City Council Agenda Packet 06-23-2003 Special
.
.
.
Mayor:
AGE DA
SPECIAL MEETING - MON ICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, .June 23, 003 - 5:30 p.m.
Bruce Thielen
Council Members: Roger Carlson, Glen Posus a, Robbie Smith and Brian Stumpf
1.
2.
..,
.J.
Call the special meeting to order. I
Review onowne Centre/Walnot Street p+jects
Adjourn.
Q () \ tft.I
~l \~ (
/ r ~~~'O
L~ \ l, \
/ ~)( t~() ~.s1~
/' . ~~ /~
/ S <1~ I
/
~t-
'~~3.. 03-
-P71; .5/;:?, 83-
-f~~~f(~
,
-- 'iAjVIMIA~~
o
('eA-Co<,r: (5)~ EflA~~I.J
elt Compan es "-
(763) 428-2242<\, J _. 4/
www.veitcompanies:.c~S
.
.
.
Special Mccting Agenda - 6/23/03
2.
Review of Towne Centre/Walnut Street P 0 'ccts. (R W)
A.
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Since I'm not exactly sure what the main pu osc of this special meeting with Mr. Veit is to cover, I
assumcd Mr. Vcit wanted to discuss with th Council some conccrns he may have regarding thc
Towne Centre developmcnt and thc Walnut 'treet project.
Rather than address each specific item he ha notcd in his letter, I am enclosing a copy of a memo I
sent to the Council February 12, 2003 along ith a lettcr from our Building OfTicial, Fred Patch, and
a summary I had presented to the Council re arding some of the issues raiscd by Mr. Vcil. You
may want to review these to refresh your me lory on some of the issues Mr. Veit may bring up at
the meeting.
Not knowing what else Mr. Veit may want t1 bring up or discuss with the Council, there is no other
information available from the staff. I
B. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Memo to Counci I
Comments from Building Official
Comments from City Administrator
Letter from Vaughn Veit
.
.
.
1-
.
Suhject:
Issue: I.
.
Issue !
Issue
.
Veit('o.
Towne Centre / Walnut St. Projects Letter, I.'ehruary 10, 20()j
I
I
I
-{1tP
E.\cessivclv high elevatioIls ofcon.ercte light stanJg).:~Lhascs and handicap ramps:
Tom I lerkenofwas the Civil Engineer f()r the Town Center project. f-Ie apparently
did n01 recognize the excessive el'vation diflcrences betv'ieen the Walnut Strect
ROWand the sidewalk in front of the shops along Walnut Street. lJpon reviewing
the building plans, and at time of iuilding footing inspection, I pointed out the
excessive elevation differences to Mr. I-lerkenoC. The explanation ofTered by Mr.
I-Ierkenof was that he had to meet the elevations at the north end (railroad) and at
the south end (6th Street) of the pnject. Wi1houtmeeting the existing elevations at
the end north and south ends of the project. the building floor and tenant spaces
\vould have to follow the grades althe street. Following the grades at the street
was not considered to be a reason 1ble option because it would effect the J1exibility
ofiloor plans for future tenants. Interior Ooors would step downward toward 5 1/2
Street.
As a result. of the diiTerence of el vation between the ROWand sidewalk. Veit had
to install guard railings and build tail'S into the sidewalk. The City hacllo redesign
planters and paver installations to reduce the elevation differences. Detai Is
entailed in making those changes should he bettcr explained by \VS13. On the east
side of the intersection of 5 12 Stret and \Valnut. 81] of the ramps \vere installed,
removed ill1d re-installed):o provi e for slopes not exceeding 1:9 at the curb and
1: 12 after the curb ramps as requi 'cd by ADA r am not aV-iare of any rernaining
ramp problems.
Hazardous \"aste & debris: No h' zardous waste other than that rem()\'ed by the
City's contractors ViaS observed on the Town Center Site. The City removed paint
that had been dumped in the nortl cast corner oCthe site near Higlwvay 25. Veit
removed mixed dark organic and 'norganie nil from the west/Walnut side of the
site for the north building. The s< me mixed fill v.,;as observed on the site of the
Communi ty Center. It \vas deem d by thc geotechnical engineer fell' the project as
allow8ble. The fill was compact d and contained less than 8% organic material.
V8u~hn Veit V-ias on the site at th' time the fill was excavated. He did no't like the
eolo~ and organic content. At his!option, Veit ordered the remov81 and replacement
of the fill. To the best of my knoivledge, no hazmdous \vaste was excavated or
removed by Veit.
.,
-, .
Absence or brick veneer on south side of Lie uor Store: Brick Veneer was ncver
considered for the south side of tl e Liquor Store. The Architect speci fied that the
south vval] was to be painted to m'1tch the color of the surrounding materials. The
Liquor Store renovation and addiion was designed by the samc architect as Towne
Centre. The south side is the mOl e uti I i tarian side of the Liquor Store. and just as in
the ensc of the north side of the n ))"th Towne Centre bui lding, brick vvns not
'f- i ~
speC! Ice.
