City Council Agenda Packet 05-26-1998
-
AGEN A
REGULAR MEETING - MON ICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, May 26,1998 - 7 p.m.
Mayor: Bill Fair
Council Members: Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, R ger Carlson, Bruce Thielen
1. Call to order.
2.
3.
4.
5.
.
.{
\S b
A.
Approval of minutes of the special eting held May 6, 1998.
B. Approval of minutes of the regular eting held May 11, 1998.
C. Approval of minutes of the special eting held May 14, 1998.
Consideration of adding items to the agend' .
Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and omplaints.
Consent agenda.
A. Consideration of approving revised rganizational structure and Building
Inspection Clerk position.
B. Consideration of resolution appro vi g Wright County redesignation of County
Road 118 as a County State Aid Hi hway.
C. Consideration of approval of the fin I stage PUD and final plat of the Front Porch
Townhome development. Applican, Mike Cyr dba Front Porch Associates, Ltd.
D. Consideration of approving modific tion of the Downtown Monticello
Revitalization Fund Guidelines.
E. Consideration of a resolution autho izing preparation of plans and specifications
for extension of sanitary sewer to t e Monte Club site.
6. Consideration of item'i removed from the c nsent agenda for discussion.
7. Public Hearing--Consideration of resolutio approving plans and specifications and
authorizing advertisement for bids - High ay 25 Project.
8.
--
Public Hearing--Consideration of approvin a resolution adopting the modified
Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticell Redevelopment Project No.1; and
establishing within Project No. I TIF Distr ct No. 1-23 and adopting the related TIF Plan
therefor.
.
.
.
Agenda
Monticello City Council
May 26, 1998
Page 2
9. Consideration of a request for a zoning text mendment and a conditional use permit
within the 1-1 (light industrial) zoning distd t to allow a go-cart track. Applicant, Russ
and Paula Adamski dba Monticello Roller R nk.
10. Consideration of reviewing bridge, roadway and utility alignment options and associated
project finance plan - St. Henry's Church.
11. Consideration of accepting feasibility study nd calling for a public hearing on the Marvin
Road improvement project.
12. Consideration of approval of final concept esign and authorize preparation of plans and
specifications for the Monticello Communit Center project; Consideration of accepting
trunk sanitary sewer relocation feasibility re ort and authorize preparation of plans and
specifications for the community center site Consideration of initiation of eminent
domain procedures for acquisition of co nity center site; and Consideration of fire hall
driveway improvements.
13. Consideration of plan for staging West Bri ge Park/Walnut Street improvements.
14.
Consideration of bills for the last half of M y, 1998.
15. Adjournment.
QtL\J~W 0\= ~\\(\u\~
.
.
.
MIND ES
SPECIAL CITY CO NCIL MEETING
BOARD OF EVIEW
Wednesday, May ,1998 - 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Bill Fair, Clint Herbst, Bria Stumpf, Roger Carlson, Bruce Thielen
Members Absent:
None
A special meeting of the City Council was held for the purpose of conducting the annual Board of
Review regarding valuations for taxes payable 199 .
County Assessor Doug Gruber noted that square fi otage rates in Wright County were increased
5% on buildings and 0% on land for residential, an 5% on land and 10% on buildings for
commerciaVindustrial properties.
The following parcel valuations were reviewed:
1.
155-010-009080 - Appeal of valuation was presented in writing. Increase was due to
county-wide square footage rate increase.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUM F AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
LEA VB THE V ALUA TION AS RECOMMEN ED BY THE ASSESSOR. Motion carried
unanimously.
2.
155-080-002100 - Increase was due to co nty-wide square footage rate increase.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUM F AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
LEA VB THE VALUATION AS RECOMME ED BY THE ASSESSOR. Motion carried
unanimously.
3. 155-020-004010 - Owner requested a dec ase in valuation due to the non-conforming
property classification.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBS AND SECONDED BY BRUCE THIELEN TO
LEA VB THE VALUATION AS RECOMME ED BY THE ASSESSOR. Motion carried
unanimously.
4. 155-500-104306 - Owner requested clarifi ation that proposed valuation was in line with
other commercial valuations. No change r quested.
5.
155-021-002470 - Owner requested revie ofthe proposed valuation, as it seemed higher
than other similar homes in the area. Asse sor Doug Gruber noted that the valuation may
have included a lower level finish in error.
Pag 1
~Pr
.
.
.
Special Council Minutes
Board of Review - 5/6/98
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN AND SECONDED BY ROGER CARLSON TO
AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSOR TO REVIEW T PROPERTY VALUATION AND RETURN
WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously.
6. 155-080-006150 - Increase was due to count -wide square footage rate increase.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF ND SECONDED BY ROGER CARLSON TO
LEA VB THE V ALUA TION AS RECOMMEND D BY THE ASSESSOR. Motion carried
unanimously.
7. 155-500-154400 and 155-500-143400 - Ower requested clarification of the basis for the
proposed valuations. County Assessor Dou Gruber suggested that the valuations be
discussed with the manufactured home asses or.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELE AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO
AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSOR TO REVIEW T PROPERTY VALUATIONS AND RETURN
WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously.
8. 155-080-007050 - Owner requested clarifica ion of the proposed valuation versus the
purchase price of the property. No change r quested.
9.
155-093-001100 - Owner requested decreas in valuation since the property has not been
able to sell at the asking price, which is lowe than the proposed valuation. County
Assessor Doug Gruber noted that there hav been only new home sales in the area and no
re-sales for comparison, but the valuation sh uld not be higher than the market value.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMP AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSOR TO REVIEW T PROPERTY V ALUA TlON AND RETURN
WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CIT COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously.
10. 155-031-002040 - Owner requested decrea in valuation due to unfinished garage. City
Assessor Jerry Kramber suggested that they review the property.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO
AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSOR TO REVIEW HE PROPERTY VALUATION AND RETURN
WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CIT COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously.
11.
155-010-030021 - Owner requested decrea e in valuation since no improvements have
been made since the storm of July 1, 1997.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBS AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO
AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSOR TO REVIEW HE PROPERTY VALUATION AND RETURN
WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CIT COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 2
~A--
.
.
.
Special Council Minutes
Board of Review - 5/6/98
12. 155-045-002030 - Owner requested decrea e in valuation due to recent market analysis
showing less for market value.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIEL N AND SECONDED BY ROGER CARLSON TO
AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSOR TO REVIEW HE PROPERTY V ALUA TION AND RETURN
WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CIT COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND ECONDED BY BRUCE THIELEN TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried unan' ously.
Karen Doty
Office Manager
Pa e3
~A-
.
MINUT S
REGULAR MEETING - MONT CELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, May 11, 998 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Bill Fair, Clint Herbst, Brian Stu pf, Roger Carlson, Bruce Thielen
Members Absent: None
2. A.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN S UMPF AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO APPROVE THE M ES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD
APRIL 27, 1998, AS WRITTEN. Vot' g in favor: Bill Fair, Brian Stumpf, Roger
Carlson, Bruce Thielen. Abstaining: Clint Herbst. Motion carried.
B.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT RBST AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO APPROVE THE M ES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD
APRIL 27, 1998, AS WRITTEN. Mo ion carried unanimously.
C.
. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROGER CARLSON AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO APPROVE THE MI S OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD MAY 4,
1998, AS WRITTEN. Motion carrie unanimously.
3.
A.
Mayor Bill Fair requested that Cou cil consider approving continued negotiations
with the post office facility landlor regarding sale of the adjacent vacant parcel
owned by the City.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUC THIELEN AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO AUTHORIZE THE CIT ADMINISTRATOR TO CONTINUE
NEGOTIATIONS FOR 60 DAYS RE ARDING THE SALE OF THE CITY'S VACANT
LOT TO MR. CHARLES EHLEN A A PRICE OF $24,000. Motion carried
unanimously.
4.
A. Mr. Paul Thielen, resident of Miss ssippi Drive, requested that the residents of
. Mississippi Drive be given the op ortunity to discuss with the City the landscaping
plan for the new wastewater treat nt plant facility and that the trees be planted in
1998 rather than 1999.
Ole
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11198
Public Works Director John Simola s ggested that staff meet with the residents on
Monday, June 15, at 6 p.m, to discus the landscaping plan and trail system in the
area.
5.
Consent ae:enda.
Councilmember Herbst requested that item 5 be removed from the consent agenda for
discussion.
Councihnember Stumpf requested that item E be removed from the consent agenda for
discussion.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller noted th t another condition should be added to
item 5F. The item was removed from the co sent agenda for discussion.
A. m
h M ili x
Recommendation: Approve a reso tion adopting assessment agreement
accepting bids, and awarding the con ract for the Resurrection Church and
Methodist Church utility extension t Kuechle Underground, Inc., from Kimball,
MN, at a cost of $40,804.24. SEE ESOLUTION 98-18.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
n
or discussion.
Pag 2
OlB
.
G.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11198
E fh 14f
. n 1 . Recommendation: Approve
the ordinance amendment to rezone from Agricultural to PS based upon the
finding that the proposed use is in c nformance with the objectives of the
comprehensive plan and is compati Ie with the surrounding land uses.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMEN NO. 309.
Approve the conditional use permitto allow a church facility in a PS zone based
upon the finding that the proposed se has or will meet with appropriate changes
and the conditions as defined in the ordinance, including adequate traffic access,
adequate setbacks to protect adjace t properties, adequate parking to
accommodate the proposed use, an compatibility with the area and
comprehensive plan objectives. Ap roval is subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant and the City, s the property owner, determine the
improvements to be constru ted and responsibility for the costs associated
with the installation of a sh ed driveway, which satisfies the minimum
design standards of the zon' g ordinance, to be located on the city property
along the length of the east roperty line of the subject site.
2.
The applicant provide build g elevation plans subject to review and
approval of the City Counc' .
3. The applicant provide alan scape plan that demonstrates unique
treatments to the sloped ar as adjacent to the parking areas, including
retaining walls/terraced gar ens, as a means of controlling storm water run-
off and erosion.
4. All drive aisles be designed to a minimum width of 24 feet.
5. The site plan be revised to esignate five (5) disability accessible stalls, one
of which must be van acces ible.
6. All grading, drainage, and tility plans be subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
H.
n f
Applicant: Star City Builders. Re ommendation: Approve the conditional use
permit and concept stage PUD for a 60-unit townhouse development subject to the
following conditions:
Pag 3
~B
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11/98
1.
Provision of a bufferyard alon the north boundary per zoning ordinance
requirements.
2. Submission of a survey docu enting the length of the common boundary
with Ruff Auto and the limits f development on the Ruff Auto side of the
line.
3. Submission of proposed ho owner's association language which would
ensure the proper maintenanc and future reconstruction of the private
street.
4. Compliance with the reco ndation of the Parks Commission regarding
park dedication land or cash.
5. Alteration of the design to re olve driveway and paving expanse issues
raised in the staff report.
6. Alteration of the design to re olve street width and turning radius concerns
as noted in the staff report.
I.
r
B k i IP
Recommendation: Approve the co cept stage PUD for Elm Street Crossing;
Approve the development stage PU for Elm Street Crossing contingent upon the
following conditions:
1. Revised site plan illustrates roper access to all garages.
2. Submission of landscape pla illustrating intensified landscape treatments
as detailed in the staff repor to Planning Commission.
3. Final approval of the pre' . ary and fmal plats.
Approve the preliminary plat for E Street Crossing contingent upon the
following conditions:
1. Submission of final utility p n for review and approval by City staff.
2. Submission of fmal grading plan for review and approval by City staff.
3.
Submission of revised pre' . ary plat illustrating lot dimensions and
common space.
Pag 4
;1..8
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11/98
4.
Submission of lot covenants nd homeowners association bylaws
demonstrating adequate prov sions for common area maintenance.
5. Final approval of the planned unit development.
J. n r i Ri r ill4
Residential Development. Inc. Reeo mendation: Approve the preliminary and
final plat of River Mill 4th Addition ased upon the fmding that the project is
consistent with applicable subdivisio and zoning ordinance requirements, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The existing design of Mill ail Lane/Mill Trail Drive as platted by River
Mill 3rd Addition be mainta' ed. The extension of Mill Trail Lane as
platted by River Mill 4th Ad ition shall intersect the existing street design
at a 90-degree angle, subjec to review and approval of the City Engineer.
2. Proposed preliminary plat, ots 13-17, Block 2, shall be designated as
Outlot B, River Mill 4th Ad ition, subject to fma1 platting at such time as
the adjacent property to the ast is platted to provide the remainder of any
street right-of-way. The Ci y does not guarantee any such platting, nor
does the City guarantee the eve10pment of any of Outlot B.
3.
The City Council accept 0 lot A, River Mil14th Addition, as adding to
previous park dedication.
4. The preliminary grading, dr inage, erosion, and utility plans are subject to
review and approval of the ity Engineer.
5. The City Engineer reco nd and approve the need and location of
easements to be included 0' the final plat.
6. The applicant enter into th standard development contract and
disbursement agreement w th the City.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE TIDE EN AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
APPROVE ITEMS SA, 5B, 50, 50, 5R, 51, D 5J OF THE CONSENT AOENDA AS
RECOMMENDED. Motion carried unani ously.
6.
5C.
Public Works Director John Sirn la reported that the contract for the Wastewater
Treatment Plant expansion requir d that two SBR tanks be operational by
February 1, 1998; however, actu operation of the SBR tanks occurred on
~6
.
5E.
.
.
Council Minutes ~ 5/11/98
February 16. The contract calls for . uidated damages for the delay in the amount
of $500 per day, and Adolfson & Pet rson requested that the damages be waived
due to construction delays beyond th ir control. The Public Works Director
suggested that the damages could be waived contingent upon the entire project
being completed by a specific date.
AFfER DISCUSSION, A MOTION W S MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND
SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO PROVE THE EXTENSION OF TIME FROM
FEBRUARY I, 1998, TO FEBRUARY 6, 1998, FOR OPERATION OF THE SBR
TANKS CONTINGENT UPON COMP ETION OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT BY
OCTOBER 15, 1998. Motion carried nanimously.
The Public Works Director also note that Adolfson & Peterson requested that the
retainage amount be reduced from 5 () to 1.6%. However, it was his view that it
would be more difficult to close the roject without the customary 5% retainage.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE HIELEN AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO KEEP THE RET AINAG AMOUNT AT THE CURRENT 5%. Motion
carried unanimously.
Councilinember Brian Stumpf reque ted clarification of the proposal for an
outdoor display and sale of sw' . g pool products by Skippers Pools and Spas
on the HRA's property. He noted s concern regarding issuance of a conditional
use permit for a parcel that may be s ld in the future. Economic Development
Director Ollie Koropchak reported t at the HRA's motion included a termination
date of August 31, 1998, for use of he property.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN TUMPF AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO APPROVE THE COND IONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING OUTDOOR
DISPLAY AND SALES SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. ENTERING INTO A SATISF CTORY LEASE ARRANGEMENT WITH THE
HRA.
2. ALL LIGHTING MUST BE D ECTED A WAY FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT ~
OF~WAY.
3. PARKING STALLS MUST B CLEARLY STRIPED AND MARKED.
4.
NO PERMANENT OR TEMP RARY SIGNS SHALL BE ERECTED ON THE
OUTDOOR DISPLAY.
Page 6
~rs
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11/98
5.
ANY SWIMMING POOL OR S A DISPLAYED OUTDOORS MUST BE
PROVIDED WITH A CONT OUS SURROUNDING BARRIER TO
PREVENT ENTR Y.
6. OUTDOOR SWIMMING POO OR SP A DISPLAYS MUST NOT CONTAIN
ANY WATER.
7. THE CONDITIONAL USE PER IT SHALL EXPIRE AUGUST 31, 1998, PER
THE HRA.
Motion is based on the finding that t e proposed outdoor display and sales use is
connected with the principal use and . 'ted to no more than 30% of the gross
floor area of the principal use; is co atible with the comprehensive plan and the
geographical area and character of th surrounding area; is justified by a
demonstrated need for such use; and oes not substantially depreciate the area in
which it is proposed. Motion carrie unanimously.
5F.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller eported that this property was originally
planned for one lot and may have 0 y been charged for one sanitary sewer in
1976. The City's policy has been to establish another assessment charge for
utilities if the lot is split, as it allows he City to recapture some of its cost for the
project. He also noted that there y be an opportunity to give a credit against
the assessment for a small piece of d that may be donated for park land. It was
suggested that approval of the simp subdivision be contingent upon staff
investigation of the past assessment 0 the property.
Chief Building Official Fred Patch n ted that he discussed the assessment issue and
possible credit for the park land don tion with Mr. Tindle and that Mr. Tindle
understood and was in favor of the ssessment.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN TUMPF AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO APPROVE THE SIMP SUBDIVISION CREATING ONE
ADDITIONAL BUILDING SITE AN A SMALLER PARCEL DESIGNATED AS
"AREA 3" FOR DEDICATION AS P K LAND, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. WRITTEN APPROVAL OF CCESS PERMIT IS RECEIVED FROM WRIGHT
COUNTY.
2.
A CERTIFIED SURVEY IS C MPLETED WHICH VERIFIES LOT
DIMENSIONS AND ILLUST A TES THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE
ADEQUATE SETBACKS BUILDING AREAS PER ZONING
ORDINANCE REQUIREME S, WITHOUT VARIANCE.
d-8
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11198
3.
CITY ENGINEER REVIEW F DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PATTERNS AND
EASEMENTS IN THE AREA
4. AREA 3, AS NOTED ON T CONCEPT SUBDIVISION PLAN, WOULD BE
DEDICATED TO THE CITY OR PARK USE.
5. CITY STAFF WILL INVEST! ATE THE PREVIOUS ASSESSMENT CHARGE
FOR SANITARY SEWER. ONLY ONE CHARGE WAS ASSESSED, AN
ADDITIONAL ASSESSME WILL BE PLACED AGAINST THE
ADDITIONAL PARCEL C TED BY THE SIMPLE SUBDIVISION.
7.
Motion carried unanimously.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill report d that staff met with St. Henry's Church
officials on May 7 to review the latest cost gures for utility and road extensions, bridge
alignment alternatives, identify steps for ob aining a building permit, and incorporation of
the St. Benedicts Center into the financing rogram.
Three options were reviewed for the 7th St eet extension. Option #1 proposed an angled
alignment at an estimated cost of $1,008,2 0, option #2 proposed a straight bridge at an
estimated cost of $989,600, and option #3 roposed a straight bridge with bulb-out road
at an estimated cost of $625,200. Option 3 was the City's original choice for extension
of 7th Street; however, St. Henry's Church requested that the City review other options
because it would cause the road to cut thro gh the Church's parking lot and run too close
to the Church building. After reviewing v ious options, the Church preferred option #2,
the straight alignment with a hill. This opti n would be the least expensive for the Church
but the most costly for the City because of he large amount of fill needed to raise the
road.
Over sizing expense and minimum road wid h for 7th Street was discussed, and it was
noted that development of the Church and he 120-housing facility would require
construction of a 36-ft wide road; however if the Church could demonstrate that it
generated less than the city standard of 750 trips per day on average, the minimum width
could be established at 32 ft, which would sult in the City paying the oversizing cost
difference between 32 ft and 44 ft.
In regard to water main, the area would re ire a 12-inch water main according to the
water plan; however, since development of he Church and housing facility would require
a lO-inch line, the City would pay the overs'zing cost.
Mr. John Olson, Business Administrator fo St. Henry's Church, stated that the Church
has offered 8 acres for senior housing, dedi ation of property for roadway and bridge
development, has set aside approximately 3 acres for storm water ponding, and would
Page 8
.;L6
Council Minutes - 5/11/98
-
provide fill for the roadway under option # . In return, the Church requested that the
trunk fees be based on the developed site 0 10 acres; the street assessment be based on a
32-ft road; the City pay oversizing from an 8-inch line to a 12-inch line for both water and
sanitary sewer; the project cost be assessed for 20 years at 6.5%; and the Church, City,
and HRA participate equitably to develop t e project.
City Engineer Bret Weiss responded that, er further study, a reconunendation will be
given for the roadway width and minimum equirement for water and sanitary sewer lines.
In regard to the dedication of 3 acres for s1l rm water ponding, he noted that credits could
not be given against trunk storm sewer fee because ponding was not anticipated in this
area. City Administrator Rick W olfsteller dded that in the last few years the City has
kept assessment rolls to 10 years but could be extended if approved by Council.
However, he noted that if the assessment i extended to 20 years, the interest rate would
likely be higher than 6.5%.
Council discussed the assessment roll as w II as the 7th Street extension and bridge
options, noting that the City must take int consideration the City's portion of the project
cost. It was suggested that the City use as a base the cost of option #3 as originally
planned, with the Church paying addition costs for alteration of the plan and receiving
credits where due.
-
After discussion, it was the consensus of ouncil to allow the assessment to be paid over
20 years at the current interest rate at the irne of bonding.
It was also the consensus of Council to us option #3 as the base cost for the street and
bridge project and table the other issues u til recommendations are received at the meeting
scheduled for May 26, 1998, at which ti the Council will also make a final decision on
the assessment agreement.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill repo ted that a significant concept of the
comprehensive plan is to direct future gr wth to the south and west of the city by
investing in infrastructure improvements 0 serve growth in that direction rather than to
the east. The proposed amendment to th comprehensive plan was modified slightly from
the original draft, which reflected input fr m landowners between County Road 39 and
90th Street. Additional industrial land w s identified to the south of the Chelsea Road
alignment, and an area of future study w s identified which contemplates the expansion of
the proposed industrial area along the re inder of the Chelsea Road corridor. The text
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO TAKE A
5.MINUTE RECESS. Motion carried unanimousl.
8.
~
..
Pa e 9
~6
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 5/11/98
was also modified to allow added flexibilit and emphasize that it is a guide plan and is
intended to illustrate a pattern of land use. Planning Commission voted unanimously to
recommend approval of the amendments t the comprehensive plan.
AFfER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS M E BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY
ROGER CARLSON TO APPROVE THE NDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AS PROPOSED IN THE SOUTH/WEST ARE PLAN. Motion carried unanimously.
9. n
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBS AND SECONDED BY BRUCE THIELEN TO
APPROVE THE BILLS FOR THE FIRST H F OF MAY 1998 AS PRESENTED. Motion
carried unanimously.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN AN SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
ADJOURN. Motion carried unanimously.
Karen Doty
Office Manager
Page 10
-.b
,..........~..
MINUT S
SPECIAL MEETING. MONT CELLO CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, May 14 1998 - 6 p.m.
