City Council Agenda Packet 07-28-2003
e..
AGE DA
REGULAR MEETING - MO TICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, .July 2 ,2003 - 7 p.m.
Mayor: Bruce Thielen
Council Members: Roger Carlson, Glen Posusta, R )bbie Smith, Brian Stumpf
1.
2A.
B.
3.
4.
5.
. SJ(
/l.'. Co tJ c.
/\V
7
6.
7.
8.
9.
~
@
..\ 12.
'ill)
Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Approve minutes of July 14,2003 regular Co ncil meeting.
Approve minutes of July 14, 2003 special Co ncil meeting.
::J:~h1L..\
C~A~ ~~Ki- )
Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
!JrSO"S5f W ON Rod (6u.-- Ct',,(~
Citizen comments/petitions, requests and co
'bUl\':>s 50 d J/~C, 41,,1-'( ~
c~~~~~~gen~~ S' "()J~fr- ~
A. Consideration of resolutions providin f<Jr the sale of general obligation improvements bonds,
Series 2003 and current refunding 01'$14,700,000 Clean Water Revolving Fund Loan.
B.
Consideration to review R-1 A, R-l, R 2 and R-2 A setback standards for the purpose of
clarification of the regulations - Appli ant: Monticello Planning Commission.
Approval of purchase of Total Registe Systems Inc. upgrade for liquor store cash register and
inventory system.
Consideration of items removed from the con ent agenda -F0r discussion.
Public Hearing - Consideration of a resolutiOl adopting proposed assessment roll for delinquent utility
bills and certification of assessment roll to Co nty Auditor.
Public Hearing - Consideration to adopt a res( lution amending the Agreement for Loan of Small Cities
Economic Development Program Fund betwe n TCDC and the City.
Review of signs erected downtown on public idewalk.
Consideration of review of bids and award of ontract - Pumphouse # 5, City Project No. 2003-4C.
Consideration to review current sign ordinanc regarding monument and pylon signs in relation to height
and square footage for possible amendment. - pplieant: Monticello Planning Commission.
Consideration of underground electrical conv rsion project - Broadway.
Consideration of calling for a public hearing 0 the sidewalk improvements from Washington Street to
Dayton Street.
Agcnda
Monticello City Council
July 28, 2002
Page Two
.
14.
Considcration of authorization to ohtain quotes 'or Briar Oakcs Pond.
15. Consideration of payment of bills for July.
16. Adjourn
.
.
.
.
MINtJ I~S
REG1JLAR MEETING - MON' ICELLO CITY COONCIL
Monday, July 14,2003 - 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Roger Carlson, Glen P susta, Robbie Smith, Brian Stumpf and Bruce
Thielcn.
Members Absent:
None
1. Call to Order.
Mayor Thielen called the meeting to order a d declared a quorum present. The Pledge of
Allegiance was said. Mayor Thielen expres ed his thanks to Gary Anderson. the Monticello I,ions
Club, the Rotary Club, Women of Today an all the volunteers who helped make Riverfest a
success.
2A. A rove minutes of June 23 2003 s ecial Council meetin .
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE T'HE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 23, 2003
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING. GLEN P )SUSTA SECONDED TlIE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED lJNANIMOUSL Y.
2B.
A rove minutes of .June 23 2003 re ula Council meetin .
ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO APPRO E THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 23, 2003
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDl':D TI IE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. Consideration of addin items to the a e da.
Bruce Thielen added discussion of the AD, boxes in the Mcadow Oaks area. Robbie Smith asked
that discussion of the traffic light situation e added. JetT O'Neill added consideration of moving
forward with the design of the lift station f r the Wild Meadows area (Now called Sunset Ponds).
Rick W olfsteller added scheduling of a me ting with the township officials.
4. Citizen comments/ etitions re uests an com laints.
Mayor Thielcn explained the purpose of th citizen comment portion of the agenda. No one spoke
under citizen comment.
5. Consent Aeenda:
.
Consideration of approval of chari able gambling license L()r Monticello VFW.
A.
~(4
.
B.
c.
D.
.
.
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
Recommendation: Approve charitab e gambling license for Monticello VFW. Resolution
No. 2003-43.
Consideration of ratifying new hires f)f Streets and Parks Department and I,iquor Store.
Recommendation: Approve new hir s as identified.
Consideration of approval of charitah e gambling license for S1. Henry's Fall Festival.
Recommendation: Approve charitab e gambling license for St. Henry's Fall Festival.
Resolution No. 2003-44.
Consideration of approving a tempor ry 3/2 beer license for S1. I lemy' s Parish rail
Festival. Recommendation: Appro e 3/2 beer license for Septemher 13 & 14,2003 for
the Church of 81. Henry's.
E.
Consideration of resolution approvin ' election of city manager for inclusion in PERA.
Recommendation: Adopt resolution approving election of city manager for inclusion in
PERA. Resolution No. 2003-45.
F.
Consideration to review setback stan ards in R-I A, R-l, R-2 and R-2A districts for the
purpose of clarification of regulation '. Recommendation: Move to approve the Zoning
Ordinance amendment relating to set ack regulations, hased on a finding that the proposed
amendment is consistent with the Ci is historical application of sethack requirements, and
reflects the intent of the City in previous decisions.
G. Consideration of development stage LJD and preliminary plat for Carlisle Village.
Applicant: Shadow Creek Developn ent. Recommendation: Approve the development
stage planned unit development and reliminary plat approval for Carlisle Village subject to
the conditions set forth in Exhibit Z.
H. Consideration of approval of the fin I plat and rezoning for Parkside at Meadow Oaks
Second Addition. Recommendatio : Approve the final plat and rezoning for Parkside at
Meadow Oaks Second Addition. 0 dinance Amd #393 and Resolution No. 2003-46.
1. Consideration of approval of final pat of the Hillside Farms Second Addition.
Recommendation: Adopt resolutio approving final plat of the 11illside Farms Second
Addition. Resolution No. 2003-47
J.
Consideration of a request for a con itional use permit allowing concept stage planned unit
development for 2 four unit townho Ises. Applicant: Emerald Estates, LLC.
Recommendation: Approve the co ditionaluse permit for concept stage PUD for 2 four
unit townhouses.
~A
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
Consideration to adopt a resolution xtending the Compliance Date within the Contract for
Private Development between the II. A, City and Twin City Die Castings.
Recommendation: Adopt the resol tion extending the Compliance Date within the
Contract for Private Development b tween the HRA, the City, and Twin City Die Castings
from July 26, 2003 to July 26,2004.
K.
L. Consideration of approval ofresolut on having Minnesota Statutes Section 272.162 relating
to transfer of property enforced by right County. Recommendation: Adopt the
resolution requesting Minnesota Sta utes Section 272.162 be enforced by Wright County.
Resolution No. 2003-48.
City Engineer Bret Weiss suggested movin agenda item #14 which covered approving plans and
specifications for the River Street sanitary s wer replacement, Project No. 2002-13C to the
consent agenda. Agenda items #10 and #11 were also added to the consent agenda. Robbie
Smith asked that item #5F be removed for discussion.
ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE rilE CONSENT AGENDA WITH ITEM #5F
BEING REMOVED AND ITEMS #10, #11 AND #14 BEING ADDED. GLEN POSUSTA
SECONDED THE MOTION.
Brian Stumpf noted that he would be abstai ing from the vote on item # 10 because he is a vested
member of the Relief Association but he w uld be voting on the other items on the consent agenda..
Mayor Thielen suggested that the motion be amended to leave item # I 0 off the consent agenda and
consider it as a separate item.
ROBBIE SMITH AMENDED HIS MOnO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO REMOVE
ITEM #5F AND TO ADD ITEMS #11 AN #14. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE
AMENDED MOTION. McyrlON CARRI D UNANIMOUSLY.
6. Consideration of items removed from the consent a enda for discussion.
Item #5F dealt with an ordinance amendmel t to clarify setbacks in the R-1, R-1 A, R-2 and R-2A
districts. In reading the proposed amendm nt, Robbie Smith felt it was not clear. He felt it would
clarify the intent of the ordinance if instead fa listing a total minimum side yard setback, it would list
a minimum side yard setback for the house ide and a minimum side yard setback for the garage
side.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO TABLE A TION ON TIlE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT TO ALLOW S'T'AFF TIM TO REVIEW AND CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE.
ROBBIE SMrr'11 SECONDED THE MOTI )N. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3
d~
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
7"
Deputy City Administrator, .lefT O'Neill pr vided background on the request feu annexation of a 60
acre parcel owned by John Chadwick. The area covered by this annexation request lies to the
south and southeast of the area previously a mexcd. The property meets the requirements of the
statutes fen' annexation by ordinance but the 'e is some question whether it meets the city's criteria,
which includes being able to serve the area ith utilities and submittal of a development plan for the
property. Jeff O'Neill noted that this area is covered by a PUD which identifies Area A as
commercial and light industrial uses; Area as light industrial and some mining and Area C as an
area for future study and possibly a buffer z ne between the industrial area and the Bondhus
dcvelopmcnt. If the City Council is satisfi d that this area is properly identified feu planning
purposes, then the annexation should take pace. JeffO"Neill noted that by not annexing the area, it
could. slow development of Area B which i" industrial. Roger Carlson asked where the utilities are
located in relation to this property. Jeff O'Neill stated the utilities are on the east side of the road.
It was noted that if the annexation was appr ved the church property would be surrounded by the
city limits. The church has not requested a nexation but it was felt that this property would be
annexed into the city at some future date.
'rhe Council discussed whether they could pen the public hearing and then table action on the
anncxation until Chadwick could provide a lore detailcd development plan. Jeff O'Neill suggested
that the Planning Commission look at any s Ibmittal by Chadwick. Brian Stumpf pointed out that the
Planning Commission would have to hold t eir own public hcaring on any concept stage PUD. City
Attorney, Matt Brokl, stated the city could pen the public hearing and then table action on the
annexation ordinance until such time as the Planning Commission could review the concept stage
PUD. JcffO'Neill asked ifajust a portion fthe property could be annexed. Matt Brokl indicated
it could as long as there was a separate legal description.
Paul Billotta from Otter Creek Developmen , discussed the proposed development. He noted. that
the City's proposal for School Boulevard w uld impact their development plans. He stated once
the area is annexed the City could proceed ith planning for their utilities. He felt the annexation
would open up adjacent properties for devel pment. Mr. BilIotta indicated their intent was to get
the annexation completed and then put toge her a development plan. Procedure for planning made
more sense once they were in thc city. Ro er Carlson stated. he was concerned about moving
forward without a more definite plan. Whil Roger Carlson felt the property would be annexed
eventually he wasn't sure this was the corrc t time to do it. The City Council wanted to see what
the developer was going to do with the site efe)re annexation takes place. Jeff O'Neill stated there
is a somewhat approved PUD in place but .. rea C was not covered in that PUD.
ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO TABLE TH . PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ANNEXA'rION
ORDINANCE FOR THE CHADWICK DE ELOPMENT UNTIL THE COUNCIL MEETING
OF EITHER AUGUST 11111 OR AUGUST 5111. ROGER CARLSON SECONDED 'lllE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIM )USL Y.
4
~~
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
8.
Jeff O'Neill provided background inii.mnatic)1 on this annexation request which is a 40 acre parcel
lying south of property that was previously a nexed. The criteria of a development plan and ability
of the property to be serviced with utilities h, ve been met and the property is ready ii.)r annexation.
