. 150. m bRaWd Y p a GO a 75 b41ns 3- U x Y a 25 beat. 1 100. 100. TS MOM 3. 100 . 100 . 25 a.M 0,100,W SOD 5.I cc INS BOO x.100 WAS 500 1001611$41 BOO 10.015 Md 000 $317.000 $312.000 $312.000 9314.000 $312.000 01,000 $51,000 $51.000 551.000 $51.000 637..000 9374,000 9374,000 074,000 9374,000 011,000 $311,000 $311,000 5311,000 $311,000 5S,030,000 — —MMO-009 , _ - ero _ _—IP.fqm $4,776,000 84.776,000 55,006,000 55,066.000 $30,000 $30,000 9300.000 1100.000 5300.000 11,17,0110 547,000 147,000 $47,000 1,47,000 $407.000 $407,000 6*07,000 $407,000 8401.000 {5[8.000 '"Masse — Cry d MYnICrGI y'Olpq%.1:4a0111—�'rra 11/14/05 9304.000 509M,ODD 5162.000 5762.000 )5a4.Om 354.000 354 000 3%64 OM 554 aro SA 14xwo is, 145,000 57,023.000 SA450,000 50.2311,061) 5407,000 407.000 9300,000 $423,000 5412.000 41%1000 1t.?22.000 41186.000 112x91210 411235,000 — —MMO-009 , _ - ero _ _—IP.fqm '"Masse — Cry d MYnICrGI y'Olpq%.1:4a0111—�'rra 11/14/05 Technical Memorandum No. 4 City of Monticollo V yA0Ipro110B1240011pwsbr1_.45 11/14/95 Table4Z3A Opinion of Probable Costs Sequencing Batch Reactor Wastewater Treatment Facilities Monticello, MN 8.100lbld BOD 3- 88 x 88 x 25 basins Salvage Unit Equipment Replac t Replac't Value Item Unit Quantity Price Total Actual Life, w 10 IR 20 yr (2020) Secondary TrantY SBR EVuip'I LS $723.000 15.14;: 20 $723.000 so structures Silo Work % 8.00 $400,000 6.38% 20 $0 Demolition LS I $20;000 0.42% 20 $0 Concrete Lsit fns.aoo 10.31% 50 $467.400 Metals % 2.15 1150.000 3.14% 20 $160.000 $0 Finishes % 2.50 $175.1100 3.66% 10 $175.000 so SpoclaUlos % 0.50 £30.000 0.63% 20 $30:000 so Furnishinas % 0.75 $50.000 1.05% 20 sw.boo $0 Mechanical Sludpo Thlckanlnci Pumps 2 $7,500 $15.000 0.31% 10 $15.000 $o 10 IPlant P!pna/Flllin:ts % 7.00 $180.000 3.77% 20 4180.000 so [Yard Piping % 6.00 $385.000 8.06% 20 $365,000 $0 IValveolPlumbinci % 2.75 X85.000 1.78% 20 X85.000 $0 (HVAC % 3.00 1 $325.000 6.81% 20 $325.000 $0 Eloctrical Electrical Egulp'1 % 7.0D I 11550.000 l tb2% 20 4sso.000 $o [Instrumontation % 4.00 $285.000 5.97% 10 $285.000 $285.000 so Subtotal $4,152,000 Conlln9ancloe % 1s $623.000 13,05% I Total $4.778.000 100.00% $475.000 $2.763.000 $467.400 Estimated Annual Power Consumption kwhtvr 2.200.000 Estimated Annual Power Cost kwh $0.031 68.200 Eetlmatod Annuol Demand Cos! kwNr 6000 $4.69 423.450 Total Annual Costa 191,650 Prosom Worth of Annual Costo $1,051.000 Total Present Worth (20 yr, 6%) $Ata07,000 M67.240 S861.50 $f48.7tt Equivalent Annual Cott $597.600 Technical Memorandum No. 4 City of Monticollo V yA0Ipro110B1240011pwsbr1_.45 11/14/95 Tabhr4�3B Opinion of Probable Costs Sequencing Batch Reactor Wastewater Treatment Facilities Monticello, MN 10,015 Ib/d BOD 3-100 x 100 x 25 basins Unit Item Unit Quantity Price Total Actual Sacondary Troa1Y SBR Equip'i LS 20 Structures 20 Site work % 8.00 I Domolition LS IConcrao LS I Metals % 2.15 1 Finishes % 2.50 Spociahios % 0.50 Furnishintls % 0.75 Mechanical 10 5285.000 $288.000 $0 Sludoo Thickonhta Pumas 2 $7.500 Plant Pfpinq(Fittings % 7.00 Yard Pipina % 6.00 Vatvas/Plumbina % 2.75 HVAC % 3,00 Eloclrtcal Electrical Equlp1 % 7.00 Instrumentation % 4,00 Subtotal Conli ooncian % IS I Total I Estimated Annual Power Consumotion kwhM 2.200.000 Estimated Annual Power Coll kwh $0.031 Ectlmalod Annual Demand Cast kwlvr 6000 $4.69 Total Annual Costs ProMro Worth of Annual Coats Total Present Worth 120 rr, 514/ Equivalent Annual Cosi - Toehnical Memorandum No. 4 -lki VAOIpnor091240011pwatlr2.►b 5625,000 16.21% $450.000 9.64% _000 0.39% 1899.000 17.67% $150:000 2.95% $175_000 3.44% 130.000 0.59% $80.000 0.99% £15.000 0.29% $180,000 3.54% $385,000 7.57% }85.000 1.67% $325.000 6.39% 5550.000 10.81% 5285,000 5.60% $4,424,000 $664.000 13.05% $5,088.000 100.00% 168.200 £23.450 191,850 11,051,bw 81,120.000 182/,500 P Salvage Equipment Replac't Replac't Value Ufa. yr 10 yr 20 yr (2020) 20 $825.000 s0 20 16 20 60 $539.400 20 $150.000 10 $175.000 20 i 0.000 so 10 11115.000 5o N 20 1180.000 s0 20 5885,000 $0 20 }85.000 $0 20 5325.000 $0 20 P550,000 $0 10 5285.000 $288.000 $0 5475.000 $2,965.000 5839.400 1265.240 JIM307 1 s t 65,155 Gly of Monticello 11/14/95 `d TO John Simola, City of Lvlonticello V From Scott Wallace, HDR l� copy Bob Peplin, HDR Chuck Keyes, PSG Dare November 13, 1995 Subi— Class "A" Sludge Treatment Revised Alternatives Since the completion of the Facility Plan, HDR has received additional process information and equipment pricing which affects the Class "A" sludge treatment alternatives. This memo summarizes additional information on three altemadves; Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment (ATP), Heat Pasteurization, and Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion. Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment (ATP) The ATP process is a European pretreatment process used in conjunction with conventional (mesophilic) anaerobic digestion to produce a Class "A" sludge. The process is licensed and manufactured by CBI Walker in the United States. Thickened sludge is introduced into the aerobic pretreatment reactor in 90 minute batch cycles. Sludge is held in the aerobic reactor for 24 hours at a temperature of 120 to 140 T. Pathogen reduccioa is campleted in the aerobic reactor. After pretreatment, sludge is fed to the anaerobic digesters. Since pathogen reduction has been completed, the retention time in the anaerobic digesters can be reduced from 30 to 15 days (at a standard mesophilic temperature of 95 *n. Volatile solids destruction in the ATP unit is limited, so that volatile solids are available fro methane production in the anaerobic digesters. Based on continued discussions with CBI Walker, we have revised the pricing for this alternative, as shown in Table 8-7. The original construction cost for this alternative was projected at 51,526,500. The revised construction cost for this alternative is $984,000. The main advantages of the ATP process is that it has a large installed base in Europe. CBI Walker is a large equipment manufacturer and offers a process guarantee. CBI Walker has also done extensive pathogen testing; the EPA has approved ATP as a Class "A" process. Heat Pasteurization Heat Pasteurization (30 minutes at 158 *n was originally recommended by HDR as the most cost-effective method to produce a Class "A" sludge. This proposal was for post pasteurization 11F Class "A" Sludge Treaunent Revised Alternatives (pasteurization after anacrobic digestion) to produce a pathogen -free sludge. This was the original means to produce a pathogen free sludge in Europe. The European experience in the mid 1970's was that pasteurization kills all organisms, beneficial as well as pathogenic. This creates a sludge which is easily reinfected during transport or land application. A salmonella outbreak in cattle was linked to reinfection of post -pasteurized sludge after land application. Because of this, most European plants began to pasteurize prior to conventional (mesophilic) digestion. This eliminates the problem of reinfection in the field. HDR has revised the costs for Heat Pasteurization for a pre -pasteurization process in front of the anaerobic digesters to avoid reinfection problems. The disadvantages of pre -pasteurization is that since all organisms are killed, methane production in the fust -stage digester will suffer somewhat. The high temperatures involved (158 °F) have caused lime scaling inside the heat exchanger at some treatment plants. It is anticipated that the heat exchanger would have to flushed and cleaned periodically to maintain heat transfer. Odors with pasteurization of raw sludge have been reported. Projected construction costs for this alternative have been revised for post -pasteurization, as shown in Table 8-9. The original construction cost for this altemadve was projected at $401,000 plus $265,000 in anaerobic digester rehabilitation work, or $666,000 total.. The revised construction cost for this alternative (including the anaerobic digester work is $798,000. Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion The thermophilic anaerobic digestion alternative, while mentioned in the Facility Plan, was not investigated in detail due to the experimental nature of the process. Since the preparation of the facility plan, HDR has been in close communication with Dr. Richard Dague at Iowa State University, who is a leading researcher in anaerobic digestion. Dr. Dague presented research data on thermophilic anaerobic digestion on primary sludge at the recent Water Environment Federation (WEF) conference in Miami. Dr. Dague has also just completed a study on 50% primary/504b waste activated sludge; these results have not been officially published yet. This process is currently being tested at the Newton, Iowa and Papillion Creek (Omaha, Nebraska) wastewater treatment plants. The process investigated by Dr. Dague uses thermophilic anaerobic digestion at 131 °F for 5 days in the first stage digester. This has process effectively reduced pathogens to below Class "A" levels in all trials to date. Thermophilic digestion has also resulted in increased gas production with higher methane content. After thermophilic anaerobic digestion, sludge is carried into the second stage mesophilic digester which is operated at 95 °F for 10 days. This provides additional digestion and reduction of volatile fatty acids. Regrowth has not been a problem on trials to date. HDR has also obtained a study done by Dr. Mark Kennedy at South Dakota State University on the Sioux Falls, South Dakota Wastewater Treatment Plant. This study evaluated both Heat Pasteurization and Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion for implementation at the plant; SIG Class "A" Sludge