Members Present: Bill Fair, Roger Carlson, Clint erbst
Members Absent: Bruce Thielen, Brian Stumpf
A special meeting of the City Council was held for he purpose of reviewing the City's vision
statement and progress on meeting goals and objec ives.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill reviewed the i ms from the project priority list that have
been completed as each relates to the vision state nt categories of aesthetic/environmental,
sociaVcommunity, cultural, economic, recreational, and spiritual. Economic Development
Director Ollie Koropchak also reviewed the items urrently being completed by the HRA, EDA,
and the marketing committee in the area of econo 'c development. During discussions, it was
emphasized that it would be very worthwhile for t e City to develop a scattered housing site
program
City Administrator Rick W olfsteller reported that t e financial condition of the City appears to be
healthy with a surplus of $13,557,875 in 1997, an a five-year capital improvement plan is
currently being prepared.
/----
The City Administrator also reported that in orderto make better use of existing personnel and to
meet the needs of various city departments, he ree mmended that the organizational structure be
modified to include separation of the [mance funct ons from the general office structure to be
directly managed by the City Administrator, the dition of a Building Inspection Clerk,
modification to the Office Manager's position to eputy City Clerk, and addition of a part-time
Administrative Clerk to help the City Clerk with r cords management activities. He explained
that, although funding for the new Building Inspe tion Clerk position was not included in the
1998 budget, the building department has sufficie t revenue to cover the additional cost for 1998,
and permanent funding can be included in the bud et for 1999. In addition, a full-time
shop/mechanic position will soon be needed in th public works department, which will likely be
proposed in the 1999 budget.
Counci1members noted that they were in agreeme t with the proposed reorganization; however, it
was suggested that it be reviewed by the full Cou cil on May 26.
Mayor Fair then listed the following additional pI ority items:
1. Preparation of a 5-year capital irn rovement plan.
2. Preparation of a management pia for the community center.
3. Review costs for improvements t the entire area near Marvin Road.
4. Update the comprehensive plan in the area of transportation.
Pa e 1
~CJ
T"\_ _ ...,
ftIL L-I--
.
.
.
5.
6.
7.
Special Council Minutes - 5/14/98
Look at incentives for industrial gro tho
Consider referendum questions for he 1998 elections.
Increase Mayor's term of office to years, which the League of Women Voters
will be researching.
No specific action was taken by the Council.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROGER CARLSON AN SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried una' usly.
Karen Doty
Office Manager
Page 2
~c..J
SA.
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
In~pection Clerk position. (R.W.)
At our visioning workshop special meeting n May 14, I reviewed with the Council some
proposed revisions to our organizational str cture that I felt would allow us to more
efficiently use our main resource in provid' g services to the public, our employees. As
the city and the workload continue to grow the attached reorganization plan will make
better use of our existing personnel, and it so indicates the areas where additional
personnel within various departments will needed to meet the workload demands.
Council members present at the workshop dicated support for the proposed
reorganization and suggested that this item be placed on the Council agenda for
consideration at our next meeting.
Some noteworthy changes being proposed in this reorganization plan are as follows:
1.
The finance functions currently be' g performed by the Utility Billing Clerk,
Bookkeeper, and Computer Suppo t Analyst are being separated from the general
office structure and direct supervis on of the Office Manager and are being
proposed to be directly managed b the AdministratorlFinance Director. This is
another step toward separating an creating departments by functions they
perform. We've previously move in that direction for the building department
when we created a separate Co unity Development Secretary position to handle
building department along with P ning and zoning issues, along with the creation
of the Administrative Assistant po ition for community development.
2. With the heavy demand for plan . g and zoning along with related building
activities, the need exists for addit onal staffmg within this department for building
inspection secretarial needs. The eorganization chart proposes the addition of a
new position to be called Buildin Inspection Clerk to fill a void in this area, which
will also serve to address the seer tarial needs in such areas as blight and nuisance
violations and other zoning issues
The funding for this new Buildin Inspection Clerk position was not included in
the 1998 budget, but the Council is asked to approve funds necessary for this
position for the balance of 1998, t which time permanent funding can be included
for the 1999 budget review. Fro a revenue standpoint, the building inspection
department has sufficient revenu to cover the additional cost; for example, 1997's
revenue for building permits exc eded expenditures for that department by
approximately $60,000. Throug March 1998, revenue also exceeds expenditures
by over $70,000.
3.
With the separation of the finan functions within city hall, it is also proposed that
a modification occur to the Offic Manager's position to reflect additional clerk
responsibilities, especially in the ea of election supervision and records
management. Although the day to-day supervision of some of the finance
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
.
personnel will no longer be necessar by this position, some job description
modifications will be necessary to a urately reflect the new job title of Deputy
City Clerk! Administrative Assistant.
With the finance activities being sep ated from the general office functions of city
hall, the necessity of a Receptionist eing more available for phone answering and
counter work becomes more import nt when finance personnel are removed from
some of the backup responsibilities or Receptionist or counter personnel. The
reorganization plan as proposed wo ld also include the addition of a half-time
permanent position that can be utili ed by the City Clerk to help with additional
typing functions and records manag ment activities, including our plan to
microfilm records currently stored .. the basement. The funding for this position,
although not specifically included. the 1998 budget, can be covered with the
funds that are available from the flI t half of the year for a Planning Technician that
has not yet been hired. These fund would be more than enough to cover the part-
time salary for this Administrative lerk, and permanent budgeting can be included
in the 1999 budget review.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the organizational struct e as recommended by the City Administrator,
along with the creation of a Build. g Inspection Clerk position.
.
2.
Do not approve the restructuring a recommended.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As noted in the governance model adopte last year, it is the Administrator's responsibility
to manage the resources of the City to ac omplish our goals and objectives, including
making changes to the organizational stru ture when needed. Before an organizational
change can occur, approval must be obta.. ed from the Council. It is my recommendation
that the proposed reorganization plan will more efficiently use our main resource, our
employees, to provide the best service we can to the public as we continue to grow. The
building inspection department has seen emendous growth in the past few years, and in
order to keep on top of building permit is uance; inspections; planning and zoning
requests for variances, conditional uses, a d subdivisions; along with re-establishing
enforcement of our ordinances in regard public nuisance and other ordinance violations,
staffing additions are necessary as outline . Revenue sources within the building
inspection department far exceed the exp nditures for 1997; and so far in 1998, revenue is
also available for additional staffing need .
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Copy of present organizational structure. Copy of proposed organizational structure for
1998/1999.
2
.
~ \-
~ a ~
. g~ ~u ~
if: :Z~..._-----_..
~G
~m
\~ ~} d)
UlI::I
. e 8L IIf
cO ~
g~R
"il\-- .
o oEP
t3Cl~
'.
W
ri
:)
\-
\J
:)
0L
__l:=
to
-1
<C
z
o
\--
<C
N
Z
<C
\l)
f)l-
o
D
w
If)
o
(l
o
.'.
~!
),
..
"
f.
. ,
, .
"
.
~
r.
-I
U
Z
:)
o
u
~
G
Ii
J~
J
E :f
; ,~
J J
-'
u
I
!
ls
t" 15
"~ ~
:p,cs
~ ~
"~ 2
U I[
~
~
11 u~
I I
~ I;l
rft . ~~ S
\S\ al
:~ ("~
~ -~
"t~--
\J ~
~~
l'\,~
~
f ]
~
~
t
......, ~
f I
0 ij
r, J
<(
.f' -[] j
\J \~
~
~
;~
n II
li
I~
J~
I
.
f
J
J
j
d
If
l! '
.11
U
~
1
J
J
r
~
0:
:j
l-
I!'
'~
~
1
l
~
w
a:
::).
I-
0
::>
a: .ft
I- ~
en i
.....J
~
<(
Z ~
0
... -.h
o ... I~
- ...J ~~
I- 0 ~ ... 15
Z C .- B~
~ ::J .- 0 ~
8 .fS ~ '!~ ~ Ii II
c:( c 0
>- ~~ .~
- l:: ou: II
z 0 ~I
(f) m
<( a go ;;~
1Il~
0 mo
CJ ..
.c.
ex: i ~
:g
0 J!
U
l!! ~
0
(f) (i; !
::,,: ..
f'... !!i ! rn rm
a.. t
0") ~
x
0") ~
,...
.
.
.
5B.
i
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
(R.W.)
As part of the Wright County Highway epartment's 5-year improvement plan, County
Road 118 from Monticello to Albertville will be reconstructed over the next couple of
years. The highway department and the' consulting engineering firm are already in the
process of doing preliminary survey wor for the frrst segment that will consist of road
improvements from Fenning Avenue in onticello easterly to County Road 37.
In order to use state aid funds for the pr ject, the County needs to redesignate County
Road 118 as a County State Aid Highw y, which they have previously approved. Before
the redesignation becomes official, all ci ies along this road must also concur with the
County's desire to redesignate as a state aid highway.
The approval by the City of this resoluti n does not affect any funding or designation
authority that the City has in creation 0 its own state aid highways and, therefore, the
resolution is recommended to be adopt d as presented.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACfIONS:
Adopt the resolution supporting the County's action to designate County
Road 118 within the boundaries of the city of Monticello as a County State Aid
Highway.
1.
2. Do not adopt the resolution.
It is recommended that the resolution adopted as proposed.
D, SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution.
3
.
.
CITY OF ONTICELLO
WRIGHT COU TY, MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the County Board of the County f Wright did adopt a resolution revising the
designation of County Road No. 118, within th corporate limits of the city of Monticello as
follows:
County Road No. 118, having a basic ri ht-of-way width of 66 feet, and described as
follows:
Beginning at the junction with ounty State Aid Highway No. 75 in the city of
Monticello (East Broadway), th nee southeasterly along the existing centerline of
County Road No. 118 through ection 13, Township 121 North, Range 25 West;
Sections 18, 19,20,28,29,33, and 34, Township 121 North, Range 24 West;
Sections 2,3 and 11, Township 120 North, Range 24 West, to the junction with
County State Aid Highway No. 19 (LaBeaux Avenue) in the city of Albertville,
and there terminating, a distanc of 7.42 miles,
Was revoked as County Road No. 118 and was redesignated and to be known as County
State Aid Highway No. 18.
NOW, THERE.~ORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monicello, that
said revision is in all things approved.
Adopted this 26th day of May, 1998.
Mayor
A TrEST:
City Administrator
I hereby certify that the above is a true and c rreet eopy of a resolution duly passed, adopted, and
approved by the City Council of said City 0 May 26, 1998.
.
City Administrator
City of Monticello
56-/
v~'TV Ok
,P ~
v "1-
~ z
~ m
1; ~
~ 4Y
1ss6
WRIGHT OUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
Jet. T.H. 25 nd G.R. 138
Telephone ~ 12)682-7383
Facsimile (6 2) 682-7313
WAYNE A. FINGALSON, r.E.
Hilolhway Enlolineer
fiR2-73RR
VIRGIL G. HAWKINS, P.E.
Assistant Highway Engineer
682-7387
RICHARD E. MARQUBTTE
Right of Way Agent
6R2-7386
Wright County Pub ie Works Building
1901 Highw y 25 North
Buffalo, Min esuta 653J:J
April 29, 1998
Mr Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator, City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Approval of City Resolution to Redesignate ounty Road (CR) 118 as a County State Aid
Highway (CSAH). \
Dear Mr Wolfsteller:
.
As you know, CR 118 is on the Wright County H ghway Department's 5-Year plan for
improvement work to include grading base and bi uminous. The project is scheduled for
improvement in two phases. The portion from Fe ing Ave. in Monticello to CSAH 37 would be
improved in 1999. The remaining portion from C AH 37 to CSAH 19 in Albertville would be
improved in 2000.
In order to use state aid funds for the project fun ing, it will be necessary to redesignate CR I ] 8 as
a County State Aid Highway. I have enclosed tw resolutions regarding this action. The enclosed
county resolution which was approved on April 1,] 998, redesignates CR 118 as CSAH 18. The
state requires city concurrence from all cities adj cent to a roadway being redesignated as a CSAH
route. I have an approved resolution form enclos d which can be used for city concurrence relating
to the redesignation of CR 118.
I respectfully request that your city council act 0 this item at their next regularly scheduled
council meeting. If you have questions regarding this action, please contact Virgil Hawkins,
Assistant County Engineer at 682-7387 or mysel at 682-7386.
Sincerely,
. ~
R~P1n- r- ~
Richard Marquette
Engineering Assistant
Wright County Highway Department
Enclosures;
1 Approved County Resolution
1 Appropriate City Resolution F rrn
.
pc:
Wayne Fingalson, County Highway Engineer
Virgil Hawkins, Assistant County High ay Engineer
Equal Opportunity / A firmative Action Employer
56....:1-
BOARD OF COUNT COMMISSIONERS
WRIGHT COUN Y. MINNESOTA
Date April 21. 1998
Motion by Commissioner
Sawatzke
Res lution No.
Seco ded by Commissioner
98-20
Mattson
LUTION TO REDESIGNATE COUNTY ROAD NO. 118 AS COUNTY STATE AID IDGHWAY NO. 18
WHEREAS, the existing alignment of County Road No. 11 is located in an area of Wri~ht County experiencing a
tremendous amount of growth, and
WHEREAS, this growth has created a large increase in the a ual daily traffic on this highway resulting in the need to
upgrade the deficient cross section and loadbearing capacity to 10 ton roadway meeting state aid standards, and
WHEREAS, the respective governing bodies of the adjacent ci 'es of Monticello, Otsego. St Michael and Albertville, concur
in the need to upgrade County Road 118 and designate it as a ounty State Aid Highway, and
WHEREAS, the state aid mileage required for this 7.42 mile adway can be obtained from other state aid routes within
Wright County with lesser amounts of traffic, and the State Ai Bank.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that County Roa No. 118. having a basic right of way width of 66 feet, and
described as follows:
Beginning at the junction with County State Aid High ay No. "75 in the City of Monticello (East Broadway), thence
southeasterly along the existing centerline of County ad No. 118 through Section 13, Township 121 North. Range
25 West; Sections 18. 19, 20. 28. 29. 33 and 34, Tow hip 121 North, Range 24 West; Sections 2. 3 and 11,
Township 120 North, Range 24 West. to the junction ith County State Aid Highway No. 19 (LaBeaux Avenue) in
the City of Albertville, and there terminating, a distan e of 7.42 miles,
BE, and is hereby revoked as County Road No. 118, and is he eby designated and to be known as County State Aid Highway
Nia8.
A~tions subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Tra portation, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Auditor is h reby authorized and directed to forward two (2) certified
copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportatio for his consideration.
YES
NO
JUDE
SAWATZKE
RUSSEK
ROSE
MATTSON
x
X
X
X
X
JUDE
SAWATZKE
RUSSEK
ROSE
MA TISON
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
ss.
County of Wright )
I, Richard W. Norman, duly appointed. qualified, an acting Clerk to the County Board for the County of Wright,
State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared th foregoing copy of a resolution or motion with the original
minutes of the proceedings of the Board of County Commissi ners, Wright County, Minnesota, at their session held on the_
2.llL.' day of April ,19...2a., now on file in my office, and h ve found the same to be true and correct copy thereof.
Witness my hand and official seal at Buffalo. Minnesota, this
.
day of April ,19..2.B.....
. sc.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
(J.O.)
A
City Council is asked to approve the final stage pun and fmal plat of the Front Porch
Townhome development. This deve opment received preliminary plat approval and
development stage pun approval at a recent meeting of the City Council. Subsequent to
this meeting, the developers have fo nd that a small portion of the land they thought they
owned is not under their control. T erefore, the footprint of the buildings has been moved
4 ft to the north, which will provide ufficient setback in the rear between the development
garages and the adjoining property. he 4-ft shift will result in a front yard setback of
26 ft, which fits this type of develop nt in that there will be no parking in the front yard
area. In checking this setback again t the nearby building setbacks, we found that the
26-ft setback will not result in impa' nt of the view of the street by adjoining properties,
nor will it look out of place in the ne ghborhood. It is the view of staff that the 4-ft
reduction in setback is a minor adjus ment that can be handled with the approval of the
final stage pun.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1.
Motion to approve the final lat and final stage pun contingent on completion of
a development and disburse nt agreement.
2. Motion to deny approval of t e final plat and final stage pun and require that the
item be returned to the Plann g Commission.
T AFF RE
Staffrecorrunends alternative #1. If ouncil so desires, however, the revised, plat based
on the reduction in land area, can be ubmitted back to the Planning Commission for
additional review.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of final plat.
4
i
"
iii ~
-J
~ , I
~ ~ ...
'" '" ~
z ~ ~l
-LI. ~ Ill... f!
! l.':!><lll ..
I: II" ' ""0....." ~
'-<<Q"''''
l.) "'"
o <:> !
E~~~
!~ Q;;t>- '" ...
" lOUiS': l:l
0<Q,.J~ ..
~ n. ,~
lth"''-<~
..~ ~
~[~ ~
~
i ~--~~'~'---------'
}
;
"
I:
/
q
i
I"!'
~
I
I
/
....
~~
!1~
I
I
/
I
I
....
,"'f
/
O'~
...., OJ
~ ~
j ~
I
I
/ A..
" 4Y
/ ~
I
I
/ ~.-
" t;- /'
/
.;
., a~
:.\
,f " ~
~<:
~ " ~
..."
... ..,
:l ,,~
..."
~ ..'"
.. '~
... ~
..
III
~ ~c;
~ " -.
... ,..., ..~
...
I ....,
.,.,
~ ..
~ ....
""
i~
...
l3 l: .....
~ ~
g ~ ~..
...
g .. "
".,
..: .- .....
.. . ill ~ I
'ill ' ij ...........
~ ,~ ~
:g t: .... , rHJ ...
. .. ....... d
" . .
~ ~. s........ .
~8i .. ......
. . .;~ ~ .....
i; .....
~;i ;!I
lI''''''
,-
:i:" f
......
~""
......
o
I
I
/
...........
...........
I
I
/
I
I
... ~ , "r,....... . ... "'.. .;
" "" ~~~~~ ~~~
;; t~ ",,~ .. ,," ..
III II:lI .............. oW ...," ...
~ i: Q~~""~ .. ..
....,,, ::
.. .. U 30-,.1::.... 0 ~ OJ...., ...
...; *' _.......... iii!' ..... ~~~
",U'f~.... _.-. "
~~ .:....~ _ ~)o,. i:: "- 't.>..
~bL,""III""'''''''''' ::~= "
"... :, ~VIIc...~.....Q ).,. =t: "
f~ ~~ri~~t)o..t ~~t ..
"
~:."'~.!":! ~eQf ...
:;01 .....~tto...,c::...
" ~()r~~~::~ci ~1oI:- "
:x ~~:o; "
~t::~~ "::cJ ..
".,
~.. ~;..:;'~s::~ ~""'" Q"'" "
,," "
~ ,~ .. ,,-J "
.., C'\I" "'I "'- .11:.., i . ., "
.. .. -Nl..~ .,...o....t.. 11M Ot l. ..... " .
" .. ::o.:!"":IIo.3~ " .... ~3
...... ~""""'1It
.... .... Q.......... tJ, .. " .. r.J
" ..r;;:"c.......~:Q$ '. ~! ~
tio, c;~~~::~..~t t.g
Ct b"'''1 ~~
..~ ~~~i:~~!~ III'!"'~~
:C.'l ......~..
..... ~......
" ......
.. ., "
~ ~
"" ..
t~~
o..~
~ ..
::~
g~~
....
~ ~ E
"".,
gg..
...,..,c:
"..~
~t~
!i~~
~ ..
~
,,~ "
"... ...
"" ..
.u.~ ~
-~~
~ ..In
':-l,.~
'.... Q IIlI
..,,-J
~~::
~t~
t ~ WI
......
" '"
.....
.....'"
...........
...........
..
~
~
...........
........
......
......
...........
...
......
.......
...........
'~H__
...........
........
...
...
.(~~ ..... --'-
t . ':.($
h~
~n
~~~
........
~i..~
....:-.........
.... ..~, ........
...........
..Y~
~.
.,>-+ ...~
, '''''''q '"" ....".,. f
..." ~"'.~
..............
.....
...........
...........
~
'~
is
i.'~
5:1
'Qj !'1'
...........
r-.......
I
I
/
.............
I
I
/
,
I,
',I
...........
...........
..............
..........
\,
v\
.............
-......
.............
............. .
'Ii .............
'-...........
~ ," ..............
~ fC;
--,
.
... ,
.
.
.
5D.
(O.K.)
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
nM n'
The Council is requested to consider this genda item for compliance of the following
DMRF Guidelines: No changes to the D RF Guidelines shall be instituted without prior
approval of the City Council.
At the EDA meeting of May 20, the co . ssioners considered and approved a
recommendation submitted by the Design dvisory Team (DA T). The approved
recommendation added the following hig lighted language to the guidelines resulting in a
need for modification:
A ADE RANT REHABILITATI D FEE REIMB R T,
pages 2 and 3 of the guidelines. To be eli ible for grant funds, rehabilitation loans, and/or
fee reimbursements, projects must meet th following criteria:
1. Improvements must comply with a plicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances, including building p rmits and inspections.
Please consider the following alternative a tion.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. A motion to approve modifying th DMRF Guidelines as recommended above.
2. A motion to deny modifying the D RF Guidelines as recommended above.
3. A motion to table any action.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation is alternative #1. The p oposed modification was a suggestion of the
Chief Building Official, a staff member of AT.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the guidelines with (*) identifyin place to insert modification.
5
.
.
.
DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO REVI ALIZATION FUND GUIDELINES
CITY OF M NTICELLO
250 EAST BROAD A Y, POBOX 1147
MONTICELL , MN 55362
(612) 271-3208
The Monticello Downtown and Riverfront Plan p ovides a guide for development in the
downtown area. As part of its efforts to impleme t the Plan, the Monticello Economic
Development Authority (EDA) offers financial as istance and incentives to property owners
through a program known as the Downtown Mon icello Revitalization Fund (DMRF).
The DMRF seeks to promote the revitalization of owntown Monticello by:
*
Enhancing storefronts and facades n accordance with the design guidelines in the
Plan.
*
Encouraging the rehabilitation of b ilding interiors to bring them into compliance
with local codes and ordinances.
*
Encouraging building rehabilitation to provide space suitable for the proposed use.
*
Providing funding to close the "ga "between financing needed to undertake the
project and the amount raised by e uity and private loans.
*
Providing economic incentives to I cate businesses in the Downtown.