It was noted that there is a property dispute 0 a portion of the site that is being considered for
annexation. Matt Hrokl, City Attorney, stat d that the property dispute is private matter between
the property owners and should not impact tip annexation. Brian Stumpf asked about the property
line dispute and how it would impact any set acks or tree preservation for the development. If the
plat needs to be redrawn because of the prop rty dispute, the county would not record the plat until
it was redrawn. Matt Rrokl stated that it is n t the City's obligation to prove ownership of the
property. The developers have submitted tha they are the owners of the property. If there is an
error in the legal description of the land they wn it would be caught at the time the plat is recorded.
.lefT O'Neill submitted a ktter from Scott Wa tel'S which objected to the proposed annexation for
these reasons: ]) He is the owner of I V; acre.. of the property being annexed; 2) The proposed
development does not meet the requirenlents )fan R-IA district and 3) The density of the proposed
development will have a negative impact on ildlife habitat.
Mayor Thiekn opened the public hearing on he annexation ordinance.
Pat 0' Donnell. attorney for Scott Walters, spc ke on the annexation request and reiterated the three
concerns noted in the letter hom Mr. Walters with the primary concern being the 1 Y2 acres that is in
dispute. If it is ultimately decided that the prlperty is indeed owned by Mr. Walters a number of
lots within the proposed development would 0 longer meet design standards. If it is determined
that the land is owned by Shadow Creek Cor. oration, then Mr. Walters would no longer have a 40
acre parcel and that would impact how he eOlld use his property under the county's zoning
ordinance. In addition if the land is owned b Mr. Walters then a portion of his property would be
in the city limits and the balance in the towns ip. The developer would also have to give notice to
potential buyers of the lots that there is a prop rty dispute affecting certain lots within the
development. Mr. O'Donnell suggested that i the City wanted to proceed with the annexation they
should annex that area that is not being disput d.
Evan Rice. attorney representing the Shadow .:reek Corporation, provided a sketch showing the
area that was in dispute and agreed that if Mr. Walters prevailed in the land dispute it would require
the developer to reconfigure a number of lots. He noted that the legal dispute is for the courts to
decide. The annexation request meets all the equirements of the statutes and should be approved.
These types of land disputes arc common and he City could be setting a precedent that would allow
easy derailment ofland LIse applications if the deny the annexation because of a disputed legal
description.
5
d~
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
Ted Holker, owns property to the south, east nd west of the property requesting annexation. He
stated that all property owners must petition or annexation and Scott Walters did not petition to
have his property annexed. Ted Holker stat d that the fence has been there for years and there is a
rule of thumb that if the fence line has been establ ished a certain length of time it becomes the
property line. I Ie indicated that there was a s lrvey of the area done in 1981. He questioned how
the City could annex the property without th ownership question being resolved. Ted Ilolker also
asked about holding pond in the southeast co ner of the proposed development. Bret Weiss stated
there are some wetlands in the area but no hiding pond. Ted IIolker was concerned about
Hooding to his property and wanted to make ure that any ponding areas were constructed at an
elevation that would not cause Hooding of hi property.
Ralph Hermes stated that he has owned the I nd for 30 years and that the propeliy ownership
question wi II be resolved. Bruce Thielen 1 oted property disputes were not uncommon when
dealing with metes and bounds descriptions.
Mayor Thielen then closed the public hearin I. Brian Stumpf stated that the developer has put in a
lot of work to come up with a development Ian and has met the City and statutory requirements for
annexation.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ADOPT A ORDINANCE ANNEXING TI IE
FARR/HERMES DEVELOPMENT PROPI RTY AS REQUESTED BASED ON THE
FINDING TI IA T THE ANNEXATION RE UEST IS CONSISTENT WITH CRITERIA FOR
ANNEXATION DEFINED BY STATE ST TUTES AND BASED ON THE FINDING THAT
UTILITIES ARE A V AILABLE AND THE ROPERTY IS PLANNED FOR A
DEVELOPMENT IN A MANNER CONSI TENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOT ON. MOTION CARRIED lJNANIMOUSL Y.
9.
Consideration of amendments to Ci
or ordinances.
City Administrator, Rick Wolrsteller, expla"ned that after the Council had approved amending the
ordinance for the extended hours as allowe by state statutes statfreviewed the city's liquor/beer
ordinances. As a result of this review, ther were some additional revisions that made to the
ordinances to match state statutes. In additi)n the City could add a charge for the extended hours
license to cover the cost of sheriff patrol w ich was an item not covered in earlier discussions of the
extended hours license. Brian Stumpf was comfortable with the other changes to the City's
liquor/beer ordinances but did not feel the ity should be charging anything for the extended hours
license.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROV THE CHANGES IN THE CITY'S LIQUOR/BEER
ORDINANCES AS NOTED WITHOUT DDING A CITY CHARGE FOR AN EXTENDED
IIOURS LICENSE. GLEN POSUSTA SEONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSL Y.
d.P\
.
.
.
Counci I Minutes - 711 4/0J
1 n. Consideration of rantin an increase to t e individual ension for volunteer Firefi hters
Relief Association members.
The Council had no questions on the propose increase to the pension fi.md for the firefighters
Relief Association members.
ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO GRANT N INCREASE TO THE INDIVIDUAL
PENSION FOR VOLUNTEER FTREFIGrrr .'RS RELIEF ASSOCIATION MEMBERS 'TO
$2,225 PER YEAR. ROHBIF~ SMITH SEC( NDED TilE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
WITH BRIAN STUMPP ABSTAINING HE :AUSE HE A VESTED MEMBER OF THE
RELlEr ASSOCIATION.
11. Consideration of a
duties.
This item to approve entering into a two year. greement with Wright County Assessor for assessing
duties at $10 per parcel for 2004 and $10.50/ arcel for 2005 was included with the consent
agenda.
12. Consideration of ratifying union contract.
City Administrator, Rick Wolf<;telIer summar' zed what had taken place in negotiations with the
union. The changes included: 1) Change to t e work schedule; 2) Severance benefit of unused sick
leave to be handled the same as non-union; J) Salary schedule adjustment of J1Yo for the first year of
the contract and 20;;) for the second year; and ) A step seven would be added to the salary
schedule which would be the same as the non union personnel.
ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO RATIFY THE CURRENT CONTRACT EXTENSION AS
OUTLINED IN THE CONTRACT PROPOS L SUMMARY AND MAKE THE BENEFITS
RETROACTIVE TO APRIL 1,2003. ROG- R CARLSON SECONDED THE MO"rION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
13.
Consideration of etition for annexation. P 0 ert owners: Wits chen Marklin.J & Frie.
Deputy City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, state that this petition docs not comply with city policy [or
annexation and flJr that reason, staff is asking f the City Council wants to accept the petition.
Although it docs not meet city criteria, the pro erty owners did want the petition to come before the
Council. The parcel is a 7 acre parcel lying b 'tween the freeway and CSAH 75. At this time
there is no development plan f()r the area nor i ' the use of this area establ ished in the City's
7
d\\
.
.
.
16.
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
Comprehensive Plan. It was noted that wh n the MOAA was in existence they felt the area should
remain as green space. At this time the Ci y does not have a plan for the area nor is it known how
the property would be accessed. In additio 1 the proposed CSAH 18/[-94 interchange could
impact this property. Brian Stumpf felt th. t the Policy Committee set up at the CSAH 18/[-94
workshop should review this parcel. Bruce Thielen felt this area should not be considered f()r
annexation until the City has time to study hat is going to happen in this area.
ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO DENY AC .~EPTANCE OF THE PETITION AND DIRECT
T[fE APPLICANT TO UNDERTAKE A F:ASIBILITY STUDY AND PREPARE A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR TlIE SITE HICI I WOULD INCORPORATE THE
POTENTIAL NEED TO REALIGN NEIG BORING ROAD CORRIDORS. ROGER
CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. OTION CARRIED lINANIMOUSLY.
14.
cifieations River Street Sanita Sewer
As part of the consent agenda, the Council a_proved the plans and specifications and authorized the
advertisement of bids for the improvements 0 the River Street Sanitary Sewer.
15.
Consideration of award of bids for River
of enterin into a eost sharin
improvement.
City Engineer. Bret Weiss reported that one id had been received on the project. The bid
submitted by Buffalo Bituminous had a pric of $59,646.25 for the realignment work and $29,964
le)[ the extension of the CSAI I 75 bypass Ian ~s. The County originally stated they would
participate in the cost but the now they indic te they do not have the funds to do this work. 13rian
Stumpf asked how the City was going to fin, nee this project. City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller
stated that the City could borrow 1[om its res rve funds. Bruce Thielen felt although the County
wanted to limit access onto county roads, the were reluctant to make improvements.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO AWARD T E PROJECT (BASE BID AND ALTERNATE
BID) TO BUFFALO BITUMINOUS IN TH' AMOUNT OF $89,610.25 WITH nlE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR 'T'O DETERMINE THE FUNDING SOURCE, ROBBIE SMITFI
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Consideration of ri
Development.
Deputy City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill state that the City Council is being asked to get involved in
the acquisition of right of way f()[ Chelsea Road as the property owners have not been able to
8
d~
Council Minutes - 7/14/03
.
negotiate a settlement. If the property owner, cannot resolve the issue, the City could use eminent
domain to acquire the land for public right of ay. Since there does not appear any resolution to the
right of way negotiations does the City want t pursue right of way acquisition. Any cost the City
would incur in the eminent domain process w uld be reimbursed by the developer. The City will
enter into an agreement with the developer 01 tlining these costs.
City Engineer, Bret Weiss stated although th re has heen ongoing discussions Mr. Chadwick would
like to start the process of eminent domain a d get an appraisal even. It was suggested that a
mediator could possihly he used to resolve th issues.
City Attorney, Matt Brokl , pointed out that t le City is not at the point where they are ready to
adopt a resolution authorizing eminent doma n. The City is authorizing staiTto proceed with getting
an appraisal and negotiate an agreement on t e costs. Matt Brokl stated with the changes to the
law there is a number of steps in the eminent domain procedure and this is just one of them. that the
City has to take.
The attorney for Denny Hecker pointed out t ey are making an effort to resolve this. They have
made an offer but there has heen no counten iTer from which negotiations can continue.
.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO DIRECT S AFF TO PROCEED WITlI INITIATION OF TI IE
EMINENT DOMAIN PROCESS AS NOTE BY TilE CITY ATTORNEY IN Ins MEMO
OF JULY 9,2003 AUTHORIZING 1) crr AND REQUESTING PARTY TO ENTER INTO
AN AGREEMENT RELATING TO PA YM"NT OF COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY; 2)
OBTAINING AN APPRAISAL AND 3) CI Y NEGOTIATING WITH THE EXISTING
PROPERTY OWNER. GLEN POSUSTA, ECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
17.
ApOfove pavment of bills fOf .July. 2003.
ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO APPRO E PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR JULY. GLEN
POSUST A SECONDED THE MOTION. OTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Added Hems:
ADS Boxes _ Bruce Thielen noted that in driving t rough the Meadow Oaks development the ADS hoxes
were in poor condition but he didn't know what au hority, if any, the City had to get them replaced. John
Simola will check into this and see what can be do e.
Signlll Timing _ Bret Weiss reported that Chuck R ckert a traffic engineer from WSB had evaluated the
timing of the lights on TlI 25. Although MnDOT has indicated that the timing is coordinated, Mr. Rickert
did not find that to be the case and felt that the tim'ng needed to be updated. Bret Weiss noted there are
other issues as well such as, number of uncontrolle. intersections and the number of accesses onto the road.