Treatment Revised Altematives Therfttophilic Anaerobic Digestion was recommended due to its lower initial heat input and greater methane production. This study evaluated the use of the thermophilic process in the second stage digester, which, while providing pathogen control, will result in higher equilibrium levels of volatile fatty acids and a more odorous sludge. The Sioux Falls treatment plant is now reportedly using thermophilic anaerobic digestion to produce Class "A" sludge. The thermophilic anaerobic digestion process will produce a Class "A" sludge at a lower initial heat input than using a heat pasteurization (pre -pasteurization) process, with the additional benefits of higher methane production. However, the fust stage digester must be maintained at 131 °F, which increases heat losses. In the case of Monticello, the fust stage digester is somewhat Larger (9 days storage at design) than that needed for the thermophilic anaerobic digestion process (5 days). Wben the added heat losses from the first stage digester are taken into account, the thermophilic anaerobic digestion process will require more heat than either the ATP or Heat Pasteurization processes. Thermophilic anaerobic digestion is an experimental process that has not been tested on 100% waste activated sludge. A laboratory study to conium that the process works with Monticello's sludge is recommended. The projected cost to complete this study by Dr. Dague is $8,000. Costs for this alternative are shown in Table 8-9A. The projected construction cost for thermophilic anaerobic digestion is 5762,000. Clan "A" Sludge Treatment Revised Altematives v Table 1 Class "A" Sludge Processes Pros and Cons Aerobic Thermophilic Pret_rrat_ment (ATP) Advantages: • Large installed project base in Europe, two U.S. installations. • Pathogen testing already done and approved by EPA. • CBI Walker offers a process guarantee. • Process could easily be done on a fast-track basis. • Lowest operating cost of any Class "A" process ($7,000/year for ATP vs. 510,500/year for heat pasteurization vs. 529,200/year for thermophilic anaerobic digestion). Payback between ATP and thermophilic anaerobic digestion is approximately 10 years. • Thermophilic pretreatment may increase gas production in digesters. Disadvantages: • Highest construction cost of options considered. Heat Pasteurization Advantages: • Process explicitly defined in 503 regulations; can produce a Class "A" sludge. Disadvantages: • Litre scaling of heat exchangers can be a problem due to high operating temperature. • Reinfection problems require use of pre -pasteurization. • Pre -pasteurization may impact fust stage digester gas production. • No process guarantee offered by manufacturer. Thermaobilie Annembi Digestioe Advantages: • Increased gas production and volatile solids destruction in digesters. • Process can produce a Class "A" sludge without construction of additional tankage. Disadvantages: • Experimental process; will require laboratory bench -scale testing prior to implementation. • Elevated temperature of fust stage digester increases heat loss. • No process guarantee offered by manufacturer. 4 11_ `" Tabled/ Opinion of Probable Costs ATP Class A Blosollds Wastewater Treatment Facilities Monticello, MN Unit Item Unit Ouandiv Price Aerobic Thormophl0e Pretreatment ATP Process LS rkwnastlon LS 1 Natural Gas System LS I huller Water System LS 2 Water Solana, LS 1 Volrv, Fatuvs LS 1 Valves LS 1 Sludge Punv3 (ham Thickener) LS 4 Salary EgWpntant LS I Inalaaa0on % 7% Spare Parts LS 1 Eloaa"] LS 1 Digester Bldo. Moddkaaans SF 200 nohab Existing Anaerobic Olgestars Flue" Gas Cover LS 1 Gua Scrubber LS 1 Mtscal. Gas Cenipononts LS 1 BuLtar LS 1 subtotal Conllrlponcles O Ib% % Projected Construction Cost Ebtanated Annual Power Consumption (kwW ) L"atunoca Annual Power Coat ($0.031Awh) Lstlmatod Annual Demand Cost (70,2 kw O $4 GW=) 1_b0matad Annual Cnorgy Consw pilon (MM01 Win) EsUr atoll Anneal Methane Production (MMUTtW) Eallmetod Annual Energy Cost (natural gae) Eblknalod Annual Cnlorgy Cost (maftha) Total Annual Casts Prosenl WoM at Annual Coats Present Worth (20 yr. e%) Eaulnlenl Anneal Cost rgdlnY'nl Mcneyurxlunl No. 0 LN y 10ilucift 124oulli vatll2 RIs $2,000 $2,000 $7.000 $2.000 $12.000 $24.000 $5.000 $2,000 $40.000 $4.000 $11.000 $75 $140,000 Equtpmant $25.000 Salvage $75.000 Uta Replacement Cwt Value Total vows tow 20w 2020 $500,000 20 11580.000 $0 $2,000 20 $2.000 so $2.000 20 $2.000 $0 $0,000 20 $8.000 $0 $2.000 20 $2.000 $0 $12,000 20 $12,000 so $24,000 20 624.000 $0 $20,000 20 620.000 $0 $2.000 10 112.000 62.000 $0 $40,800 20 $40.600 so $4.000 10 $4.000 $4,000 $0 s 11,000 20 $11,000 $0 $15,000 60 $0,000 $140,000 $140,000 20 $25.000 $25.000 20 $75.000 $76.000 20 $10,000 510,000 M $931,000 16 $57,000 s9se'a 0 17^.,000 $5,700 $1,700 0,600 0,700 •700 s0 so $7,000 $e9Gnn $117!1,000 $117.$00 $140.000 $0 $25.000 s0 $75.000 so 110,000 s0 $90ad $818.600 $9000 sawn sm.000 $3,000 ('.ey W Mmtrollo 11/17/05 Table t Opinion 01 ProbA01'a Costs Neat Pasteurization Clan A Blosolids Wast4wete7 Treatment FaciUtlas Monticello, MN le Mb E.Is1Ytp Ansaroblo 01puela float Gu Co.. to 1 6140.000 6140.000 20 6140.000 EquipnnM Ga. &,ueb. 1.8 1 625,000 "Wallis Lm 625.000 60 UNI 5MAM LIN RspNeamant Co. VA. „am_ UNI Ou.nen, 0.k" TeIN verfro 10. 20W Ron Keay PsaW"bAlbn 510.000 $561.000 $81AW CoraVonclas 0 157E 5104,am Odle LG 1 542.000 $2,00D 20 542.000 60 I n..w Trlumrra Tanr (0 M LS 1 $87,g6o 667,000 20 62.100 667,000 $8 I t.al E.c�W ". I LS I MISS 671,000 20 67],000 $8 NW E.Cn.p. Ise 2 LG 1 677,000 627,000 20 6:7,000 :D GWpa Pump. peal E -h -D.) IS 2 612.000 6.^1.000 20 621.000 $8 S.aaa Plplrp (Otasa Linso LS 1 616,000 616,000 20 611m.0DD 610,000 $8 Iw Waist Ppaq IS 1 64A00 54,000 20 U1.000 64.000 $8 N.tu ,I GY Syuam to 1 62.000 62.000 20 62,000 $8 Oesu W.I. GT.em LS 2 67,000 60,000 20 66,000 $8 Wal. Setl.tat LS 1 62,000 62.000 20 62.000 $8 Vu,utsuun (ppkv) LS 1 61,000 67,000 20 67,000 60 Camels LS 1 61,000 67,000 20 67,000 $8 Rom. "-p. LS 1 MASS 612.000 20 612.000 60 V.w" LS 1 676,000 610,000 20 670.000 $8 Sludge Pumps (bem TNkLanw) LS 4 65.000 620.000 20 620.000 60 GO" E0A mala LS I 62.00D 62,OOO 10 67,000 62,000 $8 Mw2aaon Is 1 620.ODD 625,000 20 626,000 60 Gpala Peru LS 1 64.000 64,000 10 64= 61.000 $8 Etsmkal LS 1 611,000 611,00D 20 61 IAA 60 Instrumentation LG 1 64,000 64,00D 10 N.00D 54ACO 60 00*1er 0140 mooWcyOom CF 1500 676 6117,000 60 $87AW le Mb E.Is1Ytp Ansaroblo 01puela float Gu Co.. to 1 6140.000 6140.000 20 6140.000 60 Ga. &,ueb. 1.8 1 625,000 526,000 Lm 625.000 60 Wual. Gas Co nPonanls 1 B I 5MAM 615,00 20 575,000 $8 tea. CG I $10,000 $10,Om 20 510 om JO P.— 1., 64".000 510.000 $561.000 $81AW CoraVonclas 0 157E 5104,am Pro(aalad Conabualen Cost 1146,000 G"am"e Arcual Por. Cenu rupia. (kwp) 202.00D C.larlalae Arno Por. Ca. 11000 IA.N 62.100 Csurrlae Annual GomalW Cost (25.7 kw 0 64.6Omn) $1.400 EUWWOC= Cn.py Cbmut911-(NNUTU" 4,600 Cu"Alted Mra.l WatarM ProOCbon(WAS I IL'rd _6,100 EaOnto4 Annual Cnerpy Co. (Itoa" UW .600 $8 10111 Anr.al Ce.s 610,600 Ptuara WoM of An all Costs 611m.0DD Pmem Wom(20 its, 64) 11,1",000 14000 61I0.ITO U1.000 _-_&4TANnl A",0 r;nj _ I 6!6.000 r lalauW Mcnar+na4n Ilu 0 Coy ul M.Ac41u ' � ymll.upoa121mltprlu;4yr .b 11111'Of 7 e[-, Mon.l..rtun au 0 . 1001.1 C./ W Mural 110 I N76 Table Opinion of PlobaWe Costs Thormophlllo Anaerobic 01;:tlon Clew A Blosollds Wastewater Treatment Facilities Monticello, MN . Eaulpm.0 $Mira$. IINI Lib FtWacemten Cal Ye%w Item UMI Ou.nnn Wk. T.W v.u. to. 20.. 420 Th-ph111c AWWc Dige.asn I -b -M -y Gh4 IS 1 68.ODD 84000 O.M .La 2 42.000 64,000 20 04.000 :0 fl. P-4. IS 2 %3.000 {4000 20 96.000 W I" Eu t p.. rm. 1 L0 1 *31!m %HADD 20 123.000 Jo Swo. Punp. pt.0 E. M..pu) to $ $17,000 624.000 20 624,1AD w SLd Do P06V(Obs. Lime) ID 1 Slum $10,000 20 $16,000 W Ila W.W Pwv IS 1 KODD 4.000 20 64.00D W N.Md Oa. Sy...m 18 1 $2.000 f2.000 20 62.ODD W B.O. Water Sy- l8 2 63,000 4.000 20 86.00) 6D WUu safteg1et LS 1 $2.000 12.000 20 $2.000 W 1n.W1bn(plpap) IS 1 $7,000 17.000 20 $7.000 W Cuarm LS 1 $7.000 17.600 20 $7.0 00 W Ppep, Fb*W IS 1 $11,070 $12,000 20 $12.000 W V.1". 16 1 $,6.000 SMADO 20 $36.000 a UudDe M" (60. TWA-) IS . 15.000 %20.000 20 62g00D W Swty Cg4..m LS 1 82.000 62.000 10 $2.000 $2.000 to In.laCAllonl8 1 $76.000 In ow 20 $20.0001 Sous Pan. 16 1 .000 .0 4 460 10 HOOD 4.000 10 Clecutcd t8 1 611.006 $11.000 20 611.000 W wuunaaemn t6 1 4.OD0 4.000 10 HADD 4.000 $0 k4W.I1M (Ogslls. Co -s) to 7 621.000 $12.Dm 20 42000 W DOW. DtlO, 1.000-W- OF tow $7a 8113.000 50 $67.000 n.hab Ed.eng An.wo0lc O6..I.n I to.14n01D., Cow 10 1 $140.000 0140.000 20 $140.000 W O.1 Gcr.ule.16 1 621.000 $25.000 20 $25.000 $a Mecd Get C - IU 1 $3!.000 20 $35000 JO 6u0(old 11550�00 ""am 814ow 6571.000 1167,11017 CorAW* .d.. O 16% ja X000 Pn.)eclee Cwtsh-Uon Cs.1 !743000 E.6me1W AW.W Pap. CormurrWOM P.nMn 2$2,000 E.u.ntee "" Pv. Cpl (W 03IA.e0 11,100 f.lerleled Antral Dame COM (75 7 4e 0 4 6001.0 $1.400 Ewndee Anal Cnap Cons vion(MMbltvVn 0.600 CW..Ntae A -I 100yne Pt d,c (MMIllV7n 300 E.tlmelfl Are.W Crwg(r Cu glover w.) 3,000 $18.618 [OW Are.W Coot. 1.20.176 Prawn Wom d Anal Cow 7225,000 Pn.snl Wom(20 rr. 6%) !1.:71.606 64000 st"A 7 ROAD 7 e[-, Mon.l..rtun au 0 . 