These guidelines describe the funding parameters d eligibility criteria for programs offered by
the EDA. Meeting the eligibility criteria does not ntitle an applicant to funding. The distribution
of funds is the sole decision of the EDA.
T
These financial incentives and assistance will be av 'lable for existing buildings within the planning
area described in the Downtown and Riverfront PI n. Preference will be given to property
located in Lots 6 through 15, Block 34, Lots 1 thr ugh 10, Block 53, and Blocks 35, 36,51, and
52, Original Plat, City of Monticello.
1
SD--I
.
.
.
DMRF GUIDELINES
*
The EDA may provide matching grants in the foIl wing amounts:
Up to $2,500 for eligible improve ents to the front facade and signage.
*
Up to $2,500 for eligible improve ents to promote improvements to the rear
sections of the buildings.
*
Up to $2,500 for eligible improve ents to the side facade (if applicable).
To be eligible for grant funds, projects must meet the following criteria:
*
Improvements must comply with pplicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances. ....
*
The grant will match private inves ment up to the stated limit.
*
Grant funds will be provided after completion of the improvements.
*
Applicants will provide the EDA ith documentation of the actual cost of the
improvements.
Meeting the eligibility criteria does not entitle an pplicant to funding. The distribution of grant
funds is the sole decision of the EDA.
The EDA may provide loans for the rehabilitatio of existing buildings. The maximum loan
amount is the lesser of25% of total cost ofimpr vements or $20,000. To be eligible for
rehabilitation loans, projects must meet the folio ing criteria:
*
Improvements must comply with pplicable design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances. ,,-
.
ApplicaJits must provide proof of nancing for costs not funded by the grant.
.
Loan amortization schedule not e ceed ten (10) years, balloon payment in five (5)
years.
5b-~
.
.
.
DMRF GUIDELINES
The interest rate on the loan will b two percent (2%) below the Prime Rate. The
EDA may reduce the interest rate t encourage the reuse of a currently vacant
building, the retention of an existin business, or the creation of a new business.
*
*
The rehabilitation loan will be in a ubordinated position to the lender.
The EDA may grant reimbursement of City fees sociated with undertaking improvement and
revitalization projects in the downtown area. The amount of the reimbursement will be the
equivalent often percent (10%) ofthe total cost 0 the improvements up to a maximum of $500.
Fees eligible for reimbursement include building p rmits, other city inspections, and land use
ordinances. To be eligible for fee reimbursement, rojects must meet the following criteria:
...
Projects must comply with appliea Ie design guidelines and all codes and
ordinances. ..-
*
Reimbursement will be made after ompletion of the improvements.
*
Reimbursement will be based on d cumentation of actual improvement costs and
fees paid.
The maximum amount of financial assistance avail ble to each rehabilitation property is an amount
not to exceed $25,000.
Approved DMRF shall be null and void iffunds e not drawn or disbursed within 270 days from
date of ED A approval.
The Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund is administered by the City of Monticello
Economic Development Authority (EDA), which s a seven-member board consisting of two
Council members and five appointed members. E A members are appointed by the Mayor and
confirmed by the City Council. Formal meetings e held on a quarterly basis. Please see the
by-laws of the EDA for more information on the ructure of the organization that administers the
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund (D ).
3
~b-3
.
.
.
DMRF GUIDELINES
1. Participating lending institution shall be de ermined by the DMRF applicant.
2. Participating lending institution shall coop rate with the EDA and assist in carrying out
the policies of the DMRF as approved by t e City Council.
3. Participating lending institution shall analy e the funding application and indicate to the
EDA the level at which the lending institut on will participate in the finance package.
The EDA desires to make the DMRF application rocess as simple as possible. However, certain
procedures must be followed prior to EDA consid ration of a loan request. Information
regarding the program and procedures for obtainin funding is as follows:
City Staff Duties:
The Economic Development Director, working in on junction with the Assistant City
Administrator, shall carry out DMRF operating pr cedures as approved by the EDA and Council.
Staff is responsible for assisting an applicant in the application process and will work with the
applicant in development of the necessary informat on.
Application Process:
1. The applicant will meet with city statfto 0 tain information about the DMRF, discuss the
proposed project, and obtain a funding app ication form and a copy of Section 3, 4, and 5
of the Mep Design Guidelines of the Mont cello Downtown and Riverfront Plan.
Statfwill direct the applicant to contact the MCP Design Advisory Team as a resource for
suggestions and review of improvements w . ch comply with the design guidelines, codes,
and ordinances of the Monticello Downto and Riverfront Plan.
Staff will request the applicant contact a Ie ding institution regarding financing needs and
indicate to applicant that further action by e EDA on the potential loan will require
indication of support from a lending institut on.
2.
The applicant shall complete a DMRF appli ation. StatfwiIl review the application for
consistency with the policies set forth in th Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Guidelines.
4
5b-LJ.
.
.
.
DMRF GUIDELINES
3. City staffwill accept the findings ofa lend ng institution regarding applicant credit and
fmancial viability of the project. EDA ap roval will require a letter of support from the
lending institution. Upon receipt of the Ie ter of support, City staff shall submit a written
recommendation to the EDA and a decisi n regarding the application shall be made by the
ED A within 14 days of submittal of the Ie ter of support from the lending institution.
4. The EDA shall have authority to approve r deny the financial assistance of the
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fun .
5. The EDA shall not disburse approved D without a written acknowledgment from the
MCP Design Advisory Team that constru tion of the improvements are complete and
comply with applicable design guidelines d all codes and ordinances.
6. The EDA shall not disburse approved D (grants and reimbursement) without certified
documentation of the actual costs of the i provements and completion of the
improvements.
7. The EDA shall not disburse the approved DMRF (loan) without proof of financing for
costs not funded by the grant and executi n of the loan closing documents.
SOURCE - Economic Development Authority, reater Monticello Enterprise Fund
AMOUNT - $200,000 (For Year Ending Decem er 31, 1999).
The EDA shall disburse approved DMRF dollars from the payback of GMEF Liquor Fund dollars
at such time the approved DMRF is disbursed.
ual report detailing the status of the DMRF.
At a minimum, the EDA shall review the Fund idelines on an annual basis. No changes to the
DMRF guidelines shall be instituted without prio approval of the City Council.
5
5"/)-5""
.
.
.
DMRF GUIDELINES
1. City staff shall service and monitor all loan , matching grants, and fee reimbursements.
2. All loan documents shall include at a mini urn, a note and mortgage.
DMRF Guidelines 7/97
DMRF Guidelines amended 2/98
6
5D-~
.
.
.
5E.
A
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
I . n Ii
As you recall, in December of 1997, the Cit Council accepted a petition for annexation,
established a fee schedule, and authorized p eparation of a feasibility study which would
result in connection of the Monte Club to t e city sanitary sewer system. Council is now
asked to take the next step by authorizing p eparation of plans and specifications.
Following is an update on the status of the roject.
In terms of the annexation, the Orderly Ann xation Board is reviewing the annexation
request and has not approved the annexatio at this point in time due to the potential
interpretation that the County recognition 0 the environmental problem is not sufficient to
require annexation to the city and that the innesota Pollution Control Agency must
provide an order to connect. In addition, th site is not contiguous to the city; therefore,
unless the MPCA gives its order, the proper y cannot be annexed under the agreement.
Inability to annex the site does not preclude xtending sanitary sewer service to the site;
however, the Monte Club would have to pa three times the cost for sanitary sewer
service if located in the township.
The question of ownership of the property a d the standing of the petition for annexation
is also a question that has been raised. App ently, the Monte Club business has been sold
to Bill Hoffman under contract for deed; the efore, the question remains as to who should
be petitioning for the annexation and petitio . g for utilities. Should it be Bill Hoffman,
present operator and owner under contract, r should it be Bruce Gagnelius and Butch
Lindenfelser, who were the original owners f the facility? The single most important
point to be made in all of this confusion is th t the Monte Club needs access to the city
sanitary sewer system, and the site is too s for development of an on-site system;
therefore, eventually the sanitary sewer syste will need to be connected to city services.
Therefore, despite the questions relating to nexation and ownership, City Council is
requested to authorize preparation of plans a d specifications.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
Motion to authorize preparation of p s and specifications for extension of
sanitary sewer service to the Monte lub site. Motion is contingent upon the
developer providing $3,800, which is the estimated cost for the plans and
specifications.
Under this alternative, City staff will ontinue to work with Hoffman and Bruce
Gagnelius in development of the cons ruction and financing plans for extension of
the sanitary sewer line. We will also working with Value Plus developers for
acquisition of easements necessary to extend the line through between lots to a
6
.
.
.
2.
C.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
position where it can be extended al ng Fenning Avenue to the building site. We
will also be discussing the question f annexation with the Monticello Orderly
Annexation Board, Pollution Contr I Agency, etc.
Motion to deny authorization to pre are plans and specifications for extension of
sanitary sewer service to the Monte Club site.
ST AFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff reconnnends alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
7
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
. 7.
The Trunk Highway 25 improvement locat d from 1-94 to Kjellberg Mobile Home Court
involves numerous City improvements, wh ch include improvement of Oakwood Drive,
School Boulevard, Chelsea Road, and Dun as Road. The Trunk Highway 25
improvement also includes numerous tru sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer
improvements, along with lateral sanitary s wer, water main, and storm sewer
improvements.
The City of Monticello will be responsible for these local costs as part of the Trunk
Highway 25 improvement through a Coop rative Agreement with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation. It has bee identified that a portion of these costs is
assessable to adjacent property owners fo these improvements along the above-
mentioned streets and along Trunk Highw y 25.
In March of 1998, the City Council agree with City staff that it should move ahead with
holding a public hearing on May 26, 1998
.
The City Engineer and staff will present t e proposed costs and possible assessments
associated with the local improvements' luded in the Trunk Highway 25 construction
plans.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Resolutions to order plans and sp cifications, resolution approving plans and
specifications, and resolution aut orizing advertisement for bids of the Trunk
Highway 25 project.
Motion is contingent on complefon of an agreement between MNIDOT and the
City regarding funding of costs t complete the plan set.
The City Engineer anticipates th t the project will be ready to bid in August 1998
with approval of these resolutio s.
C3
Motion to continue the public h aring at a later date for the Trunk Highway 25
iptprovement.
~\J-
.
8
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
.
c.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is our opinion that the utility, storm sew r, and street improvements are reasonable and
necessary, will improve the value of the a jacent properties, and should be assessed
accordingly. However, with regard to the finance plan, we received the report on
Thursday, May 22, and have not had suffi ient time to develop a recommendation.
Since the current anticipated letting for th Trunk: Highway 25 improvement is in August
1998, there is time to continue the public earing depending on public input at this time.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
A copy of the feasibility report is attache for your review and includes further discussion
on project costs and the proposed improv ments.
.
.
9
.
.
.
.. -
.
WSB
350 Westwoo Lake Office
8441 Wayza a Boulevard
Minneapoli ,MN 55426
B.A. Mittelsteadt, P.E.
Bret A. Weiss, P.E.
Peter R. Willenbring, P.E.
Donald W. Sterna, P.E.
Ronald B. Bray, P.E.
& Associates, Inc.
612-54 .4800
FAX 5 1.1700
Memorandum
To:
Honorable Mayor and City Counc'l
City of Monticello
Bret A. Weiss, P.E(/ ~
City Engineer ~. ~
From:
Date:
May 26, 1998
Re:
Public Hearing / Proposed Assess ents
Trunk Highway 25 Improvement roject
City of Monticello Project No. 96- 4C
WSB Project No. 1033.50
This memo is intended to address issues associate with the public hearing phase of the Chapter 429
process for the above-referenced project. The publ' c hearing phase involves presentation of the project
to the public, along with describing potential costs fthe project, including estimated total project cost
and a description of the method for assessing the ost to the benefitted properties within the limits of
the City's assessment policy.
The Trunk Highway (TH) 25 improvement proj ct is a Federal Aid project commissioned by the
Department of Transportation to improve existin TH 25 from its current condition to a four-lane,
divided highway from 1-94 to just south of Kjell erg's Mobile Home Park. In order to facilitate the
development of the street, the following other anci lary improvements are anticipated to be completed:
1. Side Streets: This project will develop ne street access points along TH 25, expand existing
street connections with TH 25 and develop a ontrolled access situation related to driveways along
the length of the improved street. The fo lowing streets are anticipated to be upgraded or
developed:
. Oakwood Drive: Oakwood Drive fro existing TH 25 to just short of Chelsea Road is
intended to be upgraded to an urban sec ion with concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer.
A cul-de-sac will be installed at the east nd of Oakwood Drive, just west of existing Chelsea
Road once Chelsea Road has been extend d between County Road (CR) 117 and Cedar Street.
. Chelsea Road: A new Chelsea Road int rsection has been developed with this project in the
area of the old RV Center. This project will extend Chelsea Road between Cedar Street on
the east to Sandberg Road on the west. uture plans will extend Chelsea Road from CR 117
across to 90th Street on the west side of onticello. .
F:\WPWIN\\ 033.S0\052098.hmc
Infrastructure ngineers Planners
EQUAL OPPOR UNITY EMPLOYER
.
May 20, 1998
Page 2
. Dundas Road: Dundas Road is proposed t be developed as a three-quarter access street with
access from southbound TH 25; northboun TH 25; with access out to northbound TH 25. No
access will be allowed to obtain southbo d TH 25 as a part of this project. This road will be
paved from TH 25 to the proposed new C dar Street connection with this project.
. School Boulevard: School Boulevard, w st of TH 25, will be developed to just beyond the
proposed Park-N-Ride lot location to an ban section with concrete curb and gurter, storm
sewer and sanitary sewer and watermain i stallations.
We are proposing to assess properties adjacent to these roadways for the new street
construction in the amount consistent wi the benefit provided to the properties. We are
estimating a potential assessment of $241 front meter based on the assessment of a 40- foot
wide street. It is assumed that, due to the alue of direct street access to TH 25, all adjoining
properties benefit from the construction an are thereby assessed the full cost of a 40- foot wide
street.
.
2. Utility Improvements: Utility improvement associated with this project include the extension
of both trunk and lateral sanitary sewer and watermain systems. Some of the utility work is
associated with relocations to accommoda e TH 25 and fall into the category of system
expenditures. Other locations, such as School oulevard, involve the extension oflateral systems
to serve potential development areas and wil be assessed according to benefit on a front meter
basis. The only lateral utility systems pro osed to be assessed are along proposed School
Boulevard and the west frontage road from S hool Boulevard.
3. Lateral Storm Sewer: This project include the construction of a trunk and lateral storm sewer
system to serve both TH 25, along with provid g future trunk discharge points from the city storm
water system to properties adjacent to TH 25 d the proposed street areas previously discussed.
None of these areas have previously been ch ged for storm sewer installation and have simply
utilized existing ditches providing for a sto water system that was marginal at best. With the
development of an urban roadway system, a p . ped storm sewer system must be developed to carry
the discharge from the street system, as well the off system runoff as it is currently developed.
We have provided storm sewer stubs to vario s properties in the area served by the improvement
and have made assumptions for future exte sions of storm sewer lines to serve areas such as
Chelsea Road East and Dundas Road to acco odate future lateral extensions. At this time we
are proposing to assess properties on a squ foot basis for the lateral system expenditures at a
rate of $0.43 per square meter. We have not stimated the trunk system receivables because this
is typically handled as development occurs.
4. Pathway Improvements: The City is respo sible for approximately $95,000 worth of pathway
improvements, which is only a small share of the overall pathway project expenditures. It is
anticipated that the pathway expenditures w uld not be assessed, but would be considered a City
responsibility .
.
F:\WPWIN\I033.S0\OS2098.hmc
.
.
.
May 20,1998
Page 3
5. Summary: As noted on the attached Estimat d Cost Summary as previously provided to you at
the time the public hearing was called, there ar additional trunk expenditures for the storm sewer
that are not proposed to be assessed. These expenditures will be returned to the City through
the trunk system area costs that were recentl enacted by the City in February of this year. The
TH 25 project has afforded a more economi al method of constructing the trunk line that was
necessary to serve the development areas in onticello and therefore, has resulted in a slightly
earlier than anticipated use of the funds to evelop this system that is necessary for current
development projects.
As you are aware, moving forward with this roject at this time does not set the assessments for
this project, but merely acknowledges that the project is feasible, necessary and cost effective. At
the time the project is completed, an assessm nt hearing would be held to levy the assessments
against the benefitted properties. At that tim , the final assessment numbers will be provided to
the Council and the property owners. A aft assessment roll has been provided for your
information to give you an idea of the antic' ated assessments. However, at this point that is
merely an estimate for planning purposes. We ould recommend moving forward with the project
and planning on a September 1999 assessme t hearing to levy the assessments for this project.
Iv/nm
F:\WPWIN\1033.S0\OS2098".hmc
. 0 0 co
0 0 m
0 0 0 0 .!..
(0 r-... N ...... m
r-... C") ~ LO ::E
m ~ m 1,1) I
T""" m u::. N (0
J9 u::. u::. .... N
..
0 T""
I- 0
.
o
-
-
Q)
U
.-
......,
c:
o
~
'+-
o
>a
......,
.-
o
.
J!3
c
0)
E
0)00
> ~ LO
e q (")
Q.CDf2
E en T"""
- 0 ci
I.C) z z
N 1:) t5
>- .!!. .~
ro 0 ...
:= D: Cl..
.c l:' CD
C) ._ (f)
:c 0 ~
::.::.
c
:;]
I....
I-
J!!
"C C
CI) CI)
en E
o en
Q"en
e CI)
Q. =
<C
e
E~
S"C
en C
~Q)
rn~
w
e
::I
...:ill:::!::
C"C
::::J C
... Q)
I-c.
><
W
o
o
LO
m
o
T"""
u::.
o
o
m
LO
C")
T"""
u::.
o
o
m
o
o
~
(0
N
T"""
u::.
T"""
LO
u::.
o
o
N
(0
C")
u::.
c
o
:=
CJ
::::J
...
....
en
c
o
o
~
-
:=
::>>
o
o
LO
T"""
co
(0
u::.
-
~
.
r:r::
"C
C
o
Q.
CJ
C
-
...
;
Q)
t/J
E
.s
rn
o
u::.
....
eD
Ilt
N
Q')
1,1)
o
o
o
N
LO
m
u::.
o
o
~
an
T""
~
o
o
u::.
o
o
I'-:.
....
T""
....
o
~
ns
:it
.c
....
ns
c..
.
.
.
Preliminary Opinion of Probe ble Assessments
City of Mantic !!lIo
Trunk Highway <Ii 5
Ctiy Project No. 96 04C
WSB Project No. 10 33.50
Parcel Abutting Prop. Abutting Prop. Cost Per Street
No. PareellD Owner (meters) feet Linear Meter Assessment
34 155-034-001010 Samuel Prooerties 51.0 167 $ 241.50 $12,317
36 155-034-001030 Fayette Fund 71 233 $ 241.50 $17,147
41 155-500-113415 Wag Partnershlo 80 262 $ 241.50 $19,320
52 155-500-113412 Wag Partnership 87 285 $ 241.50 $21,011
53 155-500-142106 Waa Partnership 30 98 $ 241.50 $7,245
32 155-500-113414 James Refrigeration 98 322 $ 241.50 $23,667
33 155.500-113408 James Refrigeration 0 0 $ 241.50 $0
54 155.079-001010 Chin Yuen Silver Fox Inn 76 251.91 $ 241.50 $18,354
37 155-079-001020 Chin Yuen Silver Fox Inn 51 166.44 $ 241.50 $12,317
38 155.079-001030 Larson-Larson Partnershl 54 177 $ 241.50 $13,041
Parcel Abutting Prop. Abutting Prop. Cost Per Street
No. PareellD Owner meters L.F. Linear Meter Assessment
116 155-027-001030 t.oH 7!fK. J Central Minnesota Project 70.0 230 $ 241.50 $16,905
10 155-027-001031 Carol Chinos 61.5 202 $ 241.50 $14,852
29 155-094-001020 Linda & Daniel Mielke 56.0 184 $ 241.50 $13,524
25 155-036-001030 City of Monticello 0.0 0 $ 241.50 $0
31 155-500-142207 Alan W. Mielke 45.0 148 $ 241.50 $10,868
28 255-036-001040 City of Monticello 0.0 0 $ 241.50 $0
24 155-036-001020 Wamet Comm Prop 40.0 131 $ 241.50 $9,660
26 155-036-001060 JoAnn & R.A. Longley 35.0 115 $ 241.50 $8,453
Parcel AbuttIng Prop. Abutting Prop. Cost Per Street
No. Parcel 10 Owner meters L.F. Linear Meter Assessment
16 no parcel 10 no. known City of Monticello 11.0 36 $ 241.50 $2,657
17 155-500-142303 CItY of Monticello 16.0 52 $ 241.50 $3,864
20 155-500-142302 Glen &Lois Posusta 26.0 85 $ 241.50 $6,279
SUB- TOTAL ASSESSMENT VALUE '" '+.~$12.aOO
Pareel Abutting Prop. Abutting Prop. Cost Per Street
No. PareellD Owner meters L.F. Linear Meter Assessment
51A 213-100-1432100 Stuart & Arleen Hoalund 265.0 869 $ 241.50 $63,9981
51 citY of Monticello 90.0 295 $ 241.50 $21,735
SUB-TOTAL ASSESSMENT VALUE "'~
GRAND TOTAL OF ASSESSMENT VALUE =
-- --- -- --
.
Engineer's Preliminary Qpinio of Probable Cost
Trunk Highway 2
City Project No. 96- 4C
WSB Project No. 10 3.50
ITEM UNIT TOTAL
NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST COST
1 CLEAR & GRUB 0.0 ha $2.500 $0
2 COMMON EXCAVATION 1859 m3 $1.65 $3,070
3 COMMON BORROW L.V. 0 m3 $5.90 $0
4 AGGREGATE BASE CL 5 73 t $6.10 $440
5 AGGREGATE BASE CL 3 0 t $5.00 $0
6 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER ( B618 200 m $21.35 $4.270
7 BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE (TYPE 41) 40mm TH CK 108 t $23.00 $2,500
8 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TYPE 31 65mm THI K 176 t $22.00 $3.880
9 BITUMINOUS TRAIL 3m WIDE 300 m2 $12.00 $3.600
10 4" CONCRETE WALK 450 m2 $18.00 $8.100
11 TOPSOIL BORROW-1oomm THICK (L.V.) 343 m3 $7.80 $2,670
. 12 RETAINING WALL 0 m2 $15.00 $0
13 BOULEVARD TREES EVERY 30m 3 EACH $250.00 $750
14 SOD TYPE LAWN 2286 m2 $2.20 $5.030
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ::: $34.300
+ Contingency ::: $3.400
Subtotal ::: $37,700
+28% Indirect Costs ::: $10,600
Total Schedule A - Street = $48,300
COST PER METER = $483.00
COST PER SIDE OF STREET/METER ::: $241.50
EQUIVALENT COST PER FOOT ::: $73.61
.