.
d-\i
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 7/I 4/03
WSB will discuss this with the MnDOT engineer. 'lcn PoslIsta questioned whether anything could he done
about vehicles that are blocking the intersections. The consensus of the Council was to have the engineer
continue to work with MnDOT on the timing ofthe lights.
Wild Meadow (Sunset Ponds) lift station - Jeff 0' eill reported that the development is moving
forward. Part of the utility requirements for this de elopmcnt is the construction of a lift station. Stail' was
asking Council to authorize the engineer to proceed with plans and specifications for the lift: station.
ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO AUT! IORIZE SB & ASSOCIATES TO PROCEED WITH THE
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS I,'OR THE SANI ARY SEWER LIFT STATION TO SERVE TIlE
WILD MEADOWS (SUNSET PONDS) DEVEU) MEN"r. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUS\,
Joint Meeting with Township - The Council had
to discuss various issues including annexation.
] ],2003 at 5:30 with thc township.
Elm Street - Glen Posusta asked if the City had 100
Street as the property owners had asked ahout it.
for that work. John Simola stated that they coul
information to the property owners.
18. Adiourn.
xpressed an interest in meeting with township of11cials
he Council discussed setting a special meeting for August
cd at the cost of paving the gravel portion of Elm
ret Weiss indicated they had not done a cost estimate
eome up with a cost estimate and present the
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 8:55 P. M. ROGER CARL$ON SECONDED
THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UN NIMOUSL Y.
Recording Secretary
d~
.
.
.
MIN U ES
SPECIAL MEETING - MON ICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday July 14,2003 - 5 p.m.
Members Present:
Roger Carlson, Glen P susta, Robbie Smith, Brian Stumpf and
Bruce Thielen
Members Absent:
None
1. Call to Order.
Mayor Thielen called the meeting to order at 5 p.m. and explained the purpose of the special
meeting. City Council, staff and develope s present were introduced.
2. CSAH 18/1-94 Interchange Aeenda.
Review Status of Plan Development
City l:ngineer, Bret Weiss provided backgr und on how the City got to this point with the
interchange plans for CSAH 18. Some time ago the City identified that they wanted an interchange
with two movements while the Federal Hig way Administration required the city to show they could
supply a full interchange with all four move ents. The Federall-lighway Administration had
approved an interchange going on the DahU eimer site. With the proposed development of the
Dahlheimer/Bondhus property, the develop r would like to see the interchange location moved more
to the east toward the redi-mix site. Since MnDOT is ready to do some work on 1-94 it would
make sense to look at the interchange again
At the last meeting, the Council authorized SB & Associates to move forward with preliminary
plans and do other necessary studies. In Se _ tember it is planned to start the final design phase with
construction to take place in 2004. Betwe n now and September there is a great deal of work
that needs to be done.
The City wanted to meet with the property wners and go over how the cost will be assessed, how
the right of way will be acquired, impact or the development plans oUhe property owners and
negotiate cost sharing agreements with the arious entities. 'fhe primary goal of this meeting is to
introduce a concept plan.
Review Commercial Development Plans in Concept
Mr. Ken Streeter spoke about his search 1'0 development sites within the City resulting in his
meeting with the Dahlheimers and Mr. Bo dllUs. Mr. Streeter indicated their procedure would be
2e:,
Special Council Meeting - 7/14/03
.
to enter into an agreement with the properti s owners and contract with the Ryan Companies as the
developer. Ken Streeter noted that nothing is requested for approval at this time but he felt it was
important for the city to have something to 1 ok at. Dick Brooks of Ryan Companies provided
some background information on their com any and the developments they have done. He stated
that he didn't want to identify the proposed enants at this time because it would premature to do so
at this point but he added that three of the bi gest retailers in the country are proposed for this site.
The proposed site is acceptable to the prosp ctive tenants so now they are proceeding with the
development of it.
Dick Koppy, in charge of engineering for R an Companies, stated that have not done a great deal of
engineering work yet. There is 174,000 sq. ft. proposed for general merchandising and grocery,
106,000 sq. ft. for soft merchandising and 9 ,000 for other merchandising. There are three outlots
which could house another 50,000 sq. ft 01'1' tailor restaurants making a total of 425,000 sq. ft. on
a 48 acre site. Dick Koppy briefly reviewe elevations in the area noting that the property lies at an
elevation of between 960-963. The intercl1'lnge configuration is essential to their development.
Whether the center can be done before the it terchange is completed has yet to be determined. The
interchange with a signal is necessary becau e of the impact the center will have on tra1Iic volume.
There will also be access to the site from 7th Street. Water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer needs
will have to be worked out.
.
Dick Brooks reviewed their schedule. Once cost information is obtained the developer will submit
the cost estimate to the tenants who will sig oll. At that time they will he representing actual tenants
in the development. It anticipated that the losing would be in May 2004 and construction would
take place in 2004 with a grand opening in 2005 depending on MnDOT and the City. He noted
that the retailers have set opening dates that hey are trying to meet. Ken Streeter added that there
arc some other issues as well such as the rei cation of Dahlheimer to a new site, either an existing
building or vacant land suitable lor construe ion. Ken Streeter stated that this development will have
a big trickle down dIect in attracting other. usinesses. Mayor Thielen stated that Monticello is a
community that will do what is necessary to make this development happen.
.
Doug Weiszhaar presented a sketch of the p oposed alignment and stated that a project works best
when it tries to build by consensus. It was s Iggested that two committees be established, a
Technical Committee that deals with items t at are highly technical in nature and the other a Policy
Committee that would deal with issues like ow the project would impact adjacent neighborhoods.
Both committees would advise the City Cou lcil on what the alternatives are for this project. Doug
Weiszhaar noted that the City Council cann t veto anything MnDOT does on a federal highway. It
was asked what would happen to the bridge n CSAH 18. Since the bridge has at least half of its
useful life remaining, MnDOT docs not wan to replace it at this time. MnDOT agreed to build
temporary bypass to the north of the new Ian s. Doug Weiszhaar suggested that a representative of
the Wright County Board be designated to s rve on the Policy Committee. lIe also noted that the
redi-mix plant is still in the township and 1'0 that reason they might want a member of the township
2
~P:>
.
Special Council Meeting - 7/14/03
board on the Policy Committee as well. Hlet Weiss stated that over the next several months the
work load would be very intense f(n these c mmittees especially during the preliminary design
phase.
Hruce Thielen asked about the process of a pointing people to these committees. Bret Weiss
suggested that if there are individuals that tl e Council feels would work well on the cOlnmittees they
should select them rather than trying to adv rtise for people to serve on the committee. The
members of the Council suggested a numbe of people that could be considered: Dave Rietveld,
Roger Belsaas, Dick Van Allen, Mary Lou cCormick. It was suggested that for the Technical
Committee the following people be selecte : City Engineer, Bret Weiss, Deputy City Administrator,
Jeff O'Neill, Virgil Hawkins or Wayne Fin alson from Wright County, Terry Homhart from MnDot
and the area representative f()I" the Federal I- ighway Administration. Ken Streeter suggested that
someone from the Ryan Companies be incl ded as well.
For the Policy Committee, Bruce Thielen at d Rohhie Smith will he the Council representatives.
Others making up the committee would incllde, a representative from the Planning Commission
which the Planning Commission will desigl ate, a representative from the south area with Mary Lou
Mccormick, Roger Belsaas and Gary Kraft listed as possibilities; a representative from the north
area with Clint Herhst, Stu Leach, Hob Mur ay and Dick Van Allen listed as possibilities, city staft~
Ken Streeter and Shawn Weinand represent'ng the developers and a member of county board. It
was suggested that the meetings be set on a egular hasis so the committee memhers had adequate
time to schedule around the committee meeings.
.
Cost Antilysis:
Bret Weiss submitted some preliminary information. Bret Weiss indicated that they will be talking to
MnDO'r ahout taking the lead on acquisitio of the red i-mix site. Bruce Thielen mentioned that he
had talked to Representative Mark Kennedy and he suggested that the City contact his
representative in Buffalo and keep him info med of this project. Doug Weiszhaar noted that with
Mark Kennedy on the Transportation ConlI ittee he does have some innuence. It was suggested
that the city make contact with his represen ative and keep him informed of what is happening. Bret
Weiss said one of the hig issues is to get the MnDOT funding moved up from 20007. The City
could fund the cost and get paid back when nDOT has funds available. There was discussion on
some $800 million of honding and advance onstruction funding available with $400 million specified
for the metro area and $400 million outstate. The estimated interchange cost is $9.3 million which
docs not include right of way costs but inclu es the ramp and bridge for CSAH 18. The
construction of7tl1 Street and a north-south s reet was estimated at $1.7 million which isjust a
preliminary estimate but it is something for he developers to use.
.
The southeast interceptor sanitary sewer wo ld need he constructed in conjunction with the
interchange project but this cost would com from trunk funds. 'fhe south frontage road whether it
is the extension of Meadow Oak Avenue or he construction of another road would have to be done
,.,
,)
~\j
Special Council Meeting - 7/14/03
.
if CSAH 75 is eliminated. Storm sewer po Kling will be funded in part by MnDOT. Some utilities
may be impacted by the lowering of 1-94.
Right of way acquisition - Just under 30 acr s of right of way is estimated to be acquired. Ken
Streeter asked about the right of way and wether there was a point where MnDOT would take all
of the redi-mix site.
Glen Posusta asked what the logic was in h ving a 4 lane bridge. Bret Weiss said that preliminary
traffic analysis shows the 4 lane bridge wou d be needed. Roger Carlson asked if CSAH 18 would
be four lane all the way to School Boulevar and Bret Weiss indicated that was a possibility.
Review Potential Optionsfor Project Full(, ing
leiIO'Neill reported that the staHhas been searching out what other communities have done. He
reviewed the various funding options availa Ie and noted that the agreement and support of the
developers is necessary on this. .TeffO'Neill thought the Policy Committee would have to come up
with funding program for this project. lef O'Neill indicated that he has met with Mark Ruff of
Ehlers & Associates, the City's financial co sultants to get the preliminary process going.
.
Bruce Thielen asked about the federal fundi g and whether they could apply for it. Bret Weiss
didn't know if they could still get it. Doug eiszhaar stated the current bill applies through October
and the application process is closed. Con ress hass indicated that there would not be a new bill
by October but it is possible the current bill would be extended another year or possibly two years.
Tfthat is the case there would be another so icitation process. Bret Weiss stated that interchange
projects don't compete well against other p ojects. MnDOT sees them more as a developer
benefit. Doug Weiszhaar felt the project ha I strong potential and MnDOT wants to have their
projects picked by the end of this month sot it is important to visit with MnDOT officials to see if this
project fits.
Glen Posusta asked if the redi-mix plant ha been approached on this project. .TeffO'Neill
indicated that there is land that is being con 'idered for a relocation site but there are some issues
with it yet.
Matt Brokl, City Attorney noted there is ape-development agreement that needs to be put in
place. Matt Hrokl and lefI O'Neill would like to start working with the developers on this.
3. Adiourn.
Mayor Thielen closed the workshop meetin J at 6:40 p.m.
. Recording Secretary
dS
Council Agenda - 7/14/03
.