1001.1 C./ W Mural 110 I N76 Council Agenda - 11/27/95 alum . U.S.) With our pathway project, we established a significant amount of 8-R bituminous pathway, added 3 R in width to some existing &R concrete sidewalks to make them a combination sidewalk/pathway, and we constructed entirely new 8-R sections of concrete sidewalk/pathway. Council is asked to consider whether or not to remove snow from the new sidewalk areas or to require that property owners remove snow as is the current practice. PATHWAY The 8 -ft bituminous pathway constructed with the city pathway project was not originally proposed to be cleared of snow in the winter. It is not our intention at this time to remove any snow or ice from these pathways and to discourage its use in the wintertime. The Parke Commission has suggested that pathway snow removal be considered only if there is a ground swell of support from the public. WIDER SIDEWALK The one area in which we added 3 R in width to an existing concrete sidewalk is located along Broadway at the High School; and since the High School was doing winter maintenance of snow and ice removal on the 5 -ft sidewalk, they have continued to do so on the additional width. A second area is on the western portion of the community on the south side of Broadway, we added 3 ft of additional width to the 5 -ft concrete sidewalk already existing from Elm Street to the Pinewood School property. Since the City is already doing winter maintenance on this as part of our original sidewalk improvement project several years ago, we are continuing to maintain the extra width. NEW SIDEWALKS It is unclear at this time whether two now sidewalka/pathwaya should be maintained by the City or by the private homeowner. These are the new 8-R sidowalkslpathways located on the east aide of Washington Street @om Broadway to 7th Street and the new 8 -ft wide concrete sidewalk/pathway on the west aide of Elm Street i}om Broadway to Golf Course Road. 21 Council Agenda - 11/27/95 There originally were portions of a 8-R wide concrete sidewalk on Washington Street, which the School maintained, and the School is maintaining the sidewalk adjacent to their property all the way to Territorial Road near the railroad tracks (at least in regard to snow, and ice removal). On the property south of the railroad tracks, there is a little "no man's land the Burlington Northern right-of-way, and then the Lincoln Estates property running all the way from the railroad near Fallon Avenue to West 7th Street. At thia time, property owners have not been informed that, by ordinance, they would have to maintain this 8-R sidewalk/pathway in regard to snow and ice removal. The other area of concern is Elm Street from Broadway to Golf Course Road. The first block from Broadway to 3rd Street is residential property, both single family and multi -family residential. The next block is partly comm er ial with the Legion property and then residential all the way from them south to Golf Course Road. If we consider these combination sidewalks/pathways part of our sidewalk grid system as originally planned, the adjoining property owners are responsible for the winter maintenance and keeping the sidewalk free of obstructions. Doth of these sidewalks, the one on Washington Street and the one on Elm Street, are on the sidewalk grid program/pathway plan. If we confirm now that these sidewalks are part of our grid system, they must be maintained by the adjoining property owner; however, since most of our sidewalks are only 6 R wide and this one is 8 R wide, we should require only a 6-R clear path in the wintertime. No coat for the installation of the sidewalk/pathway has been assessed to adjoining property owners; consequently, no public hearing notices were sent to adjoining property owners for the pathway project other than the city-wide public hearing that was conducted. Consequently, the pathway project, and more specifically the sidewalk/pathway concrete areas, may have been a surprise to some residents who did not follow along with the project in the local paper. So it may be a surprise to them that they have to maintain this sidewalk as part of our grid system. B_ ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The first alternative would be to confirm 5 R of the sidewalk/pathway system on Elm Street and Washington Street as part of the sidewalk grid/pathway system as outlined in previous plans and to notify the property owners as to their obligation under our sidewalk policy, which would require them to keep the sidewalk (6 R) flee of ice and Council Agenda - 11/27/95 snow 24 hours after the end of a storm in the winter, and to keep the sidewalk free of obstructions in the summer. The notice could also inform them that there are no assessments placed against their property, such as 25% of the cost which is typically done for the sidewalk grid system. The City also replaces up to two panels per year free of charge to the homeowner. The property owners would begin maintenance of the sidewalks upon receipt of the notice. The second alternative would be to also declare Elm Street and Washington Street as part of our grid system as originally planned and require that property owners maintain 5 ft; however, since the notice is short, the City would maintain the sidewalks for the residential property along Elm and Washington until the first of the year. The third alternative would be similar to #1 and t12; however, the City would maintain the sidewalk for the remainder of the 1995 to 1996 winter. The fourth alternative would be to revise our sidewalk grid map and/or policy to have the City clean sidewalks in front of all residential property in the city limits. This would he a mRjor undertaking and should only be considered after further study of the costs and implications for commercial sidewalks as well. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the City Administrator, Public Works Director, and Street and Park Superintendent that the City Council confirm the addition of these sidewalks to the grid/pathway system as originally planned and do not modify our sidewalk policy other than require only 5 It be cleaned in these sidewalk/pathway areas. This is alternative M2. Since some of the residents may not have had previous notice of the requirement to clean the sidewalk, it may be beneficial to clean the sidewalks until January 1, which will give them proper time to gear up for doing so themselves. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of sidewalk policy as per city ordinance; Long-term trail plan showing private maintenance of Elm Street and Washington Street segments. 1.1 CHAPTER 1 SIDEWALK REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SECTION: 8-1-1: Maintenance by Owner 8-1-2: Inspection 8-1-3: Notice of Hearing 8-1-4: Notice to Repair 8-1-5: City to Make Repairs 8-1-6: Assess Cost 8-1-7: Hearing on Assessment 8-1-8: Assessment Roll 8-1-9: Appeal from Assessment 8-1-10: Certification to County Auditor 8-1-11: Time of Removal, Ice and Snow 8-1-1: MAINTENANCE BY OWNER: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Annotated 1953, Chapter 429, as amended by Laws 1955, Chapter 811, the primary responsibility for keeping and maintaining the public sidewalk of the city in front of each parcel of land abutting thereon clean and in such state of repair as not to be dangerous to public travel is hereby imposed upon the owner of each such abutting parcel of land. 8-1-2: INSPECTION: The Public Works Director shall inspect the public sidewalks within the city or cause the same to be inspected by some competent person under his supervision and direction at least once in each year and shall, from time to time, report in writing to the City Council any sidewalks believed by him to be in such disrepair as to be dangerous to the public travel thereon, giving therein such information as to enable the locating of each alleged defective sidewalk. 8-1-3: NOTICE OF HEARING: Upon receipt of such report, the Council shall, by resolution, set a date for a public hearing on said report and cause at least two weeks' written notice of said hearing to be given by mail, addressed to the owner of each parcel of land abutting upon the portion of any sidewalk alleged in said report to be in ouch disrepair as to be dangerous to public travel thereon, said notice to be addressed to such owner at the address shown on the last general assessment roll of city real estate. 8-1-4: NOTICE TO REPAIR: If the Council shall find upon said hearing or any adjournment thereof that the sidewalks embraced within said report, or any of them, are in such disrepair as to be dangerous to the public travel thereon, it shall direct the Public Works Director to send or cause to be sent a written notir.A of the defect to the owner of each parcel of land abutting upon any ouch defective sidewalk, directing him to cause the sidewalk in front of his parcel of land to be repaired MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE TITLE VIII/Chet I/Page 1 14� accrued interest at such rate per annum as the Council may from time to �{ time fix by resolution, shall become a lien thereon ana continue until the assessment is fully paid. 8-1-9: APPEAL FROM ASSESSMENT: Any person being aggrieved by any such assessment may appeal therefrom to the District Court of the county wherein the property is located by serving upon the City Administrator, within ten days after the filing of the assessment roll in the Administrator's office, a notice of appeal stating the grounds of the appeal and giving a bond for $250 conditioned that he will diligently prosecute the appeal, pay all costs and disbursements which may be adjudged against him, and abide by the order of the court, and by filing a copy of said notice with proof of service thereof on the City Administrator with the clerk of such court within two days after such service upon the City Administrator. The appeal shall be placed upon the calendar for the next general term of such court commencing more than ten days after the filing of the copy of said notice with the clerk of court, and the appeal shall be tried as other appeals in such cases. Upon an appeal being perfected, the City Administrator shall omit the parcel in respect of which the appeal is taken from the duplicate assessment roll to be certified to the county auditor, as provided in Section 1-10, until such appeal is disposed of by the court. 