.
.
M:/1033.50/Storm As ess. (SWO).xls
Engineer's Preliminary Opinion of F robable Assessments
City of Montlcell
County Rd. 25, Chelsea Rd. & Ma vin Rd.Extension
City Project No._ -
WSB Project No. 10 3.50
Parcel Area Assessed Cost Per Total
No. ParcellD Owner (Acre) Acre Assessment
13 CItY of Monticello 0.76 $3,085.00 $2,344.60
32&33 155-500-113414 & 155-50Q..113408 James Refrigeration 2.544 $3,085.00 $7,848.24
36 155-034-001030 Favette Fund 0.800 $3,085.00 $2,468.00
37 155-079-001020 Chin Yuen Sliver Fox Inn 2.848 $3,085.00 $8,786.08
38 155-079-001030 Larson-Larson Partnership 1.174 $3,085.00 $3,621.79
41 155-50Q..113415 Waa Part 0.862 $3,085.00 $2,659.27
52 155-50Q..113412 Waa Part 0.816 $3,085.00 $2,517.36
53 155-50Q..142106 Wag Part 0.635 $3,085.00 $1,958.98
54 155-079-001010 Chin Yuen Sliver Fox Inn 0.811 $3,085.00 $2,501.94
E 0.743 $3,085.00 $2,292
21 155-032-001040 Joel & Janet Erickson 0.947 $3,085.00 $2,921
22 155-032-001030 Marlin & Ritz Besler 0.646 $3,085.00 $1,993
22a Marlin & Ritz Besler 0.722 $3,085.00 $2,227
23 155-032-001010 Charles Leininger Sr. 0.800 $3,085.00 $2,468
24 155-036-001020 Wamet Comm Prop 0.220 $3,085.00 $679
24a 155-036-001020 Wamet Comm Prop 0.324 $3,085.00 $1,000
26 155~036-001 060 JoAnn & R.A. Longley 0.278 $3,085.00 $858
27 155-036-001050 Wamet Comm Prop 0.028 $3,085.00 $86
29 & 29R 155-094-001020 Linda & Daniei Mielke 0.779 $3,085.00 $2,403
30 155-094-001010 Gae B. Veit 0.571 $3,085.00 $1,762
31 155-50Q..142207 Alan W. Mielke 0.167 $3,085.00 $515
15 155-50Q..142204 State of Minnesota 0.120 $3,085.00 $370
F 0.080 $3,085.00 $247
18 155-500-142300 State of Minnesota 0.061 $3,085.00 $188
16 no parcel 10 no. known City of Monticello 0.246 $3,085.00 $759
17 155-500-142303 State of Minnesota 0.241 $3,085.00 $743
20 155-50Q..142302 Glen &Lols posusta 0.290 $3,085.00 $895
20a TH 25 V drain for outlet 1.132 $3,085.00 $3,492
40 155-500-142400 John & Marv Lundsten 0.962 $3,085.00 $2,968
42 15-098-000010 LLC Ocello 2.677 $3,085.00 $8,259
43 15-096-000060 LLC Ocello 1.610 $3,085.00 $4,967
44 155-50Q..154400, 155-50Q..154403 & Kjellberg Inc.
155-500-154404 1.080 $3,085.00 $3,33
48 213-100-154405 Darvl 5 & Michele A Card nal 1.690 $3,085.00 $5,214
51a 213-100-143200 CItY of Monticello 2.510 $3,085.00 $7,743
47 213-10Q..154402 K1ellbera Inc. 2.640 $3,085.00 $8,144
SUB-TOTAL ASSESSMENT VALUE '" 32.814 :11$1 ()J!:'i2:I1
Parcel Area Assessed Cost Per Total
No. Parcel 10 Owner (Acre) Acre Assessment
51a 213-100-143200 City of Monticello 6.590 $3,085.00 $20,330
H(51a ?) 213-100-143200 City of Monticello 1.350 $3,085.00 $4,165
51 Stuart G. and Arleen A. oglund Q.600 $3,085.00 $1,851
Park&Rlde 3.210 $3,085.00 $9,903
G I 0.490 $3,085.00 $1,512
SUB~OTALASSESSMENTVALUE= 12.240 >'~;".$37iJ7l:j9
GRAND TOTAL OF STORM SEWER ASSESSMENT VALU = 45.054
Steve W. Dodge
5 "1/98
-
.
, . .
Preliminary Opinion of Probable ssessments
.
City of Monticello
Trunk Highway 25
City Project No. 96-04C
WSB Project No. 1033.5
.
Parcel
No.
Parcel 10
Owne
Sanitary Sewer Watermain
Assessment Assessment
Total
Charge
$0
Parcel 10
Total Proposed Assessments =
.
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
8.
A
The City Council is requested to hold a pub'c hearing and approve a resolution modifying
Project No.1 Plan and establishing TIP Dis rict No. 1-23 for Allied Companies. The
taxing jurisdictions received a copy of the oposed TIF Plan 30 days prior to the
scheduled public hearing and a public hear' g notice appeared in the local newspaper at
least 10 days prior to the public hearing. P ease open and close the public hearing.
Enclosed you will find an overview of the IF Plan for TIF District No. 1-23 as prepared
by Ehlers & Associates. You will note the overview outlines the project description and
required findings of the Council. Allied C mpanies has submitted a proforma and
Marquette Bank, on behalf of Midwest Gr phics, will be providing the HRA with
documentation for the "but for" test. The roject will create 37 new jobs with wages
between $8.24 to $12 per hour and increa e the tax base. Rusty Fifield of Ehlers will be
present at the Council meeting. A copy 0 the entire TIF District No. 1-23 Plan and
modified Central Monticello Redevelopm nt Project No.1 Plan are available at city hall
for your review.
Paul Ederer of Allied Companies, the dev loper, and Steve Krenz of Midwest Graphics,
the proposed tenant, will also be present t the Council meeting. A preliminary meeting
relating to site and building plans was hel between the Chief Building Official and Grady
Kinghorn, the general contractor, on ApI' 27, 1998. The proposed TIF District is located
on the east side of Fallon Avenue and on he south side of Dundas Road.
The Contract for Private Redevelopment tween the HRA and Allied Companies, LLC,
which describes the level of TIF assistan e and the terms and conditions of the contract,
was prepared by HRA Attorney Dan Gre nweig. At this time, both parties appear to
agree on the terms and conditions of the ontract with execution of the document to occur
prior to approval of the TIF District. Co struction of the minimum improvements to
corrunence on or before August I, 1998, with completion on or before December 31,
1998. The HRA agreed to pay-as-you-g TIF assistance for site improvements and land
write-down in an amount not-to-exceed 181,000 Net Present Value.
Please consider the following alternative actions relating to the establishment of TIF
District No. 1-23.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
A motion to approve a resolutio adopting the modified Redevelopment Plan for
Central Monticello Redevelop nt Project No.1 and establishing within Central
Monticello Redevelopment Proj ct No.1 TIF District No. 1-23 and adopting the
related TIF Plan therefor.
10
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
2.
A motion to deny approval of a resolu ion adopting the modified Redevelopment
Plan for Central Monticello Redevelo nt Project No.1 and establishing within
Central Monticello Redevelopment Pr ject No.1 TIF District No. 1-23 and
adopting the related TIF Plan therefor
3. A motion to table any action.
C. ST AFF RECOMMENDATION:
As the proposed project will increase the tax and job base for the state and local
community and the project treets the require findings for establishment of a TIP District,
the City Administrator and Economic Devel ptrent Director recotnrrend alternative #J.
I}. SUPPORTING DATA:
Overview ofTIF District No. 1-23; Map id ntifying the district location; Copy of the
resolution for approval.
11
.
.
.
.
A Ehlers and Associates
W Tax Increment Financing District Over iew
City of Monticello - Tax Increment Financing D strict No. 1-23
The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
TIF District No. 1-23. More detailed information on eac of these topics can be found in the complete TIF
Plan.
Proposed action:
Establish ent of Tax Increment Financing District
No. 1-23 and adoption of a Tax Increment
Financin Plan.
Development District:
Modific tion to the Redevelopment Plan for the
Central onticello Redevelopment Project No.1.
Type of TIF District:
Parcel Numbers
Legal Description
Lot 1, Bock I, Monticello Commerce Center Third
Additio
Proposed development and Agreement:
Facilitat the construction of a 60,000 square-foot
qualifie manufacturing and distribution facility for
Midwes Graphics. Includes 8,000 square feet of
mezzani e office space and 37 new jobs with wages
between $8.24 and 12.00 per hour.
Maximum duration:
9 years rom receipt of first tax increment or 11 years
from th date of approval of the Plan.
Estimated annual tax increment:
Proposed uses:
The T Plan contains the following budget:
Land a quisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200,000
Site 1m rovements .................. 100,000
Public mprovements ................ 100,000
Public tilities ..................... 200,000
Interest ........................... 405,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ...... 100,000
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $1,105,000
~--I
TIF District 0 erview
.
Administrative fee:
Loan or ;my-as-you-go nqte
Up to 1(% of annual increment, if costs are justified.
Form of financing:
LGAIHACA penalty Local contribution:
The Cit and HRA elect to make a qualifying local
contribution. The local contribution for a economic
develop nent district is equi valent to 10% of the tax
incremelt revenue.
Required findings by the City Council:
Eviden e
1. Finding that the District No. 1-23 is an
economic development district as defined
in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 12.
1. Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-23 is a
con iguous geographic area within the City's
Cen ral Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1,
deli leated in the Plan for the purpose of
fimncing economic development in the City
thrcugh the use of tax increment. District No. 1-
23 onsists of a portion of Central Monticello
Re( evelopment Project No. 1 not meeting
req irements for other types of tax increment
fin ncing districts, and is in the public interest
because it will facilitate construction of a 60,000
square foot production/warehouse facility which
wil increase employment in the state, and
pre erve and enhance the tax base of the state.
.
2a. The proposed development, in the
opinion of the City, would not
reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the
reasonably foreseeable future
2a. Th s finding is supported by the fact that the
de elopment proposed in this plan is a
manufacturing and warehouse facility that meets
the City's and HRA' s objectives for industrial
de elopment and job growth. The cost of land
ac uisition, site improvements and stormwater
ch rges make development of the facility
in easible without HRA assistance. The
de eloper has submitted a pro forma on file in ,
Ci y Hall demonstrating the need for the
as istance, and the developer's tenant has
ce :tified to the city that financing for the project
w uld not be available but for the tax increment
as istance to be provided under this plan.
as istance to be provided under this plan.
.
Pa e2
~-~
.
.
.
TIF District Overview
Required findings by the City Council:
Eviden e: (continued)
2b. The increased market value of the site
that could reasonable be expected to
occur without the use of tax increment
financing would be less than the
increase in market value estimated to
result from the proposed development
after subtracting the present value of the
projected tax increments for the
maximum duration of the TIF District
permitted by the Plan
2b. Th City supported this finding on the grounds
tha any development on this site is likely to be
industrial (given the zoning), and will have the
sm e type of costs to be incurred by the Midwest
Gr phics project. In addition, the cost of
ace uiring the property from the current owner
we uld add to the total development cost. This
sit has been marketed for at least 6 years
wi hout success. Historically, land and site
de elopment costs in this industrial area have
m de manufacturing development infeasible
wi hout tax increment assistance. Therefore, the
Ci y reasonably determines that no other
de velopment of any kind is anticipated on this
sit without substantially similar assistance
be.ng provided to the Midwest Graphics
development. Accordingly, the increased
m rket value anticipated without tax increment
as.istance is $0.
3. Finding that the Tax Increment 3.
Financing Plan for District No. 1-23
conforms to the general plan for the
development or redevelopment of the
municipality as a whole.
T e Plan was reviewed by the Planning
C mmission on May 5, 1998. The Planning
C mmission found that the Plan confonns to the
ge neral development plan of the City.
4.
Finding that the Tax Increment 4.
Financing Plan for District No. I ~23
will afford maximum opportunity,
consistent with the sound needs of the
City as a whole, for the development of
Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No. I by private enterprise.
T e project to be assisted by District No. 1-23
w.n result in increased employment in the City
a d the State of Minnesota, increased tax base of
tt e State, and add a high quality development to
tt e City.
Pa e3
~,3
~
~
.
z
.
~
.
~
..'.',-
I
i- -" - - ~ - - - -' - - - - - - - - - - - -' - - - - - - -.-
.....
rfj
~
=
o
.-
........
~
Q..l
00.
~
~
~
o
Z
,
I'
._~, I
-----r1
______u_u________ -r
C""I
N
I
~
,
o
Z
E-t
U
t-I
p::
E-t
Cf.l
t-I
A
~
t-I
E-t
A
~
Cf.l
o
P-t
o
p::
P-t
~
N
1Il
<t
o
Z
~ - ~
O?Jfl(J 0
--- - .-- - -- -~- - - -- --~-- -----~------ -~A-V_-N.g:j. ~ ::I--'-3-!N------
.
. .... "
\
---------- -- -- \ - -- - ------ ---- ----
T
;%
-rj~
1 ..
j J.
1'~
.
.
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGH COUNTY
STATE OF INNESOT A
Council member
introdu ed the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTI
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MO IFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
CENTRAL MONTICELLO' REDEVE OPMENT PROJECT NO.1; AND
ESTABLISHING WITHIN CENTRA MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT NO.1 TAX INCREMENT INANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-23 AND
ADOPTING THE RELATED TAX INC MENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (th "Council") of the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the
"City"), as follows:
Section I.
Recitals.
1.0 I. It has been proposed that the City Cou cil adopt the Modified Redevelopment Plan for Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I and establish within Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.
I Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-23 ("Dist ict No. 1-23 ") and adopt the related Tax Increment
Financing Plan therefor (collectively, the "Plans"); a I pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law,
including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 throug 469.047 and 469.174 through 469.179, all inclusive,
as amended, all as reflected in the Plans, and presente for the Council's consideration.
1.02. The Council has investigated the fact relating to the Plans.
1.03. The City has performed all actions req ired by law to be performed prior to the adoption and
approval of the proposed Plans, including, but not limit d to, notification of Wright County and School District
No. 882 having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in District No. 1-23, a review of and
written comment on the Plans by the City Planning C mmission, and the holding of a public hearing upon
published notice as required by law.
1.04. Certain written reports (the "Reports") r lating to the Plans and to the activities contemplated
therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and sub itted to the Council and/or made a part of the City files
and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports include d ta, information and/or substantiation constituting or
relating to the bases for the other findings and de term nations made in this resolution. The Council hereby
confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are he eby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this
resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full here' n.
Section 2.
2.01.
The Council hereby finds that the PIa s, are intended and, in the judgment of this Council,
N:IMINNSOT AIMONTICEL\TIF1.23\CITY,RES
cg,s-
.
.
.
the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impet s for development in the public purpose and accomplish
certain objectives as specified in the Plans, which ar hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3.
Findin s for the Establishment of T x Increment Financin District No. 1-23.
3.0 I. The Council hereby finds that Tax ncrement Financing District No. 1-23 is in the public
interest and is an "economic development district" u der Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 12.
3.02. The Council further finds that the roposed development would not occur solely through
private investment within the reasonably foreseeable f ture and that the increased market value on the site that
could reasonably be expected to occur without the se 'of tax increment financing would be less than the
increase in the market value estimated to result from he proposed development after subtracting the present
value of the projected tax increments for the maxim m duration of District No. 1-23 permitted by the Tax
Increment Financing Plan, that the Plans conform to he general plan for the development or redevelopment
of the City as a whole; and that the Plans will afford aximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs
of the City as a whole, for the development of Distri t No. 1-23 by private enterprise.
3.03. The City elects to make a qualifying I al contribution in accordance with Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.1399, subd. 6(d), in order to qualify District No. 1.23 for exemption from state aid losses set forth
in Section 273.1399.
3.04. The Council further finds, declares nd determines that the City made the above findings
stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons a d supporting facts for each determination in writing,
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 4.
A roval and Ado tion of t e Plans.
4.01. The Plans, as presented to the Counci on this date, including without limitation the findings
and statements of objectives contained therein, are h reby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and
shall be placed on file in the office of the Executive irector of the HRA.
4.02. The staff of the City and the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to
proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to egotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for
its consideration all further plans, resolutions, docum nts and contracts necessary for this purpose.
4.03 The Auditor of Wright County is req ested to certify the original net tax capacity of District
No. 1-23, as described in the Plans, and to certify in ea h year thereafter the amount by which the original net
tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the Cit of Monticello is authorized and directed to forthwith
transmit this request to the County Auditor in such fo and content as the Auditor may specify, together with
a list of all properties within District No. 1-23 for w ich building permits have been issued during the 18
months immediately preceding the adoption of this re olution.
N:IMINNSOT A IMONTlCEL\TIFI .23\CITY,RES
g'--~
.
.
.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoi g resolution was duly seconded by Council member
, and upon a vote being taken t ereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Dated: May 26, 1998
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Administrator
(Seal)
N,IMINNSOT AIMONTlCEL\TlFI-Z,ICITY.RES
~,?
EX HI IT A
RESOLUTION #
.
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for t e adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1-23, ("District No. 1- 3") as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
I. Finding that the District No. /-23 is an economic development district as defined in M.S.. Section 469./74,
Suhd. /2.
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-23 is a contiguous geographic area within the City's Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1, delin ated in the Plan for the purpose of financing economic
development in the City through the use of tax in rement. District No. 1-23 consists of a portion of Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project No. I not mee ing requirements for other types of tax increment financing
districts, and is in the public interest becaus it will facilitate construction of a 60,000 square foot
production/warehouse facility which will increas employment in the state, and preserve and enhance the tax
base of the state.
2.
Finding that the proposed development, in the op nion of the City Council, would nOt reasonably be expected
to occur solely through private investment withi the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased
market value of the site that could reasonabl. be expected to occur 'without the use of tax increment
financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value if the projected tax increments for the maximum duration
of District No. 1-23 permitted by the Plan.
.
The proposed development. in the opinion of tl e City. would not reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the reasonab y foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact
that the development proposed in this plan is a anufacturing and warehouse facility that meets the City's
and HRA's objectives for industrial develop ent and job growth. The cost of land acquisition, site
improvements and stormwater charges make dev lopment of the facility infeasible without HRA assistance.
The developer has submitted a pro forma on file 'n City Hall demonstrating the need for the assistance, and
the developer's tenant has certified to the city t at financing for the project would not be available but for
the tax increment assistance to be provided und r this plan.
The increased market value of the site that COt ld reasonable be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the iner ase in market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration
of the TIF District permitted by the Plan: he City supported this finding on the grounds that any
development on this site is likely to be industrial (given the zoning), and will have the same type of costs to
be incurred by the Midwest Graphics project. I addition, the cost of acquiring the property from the current
owner would add to the total development cos. This site has been marketed for at least 6 years without
success. Historically, land and site developm nt costs in this industrial area have made manufacturing
development infeasible without tax increment a sistance. Therefore, the City reasonably determines that no
other development of any kind is anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being
provided to the Midwest Graphics development. Accordingly, the increased market value anticipated without
tax increment assistance is $0.
3.
Finding that the Tax Increment Financing PIa for District No. 1-23 conforms to the general plan for the
development or redevelopment of the municip lity as a whole.
.
N ;\MINNSOT A \MONTICEL\TIF 1-231CITY. RES
~.,~
.
.
.
The Plan was reviewed by the Planning Commissi n on May 5, 1998. The Planning Commission found that
the Plan conforms to the general development pl' n of the City.
4.
Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan Jor District No. 1-23 will qfford maximum opportunity.
consistent with the sound needs oj the City a' a whole. Jar the development oj Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I by private enterpri e.
The project to be assisted by District No. 1-23 wil result in increased employment in the City and the State
of Minnesota, increased tax base of the State, an add a high quality development to the City.
N:IMINNSOT AIMONTICEL\TlFI-23\CITY.RES
C/,fj
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
. 9.
Russ and Paula Adamski have requested a zoning ordinance text amendment to allow
outdoor go-cart tracks as a conditional us within the I-I (light industrial) district. This
use is currently only allowed by condition I use permit in the B-3 (highway business)
district. The purpose of the request is to conunodate an expansion of the applicant's
existing roller rink amusement area, locate at the southwest corner of County Road 117
and Thomas Park Drive (zoned I-I distric ), to include an outdoor go-cart track. As such,
the applicants are also requesting approva of a conditional use permit for an outdoor go-
cart track. However, any action on this re uest is contingent upon the City taking one of
three alternative zoning amendment actio s to allow this use on the subject property.
.
The Planning Conunission, following disc ssion and information from the applicant's
representative and neighboring property 0 ners, voted to recommend denial of the
proposed use. Their recommendation wa based on a finding that any amendment of the
zoning ordinance to acconunodate this us would be incompatible with the surrounding
current and future land uses, primarily ind strial. At this time, the applicant has requested
that the City Council refer the matter bac to the Planning Commission for additional
review rather than act on the application.
Referral back to the Planning Commissio should be considered when the City Council
believes that there is additional informati n bearing on the question which the Planning
Commission was not aware of. Referral ack is generally not a good idea merely because
one of the parties does not agree with the outcome of the Planning Conunission's review.
The remedy for a party which is dissatisfi d with the Planning Commission's
recommendation is to ask the City Coun il for a different outcome and to appeal that
decision if they believe it to be necessary.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
DECISION 1:
REFER THE M TTER BACK TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION ITHOUT A DECISION
1. Motion to refer the zoning amen ment and conditional use permit request back to
the Planning Commission for the consideration of additional information. This
alternative would include tabling of action on Decisions 2 and 3 below.
2. Deny the request to refer the ma ter back to the Planning Commission and proceed
to Decisions 2 and 3 discussed blow.
.
2
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
.
DECISION 2:
AMENDMENT TO LLOW OUTDOOR GO-CART TRACK
USE ON SUBJECT ITE
1.
Motion to approve an amendment to the zoning ordinance to make outdoor go-
cart tracks a conditional use within t e 1-1 (light industrial) district subject to the
same conditions as outlined for this se in the B-3 district, based upon a finding
that the use is consistent with the pu pose of the 1-1 district and comprehensive
plan objectives.