SA.
rovement bonds
0000 Clean Water Revolvin. Fund Loan. (RW)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
New G.O. Improvement Bond:
The Council is asked to consider adopting a r solution authorizing the sale of G.O. Improvement
bonds to finance two city projects that arc cu rently under construction. Enclosed you will find a
bond sale summary outlining the various proj cts the City has financed with temporary use of city
funds that should now be reimbursed through the sale of this new G.O. bond. Financial advisor,
Mark Ruff of Ehlers & Associates has prepar d a bond sale report that indicates the total amount of
bond sale will be approximately $2.4 million Even though part of the assessments proposed for the
Cedar Street Project will be payable over 15 ears, it is recommended that the bond term be payable
over ten years, as it is anticipated that some of the assessments for Cedar Street will likely be paid off
early as construction improvements in the ar a are completed. As you may note, the City's share of
these improvement projects are being covere through our trunk funds, city reserves accumulated
from the reconstruction fund and through sta e aid. The result is that no additional tax levy will be
required to cover debt payments which will e solely made through assessment revenue.
.
Refunding of Clean Water Revolving Not - Wastewater Treatment Plant Project:
Along with the sale of G.O. improvement bo ds, it is recommended that the City attempt to refinance
the existing $12.2 million outstanding balan e on the wastewater treatment plant improvement project.
These funds were originally borrowed fi'om t e Minnesota Public Facilities Authority at a net interest
cost of around 4%. With the low interest rat environment, it is possible that the City would be able
to save $300,000-$500,000 in interest costs vel' the remaining 15 year term. Although interest rates
have started to rise recently, Mark Ruff indicated that we could see how the market is over the next
few weeks and possibly obtain bids for rdin ncing this issue in conjunction with our general obligatiO!
sale. If it turns out that there isn't enough s vings to make it worthwhile, we can simply cancel the
bond sale refinancing at that time, and incur 10 cost from the financial advisor.
With both of these bond sales, it is reeomme ded that the City Council hold a brief special meeting on
Wednesday, August 20,2003 at 5 p.m. to co sider awarding bids for the sale of these bonds. The
reason it is suggested to have a special meeting rather than consider the sale at a Monday night
meeting is that Mondays arc typically the da e that most cities, counties and schools sell their bonds
and if we select an alternate date, there may ot be as much competition for our issues. The meeting
would not have to last more than ten or fifte n minutes.
B. ALTERNATIVI~ ACTIONS:
.
1.
Adopt the resolutions authorizing th sale of approximately $2.4 million in G.O. improvement
bonds and refunding of approximate y $12.2 million in Clean Water Revolving I"und notes.
.
.
.
C.
Council Agenda - 7/14/03
A special meeting would be schedu\ d for 5 p.m. Wednesday, August 20,2003 to accept
bids and award sale.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation ofthe City Administrator that the Council authorize the sale of these general
improvement bonds to repay our reserve fun s for the two projects currently under construction and
to look at refinancing the wastewater treatm nt plant note to see if we can save finance costs over the
remaining term.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
. Copy of bond sale summary reports rom Ehlers & Associates
· Resolutions
.
.
o!z
z:;:)
00
lD~
>
a::
oCt
:E
:E
~
UJ
W
...J
U3
C
Z
o
III
M
o
o
N
~w~
::elD>
(l)01D
~.....O
CJ C
Go
Z W
0
~ !cO
(.) t)C
9
...J
oCt
W (I)
a:: w
oCt ~i
:::t
UJ
> CJ~
.....
e:; a:
lll:
z
:;:)~
J!:z
~~
CJ
o
o
I!)
c<f
CIl
(Xl
(h
o
(h
o
(h
o
(h
o
(h
~08
o I!)
1'-0
tOtO
'VI;")
....C\i
(h
o
(h
~8
o
0)
I'-
I!)
(h
8
o
g
I!)
(h
o
(h
S<SSSSI
(5_ CIl 0 8
CIl . .
""algI!)
'T"""~C\ICO
(h(fl(fl....
Cii
~ '- .... ;:
w w w w
CiiCii~(I)
;:;:~Ci5
g
o
a)
I'-
I'-
~~
CJ~
(I)
!z
w!z
:::!::;:)
~,
<It
~;
i8
D.
....
(h
o
SS
C"i
CIl
(Xl
(h
o
8
r-:
to
""
o
o
SS
g
(Xl
(h
o
8
.0
""
C\l
c<f
(fl
~ . ~
~ 0).9 .2
w-o Qii3
IE ..... a: r.n
Ci5 r.n ~~ w :::l
M ..... .....
..... ItI w Ci5iii-
~. 1tI-o.c w 5 (J)
-o~=
0 (J) :::l (J) ..... 0 r.n
oo~ o (J) ItI
oa:it
...
~ 0 0
i to ""
0 .....
N 0
D. 8 N
0
C\l 0
C\l
d;:
LJ)
.
.
.
CITY OF MONTICELL , MINNESOTA
JULY 28,
Proposed Issue:
General Obligation Sewer Re enue Refunding Bonds, Series 2003
Purpose:
To current refund the City's au standing Clean Water Revolving Fund, Series
1997 loan with the Minnesot Public Facilities Authority prior to its stated
maturity.
Description:
The Bonds are being issued ursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 475,
444 and 115, for the purpose escribed above.
Financing the Refunding requ res a bond issue in the amount of$12,230,000.
The proposed refinance pIa consists of the sources and uses of funds
attached to this Report.
Term/Call Feature: Principal on the Bonds will b due on February 1 and August 1 in the years
2004 through 2018. Bonds m turing February 1,2012, and thereafter will be
subject to prepayment at the iscretion of the City on February 1, 2011.
Rating: The Bonds are expected to be rated by Moody's Investors Service at an "A3"
level.
Funding Sources: The Bonds are general oblig tions of the City and as such are secured by a
pledge of the City's full fait , credit, and taxing powers. It is expected that
the same sources of paymen originally pledged to the prior bond such as
sewer net revenues and taxe will pay for the bonds.
Discussion Issues: Principal payments maturing in 2004 through 2018 are structured to maintain
level debt service in the amo nt of approximately $1,042,537 per year.
The first principal and inter st payment on the Bonds will be February 1,
2004, and semiannually th reafter on February 1 and August 1. The
projected debt service and fl w of funds are attached to this Report.
The present value savings of the refunding is expected to be around
$440,000, after all fees an expenses. This savings is over 3.6% of the
refunding principal. A mini urn threshold for savings is typically 3% to 4%
of the refunded principal. e will continue to monitor the market and the
call dates for the City and al rt you to any other future opportunities.
Bank Qualified:
The Bonds will not be "ban qualified".
Schedule:
. Pre-Sale Review: July 28, 003
Distribute Official Statement: Week 0 August 11
Conference with Rating Agency: August 4,2003
Bond Sale: August 0,2003
Estimated Closing Date: Septem er 18, 2003
Estimated Call Date: Septem er/October
Attachments:
Sources and Uses of Funds
Proposed Debt Service Schedule
Bond Buyer Index
Resolution authorizing Ehlers to proceed with b
Ehlers Contacts:
Financial Advisors:
Bond Sale
Coordinator:
Mark Ruff(651) 697 8505
Todd Hagen (651) 6 7-8508
Diana Lockard (651) 697-8534
Debbie Holmes (651 697-8536
Connie Kuck (651) 97-8527
.
Bond Analysts:
The Official Statement for this financing will be ailed to the Council Members at their home
address for review prior to the sale date.
.
e
Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
.
.
.
Resolution No.
Council Member
introduced the fo lowing resolution and moved its adoption:
Resolution Providing for the Sale of
$12,230,000 General Obligation Sewer Re enue Refunding Bonds, Series 2003
A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mo ticello, Minnesota (the "City"), bas heretofore
determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $12,230,000 General Obligation Sewer
Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2003 (the "Bond "), to current refund the City's outstanding Clean
Water Revolving Fund, Series 1997 loan with the Mi esota Public Facilities Authority prior to its stated
maturity; and
B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associa es, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its
independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is the efore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivisio 2(9);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City ouncil of Monticello, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization: Findinl!s. The City Council hereby thorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of
the Bonds.
2. MeetinQ: Prooosal Ooening. The City Council sh 11 meet at 5:00 p.m. on August 20, 2003, for the
purpose of considering sealed proposals for and aw rding the sale of the Bonds.
3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, he officers or employees of the City are hereby
authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the
Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing reso ution was duly seconded by Council Member
and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following Council Members voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed a d adopted.
Dated this 28th day of July, 2003.
City Clerk
N:\Minnsola\Monlicello\2003 Ret\Pre.Sale ReportMonticello.wpd
.
.
.
Monticello, inN
Proposed Current Re un ding of
$14,700,000 Clean Water Revolv ng Fund, Series 1997
TABLE OF CON1 ENTS
REPORT PAGE
SOURCES & USES............................................... ................................................. 1
DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE................................ ................................................. 2
PRIOR ORIGINAL DEBT SERViCE...................... ................................................. 4
DEBT SERVICE COMPARiSON............................................................................. 5
CURRENT REFUNDING ESCROW..................... .................................................. 6
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
4,700K Clean Wtr Revl Fd- SINGLE PURPOSE
7/2412003 4:44 PM
.
Monticell< , MN
Proposed Current ~efunding of
$14,700,000 Clean Water Rev: Iving Fund, Series 1997
SOURCES & USES
Dated 08/01/2003
Delivered 08/01/2003
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Par Amount of Bonds........................................ ................................. $12,230,000.00
TOTAL SOURCES............................................. ......................... ........ $12,230,000.00
USES OF FUNDS
Deposit to Current Refunding Fund.................. .................................
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.000%)............ ..................................
Costs of Issuance............................................. ..................................
Rounding Amount.. ... .... ... ....... ............. ....... ...... . ............ ..... ........ .......
12,053,364.63
122,300.00
50,000.00
4,335.37
TOTAL USES................................................... .................................. $12,230.000.00
.
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
4,700K Clean WtT Revl Fd- SINGLE PURPOSE
7/24/2003 4:44 PM
.
Page 1
.
.
.
Monticello, IIN
Proposed Current R e unding of
$14,700,000 Clean Water Revol v'ng Fund, Series 1997
DEBT SERVICE SC riEDULE
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I FISCAL TOTAL
8/01/2003 - - . . -
2/01/2004 335,000.00 1.400% 18 ,476.25 516,476.25 -
8/01/2004 345,000.00 1.400% 17 ,131.25 524,131.25 -
8/20/2004 . - - - 1,040.607.50
2/01/2005 345,000.00 1.800% 17 .716.25 521,716.25 -
8/01/2005 350,000.00 1.800% 17 ,611.25 523.611.25 .
8/20/2005 - - . - 1,045,327.50
2/01/2006 350,000.00 2.100% 17 ,461.25 520,461.25 .