8-1-10: CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY AUDITOR: On or before the tenth day of October each year, the City Administrator shall transmit a certified duplicate of the assessment roll so adopted to the county auditor of the county in which any parcel of land subject to such lien Is situated, setting forth the amount of the assessment, together with interest computed to the first Monday in January of the succeeding calendar year. 8-1-11: TIME OF REMOVAL, ICE AND SNOW: The owner or occupant of every building or tract of land within the city fronting upon any street having a sidewalk abutting upon such premises shall clear such I idewalk opposite said building or tract of land of snow and ice within twenty-four (241 hours following the termination of any snow storm or the formation of ice from any cause and shall keep the same clear and free from snow and ice. If such snow and ice is not removed by the owner or occupant within the time specified herein the same shall be removed under the direction of the Director of Pu1611c Works and the I xpense of such removal shall be levied against the property owner as a special assessment and collected as in the case of other special assessments. (4/13/87, 0153) MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE TITLE VIII/Chet 1/Pago Il6 J TRAIL DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE • LONG TERM PLAN s i s w IC I .. it H s TRAM c [ r 1 Il II .• I[ ■ D I..T OOE D 1 IOTALI.AT1011 D III I• D 10•w•TI TIIAL•CL.1 • 6CO11C7.r ots"W VIN I Tum UIOTW [ / IO wEDu■IED I [ti, L O EOt D Is I IF I !'LL, fEkr 1 s. C_,jI D. L r. o, , 4 " . I, rs K o. 0 OI IOA,I.p2A/beAAelsw•R•N" I 4IM1f�1 M 1 � I 7i� WW �I Iwai I I IM 1 1 AI CAME ADA DD.Pb GfANn I,Im I .bD p / BNM IN 7 t Ax CA 3§W- r'.wrd,e NNWI,Pu1 1 7A Atr.elfRD,As 11007 ! Is 1007 .00) .p .AI I'Mi 72m ¢ION! pa -I 7M d,Y IN 7A Ahrsy{p DnwbRr 6rw1 I.iL.,rA IOIIArA ILMI NAAP AA.II,II Iem NA f Q!!e(fAO OATNNAY I ;r wAI xCOO 1 1 • A FI—IlAA-0IIA.•. d'Al PND ca'E.m, 22m W 'I .w[PAIRrmlAQ IY W1 24RI I f s w u.'+aP/ uo teiAA/o MItA Orr NQ4Df•TMAA, I: NA, i1V 1 1 FA Dl R.pAFMAt }�YYI�,Il,.}(. btM p.0 am A I DFF IOAp V.TNWAY I rY IY\. ow t 4 7 A DAA RCgA pn+A f 1 t Writ In f II •!'r'P'I N'1 I Ly, 110A0 V.iNWAY 1 rY W._ ID> 1 1 1 A OI -D I I wl.,I o.",A D.AA ,Aq .pp NA I OFF ROAD PATNNAY Y Ir MA_ AM I 10 0 A CRM 7:rtcm t7Am C1N C0 I 7,Of7 DNror,l a�AlC•ArI•,p I tem .! II OFF ROAD PITNNAY I IY I.A IA0 I Ot1I NMlmabaMNfi B CR I!'I lam erluPF,KT e1D 7M M c"Nfv I! ID A C0.N /6Area.d A.Ab1AAr1 I IID..INII�.-IMAM" 4200 AD II OFr ROADPIINNAY Y Ir K., em 1 17 11 • AbAPaA Or Aw Dew lln ) YM�t OAA.A'+MA ' Ii) wA 'I MIROAD rATMNAv u umll t]pp t I. 17A ODYS16,P•fgAErlb[b. Ablpd IIP H» Om .1 I ,OFF ROAD PATNNAY w PROP eco 1 1A 12,113 e•m•DM-I-PAbOIb 1•ms Dalt )•PIIAAAry cm,:Nmo d Om .p II TOFF ROAD rATN14•r N PW 000 1 IO 12 C •abb.l Dw IDN. FmAI,tb IH 7IcaIa I.■A N.v !AOD .I OFF ROAD rATNNAr w cc"o I }.00 1 t1, 17 D kl..W Wd F•bn b Drag » 1•.1 7 1HYa 0CW Crw O mmIL1M AO II I 17 1 TOFF ROAD PATNNAr N POW R p 7ro 1 tf Ire C•r Ib m r.b.P.Aw IAvdu ! wAINt Fv. .%IN" 11..A I eb N• 1 OFF RDAD rAnMAY' Y MA pep 1 t01 1:11 1!^SO tmr b Olsum a,P C,cpArp III tm7 I I'm so i'0 Mwo I Y w CJIr A 17 O__Mm,l�•rN,e-Jltllrcl,JM_C�n't 7 •1_PIP-mplFSNCO. Ieb I IDO 7o_% O�nKPM (4 Iw - 'm�DJ1 Pia-0===6.•7AI.mMToct Ir.--Aw•DM,rclR-9 ' TtD mG7GICo I.wD t j60 jf.�yy��..AuLK[tr-, Y•11 lir }I t)IA IIAI,.CldnetOlaf.Ow.Y. Om A 1 ,OF/�_RDAD:AIMN1Y }]_)C IAbI•w Dtr.gmCwADn I_!I.1 rA,ewOmtC F.. AM ICOR p 1 !DFF ROAD rATMNAr w fn.p - 1App I C. I. •t CwPw.CP111bLbYMAI» 1 III100) I CWr N dr71 » 1. M f.IIeAA. OR 114mfb.tAwM _ ' I wt.A q.egn K•f!`�Tt Et- APG 1 .. �!� �A1 ll. Iaf woAy P.twwuY _ I I `f IN H IAA AD.IAAr»-10ne1 IINTNt rArl 7A ArbAk I,m,ewl I .!� AO It �FI EIO.O rATTIMIAY I ,r W Imp 1 11 10 • mD DCc—IIIAII"st"a1 Ii1Mr, OIfI. A•Pw.w•.. I !Im » 10 ODN.t1ATWPEG*NI IIY !M PROP A 16 D /rIa [A.G mANIrwG ! CiOwrfA-ma bAflfAINF Iso » 11a {ONCw16TI0VEA10117 I w IN A t0c mc. AbrIAAeMG OEMM •••AM III IIm 1,im » '10 GOMD !w Iw ]0 HDI TN p CbO HIAA A b %AO.,v- III IDA am 77 10 ,GNq I w IN IPROI 71 �I'li?Pw� --_ I [ WI•Iliy4f 17'Zat'1_ fMl KIIMMr-" 1 N 4 1PFJI X1602-1NA-nls 77� _Iw rA.Mrll�n�m CA 114 1�YII.n_ P,RArw wre'se AMO 31 /Q RNvtAATMF`Ml(VM PM— . 11 10 A ANNO, [O..IMbCIwbA• I 1 1007 Y w.Dl JI ■ r1cm UCY i D crlrwnF_f1�OI_A�-.. __� I IIWN,I fIf _fq_►M«tl�rAaI� 1'1 t1 �rAfbP1 C; _I� _NwNQ » Ip A D.�CIAAIwN �I 11N'�e'41NYYPA�-_� I I�MI.I, lA1Y,I vIA Rl n MTl.Iwl 4" )a IO fOMIMIAP�!Y[W� I I N- N !PRfq/ i _J0 AA-Rw G-.1C.YAAL CMN 1 1 Pwrwt C1Ow�iAi M w_ugrNO _ +m0 Il 1�A RA.IN-CMN IAg KJF 1I .. .1: I.i�Or'S9�__ I.01R I I OFFi1MO!.TAAl 1r MA �1tlt0_ t ■' "_A 1brt>;f-4PIw.�_- - I [I,[ llt rl�A_AAefrN'MV111 A-MM��I�ar ROA_I=P�TNNAr _ �Y�fN� Am 1 L _ n� C1w rA h.. ra m y.�w_+n_wwe1. _ .RA. _ t�tYi•,e.n m nrC/I`..eirOtbl,.j�- A _ �..� .!-P�.� ± - ____ y u r. •'-Fwl m fi n J.r�...1 n ,_- - - - - —I�[+q.retor,I�rr nrE. "Hy_..._. �. - . �! mo .A�, �� d: aO.O P•rNNAY r. - Nfy�_ - - - 7-. a Atij1-19 Y�^M I fylrr' PU'It%• I) ��-„--I__PFLROQ PATNM'.r'- lCi nr` �p t7 ♦<ir Ljnr-!-I c� 1 f T'+rar,.r•ho-,,j _ [ p-"P4TTIGAt• •_ � U 11 •1 Ola CRf 101 bCAAU Is Im) �� q A CIG1A IN Y C? A7. 14AC=R1 IOl rt r-- rt, -��----- - MPA wFalAvn'nnly^,N}`I �.. )dq .i��l� rRpLD PA1Nw•r w�P^•0� �3po0_1- .) [7A FftV DP.••OANbm Alice rrvOrw MJre.IY}•RRR aN•A ..-w. am N.I.w..l a: A7AD PiTNMA. r Y ,NA ' YG[0 f 1 tl BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 10/23/95 15:31:47 14, WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39314 10/20/95 NATIONAL AUTOMOBILE 39358 10/20/95 MN DEPART OF REVENUE 39358 10/20/95 MN DEPART OF REVENUE 39358 10/20/95 MN DEPART OF REVENUE 39358 10/?0/95 MN DEPART OF REVENUE 39359 10/20/95 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEA 39360 10/20/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39360 10/20/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39360 10/20/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39361 10/20/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 39362 10/20/95 MN RECREATION & PARK 39363 10/20/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 39364 10/20/85 JONES/WILLIAM 0 b 39364 10/20/95 JONES/WILLIAM 0 39365 10/20/95 DEPT OF TRADE & ECON 39366 10/20/95 WRIGHT COUNTY RECORD 39367 10/2.0/95 D & K REFUSE RECYCLI 39368 10/23/95 AUDIO COMMUNICATIONS 39369 10/23/95 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPI.Y, 39369 10/23/95 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY. 39370 10/23/95 EXECUTRAIN 39311 10/23/95 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE 39372 10/23/05 G E SUPPLY 39373 10/23/95 GME CONSULTANTS, INC 39374 10/23/95 GREEN/ELI?AEIETH 39375 10/23/05 HAKANOON ANDERSON AS Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 424 CHECK VOIDED 47.000R 119 SALES TAX AOJ 0.30CR 119 SALES TAX/3RD QUARTER 60.27 119 SALES TAX/3RD QUARTER 983.30 119 SALES TAX/3RD QUARTER 53.73 1,097.00 235 OTR WATER CONN FEE 2,280.00 148 UTILITIES 115.31 148 UTILITIES 36.71 146 UTILITIES 93.34 245.36 118 WATER/ATV/SNOW REG 491.00 618 REF FEE/SEMINAR 400.00 118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 1,204.00 r. 826 INFO CENTER SALARY 170.00 826 INFO CENTER SALARY 50.000R 120.00 oc 120 REG FEE/OLLIE K 120.00 254 REC FEES /ESMT/THOMAS P 19.50 611 SEPT RECYCLING CONT 3,30G.98 17 CIVIL DEFENSE RADIO RE 48.50 853 GLOVES/MATER DEPT 54.27 853 GLOVES/SEWER DEPT 54.27 108.54 •C 880 COMPUTER CLASS/GORGIN 205.00 510 FIRE COATS/FIRE DEPT 931.50 475 CAI TERIES/RECYCLING 190.56 533 FNG FEFO/NEM WWTP P 5,137.50 009 TRAVEL EXPENSE 12.00 975 SURVEY/NF.W WWTP PRO 1,200.00 BFC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 10/23/95 15:31:47 •y WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39376 10/23/95 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC 39377 10/23/95 LASER SHARP, INC. 39378 10/23/95 MILEY'S SPRINKLER SY 39379 10/23/95 MOBIL 39379 10/23/95 MOBIL Disbursement •Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 85 GAS/FIRE DEPT 49.97 936 COMPUTER CARTRIDGE/C 110.71 930 IMPROVEMENTS/PARKS 15.022.37 131 BLO INSP VAN REPAIRS 402.00 131 GAS/FIkE DEPT 12.71 414.71 39380 10/23/95 MOON MOTOR SALES, IN 142 SUPPLIES/FIRE DEPT 10.14 39380 10/23/95 MOON MOTOR SALES, IN 142 EQUIP REP PARTS/PARKS 26.04 36.18 �( 39381 10/23/95 OLSON & SONS ELECTRI 39387 10/23/95 PLUMBERY-PURCELL'S P 39383 10/23/95 RAINBOW ENTERPRISES. 