Motion to approve an amendment t the zoning ordinance to include outdoor go-
cart track uses within the scope of' amusement places" based on a finding that the
use is similar in character to that of other uses so defined and that the amendment
is consistent with the objectives of he comprehensive plan.
2.
3.
Motion to approve the rezoning of the subject site from 1-1 (light industrial)
district to B-3 (highway commerci 1) district based upon a fmding that the existing
and proposed use of the subject is ommercial in nature and that the amendment is
consistent with comprehensive pla objectives; and
.
Motion to approve an amendment to the zoning ordinance making "amusement
places (i.e., roller rinks and dance alls) and bowling alleys" a conditional use in
the B-3 district based upon the fin ing that said uses are commercial in nature and
are consistent with the purpose of the B-3 district and comprehensive plan
objectives.
Motion to deny applicant's reque t based upon a fmding that none of the proposed
actions are consistent with the ob ectives of the comprehensive plan.
4.
DECISION 3:
CONDITION A USE PERMIT FOR GO-CART TRACK IN
SUBJECT SITE
1. Motion to approve a conditional use permit to allow for an outdoor go-cart track
in the 1-1 district based upon a ding that the proposed use has met, or will meet
with appropriate changes, the c nditions as defmed in the zoning ordinance,
including adequate screening to rotect adjacent properties and adequate parking
to accommodate the proposed se and compatibility with the area and
comprehensive plan objectives.
2.
Motion to approve a condition use permit to allow for an outdoor go-cart track
in the B-3 district based upon a finding that the proposed use has met or will meet
with appropriate changes, the c nditions as defmed in the zoning ordinance,
including adequate screening t protect adjacent properties and adequate parking
to accommodate the proposed se and compatibility with the area and
comprehensive plan objectives.
.
13
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
.
3.
Motion to deny a conditional use pe mit to allow for an outdoor go-cart track on
the subject site based upon a fmding that the proposed use cannot meet the
requirements of the zoning ordinanc or objectives of the comprehensive plan.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended d nial of the zoning amendment and the
conditional use permit. Their view was bas d on a concern that the go-cart track use was
not truly industrial in nature, and that even' rezoned to B-3, the go-cart uses would be
incompatible with the surrounding industri 1 district. Staff believes that the compatibility
issue is of genuine concern. As such, we ve suggested a series of site improvements
which are designed to mitigate the incomp tibility. The discussion of those issues are
included in the staff report prepared for th May 5, 1998, Planning Commission agenda.
The issue for the City Council is whether t ere is additional information which the
Planning Commission should consider in it review and recommendation. If so, the City
Council should consider alternative #1 of ecision #1, referral of the zoning amendment
and conditional use permit back to the Pla ing Commission.
.
Staff believes that there is sufficient new' formation suggested by the applicant to justify
this request and recommends that course f action. The applicants were not able to attend
the Planning Commission hearing in pers n; and as a result, specific information about the
operation of the facility was unavailable. e would recommend that the referral be
accompanied by a re-notification so that e interested neighboring property owners can
continue to participate in the Planning Commission's review. Re-notification is optional
and would not require the usual ten-day otice. As noted, this action would include
tabling of Council action on the requests ntil such time as the Planning Commission has
re-heard the issue and forwarded a new r commendation.
If the City Council does not believe ther has been a showing of new information, it
should take the matter up without referr back. As such, Decisions 2 and 3 (zoning
amendment and conditional use permit) hould be resolved with the existing information,
including the standing Planning Commis ion recommendation.
If the City Council believes that the go- art track is a reasonable expansion of the existing
use, staff recommends approval of a rez ning of the subject site to B-3 district and text
amendment to make "amusement places' a conditional use within the B-3 district
(Decision 2, alternative #3) and a condi ional use permit to allow said use (Decision 3,
alternative #2) subject to the conditions included as an attachment to this report as
Exhibit A. However, if the City Counc' believes that the use cannot be made compatible
even with various conditions, we would recommend denial of the request as suggested by
the Planning Commission.
.
D.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Exhibit A _ Recommended Conditions f Conditional Use Permit Approval
14
.
1.
2.
3.
.
.
CONDITIONS OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL
GO-CART TACK
RUSS AND PAUL A AMSKI DBA
MONTICELLO R LLER RINK
The conditional use permit will be reviewed early to determine whether or not it is
compatible with neighboring properties and' conformance with conditions of the
conditional use.
A solid 6-foot high wood fence be provided ound the rear yard of the subject property.
The applicant provide a landscape plan that rovides planting materials of the type and
quantity necessary to supplement the requir d wood fence as an effective screen/buffer.
Said landscape plan shall be subject to revie and approval of the City Council.
4.
The go-cart track be surfaced with concrete or bituminous material.
5.
No exterior public address system or loud s eakers be utilized on the subject site.
6.
The parking lot be improved to zoning ord' ance standards so as to provide 70 parking
stalls, two of which must be disability acce sible with a 7- foot access land in between.
Standards include both curbing and stripin .
7.
Any expansion of uses on the subject site s all require an amendment to existing
conditional use permit subject to complian e with zoning ordinance provisions, subject to
review and recommendation of the Plann' g Commission and approval of the City
Council.
8.
The site plan be revised to indicate the Ice tion of any and all site lighting. Additionally,
the applicant shall provide details regard' g all exterior light fixtures including photometric
illumination fields. All site lighting shall subject to review and recommendation of the
Planning Conunission and approval of the City Council.
9.
Comments of other City staff.
EXHIBIT A. RECOM ENDED CONDITIONS OF CUP APPROVAL
9,/
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
.
10.
r
A
As you recall, at the last meetiug of the City ouncil. the City was presented with a
request by St. Hemy's Church for relaxation of oversiziug standards relative to the 7th
Street roadway and the water main. In addit on, various bridge alignment options were
discussed, and the City Council determined at the straight alignment with the bulb was
the least expensive to the City and, therefnr , this design was set as the base from whicb
additional costs to St. Henry's Church for a emative alignments would be calculated.
.
Subsequent to the treetiug of the City Cou il. staff tret with representatives from St.
Henry's Church to discuss alternative bridg alignments. It was our hope that an
alignment would be selected that would e sense iu terms of St. Henry's land use and
budget. On Monday, May 18, representati es from the Church presented new design
ideas to staff. The City Engineer reviewed them and noted that he would need to take the
ideas back for further study and conunent om MNIDOT. A follow-uP meeting was
tentatively schednled for Thursday at I p. It is now Wednesday noon, and Bret Weiss
has informed tre that the designs presente by the Church do not treet minimal acceptable
standards for speed and safety; therefore, e will not be iu support of developtrent of the
bridge and alignments as proposed. Obvi usly it is fruitless to move forward with
developtrent of additional engineering dat until soch time that an acceptable bridge
alignment alternative can be found. It is 0 r hope that at the treetiug on Thursday, clear
direction on the bridge alignment will mat riaJize. This iuformation will then be presented
to the Church buildiug committee on Thu sday eveniug. The results of this treetiug will
not be available for the City Council until Monday. I hope to treet with lohn Olson on
Friday sotretime to review the results of he buildiug committee discussion and to begiu
preparation of a finance plan accordiugly This information will not be ready iu time for
placement in the City Council packet.
-p. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
No specific action identified at this time. however, an alternative for action may be ~~
provided to the City Council at the tree iug on Monday. Iv t\,- (~,." . ,
. (r( Y \'\ -1'7 ()>> .,. ~
. . t? t ~ ) l""."f
\- ' ~~'" . \ if&?'"
Pending. Cx; .--(D
~~jJ
ov-1
D.
SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
.
15
.
.
.
MAY-26-1998 16:19
..
WS8
WSB & ASSOCIATES I C.
6125411700 P.02/03
BoA. Micrcl5[cadt, P.E.
Beee A. WtiJs. P.E.
Pelt: R. Willenbring. P.E.
Donald. W. Sterna. r.E.
Ron.ald B. Bmy, P.E.
350 Westwood ake Office
8441 Wayzat Boulevard
Minneapolis MN 55426
& Associates, Int.
6'2-54' 4800
FAX 54 -1700
Mem.randum
To:
Honorable Mayor and Members 0 the City Council
City of Monticello, Minnesota
BretA. WeissJP'~
City Engineer
From:
Date:
May 26, 1998
Reo'
?I' Street / Fallon A.lIenu.e Overpa
St. Henry's Church
WSB Project No. 1010.44
This memo is an update with regard to negotiations .:th St. Henry's Church on the location and design
of -,m Street through their property. Following th last City Council meeting, St. Henry's asked for
copies of our detailed cost analyses, which were resented at the last council meeting on the three
acceptable alternatives. At the same time, St Henry's came up with a fourth and fifth alternative, which
they requested that the City analyze. After a brief Ie . ew, it was decided that neither of St. Henry's two
alternatives were acceptable from a design standpo'nt and were not significantly less expensive than
the City's alternatives. Consequently, we comple a revised analysis of the cost for the angled bridge
and presented that to the Church on Thursday of week. The cost analysis utilized the assumption
that the City would pay for any oversizing from a 3 ~foot wide street width and that the Church would
pay for all excess fill materials and contribute $200 000 toward the future angled bridge construction.
Following that meeting, it was discussed by the hurch that with this alternative, there was some
additional money left over in the amoWlt that the City Council has agreed to pay and there was a
question as to whether it did make sense for the Ci to pay for the fill for the street. Because the City
is responsible for 27% of the street cost, and in an e ort to move forward with a compromised solution,
it would be my recommendation that the City split e f1l1 cost with St. Henry's Church. This amounts
to a contribution of approximately 5130,000. With any projects, the road would be designed to fit the
area and then the City would share in the costs. e have over.analyzed this street and it is probably
time to move forward. Providing that fill in this ar a will create a good 7m Street and Fallon Avenue
street system in the area, yet still accomplishes the hurch's goals with their facility.
If the Council does move forward with that reco endation. I would ask that several other issues be
clarified as a part of the motion. These issues have ot been discussed with the Church, but should not J
appreciably affect the agreement.
1. An agreement to pay for up to $200,000 in xcess bridge cos.ts should be committed to by the
Church in a document that is prepared b the City Attorney and reviewed by St. Henry's
F:\WPWlN\lOI O.44\OS26ga.1une
Infrastructure En neers Planners
EQUAl. OPPOR ITY IiMt"LOYER
.
.
.
MAY-26-1998 16:19
WSB & ASSOCIATES NC.
6125411700 P.03/03
'? Street / Fallon Avenue Overpass
SL Henry's Church
WSB Project No.1 01 0.44
May 26, 1998
Page 2
attorney in a manner that makes it Wldersta the Church is responsible for those costs at some
time in the future when the bridge is cons cted.
2. The Church should donate land to the Ci for the placement of the park that is being removed
as a part of this project. The City will ass e costs of relocating the park structures and grading
the site.
3. The City will purchase excess rigbt..of-w y associated with the bridge construction from the
Church. between the 1..94 right-of-way an the south edge of proposed -ph Street at a cost to be
agreed upon by the Church and City. As i our policy, the City will not purchase excess right-
of-way for 'P' Street and will request that the Church dedicate 80 feet of right-of-way for ~
Street construction.
4. The Church will be responsible for pro ding the storm sewer ponding onsite for the pond
located in the southeast comer of their sf and the construction of the pond will be completed
at the Church' s cost.
s.
In an effort to minimize the fill and gra . g costs for all parties involved. it is suggested that
some grading work be completed by the C :urch' s contractor so that we can maximize the onsite
fill and lower the ovetall grading costs.
If these minor issues are acceptable to all parties. I would suggest that we move forward with the angled
bridge alignment as noted on the attached figure. These issues will all be discussed at the meeting and
this memo is for your infonnation only.
lv/IUD.
P:\WI'WIN\IOIO.U\052.69'-bmIl
TOTAL P.13
.
.
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC.
6125411700 P.01/03
350 WestWoo Lake Office
8441 Wayza Boulevard
Minneapoli ,MN 55426
BA Mittelsteadt. P.E.
SmA. Weiss. P.E.
PcteI'R. Willenbring. P.E.
Donald W. Sterna, P.E.
Ronald B. Bn.y, P.E.
To:
Fax Transmittal
. ei Associates, ltlt.
Organization:
. II.J
Fax No:
Date: 5-~- 98
Copy to:
Fax No:
Re:
Project No:
Number of Pages Following This Lead She t ~
From:
Comments:
~w
Writ
-ir, . S:J-II~~ s
.tl~ (j-1l J
Faxed this date at
am/pm
--------
.-
c:
Initials
.
Infrastru.ctuTt nginurs Plannen
EQUAL OppOR: NrrY E,MPLOYU.
';\WPWIltIFORMSIFAX.W'D
.
11.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
. i
Marvin Road improvement project.
N
The Marvin Road improvement has been iden ified as part of the planning process for
providing adequate access to the land area 10 ated west of Trunk Highway (TH) 25 and
south of 1-94. The TH 25 improvement will isconnect existing Oakwood Drive west of
TH 25 and provide for improvement of the 1- 4 ramp and access configuration. The new
intersection will be located at Chelsea Road proximately 800 ft south of the existing
1-94 ramp location. Concern expressed by b sinesses located along Oakwood Drive and
planning for the development for what is kno n as the Southwest Area resulted in
identifying the Marvin Road improvement to promote adequate access to the frontage
road along 1-94. This improvement will also include extending Chelsea Road
approximately 500 ft westerly from Sandber Road in order to provide access to the hew
Marvin Road.
The improved Marvin Road, which will pro ide access to business along 1-94, is identified
by property owners west of TH 25 as being eeded at the time that the Oakwood Drive
connection to TH 25 is disconnected. This s anticipated to be in late July or early August
of 1999. Business owners' concerns idenf ed the need to proceed on the planning of this
project now so that they can plan improve nts to their businesses in accordance with the
future street system for this area. City staff has identified that assessments should be made
for the Marvin Road improvement since th existing roadway is a two-lane trail and the
proposed roadway will be an improved 44- curb-to-curb urban roadway with storm
sewer, water main, and sanitary sewer, and have added value to the lots adjacent to
Marvin Road.
The construction of Chelsea Road betwee Sandberg Road and Marvin Road, while
needed to provide access to Marvin Road, is somewhat ahead of schedule. It had not
been anticipated that this portion of Chels a Road would be constructed until the
development occurred west of this area. 1 has been identified that the majority of this
portion of the Chelsea Road cost should funded by the City of Monticello since it may
not be reasonable to assess this cost to th properties adjacent to Marvin Road.
The City Engineer will present the feasib' ty report on the proposed improvements to
Chelsea Road and Marvin Road, along w' h project costs and possible assessments.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Resolution accepting feasibility r ort and ordering public hearing on the proposed
improvements of Marvin Road a d the Chelsea Road extension.
2.
Motion to deny acceptance of th feasibility report.
3. Motion to table consideration of he feasibility report for additional study.
16
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
C.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1. It is our v ew that the City Council should accept the
feasibility report and order the public hearin so this project may be discussed further with
the business and landowner concerns. The ity Council can decide at that time whether to
proceed with the development of plans and pecifications. The urgency of proceedings on
this project at this time is that the landowne s and business representatives can plan the
development of their land and/or existing b siness.
D. SUPPORTTNGDATA:
A copy of the feasibility report is attached r your review and includes the proposed
improvement, along with project costs.
17
12.
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
A
E AND BA
ND:
The City Council is asked to review cost stimates for the community center and consider
moving forward on the project by taking he following actions:
. Review concept design and cost, e modifications as desired, then consider
granting authorization to prepare lans.
. Accept feasibility study and autho ize preparation of plans and specifications for
the relocation of the sanitary sew r line following a north or south alignment.
. Review status of negotiations for and acquisition and authorize powers of eminent
domain in the event that the land annot be acquired prior to construction of the
sanitary sewer line.
.
Authorize preparation of plans fo adjustments to the fire hall driveway to remove
an existing grade change problem create bigger parking stalls, and allow for easier
fire truck turning movements inte nal to the site.
PReJECT IlESIGN/CoST
In the past few weeks, the design of the fi cility has changed slightly as a result of
additional input from the community via ser groups. The changes have resulted in a
slight increase in the size of the facility. n an effort to stay within budget, added costs
resulting from added space have been off set somewhat by removal of certain "quality"
items such as the terazzo floor, tile in the pool, and ornamental pillars. These items can be
put back into the project as bid alternates if desired.
Mark Wentzell and Rusty Fifield will be ing presentations. Wentzell will be describing
the facility as recommended by the small roup and will be providing options for Council
adjustments to the plan. Rusty Fifield w' be providing a more in-depth analysis of the
financing program and will be making re ommendations with regard to the timing of the
bond issue.
City staff is also seeking other funding s urces to help with assistance with clean-up and
to help purchase items relating to youth ervices. From $200,000 to $400,000 could be
found to help off-set costs. Please note t at budget figures do not assume that the City
will be successful in gaining these funds. In the event we are successful, Council can act
to use the funds as a cost savings or use he funds as an opportunity to add quality into the
facility.
18
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
The table in Attachment 12-1 compares th total cost and annual debt service for the
original project, the original project with $ 00,000 deducted by Council action, and the
current estimate. The data in the table wa prepared by AKA and Ehlers based on the
design process and an actual plan of finan e. Mark Wentzell and Rusty Fifield will be at
the Council meeting to explain current sta us of the project and to answer your questions.
.
SANIT ARY SEWER LINE
Bret Weiss and John Simola have been re iewing two sanitary sewer relocation options
and will be presenting two proposals for ouncil review. It appears that both of the
options are within budget; however, one ption may require reconstruction of street area
that already needed to be replaced. Deta' s on the design options are in the attached
report provided by WSB. The north alig ment will affect the Burlington Northern
property, the south alignment will affect t e Grimsmo property.
l..AND ACQUISITION
With regard to the Grimsmo property, it ppears that the land could be purchased in time
for construction of the building; however if the south alignment is selected for the sanitary
sewer system, to play it safe, it is reco nded that the City Council initiate its powers of
eminent domain to acquire the land. In t e event that negotiations are not fruitful, the land
can legally be acquired and negotiations an culminate while construction is occurring. A
90-day lead time is needed prior to comp etion of the process; therefore, initiation of the
process is needed at this time.
.
In the negotiations between Grimsmo's a torney and Dan Wilson, the city hall swap has
been discussed. Details on discussions w' be provided later in the process. With regard
to the Burlington Northern land, it is str ngly recommended that the land be taken via
condemnation. Land taken by condemn ion eliminates the City as a "responsible party"
for purposes of clean-up. If in the event here is an unforeseen problem on the site, the
City has no direct liability for clean-up.
With regard to the bulk tank operations, e have been informed that Ferrellgas will be
moving yet in May. Both the 1M Oil an Riverside Oil companies have been looking for
relocation sites. Relocation cost estimat s have been provided to both businesses. It
appears that the bulk tanks can stay at t current location until their prime moving time,
which is the month of March. More in~ rmation will follow on this aspect of the project in
the upcoming months.
NATIONAL GUARD/CITY AGREEMENT
A draft of the agreement between the C' y and the National Guard has been prepared and
is available for review. The agreement as been prepared by the HRA Attorney, Dan
Greensweig, after meetings with the N a ional Guard. There do not appear to be any
sticking points between the City and the National Guard that would cause the City to
hesitate prior to preparation of plans an specifications. From the City's perspective, the
arrangement looks favorable. As menti ned earlier, the Guard's money comes as cash
upfront at the time of construction. Th program for maintenance of the facility calls for
19
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
.
Guard payment of certain utility costs for th area of exclusive use (4,000 sq ft). For joint
space areas used by the Guard once per mo th, there will be no maintenance charge to the
Guard. This "no maintenance charge" for se of joint space is in exchange for the Guard
providing funding for a large share of the jo' t use space that the City is free to use at all
times (except during l/month training).
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve a concept desig as recommended or modified by the City
Council and authorize preparation f plans and specifications; Authorize the City
to exercise powers of eminent do in to acquire necessary land areas; Accept the
feasibility study and authorize prep ation of plans and specifications for the
relocation of the sanitary sewer line, Authorize preparation of plans for
adjustments to the fIfe hall drivewa areas.
Under this alternative, the project ill stay on schedule with ground breaking set
for November. The small group w continue to work with the architect in making
selections on materials and assistin with refinements to the plan. The
development agreement with the uard will be refined and ready for approval at
an upcoming meeting. Further ne otiations with the current landowners will be
pursued, etc.
2.
Motion to deny or table action on his matter.
.
c.
ST AFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator and the small gro p recommend alternative # 1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Project program and fmancing descriptio ; Report on fIfe hall driveway redesign project;
Project timeline through March 1999; R solution initiating eminent domain proceeding;
Sewer line relocation feasibility study. py of draft development agreement available at
city hall for review.
.
20
PRELIMINARY" For Dis ussion Only
City of Monticello
.~~';;";;unitY C~nter
". .__.-.
_........~.._. _".._." .11
1 Construction
2 Site Acquisition
3 Site Preparation
4 FF&E
5 Rerouting Utilities
6 Fees & Insurance
7 Architectu ral/Engi neeri ng
B Contingency
9 Subtotal
10 Reductions
11 Total Project Budget
12 Difference from Current
13 Up-Front Funds National Guard
14 Sale of City Hall + Senior Cen er
15 Other City Funds
. 16 Liquor Store Reserves (1998 )
17 Investment of Bond Proceeds
18 Net Costs To Finance
19 Finance Plan Finance Costs 235%
20 Costs of Issuance
21 Discount 1.50%
22 Capitalized Interest 7
23 Rounding
24 Total Bond Issue .65%
25 Average Annual Debt Service 20
26 Difference from Current
. .
Original
7,037,128 7,037,128
520,000 520,000
120,000 120,000
351,856 351,856
186,000 186,000
73,500 73,500
562,970 562,970
527,785 527,785
._ __. ._. ___ ._.... ._. _. _,'_ ".___ __" __ .__ 'u_.. .__
9,379,239 9,379,239
o
(500,000)
__ _ _.,'_ __" .._ __ _.._.'_' _ ._. _. .._.. __ __. _. ___. .,__. n_. .__"_
9,605,026
9,379,239 8,879,239
(225,787) (725,787)
(1,511,11111) (1,5It,ill)
(500,000) (500,000)
(400,000) (400,000)
(224,000) (224,000)
(120,000) (120,000)
-., -.,.- .-,,'.-." ,...--. .-- --., ".-- .-- ,..-.. --., --. --- ...-- --
6,635,239
6,135,239
1,> ~~ ~~ t '"' I. t;
Cortl"t .