8/01/2006 355,000.00 2.100% 16 ,786.25 521,786.25 -
8/20/2006 . - - - 1,042,247.50
2/01/2007 360,000.00 2.200% 163,058.75 523,058.75 -
8/01/2007 365,000.00 2.200% 1 9,098.75 524,098.75
8/20/2007 - - - - 1,047,157.50
2/01/2008 365.000.00 2.300% l' 5.083.75 520,083.75 -
8/0112008 370,000.00 2.300% H 0.886.25 520,886.25 -
8/20/2008 - - - - 1,040,970.00
2/01/2009 375,000.00 2.500% 1 6,631.25 521.631.25 -
8/01/2009 380.000.00 2.500% 1 1,943.75 521,943.75 -
8/20/2009 - - - - 1,043,575.00
2/01/2010 385,000.00 2.850% 1 7,193.75 522,193.75 -
8/01/2010 390,000.00 2.850% 1 1,707.50 521,707.50 -
8/20/2010 - - - - 1.043,901.25
2/01/2011 395,000.00 3.000% 1 6,150.00 521,150.00 -
8/01/2011 400,000.00 3.000% 1 0.225.00 520,225.00 -
8/20/2011 - - - 1,041,375.00
2/01/2012 405,000.00 3.150% 1 4,225.00 519.225.00 -
8/01/2012 415,000.00 3.150% 1 7,846.25 522,846.25 -
8/20/2012 . - - - 1,042,071.25
2/01/2013 420,000.00 3.250% 1J1,310.00 521,310.00 -
8/01/2013 425.000.00 3.250% 34,485.00 519,485.00 -
8/20/2013 - - - - 1,040,795.00
2/01/2014 435,000.00 3.400% 87,578.75 522,578.75 -
8/01/2014 440,000.00 3.400% 80,183.75 520,183.75 -
8/20/2014 - - - - 1,042,762.50
2/01/2015 450,000.00 3.550% 72,703.75 522,703.75 -
8/01/2015 455,000.00 3.550% 64,716.25 519,716.25 -
8/20/2015 - - - - 1,042.420.00
2/0112016 465,000.00 3.700% 56.640.00 521,640.00 -
8/01/2016 475,000.00 3.700% 48,037.50 523,037.50
8/20/2016 - - - . 1,044,677.50
2/0112017 480,000.00 3.850% 39,250.00 519,250.00 -
8/01/2017 490,000.00 3.900% 30,010.00 520,010.00 -
8/20/2017 - - . - 1,039,260.00
2/0112018 500,000.00 4.000% 20,455.00 520,455.00 .
8/0112018 510,000.00 4.100% 10,455.00 520,455.00 -
8/20/2018 - + - + 1,040,910.00
Total 12.230,000.00 - 3. 08,057.50 15,638,057.50 -
Ehlers & Associates, Inc. File = MONTlCELLO.SF-03 cur f Ser 97 $14. 700K Clean wtr Revl Fd- SINGLE PURPOSE
Leaders in Public Finance 7/2412003 4:44 PM
Page
--
.
.
.
Monticello, MN
Proposed Current Ii efunding of
$14,700,000 Clean Water Revo ving Fund, Series 1997
DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
YIELD STATISTICS
Bond Year Dollars.......................................................... ....... ................................. .................
Average Life................................................................,......... ...,....................... ................ .......
Average Coupon................................................................... .. ................................................
$101,307.50
8.284 Years
3.3640723%
Net Interest Cost (NtC)............................... ...................,............................ --,.......... ....... .........
True Interest Cost (TIC)..................."................."................ ..............".........""..............".....
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes......"............................... ."......................................."......,
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)......................................................... ..................................................
3.4847938%
3.4755777%
3.3319845%
3.5348841%
IRS FORM 8038
Net Interest Cost............................................... ............. .................. ............ ................ ............
Weighted Average Maturity.......... ....... ,... ..........................." ...................................................
3.3640723%
8.284 Years
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
File" MONTICELLO.SF-03 cur , Ser 97 $14, 700K Clean wtr Revl Fd- SINGLE PURPOSE
7/24/2003 4:44 PM
Page 3
.
Monticello, MN
$14,700,000 Clean Water Reve Iving Fund, Series 1997
PRIOR ORIGINAL 0 BT SERVICE
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I FISCAL TOTAL
8/20/2003 - - - . -
2/20/2004 295,257.69 4.080% 245,888.64 541,146.33 -
8/20/2004 301,280.95 4.080% 239,865.38 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2005 307,427.08 4.080% 233,719.25 541,146.33 -
8/20/2005 313,698.59 4.080% 227,447.74 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2006 320,098.04 4.080% 221,048.29 541,146.33 .
8/20/2006 326,628.04 4.080% 214,518.29 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2007 333,291.25 4.080% 207,855.07 541,146.32 -
8/20/2007 340,090.40 4.080% 201,055.93 541,146.33 1,082,292.65
2/20/2008 347,028.24 4.080% 194,118.09 541,146.33 .
8/20/2008 354,107.62 4.080% 187,038.71 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2009 361,331.41 4.080% 179,814.92 541,146.33 -
8/20/2009 368,702.57 4.080% 172,443.76 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2010 376,224.11 4.080% 164,922.22 541,146.33 -
8/20/2010 383,899.08 4.080% 157,247.25 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2011 391,73062 4.080% 149,415.71 541,146.33 -
8/20/2011 399,721.92 4.080% 141,424.41 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2012 407,876.25 4.080% 133,270.08 541,146.33 -
8/20/2012 416,196.93 4.080% 124,949.40 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
. 2/20/2013 424,687.34 4.080% 116,458.99 541,146.33 -
8/20/2013 433,350.96 4.080% 107,795.36 541,146.32 1,082,292.65
2/20/2014 442,191.32 4.080% 98,955.01 541,146.33 -
8/20/2014 451,212.03 4.080% 89,934.30 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2015 460,416.75 4.080% 80,729.58 541,146.33 -
8/20/2015 469,809.25 4.080% 71,33707 541,146.32 1,082,292.65
2/20/2016 479,393.36 4.080% 61,752.97 541,146.33 .
8/20/2016 489,172.99 4.080% 51,973.34 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2017 499,152.12 4.080% 41,994.21 541,146.33 -
8/20/2017 509,334.82 4.080% 31,811.51 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
2/20/2018 519,725.25 4.080% 21,421.08 541,146.33 -
8/20/2018 530,327.65 4.080% 10,818.68 541,146.33 1,082,292.66
Total 12,053,364.63 - ,181,025.24 16,234,389.87 -
YIELD STATISTICS
Average Life..................... ................................................. ....................................................... 8.555 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis)............................. ....................................................... 8.555 Years
Average Coupon................................................................ ............................................ .......... 4.0548285%
REFUNDING BOND INFORMATION
Refunding Dated Date........................................... ........... .................................-..................... 8/01/2003
Refunding Delivery Date............. -...............,....................,........'..............-................................ 8/01/2003
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
File" MONT/CELL J.SF.Ser 97 $14, 700K Clean Wlr Revl Fd-SINGLE PURPOSE
7/24/2003 4:44 PM
.
Pagl4
.
Monticello MN
Proposed Current I efunding of
$14, roo, 000 Clean Water Revclving Fund, Series 199r
DEBT SERVICE CC MPARISON
Date Total P+I Net New [ /S Old Net DJS Savings
8/01/2003 - - - -
8/01/2004 1.040.607.50 1,040,607 50 541,146.33 (499.461.17)
8/0112005 1,045,327.50 1 ,045,327 50 1,082,292.66 36,965.16
8/01/2006 1,042.247.50 1,042,247 50 1,082,292.66 40,045.16
8/01/2007 1,047,157.50 1,047,15750 1,082,292.65 35,135.15
8/01/2008 1,040,970.00 1,040,970 00 1.D82,292.66 41,322.66
8/01/2009 1.043,575.00 1,043,575 00 1,082.292.66 38,717.66
8/01/2010 1,043,901.25 1.043,901 25 1,082,292.66 38,391.41
8/01/2011 1,041,375.00 1,041,375 00 1,082,292.66 40,917.66
8/01/2012 1,042,071.25 1,042.071 25 1,082,292.66 40,221.41
8/0112013 1,040,795.00 1,040,795.00 1,082.292.66 41,497.66
8/01/2014 1,042,762.50 1,042,762.50 1.082,292.65 39,530.15
8/01/2015 1,042,420.00 1,042,420.00 1,082,292.66 39,872.66
8/01/2016 1,044,677.50 1,044,677 .50 1,082,292.65 37,615.15
8/01/2017 1.039,260,00 1 ,039,26( .00 1,082,292.66 43,032.66
8/01/2018 1,040,910.00 1 ,040,9H .00 1,082,292.66 41,382.66
8/01/2019 . - 541,146.33 541,146.33
Total 15,638,05750 15,638,05 .50 16,234,389.87 596,332.37
.
PRESENT VALUE ANALYSIS SUMMARY (NET T NET)
Gross PV Debt Service Savings..
.............-. ....................................--.............-.....
435,610.28
Net PV Cashnow Savings @ 3.535%(AIC)......."..................................
435,610.28
Contingency or Rounding Amount....,............................................................................................ 4,335.37
NET PRESENT VALUE BENEFIT..................................... .......................................................,.. $439,945.65
NET PV BENEFIT / $12,053,365 REFUNDED PRINCiPAL..........................................................
NET PV BENEFIT / $12,230,000 REFUNDING PRINCIPA ........................................................
3.650%
3.597%
REFUNDING BOND INFORMATION
Refunding Dated Date..........."...................................,..................".......... ............... .....................
Refunding Delivery Date.................. ... ...................... .......... ................................................... .......
8/01/2003
8/01/2003
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
File" MONTICELLO.SF.03 c r of Ser 97 $14, 700K Clean Wtr Revl Fd- SINGLE PURPOSE
7/24/2003 4:44 PM
.
Page 5
.
Monticell 0, MN
Proposed Current Refunding of
$14,700,000 Clean Water Re\ olving Fund, Series 1997
CURRENT REFUNI ING ESCROW
Date Principal Rate Receipts Disbursements Cash Balance
8/01/2003 - - 0.63 - 0.63
8/20/2003 12,053,364.00 - 12,053,364.00 12,053,364.63 -
Total 12,053,364.00 . 12.053,364.63 12,053,364.63 .
INVESTMENT PARAMETERS
Investment Model [PV, GIC, or Securities]........................ .......................................................
Default investment yield target.......................................... .......................................................
Securities
User Defined
Cash Deposit..................................................................... ... ....................... ....................... ...... 0.63
Cost of Investments Purchased with Bond Proceeds............................................................... 12,053,364.00
Total Cost of Investments.................................................. ..........................--........................... $12,053,364.63
Target Cost of Investments at bond yield.......................... ......................__............................... $12,032,361.17
Actual positive or (negative) arbitrage............................... ...........................___......................... (21.003.46)
.
Yield to Receipt...... ....... ............. .... ... ..... ............... ........ .... .......................--..............................
Yield for Arbitrage Purposes............................................. .......................................................
-2.69E-12
3.3319845%
State and Local Government Series (SLGS) rates for...... .......................................................
6/23/2003
Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
Leaders in Public Finance
File'" MONTICELLO.SF.03 (ur of Ser 97 $14. 700K Clean Wlr Revl Fd- SINGLE PURPOSE
7/24/2003 4:44 PM
.
Pase 6
.
.
.
Proposed Issue:
Purpose:
Description:
CITY OF MONTICEL 0, MINNESOTA
PRE-SALE
JULY 28, 003
General Obligation Improve ent Bonds, Series 2003
To finance the following 1m rovement costs associated with projects listed
below.
Project #2002w06C in the am unt of $893,500; and
Project #2002.014C in the a ount of$I,467,000.
The Bonds are being issued ursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429
and 475, for the purpose offi ancing the construction of the Improvements,
generally described as Ceda Street ~ Dundas to Kjellbergs and Core Street
Reconstruction w Phase I.
Financing the [mprovemen s requires a bond issue in the amount of
$2,420,000. The proposed nance plan consists of the sources and uses of
funds attached to this Repo
Term/Call Feature: Principal on the Bonds will e due on February 1 in the years 2005 through
2014. Bonds maturing Feb ary 1, 2009, and thereafter will be subject to
prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2008.