39384 10/23/95 SIMULA/JOHN E. 39385 10/23/95 STAR TRIBUNE 39386 10/23/95 STEPHEN$ -PECK, INC 39387 10/23/95 TOS TELECOM 39307 10/73/95 TOS TELECOM 39387 10/23/95 TDS TELECOM 39307 10/23/95 TDS TELECOM 39307 10/23/95 TDS TELECOM 39307 10/73/95 TDS TELECOM 39387 10/23/95 TOS TELECOM 30307 10/23/95 TDS TELECOM 39307 10/23/95 TOS TELECOM 39397 10/23/95 TOS TELECOM 30307 10/23/95 TDS TELECOM 39307 10/73/95 TDS TELECOM 39307 10/23/95 TOS TELECOM 39308 10/23/95 U.S. POSTMAITER 39300 10/73/95 VIKING COCA COLA 39390 10/23/95 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CO 7 GENERAL CHECKING 160 ELLISON PK LOAD CENTE 120.33 251 SERVICE CALL/WWTP RENT 40.00 976 DISCS/PW INSPECTIONS 646.68 300 REIMB/EXPENSE 27.50 197 NEWSPAPER SUBCRIPTION 24.05 398 TITLE BOOK/DEP REGISTR 44.UU 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 237.43 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 99.80 953 NEW PW EXPAN/PHONES 317.51 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 215.57 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 192.74 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 50.00 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 60.30 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 81.00 953 TELEPHONE. CHARGES 134.78 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 69.79 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 00.30 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 774.28 953 TELEPHONF. CHARGES 158.61 7.490.36 210 FIRST CLASS MAILING FL 85.00 779 POP/PARKS 95.00 670 WATER METERS/MATER DF. 456.19 TOTAL 36,660.32 OC ESRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM rr 1.1/'01/95 15:42:06 ,ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39218 10/30/95 MONTICELLO FIRE DEPA 39218 10/30/95 FIREMEN''S RELIEF ASS 39391 10/30/95 BURSCH TRAVEL 39392 10'/3.0/95 U.S. POSTMASTER 39392 10/30/95 U.S. POSTMASTER 39393 10/30/95 REGISTRAR OFFICE 39993 10/30/95 REGISTRAR OFFICE 39394 10/30/95 MONTICELLO CHAMPION 39395 10/30/95 BECKER MAPLE LAKE 60 39396 10/30/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 39397 10/30/95 'O'NEILL/JEFF 19398 10/30/95 WOLFSTELLER,/RICHARD ,19399 10/30/95 BARRY KUKOWSKI 30400 10/30/05 MN BUILDING OFFICIAL 30401 10/30/95 LUKACH/JOHN Sg4'01 10/30/90 LUKACH/JOHN 39401 10/30/95 LUKACH/JOHI.I X96,01 10/30/95 LUKACH/JOHN _9402 10/30/05 MUNTICELLO CHAMEICR O X9402 10/30/95 ACINTICULLO CHAMDI[R O 33403 10/00/95 ANGERSON a A900CIATE J`%1103 10/30%05 ANDER£ON & ASCOCIATE I:FNCRAL GlifCKING I Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C L35 CORRECT VENDOR 0 33.234. 0t R $68 CORRECT VENDOR 4 33.23;4.00 0.00 .90415 WWTP TOUR EXPENSE 4.535.81 210 POSTAGE/SEW & WATER B 159.55 210 POSTAGE/SEM & WATER B 159.54 319.09 898 SEMINAR FEE%ROGER MAN 20.00 898 REG FEE/JOHN SI'MOLA 20.00 40.00 025 VAN REPAIR'PARTS/PW IN 13.83 979 MONTE FORD STM SW PRO 211.70 118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 699.00 161 TRAVEL EXPENSE 125.25 217 WWTP TOUR/EXPENSES RE 407.20 .90410 REFUND/OVERCHG SLO PE 341•.00 729 REGISTRATION FEE/GARY 15.00 327 MILEAGE EXPEN(�F 32.60 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 21.73 327 MILEAGE EXPENt3E 21.73 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 21.74 87.00 133 IND DEVELOPMENT TICKE 190.00 133 IND OEV(A.OPMCNT TICKET 73.00 225.00 10 G1.0 4CPARTM�!NT 9UPPI.I 119.9' 10 DTREET OIGNO. ETC D10. G5 490.:17 TOTAL 71536.70 *C1 4;G1 *C1 *l:1 SCF *Ci 6RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/01/95 09:15:,01 ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39404 11/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39404 11/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39404 11/01,/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39404 11/01./95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39404 11/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 394'04 11/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39404 11/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39404 11/01/95 AMERICAN' PAGING OF M 39405 11/01/95 BARBAROSSA & SONS, I 39406 11/01/95 BARTON SAND & GRAVEL 39407 11/01/95 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 39407 11/01/95 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 39407 11/01/99 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 39407 1'1/01/95 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 39408 1 1/0 1/95 CENTRAL MINN INITIAT 39409 11/01/96 DAVIS WATER EOUIPMEN 39409 11/01/95 DAVIS WATER EQU1'PME,N 30409 11/.01/85 DAVIS WATER EQUIPMHN 39409 11/01/95 DAVIS WATER EQUIPMEN 39410 11/01/95 EISELE/JIM 39411 11/01/98 FLICKER'$, T.V. & APP D941c 1'1/01/95 HERMES/JERRY 39413 1 1 /0'1/95 I(OROPCHAK/OLIVE `0414 11/01/95 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA 39413 11/01/95 MN COPY SYSTEMS INC 91141${ 11/01/96 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO 49417 11/01/96 MONTIGIiL1.0 SENIOR Cl 39417 11/01/95 MONTIC.ELLO SENIOR Cl Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT t 951 PAGER CHARGES 16:78 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 24.50 95.1 PAGER CHARGES 8.19 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES '8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 91.62 *C 942 MEADOW OAKS STORM 92.885.28 305 GRAVEL/NEW PW SHOP 100.00 784 CAR PHONE CHARGES 23.81 794 CAR PHONE CHARGES 1.30 794 CAR PHONE CHARGES 19.35 784 CAR PHONE CHARGES 121.30 186.91 kC 822 CMIF GRANT PYMT 1,100.21 290 SUPPLIES/WATER DEPT 12.03 280 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/WAT 15.76 290 EQUIP REPAkR PARTS/SEW 15.76 290 IMPROVEMENTS/PARKS 70.07 114.43 *c 980 REP SKID LOADER/DAMAGE 75.00 00 VCR TAPES/OLD INSPECT 17.00 01 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.60 07 REIMS/TRAVL'L EXPENSE 35.47 00 REG FEE/RICK WOLFSTEIL 25.00 790 QOVY MCH MTC/LI0RARY 31.f)5 185 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1.100.00 139 DAL/INFO CENTER GALAR 455.00 130 MONTHLY CONTRACT PV 2,03J.33 3,300,33 c7941°0 11/01/95 NORTHERN DEWATERING 377 HOC-E/C,CWFR (OLL 90.5 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM �1 1/0 1 /'95 '09 : 1'5:01 ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 3 94 1'9 11/01/95 PAUL A WALDRON & ASS 39420 1 1/0 1/95 RELIABLE CORPORATION 39421 11/01/95 U S LINK 39421 11/01/95 U 9 LINK 39421 11/01/95 U S LINK 39421 11/01/95 U S LINK 39421 11/01/95 U S LINK 39421 11/01/95 U S LINK 39422 11/01/95 UNISOURCE 39423 11/01/95 WATE.RPRO SUPPLIES CO 39424 11/01/95 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO 39425 11/01/95 WRIGHT COUNTY SHERIF GENERAL CHECKING t. Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 830 BLD INSPECTIONS SER 4.650.00 179 COMPUTER SUP/CITY HALL 51.26 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 21.06 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 43.39 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 2.60 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 0.33 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 2.35 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 20.99 90.72 *C 978 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 97.09 670 TEST BALL/SEWER COLL 701.04 219 SCERG GRANT PYMT 2,760.51 407 PYRL DEDUCTIONS/K TRI 670.00 TOTAL 100,269.40 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/02/95 15:09,:41 ` -W-ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39426 11/03/95 ARAMARK 394'27 11/03/95 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT C 39428 11/03/95 FOSTER-FRANZEN-CARLS 39429 11/03/95 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE .19430 1,1/03/95 GOULD BROS. CHEV-OLD 39431 11/03/95 JIM HATCH SALES CO 39431 11/03/95 JIM HATCH SALES CO 39432 11/03/95 LINDBERG/DAVID 39433 11/03/95 MA'RTIE'S FARM SERVIC 39433 11/03/95 MARTIE'-� FARM SERVIC 394!4 11/03/85 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 39435 11/03/95 MN STATE FIRE DEPART 3843G 11/03/95 MONTICELLO HOUSING A 30437 11/03/95 OMANN BROTHERS. INC. 30438 11/03/0$ R.A.K. INDUSTRIEfi 30430 11/03/95 RIVERSIDE OIL 39440 11/03/85 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC ?D440 11/03/95 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC 99441 11/09/96 'SENTRY GYSTEM9 30442 11-/03/95 SIMONSON LUMDFR COMB J^44? 11/03/05 GIMONGON IUMrltR COMP 301443 11/09/05 f,PFC7RtlM CUFPLY CO. 39443 11/01/95 3PUCT01M ;UPPLY CO. 1 3.9444 11/03/05 THOMAS Kt(,9HAPLW Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 848 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 85.1150 $61 OIL & CLASS V/STREETS 169.70 61 INSURANCE PREM/FIRE 0 729.17 610 GLOVES/FIRE DEPT 28.50 70 VEHICLE REPAIRS/FIR 1.869.37 883 SNOW PLOW MARKERS 158.95 883 FIRST AID KITS/STREET 115.02 2)3.97 981 PAINTING OF FIRE HA 2,879.00 107 GOPHER BAIT/PARKS 6.38 107 SEED/PATHWAY 6.39 12.77 118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 1.026.00 437 MEMBERSHIP DUES/FIRE 120.00 41.13 ANTTFREEZE/PARKS 0. OG 334 CLASS V/STREETS 02.60 648 REFLECTIVE TRUCK TAPE 277.34 400 GA`;/6TREET DEPT 062.70 227 MUFFLER/FIRE DEPT 00.40 227 BATTERICS/LYREETS 92.00 101.00 10C ALARM OYC,TEM MTC AGFA 134.19 103 )UP0LIF5/9TREt:'i$ '50.69 103 5UPPLIEG/PATHWAY 56.65 107.94 400 TOHLt S/MOPO.ETCOARKO 36;1.07 400 c .k:AwrwR 8 iUP/!SHOP 10?. 'o, �)411.6D .90404 MYLEAGE PAP,N,F. 16.01 E%RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM l/� 11/02/95 15:09:41 �% WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39445 11/03/95 TRUEMAN-WELTERS. INC 39446 11/03/95 WALLEN/MARK 39447 11/03/95 WRIGHT COUNTY SURVEY 39448 11/03/95 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP GENERAL CHECKING R Oisburement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 207 BUSHING%PIN/ROD/STREE 266.99 79S TRAVEL EXPENSE/SEMINA 291.60 632 2 AERIAL MAP/PW INSPEC 16.00 512 UTILITIES 8.00 TOTAL 9,920.52 8RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM f' 11/09/95 t2:132:37 Disbursement Journal WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT GENERAL CHECKING 39449 11/08/95 OFFICMAX .90417 PAPER/DOWNTOWN SURVEY 95,74 39450 11/08/95 'WRIGHT COUNTY RECORD 254 EASEMENTS/SOUTHWEST U 111.00 39451 11/0.8/85 MN NAHRO 581 REG FEE/.OLLIE K 95:00 39452 11/09/95 AME GROUP 8 HOCKEY,RINR/PARKS 433.81 39453 11/09/95 BARTON $ANO & GRAVEL 305 CORRECT CODING 100.QOCR 39453 11/09/-95 BARTON SAND & GRAVEL 305 CORRECT CODING/PARKS 100.00 39453 11/08/95 BARTON SAND & GRAVEL 305 GRAVEL/NEW PW SHOP BL 449.80 449.80 39454 11/09/95 COPY DUPLCATING PROD 41 COPY MGN MTC/LIBRARY 60.80 39455 11/09/95 0 & K REFUSE RECYCLI 611 RECYCLING CONTRACT./ 3,313.30 39456 11/09/95 FEEDRITE CONTROLS, I 56 MISC,PROF SERVICES/WA 108.00 39457 11/09/95 FYLE. BRAD 62 MAYOR CONFERENCE FEE 155.55 39451 11/09/95 FYLE. BRAD 62 WWTP TOUR EXPENSE REIM 45.84 39451 11/09/95 FYLE. BRAD 62 TELEPHONE REIMS 8!1.38 281.74 39458 11/08/85 GARTNER'S OFFICE PRO 