IsUmtdl
I
7,707,888
525,195
99,000
413,000
186,000
73,500
562,970
___ __ 4l?2-,-4~3_
10,030,026
(425,000)
(1,5",llli) ./
(500,000)
(400,000)
(224,000)
(190,000)
6,791,026
55,000
104,254
231,772 214,307 0
_________2-'-?~---------2~4~- ___ ~7g0_
7,035,000 6,505,000 6,955,000
IJ.. -' I
582,844
Notes for Current Estimate
(1) Costs of issuance and disc unt revised to reflect actual costs
(2) Lack of capitalized interest ssumes bonds dated 8/1/98 or later
(3) Average annual debt servi e based on debt amortization schedule
(4) Investment income based n preliminary construction schedule and 5% interest rate
(5) Changes in interest rates ill alter results
165,258
152,805
.
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
596,032
551,128
13,188
(31,716)
OS/20/98
.
May 98
SMTWTFS
------....... .~----..r--'J
3@Ci)67~)9
HI II 12 Ll eLl) 15 16
] 7 ] 8 ] 9 20 21 22 23
24 25 00 27 28 29 30
31
June 98
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 ---,\-""56
0 ~fl 9 ]0 ]J 12 13
H IS 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 14 2.5 26 ;:;. ~
28 29 30
.
July 98
S M T W T F S
r- i ---:\-4
5 1.\ 7 8 9 10 11
12 (lJ) 14 IS 16 I, 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 '" 28 29 30 31
August 98
S M T W T F S
---_.,_.,._,."..~,.- ..------1
J ,1 ii 8
9 10 ]J 12 13 14 15
] (, l' 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
September 98
SMTWlFS
-j--:i-'j""Ts
6 0 8 9 OlD 11 12
13 <l1X!D 16 10 18 19
20 21 22 23 ~,1 25 26
t! ;2.8 29 30
.
October 98
SMTWTFS
I 2 j
8 9 10
I~V~ F
2,. <.:;:j) ~
29 JO Ci
4 :; 6
11 12 13 14
18 19 20 21
25 <1;) 27 28
May 1998 -
Communi
pril 1999
Center
May
4 f:JO I'M. 6:00 PM Public I'lwmt#lion.
CdtHImm"'Y C,,>oJ""
5
Tanb Re/OOUMa
RuolutUm lleekulg gram for !lOils
testillg a"d remediatio"
plannnulg, Hltl
8
Cost Estimates on Concept Plan
ProvUlerl b.l' A 11A
14
CIIWnll'hlU8 11 BlBflJ d" ~IIUII1 ;""1Ip inpIIl
N:OOAM-lO:OOAMSmnJ1
Grollp - Blldget Check-up
26
COlUlCil Ct>l..it~ Appf'O~al ofDe.ig" - Auth
COlUt (/(),'ihiiJ
Fire Hall DrivewaY/III",'
accepted
L'!ui!!te land acquisition
Tn",k NU"""" fe,.. report ,",c<!pled
litutk nl..cl1le pl/lll$ illfJ IiP_ iJ...tNed
June
8
City/lfRAlNatiollal Guard Deal
approved
1.I...d p"",hw.-e RltIWHUHlt tllJ
July
13 Fire flall- Accept Plans- Allth
Bul
TI'IlIIk NldCflle . At!iI<!Jil Pi,u..illld -
September
1 0 Fire flall- Opell Bids
Trunk relocate bUt oJUllhl1J
14
Acqllisition Complete
-41'1'1'0<'" PfnM,Auth Am. for Biih
Fire Hall- Accept Bids - Award
pmJ<<'1
1'nmk ,."Iocl1le . Accept BitlN11fIMJ'd co,,",",t
15
T1'IUIk 'elt/cllt" - .8"gin COMt-
October
23 2.'00 PM -11:00 PM Reciev" Biih
2 6 Acquisition IUlllrewclltil'fl complete
C'OIUfCU AlIVll'dJo C{jll/l'ltlif
31
Compkte Const -lrrUIk ,."wcilte
Fire Hall Dril'eHY~r - Complete
Constrllctum
P{jlfutjd" (1_. IflIP d~l~
November
3
Grmmd Breakulg
1'II1luti0lf Cleun-1Ip IIpI' demlJiM
Printed by Calendar Creator for indows on 1998-05-21
November 98
S M 'f W T F S
j --'1 GD 4 ~ 6---7
8 <) 10 JJ 12 13 ]4
15 16 I' 18 19 20 21
~~ 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 ;3(!
December 98
S M T W T f' S
I 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 ]] ]2
13 ]4 15 16 17 18 19
::0 jl 11 2.3 24 25 26
" 28 29 :\0 31
~ ,
Jalluary 99
S M T W T F S
'Y" :2
-' 4 5 i; B 9
10 11 \j l.l 14 1'\ 16
I, IN 19 10 21 .:r:! 13
24 25 26 ~, 28 29 .~o
31
February 99
S M T W T F S
'j 2 ----3 <1 5 6
8 9 It) 11 12 LJ
1<1 15 ]6 ]7 ]s 19 20
21 22 23 24 15 26 ~"
28
March 99
S M T
1 2
8 9
14 <19 16
21 22 23
28 2\1 30
W T F S
3 --:f--S'-'6
J(J 11 12 l3
17 18 19 20
2,t 25 26 2:
_11
Apri199
S M T W T F S
""'T---l-J
4 6 R 9 10
11 12 13 1'1 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
I~ .....(
e
.
CITY OF MON ICELLO
MINNES T A
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of onticello, Minnesota, was called to order
by Mayor William Fair at 7 p.m. in the council cham ers of the city hall, Monticello, Minnesota,
on May 26, 1998.
The following Council members were present:
The following Council members were absent:
A motion to adopt the following resolution was mad by
by
and seconded
***********************************************
.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CON EMNATION OF PROPERTY
.~OR COMMUNITY CE TER PROJECT
98-
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello, by and through i s City Council and the Monticello Housing
and Redevelopment Authority, has authorized constr ction of a community center for the City of
Monticello; and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned community center w I consist of the following facilities:
(a) City of Monticello city offices;
(b) National Guard offices and assembly
(c) Recreational facilities;
(d) Provision of meeting facilities for co unity organizations;
(e) Facilities for social events;
(t) Senior citizen center;
(g) Youth center; and
.
1.1- ..-
,.
Resolution 98-
. Page 2
WHEREAS, it is necessary to acquire certain real roperty for the construction of a community
center;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved:
1. The City staff, including the City Attorney a d such other staff as may be necessary, are
hereby directed to proceed with the acquisit on of the property described in the attached
Exhibit A; and
2. Acquisition of the property described in Ex ibit A is for a public purpose, namely, the
construction of a community center; and
3. The City shall proceed by quick take if, in th reasonable judgment of the City Attorney
and City Administrator, such procedure is reasonably necessary for the timely completion
of the community center project.
The following Council members voted in favor:
. The following Council members voted against or ab tained:
Whereupon the motion was declared duly passed an executed.
Adopted this 26th day of May, 1998.
Mayor
City Administrator
.
".'
/ :f
/~-r
.
.
WSB
350 Westwoo Lake Office
8441 Wayz ta Boulevard
Minneapoli , MN 55426
& Associates, Inc.
612-54 -4800
FAX 5 1-1700
B.A. Mittelsteadt, P.E.
Bret A. Weiss, P.E.
Petet R. Willenbring, P.E.
Donald W. Sterna, r.E.
Ronald B. Bray, r.E.
To:
Honorable Mayor, City Council embers
City of Monticello
Bret A. Weiss, p.E. ~J--
City Engineer
Memorandum
From:
Date:
May 26, 1998
Re:
Fire Station Driveway Access
Community Center Project
City of Monticello Project No. 98- 9C
WSB Project No.1 01 0.77
.
This memo is written to provide infonnation regardi g access issnes associated with the existing fire
station as it relates to the pending development of the Monticello Community Center. The fire
station is currently located between 6'" Street and 5 y, Street, just east of Linn Street directly within
the Community Center project area. The proposed ommunity Center involves the vacation of 5
y,ili Street in the area of the Community Center d the reduction of 5 y, " Street from the
Community Center to the west from its existing 36- fo t width to a driveway access of approximately
24 feet in width. The Fire Station access from 5 y, "s eet will be impacted by reduced street widths
and the eliminatiou of Locust Street, which is the Pose of this memo. The Fire Department has
reqnested additional electronic warning equipment t address the increased pedestrian and vehicle
traffic associated with the proposed Community Cen er.
We have evaluated the impacts associated with the educed street and the increased traffic as it
relates to the fire station property and would offer the fOllowing infonnation:
· Parking Lot and Access
The fire station west parking lot should be wide ed by ten feet (10') to provide fire trucks and
emergency personnel greater ability to use the arking lot as a drive access to the rear garage
doors and provide larger parking stalls. The w sterly driveway to the fire station should be
widened by ten feet (I 0), along with increasing he West radius at both entrances uorth of the
fire station to provide the uecessroy tumin movements for the fire trucks. Grade
adjustments should be completed at these eutr ces to address the existing steep drop at
5 ~ th Street.
.-
Infrastructure Engineer. Planners
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EM LOYER
F:\ WPWIN\I 01 O. 77\OS2698-hmc.wpd
. '
.
.
.
.
Warning Systems and EVP
The Fire Department suggested tha a warning system identifying a fire call in
progress would make sense once th Community Center is constructed. A push
button system or electronic sensor ( y alarm) can be installed in the fire station to
activate a sign or flashing light indica ing that a fire call is in progress at an estimated
cost of $6,000 - $8,000.
Emergency vehicle preemption (EV ) is a device that allows for switching signal
lights to green for emergency vehic es. EVP can be installed on existing traffic
signal systems as necessary for emer ency vehicle access at a cost of approximately
$1 a,OOO/intersection. Two activatio systems can be provided:
· Push button in fire hall tha would provide gaps between 7th Street and
Broadway on TH 25. This ould be only to get out of the fire station onto
TH 25 at a cost ofapproxim ely $10,000 - $15,000.
· On vehicle emitter lights th t would activate signals as the vehicles are
approaching can be installe on each emergency vehicle for a cost of
approximately $1 ,800/emitte .
It will be our recommendation that a project be und rtaken to address the access revisions prior to
the full-scale Community Center construction comm ncing. It is very important that the Community
Center project include staging so as to not affect the fire station operations during construction and
to remain in close coordination with the Fire Dep ent. The opinion of probable project costs for
the anticipated access improvements and parking 1 t expansion is $12,500. This work could be
easily undertaken prior to the Community Center pr ~ect. The warning systems are being installed
in more and more communities each year. This cos must be weighed against the potential delays
associated with the pending development in th area. It is our recommendation that the
improvements identified herein be completed as des ribed. It is our opinion that the improvements
are feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an gineering standpoint.
Attachment (drawing)
nm
F:\ WPWIN\\ 0 \ O.77\OS2698-hmc.wpd
i
w
(1)
(1)
(1)
-D_,
1..-
o
-------r
25
50
/
/
/
i
!
=======::i:====='I
I
I
i
I
II
::-II
~!
i
(*~'---'
!<;,
,~
I~-~
--I
II
II
II C'-'c
II ,-~."
II
,I
II
II
II ___I
II ""---I
I II I
I~_JI I
-I
I
I
I
I ('&
r'j
1<-"
I
I
I
)--
II'" r'
II .
II
II
II I
'" '" '''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''H"mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm{ --- JJ :
II /I '",
II II "'-,
" 4'
.................,;-= = = ~ :;:;::. ~ -== -=---.....
I -
! (1) (1) (1) (1)1
III I (1) k-:::~.
i /~
-.",,--,,~
riPE
,~; T/ nON
10 WHITE
(TYP)
REMO E CURB
A~. GU TER (TYP)
,..........--=-----
..............",..'."......".' ,'".".",,,,,',,...",',,,-------
.."'........'...--...........
,.........-,,,.
~---
I,U
~~~-
-
II
..
~'"
r
----------- ------
--~--------- ------
I
mmmmlm__
m __ m) 'mm""
=======~==~~~~==~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:;~~~~~~~~-~\
\I
Fire Station Dri way Access
Community Ce ter Project
City of Monticello Pr ~ect No. 98-09C
for the ci of
Monticello, innesota
...
WSB
350 WestNood Lake Oftice
8441 Wayzata Boulevard
Minneapolis, MN 55426
612-541-4800
& A."ocIQ~', In<_ FAX 641-1700
INFRASTRUCTURE - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS
w.lB project No, 1010,77
Figure Number
1
\
\
'\'\
\\
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
CIJ
j)
(j)
CJ)
--I
Date: May 26, 1998
. 13.
.
.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
A
D'
The Parks Commission has prepared a c ncept plan for improvements to East/West
Bridge Park. The plans are a result of co siderable time and effort by the Parks
Commission, members of the MCP, and ity staff toward development of a park plan that
accentuates the benefits of the river setf g and coincides with the downtown development
plan. The plan also shows the reconnecti n of Walnut Street to the park and also
replacement and relocation of an aging . t station.
As you know, Walnut Street currently e s at a parking lot. In accordance with the MCP
plan, Walnut Street will be connected thr ugh to the park. In addition, as the roadway
runs adjacent to the park, it will be mod' ed for head-in parking. The parking area now in
the middle of the park will be eliminated nd replaced with playground equipment. The
City Council has budgeted funds for thes improvements for the past two years and has
made this item a priority for the City.
Cost estimates were prepared by the City Engineer for each item in the plan. There seems
to be a natural sequence to completing th park plan; however, the utility improvements
will need to be completed first because th's will cause the most impact on the use ofthe
park. It will be important to finish all of e utility itemo;; in one season instead of
disrupting the park for two to three years in a row. After the utility improvements are
completed, the other items can be phased as the budget allows.
The total estimated cost of the entire proj ct, including improvements to Walnut Street
and the lift station, is $734,90; total cost f the proposed fIrst phase of this project is
$356,000. The $356,000 will be distribut d between three areas: sanitary sewer fund,
street fund, and the park fund. The sanit y sewer lift station ($150,000) was due for
replacement and arguably is not a park ex ense. The park budget for 1998 was $60,000.
the total park-related costs in 1998 are es imated at $140,000, which leaves a deficit of
$80,000. Please note that the parks Co 'ssion capital improvement program had
earmarked $100,000 for park improveme ts over five years. The City will need to use
reserves to pay for the balance of what h s been budgeted, and as the years proceed, we
will need to budget additional funds to pa back the City for the additional costs beyond
what the budget called for.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
Motion to approve the feasibility tudy and authorize preparation of plans and
specifications.
2.
Motion to deny approval of the fe sibility study as proposed.
2
.
3.
Motion to modify and approve p ns as proposed.
Council Agenda - 5/26/98
If Council feels that the cost of t project is too high or too great at this time to
complete, restoration of the park ill need to be delayed until the amount can be
budgeted for in 1999.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator recommends that the first phase of the project be completed in its
entirety. The extension of Walnut Street along with the improvements to the park are
items that have been placed in the budget and are priorities for completion by the City
Council. It is our view that it makes sen e to do the entire utility and observation deck
portion of the project at one time to mak the greatest impact in the most efficient manner.
The other park improvement items in the cost estimates will be included in the park budget
for 1999 and beyond. According to City Council priorities identified in the comprehensive
plan as prepared by the MCP and Plann. g Commission, development of the river parks is
very important; therefore, it is our view t at in keeping with these priorities, this project
should proceed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Concept Plan; Budget; City Engineer's mo; Time schedule.
.
2
. .-
'"
~'l'.
l~
''i;.'
>~
"
0"."" ....,
,~:. ~', . : :~ :';j.: ,'.1 ~...,
~j:~{ ~_.
....'. ....... .
.,~~
~~,
".
.
Bridge Park Bud ~et - 1998
Sanitary Total
Project Items Sewer Street Park Amount
Lift Stationl $150,000 $150,000
Sanitary Sewer
Walnut Street $39,5( 0 $39,500 $79,000
Terrace Wall
~ East Bridge $26,000 $26,000
. West Bridge $26,000 $26,000
Observation Deck $75,000 $75,000
Total $176,000 $39,5 )0 $140,500 $356,000
C:\SANDY\WORIN'ARKS'SUDGET.FM 'I'
.-. ..- ..--
<)t" It ~
~ ~vJ'-'~)A
.-.
.,
, '\
"\
~~~f
---.
Apr-09-9B ~2:~3P
.....
,.,
A.
WSD
350 Westwood Lak Office
8441 Wayzata So levard
Minneapolis, MN 55426
B.A. Min:e1steadc, P.E.
nrcl A. Wdh. I'.E.
rem R. WiIlc:nhrinF,. P.F..
Dun11d W. Srcrn1. p.r..'
Rnn11d B. flr1Y, P. r..
e: Associates, Inc.
Memorandum
To:
Honorah/e Mayor and City Council
City 01 Monticello
From:
Bret A. Weiss, P.E.
City Engineer
Date:
April9,1998
Reo'
Bridge Park Improvements Cost Estim Ie
WSB Projecl No. 1014.00
.
This cost estimate addresses the recently completed Brid e Park lmprovetnem Study that wa.,c; intended
to beautify and enhance a major entry point into the Ci . Loeat~d at the Trunk Highway (TH) 2S
intersection with East River Street, the park provides an pportunity to create a gateway imo the City
that demonslrat~s the pride and character of Monticello.
The cost estimates address the various items included with the Hridge Park Improvement Study
completed by Northwest ^ssociated Consultants. The ite ns arc sepamted into West side and East side
improvements. All costs are project costs and include.l t % contingency and 28% indirect cosL'i added
to the construction cost estimates. A summary is includ d at the end of this memo for each phase.
The following items pertain to the West Bridge Park are:
1. Sanita.ry Sewer Relocation S32,400
This item includes replacement ofthe ex.isting to' vcr sanitary sewer from its current loe~tir:m
across the park with a 12" PVC sewer on a peri eter alignment along Walnut Street and E..lst
River Street to a new lift station. The project c st includes a 4" service line to the existing
Brick Pc.trk shelter building. No information reg rding the current clcvation and grade or this
sewer wa.~ available in completing this item.
2. Sanitary Lift Station S84,500
This item includes the removal and disposaJ of the existing wet well and pump house amI
construction of..l submersible pump station. Th submersible pump stations are low profile
and will he minimally visible to the public. Give this, our recommendation is to construct the
.-.
......
l'.\ W I'W I/llU(l14 .lIU\Ii409"-l.".. wpd
lnfmstructure Engtnce Plannel.s
F.QU^L OPPORTUNITY I' l'l.nvm
13"3
Apr-09-9a 12:13P
.
.
.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of MonticeJ/o
Apri/9,1998
Page 2
station near the existing site to minimize co t. The City has an opportunity to examine the
desired capacity of this station during design
3. 81 Wide Sidewalks and Patios $29,5()(J
This item includes all sidewalks. paths and p tios in the West Hridge Park area except for the
Ice Rink, street sidewalk. and the Under~I3ri ge lookout arca. The typical section is assumed
at 4" concrete on a sand subgrade.
4. Ice Rink $51.000
This item includes the concrete ice rink pad outh of the existing brick building. The rink is
proposed to be 5" concrete with a minimal sl pe the center of the rink. The invened rink. will
facilitate the freezing oflhe skating surface in the winter while the storm drain at the low point
will keep the walk free of bird baths during the warmer months. The storm sewer drain is
included in the cost estimate.
5.
8' Sidewalk Along Walnut Street and East River Street S20,000
This item includes the sidewalks and interse tjon Jill areas on Walnut and East River Streets
with a color patterning at the TH 25 intcrsecfon. This sidewalk is assumed with an 8' width
because of the likelihood of high pedestl'ian t affic associated with the park.
6.
Fence $40,000
This item includes the "Monticello Rail" 'nee. This price is tor the west side of the
intersection only. The cost is based on the quo e received from the Chowen Welding Company.
7.
Walnut Street Improvement North of East River Street S39,500
This item includes removul of the existing avement and curb and gutter. paving with 4"
asphalt/6" granular sectio!148' wide with 60 d grcc perpendicular parking on both sides of the
street, segmental block retaining wal J on the est :c;ide; and the conveuion ()f Walnut Street to
one way (north).
8.
Walnut Street Improvement South of F.ast River Street S39:o-';O(t
This item includes the paving, demolition, an storm sewer required for the connection ofEac;t
River Street and Walnut Street to the sout. The existing condition ha.. Walnut Street
approximately 5' above East River Street. T le reconstruction of l.\ large ponion of Wulnut
Street (1.5 0 linear feet) and the parking lot cas of Walnut Street will be required. The removal
of a concrete stair and two catch basins. a5 wel ..\S the construction of sidewalk, curb and gutter
and site grading, are also included in the cos estimate.
1':\WrWlNI20 11 ,OU\010998-hmc."'1'c1
13,~
Apr-09-9a 12:13P
.
.
.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monticello
April 9, 1998
Page 3
9. Demolition of Existing Structure., $8,500
This item includes removal and disposal of he existing shelter, playground equipment and
gravel parking lot
10. Playground Equipment $35,000
This item includes miscellaneous playground equipment, handicapped accessible equipment
and surface, and edging to keep sand in pIa ground area. The estimated amount can valY
depending On the type and quantity of equip ent desired by lhe City.
11.
Sand .
This ilem includes granular material. 12" thic around thc playground equipment.
$2,500
12.
Sod $12,(jOO
This item includes the sod for all disturbed are in the West Bridge Park area. Jf desired, seed
can be used instead of sod with the obvious dr wback ofa longer growth period before use or
the facility can begin. Seed would be less ex ensive.
13.
Gazebo Improvementll S8,500
This item includes raising the roof 3', ~\dding ecoralive railing, adding a weather vane to the
top. p<linting the structure white and re-shingl'ng thc rool:
14.
Terrace Wall 526.000
This item includes the segmental block retainh g walls along TH 25 and EaSl River Street. The
wall is assumed to average 4' high with a max'mum height of5'.
15.
Lighting $35,000
This jtem includes decorative single glObe lig ting posts along the paths and sidcwalks.
16.
Irrigation System SlS,500
The irrigation system is included to facilitate th centering of plants anu grass. The system wi II
include automatic timers, pop-up sprinkler hea s, and spray nozzles.
17.
PhmtinKJ $17,500
This Item includes 2" caliper trees and low co er shruhbery and hedgerow along TH 25 amI
East River Street.