Rating:
Funding Sources:
Discussion Issues:
The Bonds are expected to b rated by Moody's Investors Service at an "A3"
level.
The Bonds are general obli ations of the City and as such are secured by a
pledge of the City's full fait , credit, and taxing powers. It is the intent of the
City to levy special assess ents for the entire amount of the Improvement
costs against benefitting pro erty owners in the years 2003 through 2012, for
collection in the years 2004 hrough 2013, at a rate of 1 % to 1.5% per annum
over the net interest cost of e Bonds. Therefore, it will not be necessary to
levy a tax at the time th Bonds are issued. However, if significant
prepayments of assessment are received in the next few years, a tax levy
may be necessary.
Principal payments maturin in 2005 through 20 14 are structured to maintain
level debt service in the am unt of approximately $293,945 per year.
The first interest paymen on the Bonds will be August 1, 2004, and
semiannually thereafter on February 1 and August 1. The projected debt
service and flow of funds a e attached to this Report.
We have reviewed all outst nding indebtedness for the City and find that the
.
.
.
City's outstanding loan with t e Minnesota Public Facilities Authority may
present a refunding opportuni for the City at this time. We will continue
to monitor the market and th call dates for the City and alert you to any
other future opportunities.
Bank Qualified:
The City will not be issuing ore than $10,000,000 in direct or any 501 (c)
(3) conduit financings, therefi re the Bonds will be "bank qualified".
, Schedule:
Pre-Sale Review:
Distribute Official Statement:
Week f August 11
14,2003
Conference with Rating Agency:
Bond Sale:
Estimated Closing Date:
Attachments:
Sources and Uses of Funds
Proposed Debt Service Schedule
Bond Buyer Index
Resolution authorizing Ehlers to proceed with
Ehlers Contacts:
Financial Advisors:
Mark Ruff (65 1) 69 -8505
Todd Hagen (651) 97-8508
Diana Lockard (65 ) 697-8534
Debbie Holmes (651) 697-8536
Connie Kuck (651) 697-8527
Bond Analysts:
Bond Sale
Coordinator:
The Official Statement for this financing will be ailed to the Council Members at their home
address for review prior to the sale date.
e
Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
l-
e
.
.
r.n~
0:::=
LLI;
...J~
:J::
LLI:
c:
.,
01 co
"'l!!0
J:g~~
31.-<0....
o>o~
~~~~
~.~ ~ ~
~C:'98
~ .~;n "i'
""u-tO~
.
ell
:;
'tJ
ell
.c
CJ
cu In
_ ell
s: .~ 1J
~ ell 0
s::: ~ ~
2 il ~
c~
.,
.!II 'e
Ulo..
.2'<3
:g~
<~
3:0
o~
~~
:3 'e
u~
.2
(j)
u
..
s:::
o
::E
-
o
>.
-
U
0.,g0"';,e;;<<:;;jj
00~8cooo..
~g ~C)~ai
@u-i 8 6-
~ ~ w
.l!l
c:
..
E
III
III
Ql
III
~
Ci
U
..
Q.
'"
_u
-"C III
13 c: '-
cu 0 2
= coo..
8:;:;"8
}5!5!:5
Q) I,ft in Q,)
...J.,Ill:;
~ ~ ~.~
c ~'2c!2
5~d~t::~@Q
E '" III J!l III III '"
< 0:: I-en a. a. 0
..,
o
o
N
III
..
'1:
..
'"
iii
"C
I:
o
co
..
I:
..
E
..
:>-
o
a
.5
c:
.2
iii
.2'
:is
o
~
..
I:
..
Cl
00
00
00
00
N N
......
N-N
:E88:E8
NOU1NO
oaici 0
MNtO N
'" ...
N- N
*
o
\l)
"!
..
"C
c:en
ow
COu
cO::
~::l
c:o
5en
~;i
l;;b
0..1-
g'Gi~;g g~~re ~
<( .I:J en . <( , ",,,,:;::l
.;,E.,l.g:;:s~COiil:;::l
N."l <(cuu-en....2t
at ~U.~~vE
C/l 0
o
.!!
"iij
~
Ql
Ci
'"
..
01 ~Qj ~Z'
.5 "C 'E Q) .:: (f) .~
Q) en Q)- a... g'-OI1""""
cg..Qcaiii.! Q.Ql3 ~
en00~.sOO::<(1-
_t
E ..
E g
::I "
u"
CO
..
'1i g
~ !
IX
-;;
e
.!l
.5
_;f-
"0
oC!
1-11>
+
3;
~o..
- ..
" I:
"~E ~
'E 1;'Q
a. a.
c:
o
tj :;
~~
o
u
~li
.. ..
...J)-
:g~:&~;;!;1il~~~
NOO)c-ll)......tDmt\!
NU'iaia)~N~'liLri
............. '1""",..........
i7;u:i;nGini:OininiDin
wtOtOwtOtO",,,,ww
......'I""'-r,...."""'"'i"'"~T""...........
0000000000
'1""""1"""......"""',....'1""""1""".....,-1"""
!!.ec.e~ec.n.~~
~tOOLn~li)r::-wr::-~
O(1J",cn"l:tcotQ...-C")'I"""
....C\lQliOfDl.Oa)U')'c:t(,C
~~;;tfiRli:g~
~::.=..-------
'u
c:
"I:
a.
m~~;2~~~W~~
o~""'Ol.Ol.l>['\j(CJ"l()
~t~~~~fi~~~
:::..s~~t!.~~~~~
....~~ffir;~~~~N
~'r""C")NO<D\.l).....<nC)
m<<i":<s5o":aiol<io
0000......00'1"""0.....
(")('"')Mcr')(")C"".IM~ct)C")
I.t)OOl.Ol,/)~trJMOU')
~~~~~~~a;~::
ll'iMN~lti~'fI!it-..n---tD
mO)O)~C')O)O)cnOlm
NNNNC",jNNNNN
...
..
e
.!l
.5
U')OO\OU')l()(;Qt")OIJ')
~~~~~;3~m~::
6rt'ir-:~.nr..cia)C~~
""l"'-tQr.cI.O"I$'"~C")N~
s
"
IX
;;<<:.,g.,g;,e#..,g;,e;,e;;<<:;;<<:
OOOOOI.l')OU')IJ"')O
("'>'O"'C:OOC")l.n(DI"--Ol
NN~NMMC"i~~M
Ci
'u
c:
1:
a.
8000000080
0888888808
U"icitri6cillilri~61J"i
C()NNCV)~"If'a.n(D,....a)
'f""'~NNC'\INNNNN
'"
o
o
~
a;
\l)gt-a)mO'l""'"N(,,)"If'
o ooo~~"I""'""~~
o 00000000
~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~
~l.n(D"""'a)o)O~NC")
oggggg5ooo
C"I.!NNc:-...NNNC\lNN
8;g\l):g~~1!l~:::~
0080000000
('\,jNNC"IINNNNNN
'"
8
N
~
\::!
....
~
N
I<i
....
o
\l)
to.
0"
o
'"
o
\l)
....
....
...
....
o
o
\l)
o
<D
..,
N
l
.,
0-
"
.,
l'!
'"
..
'E
cu
E
,.,
'"
0-
il!
0-
S
.I:J
r::
.2
~
-;:
o
E
'"
....
'"
.,
>;-
\l)
....
'"
,g
"C
2
'"
0-
:g
'E
CO
.,
~
o
o
~ 2!
0'> '"
CO ..
... 'E
@ ~
lEc:i~
",851
~ri~
o~o
~...:..
-"'-
~@~
e0 ~
a....'"
00 g-
'ig~
I: 0 c:
~ ~ ~
~~~
~ -e'~
<(0..=
.
.
U
.5
en
2
CO
"0
o
..
..
<(
od
l.'!
.,
l'
w
,.,
.I:J
"C
.,
~
Q.
i!?
a.
~
...
cO
OX)
o
'"
-ci
.,
'>
2
cu
.I:J
.9
>-
...J
Z
o
'"
cu
..
o
e-
'"
a.
t:::
o
'Iii
a
..
is
....
o
U.
\l)
...
...
ai
'"
0'>
N
al
.,
c:
i;'
E
"
~
'"
<='
'"
c:
~
l'!
a.
\l)
...
...
ai
;n
III
l;;
III
,.,
]
o
o
o
o
N
...
N
x
III
c:
.,
:5
.5
"C
.,
:>-
'fi
il!
.
.
.
Resolution No.
Council Member
introduced the follo ing resolution and moved its adoption:
Resolution Providing Co the Sale of
$2,420,000 General Obligation Impro ement Bonds, Series 2003
A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monti ello, Minnesota (the "City"), has heretofore
detennined that it is necessary and expedient to iss e the City's $2,420,000 General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 2003 (the "Bonds"), to fin nce the construction of various improvements
in the City; and
B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its
independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is there re authorized to solicit proposals in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision (9);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Co ncil of Monticello, Minnesota, as follows:
I. Authorization: Findinl!s. The City Council hereby aut orizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of
the Bonds.
2. Meetine:: Prooosal Ooenine:. The City Council shall eet at 5:00 p.m. on August 20, 2003, for the
purpose of considering sealed proposals for and award ng the sale of the Bonds.
3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, th officers or employees of the City are hereby
authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the
Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the Cty upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolut on was duly seconded by Council Member
and, after full discussion th reof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following Council Members voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and dopted.
Dated this 28th day ofJuly, 2003.
City Clerk
N:\Minnsota\Monticello\2003 Impr\Pre-Sale ReportMonticello.wpd
.
.
.
SR.
Consideration to clarif R-IA R-l
Applicant: City of Monticello (FP
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
-2 and R-2A setback standards.
AC/JO)
On July 14,2003 the City Council revi wed the subject standards and requested
that stalT add clarification to the ordina ce providing for residential setback
standards. The proposed language has een clarified and related ordinance
standards have been rewritten to provi e for consistency. The Planning
Commission has recommended approv I under alternative 1 below.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROlJN
B.
The proposed ordinance identifies pro osed clarifying amendments by strike out
and underline. When the R-I, R-l A, nd R-2A Districts were developed (or
amended) last year, an extensive set of changes was made relating to varied
setbacks and other regulations.
The proposed changes are technical in ature, not intended to change the meaning
of the regulations. Other changes simply add the words "minimum" or "at least"
to ensure that it is understood that the 'etback standards listed are the lowest
threshold. Setbacks establish only min' mum standards and may be made greater
than these numbers, as they do not repr sent a specific prescriptive requirement.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to approve Ordinance umber 2003~395, amending residential
setback regulations, based on a finding that the proposed amendment is
consistent with the City's histo ical application of setback requirements,
and reflects the intent of the Ci y in previous decisions.
2. Motion to deny the amendment
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff and Planning Commission reCOIn lend approval of the amendments. The
changes are intended to clarify the Cit 's previous Ordinance amendments
relating to zoning and setback standar s.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Ordinance Number 2003-395.
ORDINANCE NO. 2003-395
.
CITY OF M NTICELLO
WRIGHT COUN Y, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING BU LDING SETBACK STANDARDS
IN THE R-l, R-IA AND R-2A RE TDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO DOES ORDAIN:
Title 10, Chapter 3, Section 3-2[B] of the City Code s hereby amended to read asfollows:
[Bl DWELLING UNIT RESTRICTION:
1. No cellar, basement, gar ge, tent, trailer. motor vehiclc or accessory building shall
at any time be used as a independent residence or dwelling unit, temporarily or
permanently.