377 POSTAGE/FIRE DEPT 27.13 39458 11/09/95 GARTNER'S OFFICE PRO 377 OFFICE SUPPLIES_/LIBRAR 17.43 44.56 39459 11/09/95 GRANITE ELECTRONICS 973 PAGER REPAIRS/FIRE DE 369.01 39460 11/09/95 L "N" R SERVICES - L 103 REPAIR LOCKS/PARKS 96.00 39461 11/09/85 MAUS FOODS 108 SUPPLIES/CITY HALL 103.65 30461 11/00/95 MAUS FOODS 109 OUPPLIES/SHOP & GAR 13.19 39461 11/09/95 MAUS FOODS 100 CLEANING GUPPLIES/LIBRY 9.74 126.57 30467 11/09/95 MIDWEST ANALYTICAL S 025 TESTING/FIRE DEPT 157.00 39463 11/09/88 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIF.O 01.71 :19463 11/00/95 AINNEGASCO 712 UTILITIES 01.63 39403 11/09/96 MINNF.GASCO 712 UTILITIIS 20.94 39463 11/09/05 MINNEGASCO 77? UTILITIES 26.54 39463 11/09/95 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIF3 22.67 3f1463 11/00/95 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIES 116.53 / 39463 11/09/98 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIES 695.00 30463 11/00/95 MINNEGArCO 772 UTIwITIE£ 25.25 1.009.05 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM x-11/09/95 '12:32:37 (WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39464 11/09/95 MN RECREATION & PARK 39465 11/0919.5 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09/,95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 14/09/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11109/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39465 11/09195 NORTHERN STATES POWE 39466 11/09/95 O''NEILL/JEFF 39467 11/09/95 PETERSEN'S MONT FORD 39468 11/09/95 PHOTO I 3.9468 11/09/95 PHOTO I 39468 11/69/95 PHOTO I 39489 11/09/95 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA 39469 11/09/95 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA 39469 11/08/95 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA 39470 11/09/95 WRIGHT'HENNEPIN 9ECU 39470 11/09/95 WRIGHT HENNE.PIN 9ECU GENERAL CHECKING a D'isburseme'nt Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 618 SUBSCRIPTION/PARKS 30.00 146 UTILITIES 2,608.28 148 UTILITIES 300.97 148 UTILITIES 4.778..28 148 UTILITIES 81'2..09 148 UTILITIES 14,.14 148 UTILITIES 511.22 148 UTILITIES 212.91 148 UTILITIES 400.71 148 UTILITIES 733.28 148 UTILITIES 88.53 10,438.39 161 MILEAGE REIMS 48.90 165 STREET VEHICLE REPAIRS 48.45 743 SUPPLIES/PW INSPEC 44.71 743 SUPPLIES/WWTP EXPAN 65.13 743 SUPPLIES/PLAN & 20N 15.82 125.66 524 GARBAGE CONTRACT/OC 8,208.67 524 SALES TAX/GARBAGE 597.25 524 LEAF PICKUP CHARGES 860.00 10,,765.92 675 ALARM 9YST MTC/DEP REG 19.12 875 ALARM SYS MTC/PARKS 16.98 35.10 TOTAL 28,252.70 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/15/95 13:50:13 ,ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39471 11/14/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 3947,2 11/1'5'/95 ANDERSON & ASSOCIATE 39473 11/15/95 AUTOMATIC GARAGE 000 39474 11/16/95 BIG LAKE LUMBER 39475 11/15%95 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPO 39475 11/15%95 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPO 39475 11/15/95 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPO 19475 11/1'5/95 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPO 39475 11/15/95 BRAUN INTERTEO CORPO 39476 11/15/95 BUCHEN ENVIRONMENTAL 39477 11/15/95 BUSINESS RECOROS COR 59477 11/15/95 BUSINESS RECORDS COR 19470 11/15/95 CENTRAL MCGOWAN. INC 30479 11/15/99 CLARK FOOD SERVICE. 39480 11/15/95 COMMUNICATION AUDIT& 39401 11/15/95 COMPUTER PARTS & SHR :,9401 11/15/95 COMPUTER .PARTS 8 SER 99402 11/19/95 CULLIGAtJ 39403 11/15/95 UEHMER FIRE PROTECTI. 19404 11./15/98 DYNA SV -,-,TEM!) j0405 11/15/95 EARL 'S WELDING A INO 39400 11/1'i/95 ENNIS CABINETS/JIM 99401 11/15/95 FOREST CITY ROAD LAN )9400 11/15/96 FRONTI.INL PLUS FIRE 19409 11/15/05 FYtES CKC'AVATING 9 H >. 39490 11/15/95 6 & K SLRVIt:C`; 90 44�it)/00 G 0 tt f,fkvIi_E, lOb 10 tt/1! /Oi t. A if-�F.RVICFS Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1^18 WATER/ATV/SNOW REG 1,210.00 10 SIGNS/STREET DEPT 3,203•,89 260 GARAGE DOOR REPAIRS/S 788.18 316 NEW HOCKEY RINK/PAR 4,8,97.,81 638 ENG FEES/SCHOOL BLV 1,578.50 1339 ENG FEES/CARDINAL H 2,274.25 638 ENG FEES/PATHGAY PROJ 513.50 638 ENG FEES/KLEIN FARMS 223:00 630 ENG FEES/M OAK STRM S 153.50 4,742.75 937 SUMP PUMP INSPECT FEE 400.00 27 UTILITY BILL FORMS/WA 584.06 27 UTILITY BILL FORMS/SE 584.09 1,169.77 W 30 SHOP SUPPLIES 65.15 897 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 102.00 38 NEW RADIO/FIRE DEPT 1,418.09 500 CREDIT/MTC AGRkEMt;NT 58.50C!d $00 COMPUTER REPAIRS 10b.00 107.40 u 753 RENTAL, WATER OOFTNER C. 23.11 674 MTC OF EQUIP/FIRE DEPT 73.75 50 NUTS 0 BOLT3/0140P & G 3'39.15 741 CHAIN & HOOK/:STREET& 103.71 54 NEW CAOYNLT/LIARAQY 171.00 509 DEMO REMOVAL/PAP95 04.00 510 PANTS A1.TF.REO/FIRP: 01:P 55.60 700 EXCAVATION/PARK&'/IMPR 30J.i5 0'31 9NIF012M RF,NTAI (40.:)9 051 VNIFORM RENTAL I0.00 051 UNTVORM ;t;'NTAI 10. )1 PRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 1/ 15/95 13:50:13 AkRANT DATE VENDOR GCNERAL CHECKING 394'90 11/15/95 G & K SERVICES 39490 11/15/95 G & K SERVICES $9490 11/15/95 G & K SERVICES 39480 11/15/95 G & K SERVICE'S 39490 11/15/95 G & K SERVICES 39491 11/15/95 GLASS HUT/THE Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 854 UNIFORM RENTAL 30.35 9S1 UNIFORM RENTAL 169.49 851 UNIFORM RENTAL 169.48 851 RAG/'SHOP & GAR 36.00 851 MTC OF BLD/RUGS/DEP RE 29..84 614.84 66 GLASS/MTC OF BLO/PARK 112:00 39492 11/15/95 GREAT RIVER REGIONAL 508 VIDEO RECORDER/LIBRAR 292.62 39493 11/15/95 HARRY''$ AUTO SUPPLY 39493 11/15/95 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 39493 11'/15/95 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 39493 11/15/95 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 39494 11/13/95 NOR ENGINEERING, INC 10495 11/15/95 HENRY & ASSOCIATES 39496 11/10/95 HERMES/JERRY 39497 11/15/95 HOGLUND COACH LINES 39498 11/18/03 INFOR MED 394c)9 11/1.5/05 J M OIL COMPANY 39409 11/18/95 J M OIL COMPANY 78 VEH REPAIR PARTS/PARKS 14.25 78 EQUIP REPAIR DARTS/STRT 1.04 78 VEH REPAIR PARTS/STREE 29.50 78 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/FIR 12.69 %6.40 944 ENG FEES/NEW WWTP E 9,000.00 545 METER VALVES/WATER 1,171.40 81 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.30 403 HEARTLAND EXPRESS C 5.,331.DO 885 FIELD GUIDE/FIRE DEPT 17.510 95 GAO/FIRE DEPT 4G.32 95 OIL/FIRE DEPT 17.10 82.4P. c 391)00 11/15/93 KFN ANDERSON TRUCKIN 697 'ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICF. 95.06 )f1501 11/15/95 KRAMDER 8 AOf.00I'ATES 1980^ I1/i5/9S LAR50N10 A1;F HARDWAR ,)9bO? 1I/16/73 LAR`"ON's ACC HARDWAR 79509 11/15/99 LARSON', ACE HARDWAR 01150 11/15/95 LARSON'fi ACC HARDWAR 30%02 11/1b/05 LAROON'O ACE HARDWAR 0401 11/16/115 LAR5ON'S ACF. HARDWAR 1156? 1I/i(j/OG LARCON113 Ai:F. HARDWAR 2f)60? 11/15/95 (ARSON -r ACE HARDWAR 1901 1 1/ 15/.1'3 LAR;DN''J ASF HARDWAR �t7? 11/15/95 1 AN' -UN' i• A',L HALhHAR J 1:10? 11/15/0') 1.AN';0N11; A(A' HARDWAR (� :950? 11/15/05 LARSON' O A'_E HAI;DWAR 1105/05 15/03 1 A!V;0N' 1 ACE HARDWAN LAR�ON'C• A(, HAkUWAR I.AR';DN' , A._I' HAPOWAN 000 A6SESU3'NG CONTRACT 1,941.22 874 MM '1UPPLIF.S/PWORK'3 14,.36 076 MISC SUPPLIES/DEP REG 4.76 874 MAILF)OXGJ/F.ASTWOCO KN 223.33 074 TADLE REPAIR/CITY HALL 12.7G 074 CNOW SHOVEL./SNOW 0 ICE 25.02 076 VEH REPAIR PARTS/STRFET 2.05 074 WQCW/MTC 01; CHOP OLD 0.63 074 MIOC SUPPIIF5/WATEtr DE ?6.05 014 COFFPI' POT/FIRE PF.PT 39.5') 074 F1U10 11GHTER/FIRE MPT ?.64 074 JAW/SHOP 0 6ARA6F ?1.01 U74 MIGC `UF'PLIE5/GTREET 104. Ob 074 YRCG VPM1JFW/PAR93 63.07 074 MIGC 5UPP1II5/PARK& 4!,.07 074 MIt;C 41PI.I1:i/MO TQ9 it 1.) 2 SkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/15/95 13.:' 66: 1' 3' ARRANT OATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39503 11/15/95 LASER SHARP, INC. 395.04 11/15/95 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE 39605 11/15/95 M & P TRANSPORT, INC 38506 11./15/95 MARCO BUSINESS PROOU 39500 11/ts/95 MARCO BUSINESS PRODO 39507 11/15/95 METRO SIGN SERVICE 39508 01/1,5/95 MIDWEST ANALYTICAL S 39500 T1/15/95 MILEY'S SPRINKLER SY 38509 11/15/95 MILEY'S SPRINKLER SY 38510 11/13/'95 MN DEPAk-T OF TRANSPO '30511 11/15/05 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO D0911 11/15/85 14ONTICELLO ANIMAL CO D0512 11/15/90 MONTICELLO FIRE DEPA 30512 1,1/ WOO MONTICELLO FIRE DEPA 99512 11/15/95 MONTICELLO FIRE DEPA 3061?. 11/18/95 MONTICELLO FIRE OEPA 90513 11/15/95 MONTICELLO FIRE DEPA 30512 11/15/05 MONTICELLO FIRE OePA D0512 14/15/05 MONTICELLO FIRE DEPA DOFi13 11/15/8_5MONTICELLO OFPICE Pk 3,'1513 1'1/'15/A5 MONTICELLO QVI, ICE PR 90118 11/15/05 KOOTICELLU OFFICE PR .1577 11/15/135 MONT-ErELLO OFFICE PR 5OSID 11/1D/9v M0YTICEILG OFFICE PR 3.35 V) 1 1/ 15/0 MONTICELI 0 OFFICE PR 30',14 11/1MONTICCI.LQ PRINTING 10`)14 11/15/09 14ANTI(;CtLU PRINTl'NG-- 31)514 11/i5/91..j MONTXeLLI.0 VRLNTING DisburseMent Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 593.73 93.8 TONER ,CASS.ETTE/CITY HA 7'4.50 709 SNOW & IEE/SANDER SUP 78.88 265 CLASS V/STREET DEPT 605.53 106 TONER/'PWORKS COPY MCN 106.50 106 COPY MCH REPAIRS/P WO 137.110 244.10 983 SIGNS/EASTWOOD KNOLL 80.00 925 TQSTINQ•/F IRE .DEPT 124.00 9'30 SPRINKLER REPAIRS/PAR 220.34 930 INSTALL SPRINKLERS/FA 250..00 478.34 530 ENG FEES/OCHOOL BLVD 142.10 109 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1000.00 185 MISC OUPPLIFS/ANIMAL 23.2.7 1.123.27 135 POSTAGE/F;RE DEPT 3,x.00 135 MTC OF EQUIP/PARADE T 200.00 135 TRAINING LfUPPLiES/FIRE 30.00 138 OP[tN H.000E EXPENGE/i:I 4.70.51 135 CONFERENCE EXPEN.OE/FIR 79.90 1-30 SMOKE EATER/FIRE DEPT 120.00 136 MIOC OUPPLIEO/FERE DEPT "4.7.8 3,64.20 136 OFFICE SUPPLIES/LIBRAR 60.43 136 OFFIG$ OUPPLIE3/.PWORK9 q3.22 1'00 OFFICE OIJPPLIEO/FIRE D 20.10 139 OFFICE ;UPPLIkS/OOP RE 23.30 136 OFFICE OUPPLIEO/CITY H 93.26 130 COPY MACHINE PAPER/C H IV),.00 ?06.00 137 PRINTC.0 FOQM�/G.?RF BE 175.00 1D7 OEWFR ifl�-PTCYION FORM 109.04 197 1,11TYH01CA0 IMPRINT/C !30.75 4 15. 