F;IWPWlN'.1C114 OO\O"09I)~.h..,~...pel
13"~
Apr-09-9a 12:14P
.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monticello
April 9. 1998
Page 4
18. Electrical Bury
No cost has been estimated for item as NSP has ot had the opportunity 10 review the plan. The
cost figures will be forwarded as soon a... they ecome available.
19. FishinJt Pier
We have no cost available for this item. We ha e noted it as a possibility with this project and
will estimate a cost ifit becomes a desired opti n.
The Ibllowing items ace included for the nast Ilridge P rk only
1. 8' Wide sidewalks S6,OOO
This item includes the path along the Mississipp. Riverexelusive of the under~bridge walkout
and the sidewalk/vehicle access from Walnut S 'eet to the brick building.
2. 8' Sidewalk AJoDE East River Street S 17,000
This item includes the sidewalks and intersccti n fill areas on East River Street with a color
panerning at the TH 25 intersection. This sidew Ik is assumed with an 8' width becuuse of the
likelihood of high pedestrian traffic associated ith the park.
. 3.
8' AK~regate Path SI.800
This item includes the 8' aggregate path that wind through the East Bridge Park. The aggregate
section is assumed at 6" thick.
4. Ramp to East River Str(let S2.400
This iL13ffi includes an 8' wide concrete ramp ITO Ea'it River Street to East Bridge Purk. Lik~
the other ~idewalk items. this is assumed at 4" th ck.
5.
Terrace Wall
This item includes the segmental block retaining
wall is assumed to average 4' high with l\ maxim
S26,OOO
all!c along TH 25 and East River Street. The
m height ef5'.
6. Sod S12,600
This item includes the sod for all disturbed areas i 1 the East Bridge Park area. If desired. seed
can be used instead of sod with the obvious draw ack. of a longer growth period before use of
the facility can begin. Seed would be less ex pen ive.
P:\W"WINU1l1.OlNl.1l991.h"",..
.
. ."u. ....,,_w........_..v,.,II..;............_
13--/P
..
~,pr-09-9a '2'25P
. Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monticello
April 9, J 998
Page 5
7.
Fence
This item includcs the "Monticello Rail" fence.
only. The eo~t is based on the quote received
$40,000
"his price is fonhe tmst side of the intersection
om the Chowen Welding Cumpany.
8. Liebting $32,000
This item includes decorative single globe ligh ing posts along the paths and sidt::walks.
9. Irrigation $15,500
The irrigation systcm is included to tacilitate lh centering of plants and grass. The system will
includc automatic timers, pop-up sprinkler hea s, and spray n07.zles.
10. Plantings $8.500
This Item includes 2" caliper trees, low cover s rubbery and hedgerow along TH 25 and Ea<;t
River Street.
.
11.
Under Bridge Walkway
This item includes the widened walkway under
surface. Because work will take place in the
righl~of:'way, the permit process will be very inv
above.
Summary of ":stimated Project Costs
Walnut Street south orEast River Street
Walnut Street north of East River Street
Sanitary Sewer Relocation incl. Lift Station
West Bridge Park Improvements
East Park Improvements
Under Bridge Walkway
Total
$75,600
H 25, with retaining wall, railing and concrete
ississippi River flood plain and in MnlDOT
Ivcd. This additional proc~ss cost is included
$39,500
$39,500
$116,900
$301.600
$161,800
$75.600
$734.900
Please contact me at 541-4800 with any questions or co ments.
.
jb/nm
F'\WPWI~\20 1.1.00IlJ.lCI-l9A.h"" WJld
13,7
.
.
.
Bridge Park T me Schedule
Sanitary Sewer Walnut Street
Lift Station Improvements Terrace Wall*
Pipe Relocation N&S (Both Sides)
Feasibility Report May 26 1 rlay 26 May 26
Acceptance
Order Plans &
Specs
Accept Plans & June 22 J lIne 22 June 22
Specs, Authorize Ad
for Bid
Receive Bids July 17 J ly 17 July 17
A ward Contract July 27 J\ ly 27 July 27
Begin Construction August 3 A Ilgust 3 August 3
Substantial September 3 - pipe Se ptember 3 October 1
Complete November 1 - L.S.
* This item will need to be staggered with sanitary s ewer work.
C:\SANDY\WORIN>ARKS\TIME_SCH.FM /3
-- - -- - --- -- .-
,.i'
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/12/98 14:10:37
Schedule of Bills
CITY OF ONTICELLC
GL050S-V05.20 COVERPAGE
GL540R
.
Report Selection:
RUN GROUP... D512
COMMENT... 5/12 CKS
DATA-JE-lD
DATA COMMENT
0-05121998-491 5/12 CKS
Run Instructions:
Jobo B~nner Copies Form Printer Hold Space LPI Lines CPI
J 01 Y S 6 066 10
.'
.
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12/98 14: 10:37 Schedule of Bi 1s GL540R-V05.20 PAGE 1
. NAME
'RIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll F/P 10 LINE
AMERICAN PAGING OF MINNE
JOHN M, RICH C 18.56 TELEPHONE 601.49440.3210 491 00001
MATT 27.41 TELEPHONE 602.49490.3210 491 00002
PATTY 16.01 TELEPHONE 101.42701.3210 491 00003
JOHN S 9.28 TELEPHONE 101.43110.3210 491 00004
GARY A 9.28 TELEPHONE 101.42401.3210 491 00005
JOHN L 9.28 TELEPHONE 101.45201.3210 491 00006
TOM B 9.28 TELEPHONE 101.43115.3210 491 00007
ROGER 9.28 TELEPHONE 101.43120.3210 491 00008
108.38 *VENDOR TOTAL
ANKENY KELL ARCHITECTS,
COMM CENTER-ARCHITECT 23-,650.64 PROF SRV - ARCHITECTS' F 61. 49201. 3020 8984 491 00009
BARCO PRODUCTS, INC.
WWTP-BRUSHES 769.31 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 36.49201.2199 39800053 491 00010
BERNICK'S PEPSI COLA COM
BEER 963.60 BEER 09.49750.2520 491 00017
. MISC TAXABLE 166.60 MISC TAXABLE 09.49750.2540 491 00018
1,130.20 *VENDOR TOTAL
BIARY
TARY WORK 450.00 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL/CAR 51.49010.3110 1ST QTR 1998 491 00011
CELLULAR 2000 OF ST CLOU
TOM B 80.68 TELEPHONE 101.43115.3210 491 00013
FIRE DEPT 1. 50 TELEPHONE 101.42201.3210 491 00014
GARY A 47.05 TELEPHONE 101.42401.3210 491 00015
MATT T 22.10 TELEPHONE 601.49440.3210 491 00016
151.33 *VENDOR TOTAL
CENTRAL MINN INITIATIVE
CMIF GRANT REIMB 1,100.21 GRANT REIMBURSEMENT 2 3.46501.6601 491 00012
COMPUTER PARTS & SERVICE
EQUIPMENT M/A 3,898.24 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS 1 1.41920.3190 109901 491 00152
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING
BEER 7,526.07 BEER 6 9.49750.2520 491 00019
NON ALCOHOLIC 70.50 MISC TAXABLE 6 9.49750.2540 491 00020
7,596.57 *VENDOR TOTAL
DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
BEER 414.50 BEER 6 9.49750.2520 . 491 00021
DEMARS SIGNS
REPL TRANSFORMER 35.00 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 6 9.497?4.2199 4174 491 00022
.
-----.---- -"_..~._-'-"---~---
~ -~--,-, ---"~--'._'~--'-'--"-"
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12/98 14:10:37 Schedule of Bill GL540R-V05.20 PAGE 2
. NAME
CRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME F NO & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll F/P 10 LINE
DICTAPHONE
PLANNING-DICTAPHONE 849.50 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1 1.41301.5701 798079 491 00151
FLESCH'S PAPER SERVICES,
BAGS 188.58 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 6 9.49754.2199 1049110 491 00023
GCR MN TRUCK TIRE CENTER
FIRE-TIRES 670.21 REPAIR & MTC - VEHICLES 1 1.42201.4050 67678 491 00150
GRIGGS, COOPER & COMPANY
FREIGHT 88.50 FREIGHT 6 9.49750.3330 491 00024
LI QUOR 6,124.92 LIQUOR 6 9.49750.2510 491 00025
WINE 680.24 WINE 6 9.49750.2530 491 00026
MISC TAXABLE 169.05 MISC TAXABLE 6 9.49750.2540 491 00027
7,062.71 *VENDOR TOTAL
GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE INC.
BEER 9,251.00 BEER 491 00029
GROSSNICKLE/THOMAS P
PARKS-BOOTS 90.00 CLOTHING SUPPLIES 101.45201.2111 491 00028
HERMES/GERALD T
~RY CLEANING 227.50 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 11.45501. 3110 5/01 TO 5/15 491 00030
HOGLUND COACH LINES LTD
MARCH 1995 REIMB 909.39CR PROF SVR - HEARTLAND BUS 10.49801.3060 491 00035
CONTRACT 5,819.20 PROF SVR - HEARTLAND BUS 10.49801.3060 APRIL 491 00034
4,909.81 *VENDOR TOTAL
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE L
FREIGHT 62.46 FREIGHT 09.49750.3330 491 00031
LIQUOR 4,471.51 LI QUOR 09.49150.2510 491 00032
WINE 1,173.15 WINE 09.49750.2530 491 00033
5,707.12 *VENDOR TOTAL
KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN
AMNESTY DAY-CHICKEN 119.28 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 01.43230.4399 491 00036
MINNEGASCO
CH 56.57 GAS 101.41940.3830 491 00038
DEP REG 29.13 GAS 101.41990.3830 491 00039
AN SHELTER 27.73 GAS 101.42701.3830 491 00040
PARKS 37.63 GAS 101.45201.3830 491 00041
FIRE HALL 87.09 GAS 101.42201.3830 491 00042
SHOP/GARAGE/MAINT 762.20 GAS 101.43127.3830 491 00043
LIBRARY 92.16 GAS 211. 4550 1. 3830 491 00044
LIQUOR STORE 32.49 GAS 609.49754.3830 491 00045
. 1,125.00 *VENDOR TOTAL
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12/98 14:10:37 Schedule of B 115 GL540R-V05.20 PAGE 3
V. NAME
~ ~:RIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll F/P 10 LINE
MN DEPT OF TRADE & ECON
SCERG REIMB 2.483.45 GRANT REIMB - AROPLAX 222.46501.6602 491 00037
MONTICELLO CHAMBER OF CO
TAKE PRIDE-SIGN 10.00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 224.46102.4399 491 00046
MONTICELLO ROTARY
JEFF-DUES 232.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SUBS 101.41910.4330 491 00049
MONTICELLO SENIOR CITIIE
CONTRACT 2.833.33 SENIOR CENTER CONTRIBUTI 101.45115.3136 JUNE 491 00050
MONTICELLO SOCCER CLUB
PARKS-CONTRIBUTION 1,800.00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.45201.4399 491 00051
MONTICELLO TIMES
DISCOUNT 56.15CR DISCOUNT 101.36298 491 00052
REFUSE-LEAF P/U 80.20 AOVERTISING 101.43230.3499 491 00053
LEGAl. 1.453.98 LEGAL NOTICE PUBLICATION 101.41601.3510 491 00054
BLDG PERMITS 122.50 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 101.42401.3520 491 00055
CH-HELP ADS 56.93 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 101.41301.3520 491 00056
WATER 141.45 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 601.49440.3520 491 00051
I CENTER 9.81 LEGAL NOTICE PUBLICATION 461.49201.3510 491 00058
OR-ADV 136.25 ADVERTISING 609.49754.3499 491 00059
RRECTION 78.48 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 101.41910.3520 491 00060
PLANNING-INTERNET 350.00 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 101.41910.3520 491 00061
PARKS-AD 232.61 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 101.45201.3520 491 00062
SHADE TREE-ADV 745.66 GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATI 224.46102.3520 491 00063
DISCOUNT 8.08CR OISCOUNT lQ1.36298 491 00064
3,343.64 *VENDOR TOTAL
MONTICELLO/CITY OF
SEWAGE/WATER 28.79 WATER & SEWER 609.49754.3820 491 00047
MORAN USA, LLC
TAX MISC 258.39 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 112938 491 00048
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
WATER 958.42 ELECTRIC 601.49440.3810 491 00065
SEWER 943.36 ELECTRIC 602.49490.3810 491 00066
STREET LIGHTS 5,633.08 ELECTRIC 101.43160.3810 491 00067
PARKS 188.42 ELECTRIC 101.45201.3810 491 00068
CIVIL DEFENSE 11.13 ELECTRIC 101.42501.3810 491 00069
SHOP/GARAGE 592.93 ELECTRIC 101.43127.3810 491 00070
FIRE OEPT 220.14 ELECTRIC 101.42201.3810 491 00071
LI BRARY 559.91 ELECTRIC 211.45501.3810 491 00072
CH 717.49 ELECTRIC 101.41940.3810 491 00073
PARKING LOTS 18.75 ELECTRIC 101.43140.3810 491 00074
.OR 866.74 ELECTRIC 09.49754.3810 491 00075
HELTER 83.83 ELECTRIC 101.42701.3810 491 00076
BRe FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12/98 14:10:37 Schedule of B1 lls GL540R-V05.20 PAGE 4
WR NAME
CRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll F/P 10 LINE
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
~. *VENDOR TOTAL
PERKINS FAMILY REST. /0/ 7ft/. ~o
RIVER TERRACE FLOOD 483.06 MISe OTHER EXPENSE 101.42501.4399 491 00078
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
FREIGHT 33.35 FREIGHT 609.49750.3330 491 00079
LIQUOR 3,105.00 LIQUOR 609.49150.2510 491 00080
WINE 124.00 WINE 609.49750.2530 491 00081
3,262.35 *VENDOR TOTAL
PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING
MISC TAXABLE 205.75 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 491 00082
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GR
WWTP CONTRACT 35,360.50 PROF SRV - PSG, INC 602.49480.3080 MAY 491 00096
RIVERSIDE OIL
STREETS - FUEL 892.60 MOTOR FUELS 101.43120.2120 491 00099
RON'S GOURMET ICE
LI QUOR- I CE 24.70 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 8831,2389,CR 491 00083
S~DEL/PATRICIA
PATTY-TRAVEL EXPENSE 53.20 TRAVEL EXPENSE 101.42701.3310 491 00097
PATTY-POSTAGE REIMB 32.00 POSTAGE 101.42701.3220 491 00098
85.20 *VENDOR TOTAL
SAVITT LAW OFFICE
TRIPPE-GARNISHMENT 384.49 GARNISHMENT PAYABLE 101. 21709 491 00087
SIMPSON/CYNTHIA R
FIRE HALL CLEANING 50.00 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 101.42201.3110 491 00102
ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT SUP
MISC OP SUPPLIES 58.21 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 609.49754.2199 491 00100
MISC TAXABLE 62.80 MIse TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 491 00101
121.01 *VENDOR TOTAL
STEVE'S ELK RIVER NURSER
SHADE TREE-TREES 2,529.26 TREE REPLACEMENT 224.46102.4391 10600 491 00103
SUPERIOR SERVICES-CENTRA
SALES TAX 771. 50 SALES TAX 101.43230.3720 491 00086
RECYCLING 3,900.76 PROF SRV - RECYCLING C N 101.43230.3101 FEBRUARY 491 00084
GARBAGE 7,912.77 PROF SRV - REFUSE COLL C 101.43230.3100 FEBRUARY 491 00085
12,585.03 *VENOOR TOTAL
.
--,.~- --,-~,-~--- -- --._--~-
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12198 14:10:37 Schedule of ills GLS40R-VOS.20 PAGE 5
V. NAME
RIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POl F /P 10 LINE
T-SHlRTS PLUS
SHADE TREE-T-SHIRTS 120.95 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 224.46102.4399 491 00088
TERRACON
COMM CENTER-ENGINEERING 3,675.00 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING 461.49201. 3030 4181314 491 00104
THEISEN/MATT
REIMB FOR BOOTS R CLINE 90.00 CLOTHING SUPPLIES 601.49440.2111 491 00105
THOM/SHANNON
TRAVEL REIMB 12.60 TRAVEL EXPENSE 101.42401.3310 491 00106
THORPE OISTRlBUTING COMP
BEER 25,278.80 BEER 609.49750.2520 491 00107
MlSC TAXABLE 383.85 MlSC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 491 00108
25,662.65 *VENOOR TOTAL
TWIN CITlES FLAG SOURCE
LIQ-FLAG REPAIR 42.00 REPAIR & MTC - OTHER 609.49754.4099 16811 491 00089
U SLINK
CH 130.28 TELEPHONE 101.41301.3210 491 00091
tSHEL IER 16.17 TELEPHONE 101.42701.3210 491 00092
IC WORKS 6.76 TELEPHONE 101.43110.3210 491 00093
REG 1. 34 TELEPHONE 101.41990.3210 491 00094
LIQUOR 9.98 TELEPHONE 609.49754.3210 491 00095
164.53 *VENDOR TOTAL
U S POSTMASTER
DEP REG-POSTAGE 364.00 POSTAGE 101.41990.3220 491 00109
USA WASTE SERVICES, INC
REFUSE THROUGH 3/30 2,806.03 PROF SRV - REFUSE COLLEC 101.43230.3100 12640 491 00090
VIKING COCA COLA
LIQUOR-POP 509.85 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 491 00110
CH-POP 39.19 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.41940.4399 491 00111
549.04 *VENDOR TOTAL
WATSON COMPANY, INC/THE
MISC TAXABLE 573.81 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 491 00112
WRlGHT COUNTY AUDlTOR-TR
SCERG GRANT REIMB 2,760.51 GRANT REIMBURSEMENT 22.46501.6601 491 00128
SHERIFF PATROL 27,776.40 PROF SRV - LAW ENFORCEME 101.42101.3050 MAY 491 00127
KRAMER HOUSE 1,537.00 LAND 40.49201.5101 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00113
. PARKS 1,095.00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 01.45201.4399 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00114
WATER 1.217.00 PROPERTY TAXES 01.49440.3710 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00115
4IIIt 25 (RV CENTER) 1,701.00 PROPERTY TAXES 50.49201.3710 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00116
ANAN FARMS 2,006.00 PROPERTY TAXES 36.49201.3710 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00117
LlQUOR STORE 42.00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 09.49754.4399 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00118
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12/98 14:10:37 Schedule of Bi ls GL540R-V05.20 PAGE 6
.R NAME
CRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# F/P 10 LINE
WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR-TR
REFUSE-SEWER 420.00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.43230.4399 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00119
FIRE HALL 42.00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.42201.4399 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00120
WWTP 42.00 PROPERTY TAXES 602.49480.3710 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00121
SENIOR CITIZEN HALL 44.87 PROPERTY TAXES 213.46301.3710 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00122
HRA 116.33 LAND 213.46500.5101 PROPERTY TAXES 491 00123
38,860.11 *VENDOR TOTAL
WRIGHT HENNEPIN SECURITY
DEP REG-MONITORING 19.12 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS 101.41990.3190 491 00124
PARKS-MONITORING 15.98 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS 101.45201.3190 491 00125
35.10 *VENDOR TOTAL
WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELE
STREET LIGHTS 9.00 ELECTRIC 101.43160.3810 491 00126
WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOLD NUGGET 149.57 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00131
KLEIN FARMS ESTATES 360.00 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00132
SOUTHEAST INTERCEPTOR 2,520.00 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00133
WRIGHT CO SHOPPER 90.50 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00134
CUB FOODS 525.75 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00135
BIG LAKE HOSPITAL 497.75 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00136
.N FARMS 4TH 3,523.02 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 58.49201.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00137
RRECTION CH.URCH 362.00 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 59.49201.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00138
RESURRECTION CHURCH 1,365.00 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 59.49201.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00139
ST HENRY'S 226.25 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00140
STATE AID 543.00 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00141
EASTWOOD KNOLL 45.25 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 38.49201.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00142
MONTICELLO MAPS 1,402.50 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 1 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00143
KLEIN FARMS 3RD 90.50 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 1 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00144
ST HENRY'S 1,480.25 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 1 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00145
TH25/CHELSEA ROAD 29,610.50 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 4 50.49201.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00146
CR 118 83.50 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 1 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00141
GEN ENGINEERING 599.50 PROF SRV - ENGINEERING F 1 01.43110.3030 FEBRUARY 491 00148
TH25 WETLAND 11 ,311.15 MISC PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 2 3.49201.3199 FEBRUARY 491 00149
60,906.59 *VENDOR TOTAL
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
LIQ-FIRST AID SUPPLIES 14.32 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 6 9.49154.2199 491 00129
PW ADM-FIRST AID SUPP. 47.14 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 1 1.43110.4399 491 00130
62.06 *VENDOR TOTAL
.
-'--~------,_. ,_.~._~--_. -----.- ---..-
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/12/98 14:10:37
. NAME
RIPTION
REPORT TOTALS:
.
.
AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME
281,329.91
RECORDS PRINTED - 000152
Schedule of Bil s
UNO & ACCOUNT
CLAIM INVOICE
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL540R-V05.20 PAGE 7
POI F/P 10 LINE
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
05/12/98 14:10:40 Schedule of ills GL060S-V05.20 RECAPPAGE
GL540R
.RECAP:
FUND DESCRIPTION DISBUR EMENTS
----------------------------
101 GENERAL FUND 77, 35.45
211 LIBRARY FUND 79.57
213 HRA FUND 21.20
222 SCERG (ECON RECOVERY GRANT) 5, 43.96
223 CMIF (CENT MN INIT FUND) 1. 00.21
224 SHADE TREE FUND 3, 05.87
240 CAPITAL PROJECT REVOLVING FD 1, 37.00
263 STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND 17, 71. 75
436 93-14C WWTP EXPANSION PRJ 2, 75.31
438 94-02C EASTWOOD KNOLL 45.25
450 96-04C HWY25/MNDOT IMPR 31, 71. 50
458 97-04C KLEIN FARMS 4(LION'S) 3, 23.02
459 98-01C RES CHURCH SS & WM 1, 27.00
461 98-03C COMMUNITY CENTER 27, 35.45
601 WATER FUND 2, 47.53
602 SEWER FUND 36, 73.27
609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 63.1 76.76
610 TRANSPORTATION FUND 4. 09.81
651 RIVERSIDE CEMETERY 50.00
TeALL FUNDS 281. 29.91
BANK RECAP:
BANK NAME
DISBURSEMENTS
GENL GENERAL CHECKING
LIQR LIQUOR CHECKING
218.153.15
63.176.76
TOTAL ALL BANKS
281.329.91
THE PRECEDING LIST OF BILLS PAYABLE WAS REVIE ED AND APPROVED FOR PAYMENT.