. Title 10, Chapter 3, .S'ection 3-2/D] of the City Code 's hereby amended to read as follows:
[D] ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, USES, AND EQ IPMENT:
1. An accessory building s all be considered an integral part of the principal building
it is connected to thc principal building either directly or by an enclosed
passageway.
2. No accessory building s all be erected or located within any rcquired yard other
than the rear yard.
3. Detached accessory bui dings shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height, and shall
be tOI (10) six (6) feet l' more from all side and lot liliL.'> of clJ.ioiJlilig klts, five, (5)
feet OJ 11101 e, flOll} tlte l' ar lot I ine~, shall be tcn (10) feet or more from any other
building or structure on the same lot, and shall not bc located within a utility
easement.
Title 10, Chapter 3, Section 3-3[Cj of the City Code is hereby amended to read asfollows:
.
[Cl
All setback distances as listed 'n the table below shall be measured from the appropriate Ie
line and shall be required mini mm distances.
'S~
Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard
. A-O 50 30 50 .
R-l * 30 * 30*
R-IA* 35 * 30*
R-2* 30 10* 30
R-2A * 15 6* 20*
R-3 30 20 30
R-4 30 30 30
PZR See Chapter 10 or specific regulations.
PZM Sec Chapter 10 or specific regulations.
B-1 30 15 20
B-2 30 10 20
B-3 30 10 30
B-4 0 0 0
1-1 40 30 40
1-2 50 30 50
I-IA 50 30 40
P-S See Chapte 19B for specific regulations.
*See Section 3-3[C] 3. below for speci al side yard setbacks in the R-l and R- 2 Districts.
.
.
1.
In R-l, R-2, B-1, and B 2 districts where adjacent structures, excluding access.
buildings within same lock, have front yard setbacks difTerent from those require(
the front yard minimun setback shall be the average of the adjacent structures. If
there is only one (1) adjacent structure, the front yard minimum setback shall be th
average of the required setback as established within the underlying residential
district and the setback of the adjacent structure. In no case shall the minimum
front yard setback exce d thirty (30) feet, except as provided in subsection [F]
below.
2.
In R-l, R-2, B-1, and -2 districts, if lot is a corner lot, the side yard setback shall
be not less than twenty (20) feet from the lot line abutting the street right-of-way
line.
...
., .
Side yard setbacks for , inglc family homes on lots of record with a lot width 66 fe(
or less in the Original ]at of Monticello and Lower Monticello which are zoned R
1 or R-2 shall be at lea, t six (6) feet, subject to the corner lot provisions of Section
3-3[C]2. Above. (#352 8/14/00)
.
s~
.
.
.
4.
R-l District Setbacks:
Front yard:; 30 feet. ho for Jots latted after A ril 8 2002 front ard
setbacks ma be identifi. d b ]at to average 30 feet. ** When averaging of front
ard setbacks is allowed blat [e,l ally subJl ~isioll ill ch1 R-l D~5tliGt, no house
may be placed closer tha 2S feet minimum to any street right of way, and no fewe
than 40% of all individu I houses within the platted area shall have front setbacks I
30 feet or more.
Side yards, interior: 10 et minimum to dwellin and 6 feet minimum to Tara :re'
however. the sum of bot side ard sethacks must he 20 feet or 'reater. 6-feet
20 feet.
~
Side yards, corner lots: 0 fcct minimum on the street side, and no Ie.';;' thall ] 0 fee
minimum to house on i1 terior side or m 6 feet minimum to garage on interior sid
un tlK inkl iul :>~de.
Rear yards: 30 feet mininum usable. The rear yard shall include a space of
at least 30 feet in depth cross the entire width of the Jot that is exclusive of
wetlands, ponds, or slo cs greater than 12 percent.
**Averaging orlot area, lot idth, or setbaek dimensions shall be considered to be the
arithmetic Inean. not the /11"dial1. For example, lot widths in a five lot subdivision could be
70 teet, 70 teet, 75 feet, 80 fe 't, and 105 teet: (70+70-1 75+S0 1105 = 400 feet, divided by 5 - 80
feet average lot, with 40% of he lots (2 of 5) 80 teet or more in width)
R-IA District Setback:
Front yard:; 35 fect. ho ever front ard setbacks ma be identified blat to
average 35 feet. *':::' Wh n avera in -,- of front ard setbacks is allowed blat For
. ,no house may be placed closer than 25 feet
minimum to any street ight of way, and no fewer than 40%) of all individual house
within the platted area shall have front set hacks of 3S feet or more,
Side yards, interior: 10 f et minimum to dwellilP and 6 feet minimum to c'
however the sum of bot side ard setbacks must be 20 feet or 'reater. 6-feet
20 feet.
Side yards, corner lots: s' de ard setbacks must be 20 fect minimum on the street
side, and 110 kS5 th~dl 10 feet minimum on interior house side or m 6 feet minimun
on the interior garage si e.
Rear yards:; 30 feet min'mum usahle, The rear yard shall include a space oilit
least 30 feet in depth ac oss the entire width of the lot that is exclusive of
wetlands, ponds, or slop s greater than 12 percent.
58
.
**Average of lot area, lot widtl , or setback dimensions shall be considered to be the
arithmetic mean, not the media. For example, lot widths in a five lot subdivision could be 80
feet, 80 feet, 85 feet, 90 feet, a d 115 feet: (80 +80+85+90-f 115 = 450 feet, divided by 5 = 90 feet
average lot, with 40% ofthe 10 s (2 of 5) 90 feet or more in width)
R-2A District:
Front yard~~ 1 5 feet minilllun.
Side yards, interior: 6 fee m1l11mum.
Side yards, corner lots: 2 feet minimum on the street side, and no less than 6 feet
on the interior side.
Rear yards~~ 20 feet mini mm usable. The rear yard shall include a space of
at least 20 feet in depth a ross the entire width of the lot that is exclusive of
wetlands, ponds or slope greater than 12 percent.
This Ordinance shall become effective immediately pon its passage and publication according to law.
.
.
ADOPTED by the Monticello City Council
day of
CITY 0 MONTICELLO
By:
B uce Thielen, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Rick W olfstcller, City Administrator
AYES:
NAYS:
2003.
sB
.
SC.
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
~rade for Ii uor store cash
A. REFERENCE AN]) BACKGRO ND:
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Recently, Hi- Way Liquors completed a ma or upgrade and expansion to the liquor store. At
the time, it was decided to keep the current cash register system with Total Register Systems
and add one additional computer for a thir point-of-sale cashier station. The system includes
DOS-based software which runs off a serv r located in the oUke. Customer sales arc
processed at one ofthe central stations whi 'h is connected to the server.
We initiated a look at upgrading the curren system because of the many inefficiencies and slow
runtime which the cashiers experience ofte . We met with Brian from Total Register at the end
of June and received a proposal from him or a complete upgrade oi'both the hardware and
software at a cost of around $13,000. The ew system would be a database driven system
operating under a Microsoft Windows 200 network which will provide not only a more
emcient system but numerous changes an additions that would benefit the liquor store
operations. Following is a list of some of hc updates to be included with the upgrade. The
current system does not have these capabil tics.
.
system instantly and simultaneousl updates entries to the server so that inventory is
updated as each sale is processed
reports can be printed at any time' ld will ref1ect that point in time
end of day updates are eliminated' nd history is stored indefinitely
inventory data can be sorted, adde or inquired as needed
harcode label printer - can print sh lflahels at any time (not possible previously) -
important for customer sales and i ventory
can set sale prices and activate aut matic start and end dates
can cnter price changes and downl ad the next morning to update to the system
can input text and graphics and pri t signs
"touch screen" monitors: after cas ier scans items, can touch screen to process sale
without having to use keyboard
automatic credit card interfaces bu It into system - do not have to use a separate credit
card machine
can process credit cards through D 'L high speed internet instead of dial-up modems -
this is a priority need for Hi~Way iquors
gift certificates can be sold and tra ked on system instead of keeping a manual
inventory ~ also uses "gi n. cards" hich are scanned during thc sale and the balance
automatically updates
an employee "time clock" eheck-il system is included - this is a priority need for Hi-
Way Liquors as the current system is obsolete and has to he replaced
replacement of current hardware ith a new server and 3 cash register computers
.
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
.
The proposal includes installation, data co version and transfer from the old system, and one
year warranty with unlimited training and s ftware support.
Although this upgrade was not specifically included in the 2003 budget, it should be considered
as part of the expansion/remodeling projec. The liquor store generates suHicient revenues to
cover this upgrade.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I. Approve the purchase of Total Reg' ster Systems Inc. upgrade at a cost of
approximately $13,000.
2. Do not approve the purchase of Tot 1 Register Systems Inc. upgrade.
c. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the purchase as shown i the proposal. This will benefit not only the Iii-Way
Liquor staff but the finance personnel at ci y hall as well. This upgrade should prove to be
much more efficient and a lot faster.
.
n.
SlWPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposal.
.
i JUL-8H3
TOTALREGISTER
18:138 PM
7635371986
TOTAL REGIST'E SYSTEMS INC,
4215 LOUISI AAVEN.
NEW HOPF, MN. 55428
(763) 53 -1906
.
PROP SAL
July 1 SI 2003
City ofMo Ilticello
P.O. B '( 845
Monticello, (N.55362
The following is a list and pricing infonnatlo needed to upgrade to the TRS ARS
Version 5 invento and cash mana ement stern.
Quantity Descri tion
1 Host Computer (Server) P-4 1.60Hz
Includes: 512 MB Ram. 40 G Hard Drive.
3 W' Floppy, WfR CD Rom, 7" Monitor,
56K U.S. Robotic Modem, indows 2000,
Keyboard, Mouse.
. 3
1
2
1
1
1
3
Total
Cash Register Computer (Up;r : des)
.
Price
1,295.00
950.00
ARS Version 5lnveritory So 'I,are Upgrade 1,695.00
ARS Version S POS Softw:U' 200.00
Data Conversion, Training, 1 It year Support. 1 ,500.00
Protobase Gateway - Credit ard Server 2,395.00
Ovation Barcode Label Print r 595.00
EloTouch 13" Flat Panels 695.00
Extend(~d
1,295.00
2,850.00
1,695.00
400.00
1,500.00
2,395.00
595.00
2,085.00
12,815.00
This price includes installation, data transfer data file conversion, and a one
warranty with unlimited training and softw e support. Applicable sales tax
If you have any questions, or would like ad iLonal information, I can be re
(763) 537-1906 Ext 12.
~4(aL-
Brian K. Anderson.
.
P.81
hIe
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
7.
Auditor. (R W)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGRO NO:
The City Council is again asked to adopt an assessment roll for utility billing accounts
which are delinquent more than 60 days an to certify the assessment roll to the County
Auditor for collection on next year's real est te taxes.
The delinquent utility accounts that arc incllded with the agenda are accounts that are at
least 60 days past due and inelude all new d linquents from the last time we certified
them. In addition to the delinquent amount, the Council also previously approved the
establishment of an administrative fee of $5 per account that is added to each delinquent
assessment. T'he amounts shown on the en losed delinquent utilities list include the
additional $50 administration fee for the pr paration of the assessment roll.