60 t M • 4 4 d'RC FINANCIAL 'SYSTEM rr31/15/95 13:50:13 �CWARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKI103 39515 11/'15/-95 MONTICELLO TIMES 395-15 1 U/ t,Q,95 MONTICEiLLO TIMES 39515 11/15/95 MONTICELLQ TIMES 39515 11/15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 39515 11/ 15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 39515 11/15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 39515 11/16195 MONTICELLO TIMES 3'9514 11/15/95 MONTTICELLO TIMES 30515 11/15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 39515 11/15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 395t5 11/15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 39515 11/15/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 39518 11/16/95 MONTICELLO-DIG LAKE Otsb'ursement Jourhal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 140 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 1.,580.43 140 B'LO PERMIT INFO 64.00 14,0 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES 72,.;82 140 TIMES ISSUE BOUNO/'418 198.60 146 WATER FLUSHING INFO 58.80 14.0 OPEN HOUSE INFO/FTRE 472.95 140 LEAF PICKUP INFO 63.00 1'40 LEGAL NOTICE/WWTP EXPA 11.07 140 LEGAL NOTICE/MAPLEWD C 77.14 140 LEAGL NOITCE/M O TRK S 2.2.14 140 LEAGL NOTICE/SOUTHWEST 22.14 140 LEGAL NOT/SIXTH ST ANN 63.36 2,669.14 403 RESPONOER CLASS/FIRE 315.00 39517 11/15/95 MOON MOTOR SALES. IN 142 VEH REPAIR PARTS/PARKS 11.34 30518 11/1.S/95 NATIONAL SU'SHING PAR 39518 11/15/95 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 38518 11/t5/95 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR (;93518 11/15/95 NATIONAL. EiUSHIWG PAR 39u18 11/15/95 NATIONAL Oy0HIN0 PAR 913510 11/15/95 NATIONAL BUFHING PAR c 39519 11/15/95 NORMAN JOHN60N 385aO 11/15/9S NORTHWUST ASSOC CONS 98420 11/15/96, NORTHWEST AOCOC CONE 3U6 0 11/18/9,5 NORTHWEST ASSOC CONS 3DS30 11/15/95 NORTHWEt;T A£SOC CONS '301410 11/0/35 NORTKWe6T ASSOC CONO 39521 11/15/95 OLSON @ SONS EL'ECTRI L0521 11/15/'95 GLGON E4 &ONS ELECTRI 144 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/STR 25.88 144 UTILITY MTC SUP/WATER 14.27 144 VEH REPAIR MAjLI7l:0e*tH 99.20 144 SWIVEL ADAPTER/SHOP 2.31 144 VEH RGPAIR. PAR"V PARKS 1°7.52 1,44 EQUTP REPAIR PARTS/SNO 85.80 254.79 ,80418 MTC OF EQUIP/,EIRE DEP 11.7.44 980 FECS/KLEIN FM PSTATE3 300+10 550 FEED/COMPREHENSIVE 2,202.60 650 FE419/JOHN 1,EER3'JF,N PRO 49.60 550 FEE'C/PRAIRTE WEST PRO 273.50 SGO MISC FEE3/MYGO 9 VI 1.EQ9.,48 4,500.27 100 MTC SUPPLIES/F•INC DEPT G,J'1 100 NEW HOCKEY RINK/PAR 5,274.2,0 4.2CO.GS 13052? 11/15/95 ONE CALL rONC'FPTG. I OOG GOPHER `:TATE C'ALL.G/WA 764.00 39323 11/1-4195 ORR- 9CH1'-L CN =MAYI N(eN `1O5P0 11/15/05 ORR 5fHELFPN MAYERON )93:2D 11/ 19/00 ORR 9CHPA PN MAYCIOIN 9 29 11/15/05 Okn-rCHELFW-MAYFRON JO`)29 11/15/95 l W14 I:rHPI,FN MAY1'R43N 09523 11/15/95 TIRE (�CHELFN-MAYEEION 395`?3 11/15/95 JRR 9CHELLN MAY11RON 30:?3 11/15/05 ORP-GCHELEN•MAYERON 38!�) 3 11/15/n5 OUR ;I'.i91:1 ('N MAYkWON 182 COUNCIL M•TG CItX1 61.0 704.30 102 PRAIRIE WEIST REPLAT F 12.00 IWA VI:P,TOR T001, FN%i FL:.'S 130,30 107 ENG FEES/SCHOOL Pt 15.115.91 162 LNG FEEWCA(ZOINAL 14.910.05 102 ENG EF.EC,/WWYP FAPAN 1.010.00 102 `.,NO FEES/M 0 TRUNK 1,201.3') 1G2 fNG FEES/KLEIN FARM 1,06?.00 102 CHO FEED/PATHWAY PROI 309.00 x a a, RRC FINANCIAL $VSTEM ��13 1/15/95 150:_13 l3ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39523 11/15/95 ORR-SCHEL,EN=MAVERON 38513 11./15/95 CRR-SCH'ELEN-MAYE.RON 39523, 11/'15/95 ORR=SCHELEN-MA.YERON 39523 11/15%85 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERGN 39523 11'/15/95 ORR-SCHELEN'-MAYERQN 3A543 11/15'/95 00-'SCHELEM-00gRON 38523 11/15/95 ORR.-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39523 11/15/'9.5 GRR-SCHELEN-MAYE,RON 3952'3 11/15/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39523 11/1,5/$5 ORR-6CHELEN-MAYERON Citsbur-cement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 162 ENG FEES/MISS SHORES SOT.30 162 ENO FEES/RIVER MILL 1,630.03 162 ENG FEES/KLEIN ESTATE 2F30'.63 162 FEES/MONT COMM CENTR 1,29.38 162 FEES/MEADOW OAR 4'TH 1,048..25 162 ENG FEE$/GLORLUS CHUB 287.00 162 ENG FEE Sr/LIBERTY SAVIN 46.13 162 FEES/HART BLVD EXTENS 282..36 1,62 fEE3/CEDAR 57/HWY 2 4,343.63 1.62 FEES/FNEEWAY/CR 118 3,672.57 48,5'0'1.18 39524 11/15/95 PLUMSERY'-PURCE'LL'8 P 251 PLUMBING MATERIALS/SHO 18.09 39525 11/15/95 PREOSEE'S CLEANING S 39,525 11/15/9E+ PREUSSE'S CLEANING S 39536 11/15/95 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE J8L�2/ 1.1/16/85 PROFE53IONAL TURF & /19528 11/1',S/90 PUO'LIC RESOURCE GROU 99528 11/15/95 SCHARBER & SONS. INC 30328 11/16/95 SCHARBER & SONS,. INC 173 FIRE HALL CLEANING CON 50.00 173 CITY HALL CLEANING CO 400.00 4&0.00 175 WWT.P MONTHLY CONTR 3,6,800.28 682 GRASS/SOFTBL-S"CER 4,000.00 26 MISC PROF SERVICES/NRA 07:00 220 VEH REPAIR PARTS/PARK'S 13.84 229 EQUIP PARTS/SNOW & IG 244.01 20'7.01 995JO 11/1.5/99 SENGIOLE LAND'U8E CO 893 MEMBERSHIP OURS/PLAN- 123.00 9n591 11/15/95 T09 TELECOM 39531 11/1.5/08 TOS TELECOM J?531 11/19/95 TOS TELECOM 93631 11/'15/05 T60 TELECOM D9591 11/16/05 T09 TELECOM 99531 I1/18j36 TOB TELECOM JOD91 11'/15/05 TOS TELECOM 39931 11/19/9$ TD.i ULECOM J'0!)AI 11/t0/95 TOG TELECOM 9"1631 11/15/96 TWI TELECOM 90&91 11/19/95 TOQ TELECOM 39531 11/10/03 T0Q TI,LFiCOAa JOIE 11/1G/*Jy YHF. f 31'I,fl COMPANY 30>H3 11/16/06 UNITED IAF16RAI0RIEf, 053 TELEPHONE CHARGES 400.71 8S3 TELEPHONE CHAR(EO 78,15 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 15?.,09 053 TELEPHONE CH ARG t13 138.70 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 50.00 951 TFLEPHONR CHARGES 61.75 053 TELEPHONE CHARGE'S 62.0? 953 TELEP4014,7 CHARGES 103.01 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 54.06 953 TELEPHONE CHARGES 01.?'l 993 TELEPHONE CHARGES 569.60 01.33 TL'LEPHONE CHAROP'1 120.1>4 1,631.34 904 CARL50-N APPRAI7AL GEC 21v10.00 634 CLEANING SUP/PARKS 100.00 BRC FINANCTAI SYSTEM �1 1/ 16/85 1 3 :50.:1 3 ARkANT GATE VENDOR GENERAL CHEOKING 39534 11/15/95 WOLKERSTORFE'R CO INC 35535 11/15/95 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 39535 11/15/85 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO 39535 11/15/95 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 39536 11/15/95 WRIGHT COUNTY DEPT 0 39537 11/15/95 WRIGHT COUNTY SURVEY 3,8538 11/15/95 Y.M.C.A. OF MINNEAPO GENERAL CHECKING M Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 866 SANOCR PARTSjSNOW R 1,124.00 219 SHERIFF'S CONTRACT 24,469.33 218 ADD -L LANDFILL CHAR 8,024.80 219 CREDIT/OVERCH IN AU 1,179.20CR 31,314.99 275 CULVERT 80S/M OAK STM 27.9H 632 DEWER PRINTS $6.00 224 MONTHLY CONTRACT PVMT 625.00 TOTAL 491,791.48 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 1/0'1195 16:37:58 Ofsbursement Journal 1 rxRRANT DATE VEOOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL LIQUOR CHECKING 18398 1'0/31/95"QUALITY WINE R SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHA'S 1.728.09 18399 10%31/9,5 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA SD0022 LIQUOR PURCHAS 3.578.46 1.6399 10/31%95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 1,088.47 40, 666. 93 u t 184 DO 1'.0/31/85 MCDOWA'LL COMPANY 8000,85 FURNACE REPAIR 171.89 18401 10/31/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 860022 WINE PURCHASE 1,421.07 18402 10/91/95 EAGLE VINE COMPAN-Y 800012 WINE PURCHASE 401.15 19402 10/31/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 MIK FOR RESALE 25-.49 428-.64 tcC 18403 10/31/95 GRIGGS, COOPER & COM 000D19 LIQUOR PURCHASE 8,034,85 10404 tO/34/95 MIDWEST EXPO 95 8001-01 REG FEE/MIDWEST EXPO 9 54-40 18405 10/31/95 U S'WEST COMMUNICATI 800093 ADVERTISING 27.50 10406 10/31/SS JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA. 00002.2 'LIQUOR PURCHASE 64,16 0406 10/31/95 JOHNSON OROS WHOLESA S00022 WINE PURCHASE. 1,885.79 1,950.95 •Ch 18407 10/31/05 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 000100 WINE PURCHASE 68.45 -10407 16/31/95 PHIL_LIFS WINE & SPIR 800190 LIQUOR PURCHASE 533.32 601.77 4Ct 1.0405 10/31/95 JOHNSON BROtt WHOLESA 000022 LLQUOR PURCHASE 219.80 19408 10/31/96 JOHNSON, BROS WHOLESA 800022 WING' PURCHASE 310,01 S37.51 Oct 10409 1;0/31/94 PHILLIPS WINK 0 SPIR 00018.0 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2(32.,42 10410 }0/31/85 EAGLE WINE C.0?PAN,Y 000012 WIVE PURCHASE 579.20 10410 10.%31196 EAGI;E WING COMPANY 006012 MIX FOR RESA6E 28.49 004.69 4C 11n11 10/31,/95 GRIGOS, CODPER a COM 000010 LIQUIOR PURCRAGE a.i00.J0 J0412 10131105 EAGLE Wlt4 COMPANY 000012 WINE PURCHASE 046.46 1041,1 10/01/95 GRIGGO. COUPCR 0 CUM 000010 LI©UUP PURCHAOE 0.008.17 10414 1,0/,11/95 GRO+ELLIN FEVERASF I, 600019 BEER PURCHASE 0.403.05 1415 10/31/91-) GAGLE WINI COMPANY 000013 WINE PURCHASC 406.00 10/01 /9!) EAGLE WINE CCiMPANY 000012 OLF9 PURCHAnE. 2'1 .40 5UO.OJ h RRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 1001,/95 18:37':89 Disbursement Jour.n.al ARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Cl LIQUOR CHECKING 784.16 1'0/81/-95 GRIGGS: COOPER & COM 80001,8 LIQUOR PURCHASE I.