DATE ............
APPROVED BY
.
.
.
.
. (J.S.)
A few weeks ago Mayor Fair asked staff to check in 0 the possibility of helping sponsor a second
Sentence to Serve crew in Wright County. Benefits 0 the City would be that we would have a
crew available for one to two days per week to wor on projects within the community. The
Sentence to Serve Pro gram operated by the Minnes ta Department of Corrections allows for
manageable offenders to give back to society throug work programs and in turn shorten their
stay in the local jail. For each eight hours they put' through the Sentence to Serve Program,
they shorten their stay in jail by a day. This benefits he County by saving jail space at an
estimated $55 per day.
The Sentence to Serve Program has provided worke s in the city of Monticello on several
occasions, mostly cleaning and clearing in our park ystems and helping after the storm.
The cost of adding a second crew is approximately 52,000 per year. This covers the crew
leader's salary and fringe benefits, travel, supplies, a d equipment such as chain saws,
communication, and training. All of the liability ins ranees are covered by the State of Minnesota.
Typically, the State funds half the program and the ounties fund the other half on a 50/50 match.
However, at this time the State does not have the fu ds for their matching half, so they're
working with the County to see if Wright County w uld sponsor the first half and some other
entities such as another county or a couple of cities Wright County would be co-sponsor with
matching funds. What we are looking at is a joint p ogram with Wright County, the City of
Buffalo, and the City of Monticello. The cost to th County would be $26,000 per year, which
would be more than offset by benefits gained in the ounty and reduced jail time. And the cost to
the City of Buffalo and Monticello would be $13,00 each. At this point in time we are still
working with the City of Buffalo, the Minnesota De artment of Corrections, and Wright County
to determine if it is feasible for all parties to go ahe d. I have enclosed information about the
Sentence to Serve program and the different tasks t at they have worked on for other
communities and government agencies throughout e county.
At this point in time a consensus of the Council to ontinue working toward this Sentence to
Serve crew or not would be valuable to staff.
.
.
.
State of Min esota
Minnesota Departme t of Corrections
May 11, 1 998
John Simola, Director
Office of Public Works
909 Golf Course Road
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
RE: Wright County STS
Dear John:
Enclosed are the quarterly reports that have be n sent to the Wright County Board of
Commissioners for the past year (April 1, 1997 through March 31, 1998). They report
the location and type of project worked on an the number of offenders on the crew.
Hopefully this information will be helpful to y u in discussions to add some additional
STS service in Wright County.
Please call me if you need additional informati n or if I can be of further assistance in
this matter.
Sincerely,
JlL,~ L .1vJ-~L4-t~J
Shelva Lee Swanson, Supervisor
MN Dept of Corrections
Sentencing to Service Program
/sls
cc: File
1450 Energy Park Drive. Suite 200. t. Paul, Minnesota 55108-5219
Phone 612/642-0200. D 612/643-3589
An equ_al opportun'ty employer
.
.
.
SENTENCING TO SERVICE PROGRAM BUDGET
COUNTY DATES OF CONTRACT Julv 1. 1998 TO June 30. 1999
EXPENDITURE
EXPENSES
CREWLEADER SALARY & FRING i::
41,900.00
REPAIR SERVICES
400.00
PROF. & TECH. SERVICES
(TRAINING)
500.00
COMMUNICATION
600.00
TRA VELNEHICLE
6,600.00
-S,lJPPLIES & EQUIPMENT
2,000.00
OTHER EXPENSES (EXPLAIN)
TOTAL
$52.000.00
STSIN\99\I YR
YJ..., ':; ,;l~ I 000
'Iv:. (3, DOO
if O-c-..L- Sick I.; ;::. (Qj /3 ~ ~ /r-d.
State of Min esota
Minnesota Departme t of Corrections
.
April 14, 1998
Wright County Board of Commissioners
Wright County Government Center
ION. W. 2nd Street
Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
RE: Sentencing to Service Quarterly Report
The following is a list of projects worked and a su ary of activities of your Wright County
Sentencing to Service Program for the quarter ofJa uary 1, 1998 through March 31, 1998.
. DATE PROJECT # IN CREW
01-02-98 City of Buffalo-civic center cleanup
LMSP-DNR-Pks.-split and stack fire ood 7
01-10-98 City of Buffalo-Christmas tree picku 11
01-12-98 City of Buffalo-Christmas tree picku 9
01-14-98 Schroeder County Park-split and bu dIe firewood 9
01-15-98 Schroeder County Park-split and bu dIe firewood 9
01-16-98 City of Buffalo-civic center cleanup
LMSP-DNR-Pks.-split and stack fir wood 9
01-21-98 LMSP-DNR-Pks.-split and stack fir wood 8
01-22-98 Ney Park-shovel snow off deck
Schroeder Park-split and bundle fire ood 8
01-24-98 Fare For All-help prepare the shares
. Schroeder County Park-split and bu dIe firewood 9
1450 Energy Park Drive, Suite 200. t. fau/, Minnesota 55/08-5219
Phone 612/642-0200. D 612/643-3589
An equal opportun'ty emplovf!r
.
Wright Coupty Board of Commissioners
April 14, 1998
Page 2
01-26-98 LMSP-DNR-Pks.-split and stack lrewood 7
01-28-98 Schroeder County Park-load and aul firewood to Clearwater 8
01-29-98 Clearwater/Pleasant County Gara e-split and bundle firewood
City of Buffalo-shovel fire hydran s 8
01-30-98 LMSP-DNR Pks.-make firewood 7
02-04-98 Clearwater/Pleasant County Gara e-split and bundle firewood 9
02-05-98 Clearwater/Pleasant County Gara e-split and bundle firewood 9
02-06-98 Buffalo-Civic Center-cleanup for ockey tournament
LMSP-DNR Pks.-setup for candl light ski 11
. 02-18-98 Buffalo Fire Dept.-wash and wax qUIp.
County property-pickup litter 10
02-19-98 Wright County Highway-Albertvi Ie Shop-scrub walls and ceiling 8
02-20-98 LMSP-DNR Pks- split and bundl firewood 9
02-21-98 Wright Co. Public Wks.-Buffalo sop-wash and wax equipment 11
02-23-98 Wright Co. Heritage Center-clean p storage area for new shelving 9
02-25-98 Wright Co. Highway Dept.- clean and organize sign shop 9
02-27-98 LMSP-DNR Pks-firewood and st rt on log cabin 8
03-04-98 Clearwater Fire Dept.-wash and ax fire equipment 9
03-05-98 City of Monticello-brushing for n w city park 9
i,.
03-06-98 LMSP-DNR Pks-firewood and w rk on log cabin 8
03-07-98 LMSP-DNR-Pks-firewood and w rk on log cabin 11
.
,,," ; i .
.
Wright County Board of Commissioners
April 14, 1998
Page 3
03-09-98 LMSP-DNR-Pks-firewood and w rk on log cabin 6
03-11-98 County Shop-(Waverly) clean int rior walls and ceiling 7
03-12-98 County Shop-(Waverly) clean int rier walls and ceiling 8
03-13-98 LMSP-DNR-Pks-firewood and w rk on log cabin 9
03-18-98 Collinwood Co. Pk.-brush entranc road 7
03-20-98 LMSP-DNR Pks.-Iog cabin const 8
03-21-98 LMSP-DNR Pks.-log cabin const 10
03-25-98 LMSP-DNR Pks.-service area cle up and log cabin construction 7
03-26-98 Montissippi Co. Pk.-brush hiking tails 7
. 03-27-98 LMSP-DNR Pks.-Iog cabin const 6
03-30-98 LMSP-DNR Pks.-log cabin const 6
.
During this past quarter your Wright County STSProgram served 38 males and 3 females who
worked a total of2,472 hours. This is a benefit 0 $12,360.00 (based on $5.00 per hour). There
were 213 jail days saved for a benefit of$IO,330. 0 (based on a $48.50 cost per diem). The-
estimated value of projects completed was $27,10 .00. Therefore, the overall estimated benefit
to Wright County for this quarter's operation was 49,790.50.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate t contact me.
Sincerely,
Shelva Lee Swanson, Supervisor
STS Region VIII
IsIs
'I'
,.';" ',;-'.
~ . t ': \
i I: I. i'J . :, ~. .
.
.
.
Wright County Board of Commissioners
April 14, 1998
Page 3
cc: File
Sheriff Don Hozempa
Capt. Gary Tornn
Bill Weber, DOC Dist. Supervisor
Mike MacMillan, Court Services Dir.
DOC Probation Office, Buffalo
Brad Thompson, STS Crewleader
Honorable Bruce Douglas
Honorable Gary Meyer
Honorable Dale Mossey
Honorable Kim Johnson
c
c
,.
.
State of linnesota
Minnesota Depart ent of Corrections
January 22, 1998
vVright Count y Board of Commissioners
Wright County Government Center
10 N. W. 2nd Street
Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
RE: Sentencing to Service Quarterly Report
Dear Commissioners:
.
The following is a list of projects worked and a s mmary of activities of your Wright County
Sentencing to Service Program for the quarter of October 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997.
DATE PROJECT #INCREW
10-01-97 County Highway-weed whip guar rails 8
10-02-97 City of Buffalo- Civic center-prep or Ice 7
10-03-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 9
~
10-08-97 County Highway-weed whip guar rails 7
10-09-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 7
10-10-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 9
10-11-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 11
10-13-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 7
. 10-16-97 County Highway-weed whip guard ails 9
/450 Energy Park Drive, Suite 200. . Palll, Minnesota 55108-52/9
Phone 6/2/642-0200' r. D 6/2/643-3589
.1,., ,..,_"", """""to".;.~:.. ......1.... ...
"
(~
r-
.;
.
Wright County Board of Commissioners
January 22, 1998
Page 2
10-17-97 County Highway-weed whip guar rails 7
10-20-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 6
10-22-97 County Highway-clean and bag pr irie grass seed, and
weee whip guardrails 8
10-23-97 County Highway-weed whip guard ails - 10
10-24-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 12
10-30-97 County Historical Society-building maintenance
County Public Works-equipment aintenance 10
10-31-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 9
. 11-01-97 City of Buffalo-leaf pickup for city esidents 12
LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin
11-04-97 LMSP-DNR Parks-build log cabin 8
11-05-97 DNR-Fisheries Montrose--cut trees cleanup service area, and
cut old nets off frames 8
11-06-97 Ney Park Nature Center-cleanup st rm damage 8
11-07-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks.-construct log cab n 8
11-10-97 Wright Co, Pks.-haul firewood fro Clearwater to Collinwood 7
11-12-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin constru tion 7
11-15-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin constru tion 12
11-19-97 County Auditor/Treasure-tax forfeit property-Clearwater 9
11-20-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin constru tion 9
. 11-21-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin construe ion 8
"..,
r
r
.
Wright County Board of Commissioners
January 22, 1998
Page 3
11-26-97 LMSP-DNR~Pks. log cabin const 7
11-29-97 LMSP-DNR~Pks. log cabin canst 12
12-01-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin chinki g 7
12~03-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin chinki g 7
12-04-97 Montissippi Co. Pk.- brushing of ea for Oak regeneration 8
12-05-97 Buffalo-Civic Center-general clean p of civic center
LMSP-DNR-Pks.-split firewood 7
12-10-97 Montissippi Co. Pk.-brushing afar a for Oak regeneration 8
12-11-97 Montissippi , Marcus Zumbrunnen o. Pk.-brushing 8
. 12-12-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin chinki g, staining, and caulking 8
12-13-97 County Public Works-wash and w county vehicles 8
12-15-97 LMSP-DNR-Pks. log cabin stainin ,windows and door inst. 8
12-17-97 Ney County Park-storm damage cl anup 6
12-20-97 Fare for Al1- help organize the shar s
County Public W orks- wash and w county equipI?~n~ .11
12-22-97 LMSP-DNR Pks. finish chinking d caulking cabin.
cut firewood for cabins 11
12~26-97 County Shop-Buffalo-wash and w county vehicles 9
12-29-97 Schroeder County Park- bundle fir wood 10
12-30-97 County Shop-put snowplow cuttin edges in rack
County Parks- Schroeder Pk.-split d bundle firewood 7
.
'.
.
.
.
(-
Wright County Board of Commissioners
January 22, 1998
Page 4
(~
During this past quarter your Wright County STS rogram served 39 males and 11 females who
worked a total of2, 992 hours. This is a benefit 0 $14,960.00 (based on $5.00 per hour). There
were 220 jail days saved for a benefit of$10,670.0 (based on a $48.50 cost per diem). The
estimated value of projects completed was $32,92 .00. Therefore, the overall estimated benefit
to Wright County for this quarter's operation was 58,558.00.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate t contact me.
Sincerely,
Shelva Lee Swanson, Supervisor
STS Region vm
/sls
cc: File
Sheriff Don Hozempa
Capt. Gary Torfin
Bill Weber, DOC Dist. Supervisor
Mike Mac:Millan, Court Services Director
DOC Probation Office, Buffalo
Brad Thompson, STS Crewleader
Honorable Bruce Douglas
Honorable Gary Meyer
Honorable Dale Mossey
Honorable Kim Johnson
r
r
.
State of
Minnesota Depa
October 27, 1 997
Wright County Board of Commissioners
Wright County Government Center
#10 N. W. 2nd Street
Buffalo, MN 55313
RE: Sentencing to Service Quarterly Report
.
Dear Commissioners:
The following is a list of projects worked, a d a summary of activities of your Wright
County Sentencing to Service Program for the quarter of July 1, 1997 through September
30, 1997.
DATE PROJECT # IN CREW
07/01 County Highway Dept/weed whi guardrails 5
07102 Monticel/o/city storm damage de nup 4
07/09 County Highway Dept/weed whi guardrails 4
07/10 Monticel/o/city storm damage de nup 4
07/11 " " " 4
07/12 French Lake Southside Twnshp/Ju k Amnesty Day 10
City Highway Dept/weed whip g ardrails
07/15 LMSP-DNR/build wood crib 4
07/23 County Courthouse/chip brush 3
LMST-DNR/put roof on wood crib
07/24 County Hwy Dept/repair barricad s and flashing lights 2
07/26 Corrina Twnshp/Junk Amnesty Da 3
07/29 Col/inwood Park/paint residence 1
07/30 " " " 2
08/01 LMSP-DNR/put roof on wood crib 2
. 08/12 County Hwy Dept/weed whip gua drails, work on barricades 3
08/1 3 Col/inwood Park/paint residence 4
1450 Energy Park Drive, Suite 200. St. ul, Minnesota 55/08-52/9
Phone 6/2/642-0200 . TDD /2/641-1589
AneQUflf nrmn,.rllnirv" ",",.,...
r
c
. Wright County Board of Commissioners
October 27, 1997
Page 2
08/1 5 LMSP-ONR/fill wood crib with wood 4
08/1 6 State DOT 1-94/1itter pick-up e st of Albertville 11
08/1 9 County Historical Societylrepair exit and emergency lights 4
County Sign Shiplrepair sign a d lights
08/20 County Hwy Oeptlsign bundle old signs 4
08122 Collinwood County Park/paint house 6
08/23 Fare For All Food Program/dist ibution 6
State DOT 1-94/1itter pickup
09/03 Collinwood County Park/paint garage 1
09/04 " " " 1
09/05 LMSP-DNR/build log cabin 2
09/10 Ney County Park/spray deck; ollinwood Co. Park/paint 3
09/11 Ney County Park/seal deck, cI an Nature Center 4
09/12 LMSP-ONRlpeel and seal logs r cab i n 4
09/13 ONR-Locke Lake/clean outlet 7
09/1 5 County Hwy OeptlCo. Rd. 20, ut weeds 4
0911 7 County Hwy Oeptlmark headw lis on Co. Rd. 20 6
LMSP-DNR/peel and seal logs ~ r cabin
09/1 8 " " " 6
. 09/1 9 " " " 7
09/26 " Iconstruct log cabin 7
09/27 " " " 7
09-29 " " " 7
During this past quarter, your Wright County TS Program served 28 males and 9 females
who worked a total of 1,264 hours. This is benefit of $6,320.00 (based on $5.00 per
hour). There were 78 jail days saved for a b nefit of $3,783.00 (based on a $48.50 cost
per diem). The estimated market value of com leted projects was $11,184.00. There was
an additional $160.00 worth of fines owed to the court, that was worked off through
completion of STS.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
j;;!0-~~~
~7~l;;tf~;;fee Swanson, Supervisor
STS Region VIII
.
Isis
.
.
.
(
c'
County Board of Commissioners
October 27, 1997
Page 3
cc: Sheriff Don Hozempa
Capt. Gary Torfin
Bill Weber, DOC Dist. Supervisor
Mike MacMillan, Court Services Dir ctor
DOC Probation Office, Buffalo
Brad Thompson, STS Crewleader
Honorable Bruce Douglas
Honorable Gary Meyer
Honorable Dale Mossey
Honorable Kim Johnson
.
.
.
July 16,1997
Wright County Board of Commissioners
Wright County Government Center
#10 Northwest 2nd Street
Buffalo, MN 55313
RE: Sentencing to Service Quarterly Report
The following is a list of projects worked, and a ummary of activities of your Wright County
Sentencing to Service program for the quarter fr m April 1, through June 30 ,1997.
.bM.IT
4/2
4/3
4/5
4/8
4/10
4/1}
4/18
4/19
4/20
4/22
4/24
4/25
4/30
5/1
5/2
5/3
5/6
PROIECT
# IN CREW
Woodland Twp. Shop/Clean up
Monticello/Ground maintenance
Wright County Public Works/Clean up county vehicles
LMSP Park/Split and bundle firewo d
Montissippi Park/ Maintenance
Riverside Park/Maintenance
Beebe Park/ Maintenance
Otsego County Park/Flood clean u
LMSP Park/Split and bundle firewo d
DOT 1-94/Litter pick up
DOT 1-94/Litter pick up
Wright County Public Works/Grou d maintenance
Wright County His. Soc.!Chink and daub log cabin
LMSP Park/Bundle firewood and bu Id wood crib
Sylvan Cementery/Clean trees and rush forexpansion
Wright County His. Soc.!Chick and aub log cabin
City of Buffalo/Junk Amnesty Day
City of Otsego/Junk Amnesty Day
County Public Works/Move office f rniture
County Parks/Park maintenance
10
11
12
10
10
9
8
12
9
8
6
6
3
3
3
7
4
.
.
.
Wright County Board of Commissioners
July 16,1997
Page Two
5/7
5/9
5/10
5/14
5/17
5/20
5/21
5/22
5/23
5/27
5/28
5/29
6/4
6/5
6/7
6/10
6/11
6/12
6/17
6/18
6/19
6/20
6/25
6/26
6/27
6/28
6/30
County Public Works/Clean fixtu es, wash county vehicles
LMSP Park/Park maintenance
Lakeview Cementery/Lawn main enance
County Highway Oept/Flood c1e n up
DOT 1-94/Road maintenance
Sylvan Cementery/Tree and bush clearing
County Highway/Fix swing away n mailboxes
Sylvan Cementery/Cut brush
Schroeder County Park/Prepare b throoms for painting
LMSP Park/Build wood crib
LMSP Park/Build wood crib
Sylvan Cementery/Tree and bush learing
Schroeder Park/Prepare bathroom for painting
County Highway/Put marker posts in ditch for line painting
County His. Soc./Finish daubing I g cabin
County Highway/Repair barricade
County Highway/Repair barricade
County Public WorkslWash and w x dump truck
Schroeder Park/Paint bathroom wa Is
Schroeder Park/Paint bathroom an picnic tables
LMSP/Build canoe rack, put rafters on wood shed
City of Monticello/Brushing along ississippi
City of Monticello/Brushing along ississippi
City of Monticello/Brushing along ississippi
LMSP/lnstall sign post and guard p sts
Schroeder Park/Paint bathrooms
County Public Works/Prepare for action
LMSP/Build wood storage crib
Silver Creek Township/junk Amnes y Day
County Highway Oept.lWeed whip guardrails
5
5
7
3
10
4
2
2
2
3
2
2
4
3
4
2
4
4
5
5
5
5
7
6
5
7
4
.
.
.
Wright County Board of Commissioners
July 16, 1997
Page Three
/ ,..--
During this past quarter, your Wright Count STS Program served 54 male and 6 female
offenders who worker 2,016 hours. This is a b nefit of $10,080.00 (based on $5.00 per hour).
There were 128 jail days saved for a benefit 0 $7,040.00 (based on $55.00 per diem). The
estimated market value of completed projec s was $19,855.00. There was an additional
$160.00 in fines owed to the court worked of through completion of STS hours.
If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Shelva Lee Swanson, Supervisor
STS Region VIII
SLS:db
cc: Sheriff Don Hozempa
Capt. Gary Torfin
Bill Weber, Doc Dist. Supervisor
Mike MacMillan, Court Services Director
Doc Probation Office, Buffalo
Brad Thompson, STS Crewleader
Honorable Bruce Douglas
Honorable Gary Meyer
Honorable Dale Mossey
Honorable Kim Johnson
Wright County Attorney's Office
V~TY t::J~
Q()~1.
,... z
-\ Yl (l
? ..6">'
7856
MAY 5 !~:::~
WRIGHT OUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF OURT SERVICES
Tenth Judi ial District
May 1, 1 998
Shelva Lee Swanson
Minnesota Department of Corrections
1450 Energy Park Drive, Suite 200
St. Paul, MN 55108-5219
Dear Shelva:
Michael J. MacMillan
Director of Court Services
As per our phone conversation last week, I wanted to rite you a letter to express interest in Wright
County obtaining funds for a second crew.
According to the data that I have collected and the co versations that I have had with Melanie Courrier,
who coordinates my programs and community service nd Brad Thompson, it seems feasible that Wright
County would pursue funds for an extra crew.
.
I believe our crew sizes are averaging between 8.5 an 11 which in my estimation is well above the
standard established by the Department of Corrections 0 operate an appropriate size crew.
I will be forwarding you further information regarding ur numbers and statistics and also be contacting
Sherburne County for the possibility of doing a joint cr w.
If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
MJM:njt
-
Government Center-10 2nd Street N.W. Room 141- Buffalo, MN 55313-2 54- (612)682.7308-1.80Q.362-3667 E.:x;t. 7308- Fax (612)682-7943
Equal Opportunity / Affirmat.ue Action Employer