I
/
/
1--1
MONTICELLO
IVUMO
FROM:
Mayo~' and Council \
n,)J
, 1\1' ]/" I] (,. . . \L{,
Rlc \. V\IO ',ste er, _lty AdminIstrator)
TO:
DATE:
RE:
February 12. 2003 I
V oit Letter - Towne Centre j>rOiCcl
I
Enclosed is (1 copy of a leuer that Vaughn Veit sen to the City addressed to the Mayor and Counci I
members.
.
Since Mr. Veitwas questioning a number of issues related to his Towne Centre dc\'el(Tll1Cnt. the liqu())'
store expansion project and the Walnut Street iJ1jl'r)\'cm~'nlS. I also thought it \\ould !w ;'icill'llcial f()r
Building OffIciaL Frecll\ltch cll1d myselflo respon~ltu SGl11C o1'[l:e concerns expressed :\11" Veil.
I
11' the Council needs any additional iniCmywtion rro 11 the slaW please ]et me know. I itl1,; Council \'vants me
to respond to Mr. Veil's concerns, I would be glad 0 do suo
^ ttachmenls:
Fe,bruar,'\,' J,O. .2003 Letter ii'om ValJL1'hn Veil
Stalf Response
I
I
.
,I
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite I, Monticello, MN 55362.8831 . (763) 295-2 II. Fax: (763) 295-4404
Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd.. MOl1ticell(, MN 55362 . (763) 295-3 I 70 ~ Fax: (763) 27] -3272
.
SlIBJECT:
Vl'it (\HllP:lI1Y'.'I'owne Ccnlre/W,dm I Street Projects [,l:llel' - !-'i,-'hrUilr) 10.200.1
~
It'~HI f}t 1 I, i g,bJnnl c III (1 U!l t i.!lJ.~ h as c fJ~xnti. Q!!"
Decorative strcct lights wcrl' installed along Walnu Slrcct hy Xccll~nergy and (heir subcontractors, The
City did not design nor prepilrl: any specific plans I' 'garding the street lights other lhan to indicate the
location where they \,'iolild be placed. According t( Xccll':nergy. light pole bases were insl<dlcd anticipating
a certain elevation around the linished sidewalk an lor pavers. [n some cases the concrete mounting pad
itlr sOl11e of the light fixtures extcnd above the side :valk or paver areas. vvhich is what Mr. Vcit is concerned
about. Since this was not a city project Vie have Isked Xcel Energy representatives to contact Mr. Veit
to discuss his conccrns with dCc(lrative light poles hat arc on his side or the Walnut Street Project (Towne
Centre). The City has not required Xccl Energy (0 make any modifications to the decorative light poles
adjacent to other prc)perties. including the commun ty center or anyvvhere else along Walnut Street.
The reference made to Mr. Veit paying an extra $1 00 relates to his request to have our city engineer look
at designing a cross\,valk across Walnut Street that vould have been elevated above the pavement. Mr.
Veit apparently felt that the payment of the engine ring Cees for studying that design vvould guarantee him an
elevated cross\valk that he was looking for, but ourlengineeL after further review. f()lmd that an elevated
crossv/a.lk. \V01ll(.1 c..'a.use additional problen.1s \.v. ith <"~Jrainage. to 1.:1eet. ex.isting catch ba,si~1 locations.. The result
was that the cross\,valk pavers Viere put at grade \V11h the eXlstll1g street and Mr. Velt IS now upset that he
. paid an extra $151...10 lO..h..ave his request studied. I'
Issue #2 LIquor Store south wall. I
The development agreement did indicate :hat the ejit)' v..oule! attempl to remodel unci expand the liquor store
\vilh compatible architecture to the Towne Centre IprojecL The design thm had been submitted and
approved by the ('ity Council throughout the entir9 process is very compatible with the Towne Centre
architecture, Brick veneer on the south side ofth9 existing liquor was never intended to be applied as the
architect and the City had always planned on simply painting the precast \valls to malch the color oflhe
brick used on the liquor store and Towne Centre plOjects,
Issue #3 Landscaping.
.
The development agreement ttll' the Towne Centre project never indicaleclthat any landscaping changes
would be made to the liquor store property along 1- ighway 25. Mr. Veil is apparently concerned that some
of our landscaping that existed for years may be bl leking the view of the ne\v Towne Cl~ntre sign that \vas
placed on the liquor store property. [fthe Counci wallis 10 redo landscaping along this corridor or would
lik.e to have son.1e of the shrub.s and trees cut dov'ml" that is your choice. but it was not part of the
development agreement that ['m aware of.
i
The City does bave some lanclscaping left to comt Jete on the north side of the liquor store expansion area.
\vhich is on the Pmks Departlnent schedule to con plete this spring. A delay occurred last li'1I1 in getting this
landscaping completed clue to the fact that the TO\'ne Centre contractor had rel110ved sOl11e or our electrical
,
conduil to our streetlights ane! had severed lhe un krgrouncl sprinkler system in this <UTa. By the time the
City had repaired the electrical and sprinkler sysle 11. it hec<ll11e too late to compkte the landscaping,
I
/