$02.23 18417 10/31/95 TDB TELECOM GOOT96 TELEPHONE CHARGES 234.28 1.8417 10/31/95 TDS TELECOM 8001.96. ADVER'TISING 61 ,,20 295.48 *Cl 18418 10/31/85 DISCOUNT PAPER PRODU 800177 'PAPER 101.99 18418 0/3 1/05 DISCOUNT PAPER PRODU 800,177 OFFICE SUPPLIES/RIBBON 95.98 197.97 wet 18419 10/31/95 .MCbOWALL.COMPANY 800085 FURNACE REPAIRS 183.70 19420 10/81/95 VIDEO PROTECTION SER 800189 TAPES 59.49 18421 10/31/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800180 LIQUOR PURCHASE 506.00 18421 10/31/95 PHILLIPS MINE 4 9PIR 800180 WINE PURCHASE 1,006.65 1.,512.,74 *Ct 10422 10/31/9,5 JOHNSON OROS WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1117.2.88 18422 10/3 1,/98 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WIVE 'PURCHASE 2,416.60 31588.76 *Ct 10.13 0423 10/31/95 CITY OF MONTICELLO 000.003 SEWER WATER BILL 18474 10/31/05 CI?V OF MONTICELLO 800003 CIGARETTE LICENSE 25.00 18425 10/31/05 QUALITY WINE 9 SPIRT 8170040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1.0 1.52 104,,^8 10/31/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLE,SA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 6,020.17 10426 10/31/85 JOHN96N BROS WHO 4EGA 000022 WINE PUROHASF 2.081.2Q 0,001.45 *0 10427 10/31/88 TRAVELERS OIRFCTORV 800007 AOVavr19ING 1913,.00 11)420 10/81/95 GRIGQG'. COOPER A COM 00001.0 LIQUOR PURCHASE G.050.4Ei 10429 '10/31/96 LAGLP. WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PORCHA413 990.20 10420 10/91/05 EAGLE WINO COMPANY 000012 'MINES FOR REIIALE 201.0 0 11200.10 *(- rLIQUOR LIQUORCHUCKING TOTAL 601120.60 C, BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/06/95 12:441.39 Disbursement Journal ARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL LIQUOR CHECKING 18430 11/06/95 BELLBOY CORPORATION 600.098 NUTS FOR RESALE 36.00 18430 11/06/95 BELLBOY CORPORATION 800098 MI'SC ITEMS FOR RESALE 242..06 278.06 *CF 18431 11./06/95 BERNICK'S PEPSI COLA 800001 POP PURCHASE 163.55 18432 11/06/95 CONSOLIDATED COMM DI 800163 ADVERTISING 40.25 18433 11/08/95 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 800009 BEER PURCHASE 16,711.65 18433 11/06/95 UAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 800009 NON ALCOHOLIC BEER 323.40 17,035.05 *Cl 18434 11/06/95 DAY DISTRIBUTING COM 800010 NON ALCOHOLIC BEER 3.8.40 18434 11/08/95 DAY DISTRIBUTING COM 800010 BEER PURCHASE 268.20 304.60 *CI 18435 1.1/06/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO., 800011 BEER PURCHASE 2,462.40 18435 11/06/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 20.00 16435 11/06/0 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 SUPPLIES/BAGS 382.04 2,864.44 *C 18436 11/06/85 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 2,083.91 .0436 11/06/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 900012 MIX FOR RESALE 175.09 2,.259.00 *C 18437 11/09/95 6 & K SERVICE 600128 MTC OF BLD/RUG MATS 188.94 18436 11/06/95 GETTMAN COMPANY 800187 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 24.00 18438 11/08/95 GRIGGS. COOPER & COM 900018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 4,147..65 10440 11/05/98 GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE 18000tS BEER PURCHASE 8.008.90 16441 11/06/05 HOME JUICE 900136 JUICE FOR RESALE 33.80 18442 11/06/05 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800021 LIQUOR CREOIT/RETURN 688.24 18443 11/06/95 JUDE CANDY & TOBACCO 800021 CIGS A CIGARS/RESALE 80.14 10443 11/06/96 JUDE CANDY 8 TOBACCO 800021 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 67,88 147.92 *C 10444 11/08/65 L "N" R SERVICES 800020 MTC OF OLO/LOCK REPAIR 30.00 10445 11/06/95 LEHMANN FARMS 800190 MIX FOR REGALE 47.00 10445 11/06/95 LEHMANN FARMS 800190 FOOD ITEMS FOR REGALE 989.76 430.70 *C 0440 11/06/95 MINNEGAOCO 600160 UTILITIES 01.69 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/06/95 12:44:39 Disbursement Journal �(( `1.A'RRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL LIQUOR CHECKING 18447 11/06/95 MONTICELLO TIMES 800032 ADVERTISING 79.00 18448 11/06/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 800035 UTILITIES 933.24 18449 11/06/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800180 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2:473.50 18449 11/06/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800160 WINE PURCHASE 1,690.76 4064.26 164.26 •CF 18450 11/06/95 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 9,673.94 18450 11/06/95 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 600040 WINE PURCHASE 712.60 18450 17/06/95 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 MIX FOR RESALE 48.20 10,434.74 •CI 18451 11/06/95 RON'S ICE COMPANY 800041 ICE PURCHASE 308.62 19452 11/06/95 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 800048 NON ALCOHOLIC BEER 347.50 19452 11/06/95 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 800048 BEER PURCHASE 28.571.25 26,918.75 *C1 18463 11/08/95 TOTAL REGISTER SVSTE 800112 MTC AGRMT/COMPUTER 1,650.00 , '8454 11/06/95 U S LINK 800195 TELEPHONE CHARGES 24.58 16455 11/06/95 VIKING COCA-COLA BOT 600051 POP PURHCASE 783.15 LIQUOR CHECKING TOTAL 01,950.19 'BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 13051:57 Dtsbursomen_t Journal X11115/95 �AARRANT DATE VENDOR, DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C LI-000R CHECKING 18456 11/13/95 LIEFERT TRUCKING 800025 FREIGHT CHARGES 729..24 18457 11/13/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 8Q00.22 LIQLiOR PURCHASE 1,973.14 T9457 11113/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 1,328:17 3,30'1.,31 ►C 18458 11/13/85 PAUSTIS & SONS 800103 WINE PURCHASE 3'0.5.80 18459 11/13/95 PIPER J'AFFREY 800199 INVESTMENTS/PURCHA 11;541.07 16460 11/13/95 CITY OF MONTICELLO 800003 YNVESTMENTS 8,951«.66 10461 11/15195 EAGLE WINE .COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 396.18 10462 11/15/95 GRIGGS. COOPER & COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 15.009.27 10463 11/15%85 GROSSLEIN "VERAOE 1800019 BEER PURCHASE 6,102.75 iO4b4 11/15/85 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 FREIGHT CHARGES 22.50 10404 11/15/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 820.61 10404 it/1-'/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE ?105.50 L; 113'18.61 xC 10665 11/1$/95 MCD.OWALL COMPANY 800065 FUkNAtE REPAIR 11208.03 1040G 11/13/03 MN CROWN 013YRIDUTXN 800145 WING PURCHASE 220.00 1'0467 11/15/05 MN JAYCEES 800100 ADVERTISING ")$.00 10468 11/t5/95 PHILLIPG'WINE & SPIR 000100 LIQUOR PURCHASE 5,,312.1h 1000 1'1(15'/9.5 PHILLIP& WINE & £PIR 0061'80 WINE PURCHASE 009.,08 8,223.00 �C 104 GO 11/15/95 QUALTTY WINE 8 RPIRI 000040 WINE PURCHASE 8,64.58 10400 11/15/85 QUALIYY WINE 8 SPIRT 600640 LIQUOR PURCHASE 5.003.40 5,067,.90 1C 10470 11/15/95 TOS TGLCOOM 000196 AOVfRTISIN(3 61.20 10410 11/lh/O9 TOO TELECOM 000100 TELEPHONE CHARGES 100,.50 i41,70 x;- 104,11 11/ o/05 U G WELT COMMUNICATT 000009 ADVCRTIOING 27.50 I, [011)R LHECKINI, TOTAL 6I.L57.00 R COUNCIL UPDATE November 22,1995 W.O.) PLANNING COMIVIISSION The Planning Commission continues to work on the update to the comprehensive plan for the city. At the most recent meeting of the the Planning Commission, the Commission started their review of the first draft of the development framework portion of the comprehensive plan. It is anticipated that it will take at least one more meeting to adequately review this document. Subsequent to completion of the development framework, the Planning Commission will begin the process of identifying steps necessary to implement the comprehensive plan. After the preliminary work is complete, the Planning Commission will meet with the City Council to formally review the document. After City Council completes its review, it will be presented to the public for review and comment via the public hearing process. You are certainly welcome to review the development framework document at this preliminary stage of review. If you would like a copy of the document as developed to date, please let me know. As you know, our original plans were to have the comprehensive planning process completed by October or November of this year. It now appears that the process will be completed sometime in February or March. Given the tremendous level of construction and day-to-day planning activity experienced by the City in 1995, we are satisfied with the pace of completion of the comprehensive plan process to date. Approval in October would have required special meetings in the summer and late fail. Given the number of special meetings in the summer/fall relating to the wastewater treatment plant and other projects, it is doubtful that there would have been much energy left over to commit to the comprehensive plan process on top of everything else that was going last summer. The slight delay in completion of the plan has not created any problems and has actually resulted in better integration of comprehensive planning efforts with more specific planning relating to various prejects and systems, including wastewater treatment plant expansion, sanitary sewer system development, downtown redevelopment, Highway 25 transportation planning, and IM4-County Road 118 interchange planning. Finally, the prgject is within budget. PARKS COMIIIISSION The Parka Commission is focusing its efforts on developing a shade tree plan for the city. As you may recall, the City has budgeted $1,500 for tree planting. To help with development of the plan, the Commission has obtained the services of Joanne Spence, who is employed by the DNR to help cities develop shade tree programs. The first phase of the work involves taking a general inventory of the shade trees in the city. Tho results of this research will help guide development of a planting plan and COMMMUPD: 1U8M Pago 1 associated shade tree policies for the city. The plan will identify a phased program for tree planting in public rights -of- way and in parka. The budget for this planning effort is set at $2,200. Under the DNR program, the DNA will pay $1,800 toward the `t study, and the Parka Commission will pay the remainder. The Commission plans on drawing the $400 needed from the shade tree portion of their budget. Please let me know if you do not agree with the plan to spend $400 on shade tree planning efforts and the item will be placed on the Council agenda. OOMMMUPD: 1VZM Pago 2