It is recommended that the delinquent acco nts be put on an assessment roll for
certification at an interest rate of 6% as all wed by state statute. As in the past, if any
accounts are paid within 30 days after the a option of the assessment roll, they can be paid
without the additional interest. After 30 da s, payments will be charged interest.
B.
AL TERNA TIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the assessment roll for the de inquent charges as presented.
2. Based on public hearing input, adju t the assessment roll as required.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is stalT recommendation that the Council' dopt the assessment roll as presented. All of
the accounts are at least 60 days past due at d have been given proper notice of this
assessment hearing and ample opportunity 0 pay the accounts in full. All utility accounts
were notified that there would be an additi nal $50 administrative fee attached to each
outstanding balance if the account was not aid by 4:30 p.m. on July 8, 2003.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
. Copy of resolution adopting assess ent roll
. Complete listing of delinquent acco nts to be certified.
.
CITY OF M NTICELLO
RESOLUTIO NO. 2003-51
RESOLUTION ADOPTI G ASSESSMENT ROLL
FOR DELINQlJENT lJTIlXfY ACCOUNTS
WHERE-AS, pursuant to proper notice duly given s required by law, the Council has met and beard
and passed upon all objections to the proposed as 'essment for delinquent utility account
charges,
NOW, THEREFORE', BE IT RES'OLVED BY TH CfTY COUNCIL OF MON'TIC'ELLO,
MINN ESOT A:
1. Such proposed assessment, a copy ofwhi h is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is
hereby accepted and shall constitute the s ecial assessments against the parcels named
herein, and each tract of land therein ine! ded is hereby found to be benefitted by the
assessment levied against it.
2.
Such assessment shall be payable in one (1) annual installment payable on or before the
first Monday in January 2004 and shall b ar interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum
from the date of the adoption of this asse sment resolution. To the first installment
shall be added interest on the entire asses ment from the date of this resolution until
December 31, 2004.
.
3. The owner of the property so assessed m y, at any time prior to certification oftbe
assessment to the county auditor, pay the hole of the assessment on such property
with interest accrued to the date ofpaym nt, to the City Treasurer, except that no
interest shall be charged if the entire asse sment is paid within 30 days from the adoption
of this resolution.
4. The City Administrator shall forthwith tr nsmit a certified duplicate of this assessment
roll to the county auditor to be extended n the proper tax list of the county, and such
assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of Ju y, 2003.
ATTEST:
Br ce Thielen, Mayor
. Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
I
.
:..1 t", ~ ~~ c' 0
,. H [;i
:< ~ rl c' "'
.... '" t'J ~ oj i" "
P t-<; " d
'i5 "
"' " t:i \~
c'
- So ~,
~ OJ ~
"'
l" "
'- ro
" t< ~
::g H "
oJ
d ~ n
~ "
,-, " ~~
" ,"
" 0 " d '"
.... _J 0 OJ ,"
. .~:~. :i t< "
.. " ~.
" 'D c: :;: " '"
," '"
<0 "' ,,' j1 ....,. 0
.... rl "
~ "'
oj ~:.
en '" ,I
~.1"
",
:0:
co
'" rLj n
A 0
'" ~,.
Q ?: w
b ~ "
'J "'
'" lfi ro
.
..J
.
.
.
.j
0"10";
o
~ t
00
o
"_J 0"1
000
t-..! t_J
IX' C(l "_J
~'J WJ
~ ~ ~ 0, ~ 0, 0, ~ 0, ~ ~
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~) ~ ~ 0 0
a 0 ~ (~ (~t~ (~ n 0 Q
00 00000
~ ~ ~ r. 6 S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'0 '0
1-' t-' I-' f-l f-l
f-' f..l f-')-J j-J V1
~ f-I 0 f-l 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 1\)
,I" 1\.1 Q:l l-' !J1 ~.)
RRR~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~
~t~~;~~
S; 0 en
3') ~ 8................
t'" t""' ;:..J
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
trj trJ tJ:l ttl
::0 ::u ::u ::u
~ ~ ~
rJ~ {r) U".J U".J
>-3 >-:3 >-3 >-3
tJ tJ
AI i':1
L; U
>u ~; I-'
i:r:1 .1'-
c. r-< r-<
~ ~ ?;;
-Ij ~ ~
,<
~
:::
"'
~ ~ ~ ~
9. ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~~~~);1Hi;:~
...~~~gn~n
r; >-:l 11 ~....:;
H tJ ~.... t'J
81"O~t:!k~~:t,)
~~~~~ ;
m~ ~~ E.; J~
fn e,l ~
9 G 9
rl
~
"
o
,.
1\-, ~,-'
00
() ('J
..
(5, t-.J
1-" f...
'" '" '"
\)1 UI U,
J ~ ,-:-,:, S
>-'
C-' 0 ('".;
o 0
I' l\J t-.J
o ~ ~
"
f-' I-' I-' f-'
f-' l\.l l-' W
['.) t-.J 0 0 Co
CD (D
~. ~.'. ~~
;: s B
OJ
>:
~ ~
'"
~ t ~
;...:; t~ ::0
Gl
R" '"':l [>J
'-'
f.1 IJJ R"
o UJ
~
~
E2
c. n
~ :;i
,j
en en
~ ~ ~
OJ n
'" '"
Ol OJ
r< ::0
s
'"
'"
is
~
o
'"
G
~
n
OJ
~
C'
o
~ ~ :; ~ ~ ~~ ~ tJ; "2 l'-; t,~ !: b ~ 0 t-J I"
~ t-.J Lr.! I' U, ~ ~ ~:~ ~ ~;~ (t1 <"-1 ~~ ~ ~~
~ ~ ~ rl; r!i U".J ~ ::u ::u :::0 :.D . ~ >-3 ~"
!2~Q l..: '~,. ~~II~U-:~~:~
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' 8 I-' 00 ~
~ t""' ~ !J1 ~ >-:3 >-:3 ~ ~ 'D ~ >-:3 ~
~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ r..~trj~
t""' t'" t""'..... ~; ::o::u
~~~ ~ G
~ ~ ~
...- z
c'
f-' (1"\
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~)
e{l 'T"1 l'.J C_l f-l ._1 .~. V1 __I .~. W
.i:.~~~~~~~0~~;0~~~]
tJ'\ C.l
o 0 0 \11 0
000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C.l ,..l C.l C.l CJ
g g g 0
Cl C, C.l CJ ~.! C.l C.l
000 00
~ ~ ~ \11 ~ ~ \11 \11 ~ \11 \11
C.l ~.l ~.l
6 660 6 6 6 0 0 6 0
f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l ._1 f-l
f-l -_J.., I') I') C! f-'
ep r1"\ tv (, f-.1 ..l ....
f-l 1-' f-~
t-.) CI CI ._J
l;\ ._1 ,.J
~ ~j~; :c
l.n \,) f-l (,n
..J 'J\ IjJ ..,
f'.) f-l (,n m
1-' \jJ 1'-) ~,)
00 ._J IJl (!\ ,,.)
1_' """ u.' ,.J f'
t-..l c, .+:.. uJ ~~\
.+:.. ~ f-l ._J 00
C.l CJ C.l C-l 0
o 0
000
C-lOOOO
C.l 0 0 C.l 0
0000
\11 IJl \11 ~ \11
c. ,-.l C.l t) C.l
,',
o 0 000
I,.' f-l f-l
I""" ['-.) 0 f-l
>>'. W Cl
C 1 ,j., W 11~ ('~ c.) I.' (J~
0"\ f~ ._J 00 IjJ 0 I.,,) I.""
'" '"
62,66
~ ~ f-l ~ ~,
0000
..:.. t-.J f'.'
.+:.. uJ l.J uJ
l.) C,) C.l C.l C.l CJ
e 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
\11 00 (!\ ~ 00 ..1 00 ~ ~
o ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 6 0 _ 6
~.; C.l CJ CJ 0 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~ I'-J ~ ~ ~ f-l
CJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
~ ~ ~ ~ ~; \jJ \jJ (!\ 0 WI ~~ X ~
(J t~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
./' ,.J ,.;) t:.l 0 C.l 0 0 C.l
,.:. ~ ~ ~ c;
t,"" f-l
l.n \.n
WI U"I
>-' >-'
00
t ~
:=-: f~.1
,... ,...
._J 00
0(;
,... >-' >-'
~ ~ ~
(:, 6 ~
~ ,.:. f-l
>-' ,... >-'
i.J.! G-! G-!
" "
~ ~ ~
f-l I-' f-l f-l f-l f-l I-' f-l f-l f-l f-l I-' fo_I f'
(/1 lJ\ UI \)1 UI U1 ~ ~ LI1 ~ \11 \11
\11 \11 \11 \11 IJl \11 \11 \11 \11 \11 \11 \11
(..lC.lOOOOOOOO
f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l f-l
c.,) CJ a 0 0 0 0 0 \11 0 0 0
0000000
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~
~ ~ 0 6 0 ~ 6 0 6 0 ~ 0 ~ 0
f.! I'
'" '"
00
~-' f'
DO
,',
c.; c.;
0,...
'" ..
00
~ ~ ~ ~
o 0 0 0
:.; g g ~
t 6 ~ ~j
o I-' I-' 0
;; r..; ~ ~
,~ ,...
'" '"
Ul ul
00
1-' f.....
'" '"
C.l C-l
00
c.; u,
,... ,...
lil U'I
en ..:.. .+:.. ~ .+:..
>-3 >-3 rl >-3 >-3
:::r:: ::r: ::r:: :J:: ~:
,...
3~B:~~~~~~~~~~~~~*~
>-'
:=; ::: ~~ I'J I-' ;::;
--J \[1 II.' ,j.' 00 ~.l
_J ..J ._J ..J
,..! ['-.l r,,)
J u; I'.' ._J UI
'1"1 'TJ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ }ii~~
~ R ! ~ ~ i2 g.;
t<J tIJ 0000
J .'~ ! oJ I.J 1..1
:r:~ :I=' :r=' :r='
~
S
l:i
'"
'. rl
,<
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o''')en'^'f'~~~~~~~
>-3 >-3 >-3 >-3 >-3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
:r. :r. ~. ;tJ :t"J :tJ ;tJ
~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 1.,1 ~ ~ ~ ~
rl OJ
~~~~~~
tI:l tI:l ~ ~
1jJ Co en (rJ {/J
rl t-3 rl r-3 >-3
....~ t":I ~ =r~
8 g ~
::0 l<J l~J
OJ OJ
:...; ;....
CI1 en U} u:l
rl I-~ ~-J ''''J
"'
d
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
] ~ ~ ~ ~
n n n n
t':l ttj ttj trJ
t' Ll l'l L'
~ t""' ~ ~
0000
!'1 ~ ~
~ ~ ~,
i'i
~
'"
g ~ ~
b ~
Z ;t!
d ;'" ::0 d
~ ~ ~ ~
~ -, ~ ~~
to. t., LI
~ ~ ~
;J=' :I'=' ~
Gl G) Gl
(I] (.I) rr1
~ ~
(;-J U".J
OJ "'
~ tJ
o
n ~
;::r:: ::0
'-'
rl
'"
~~ :r'" :r=' ;r.:<
Cd I1j I1j I1j
>-3 >-3 >-3 >-3
r/!!jJ r/J f{l
n n n n I1j ~ ~ ~ '< ~ ~ (!\ ~ W \11 'll 'I) p,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~
SSS~1 ~~~~~!.~,~b~btj[~G?:;:::
fJfjEJCJ8f." eJ~UJU"Jrn0101~~~:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ n ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ rl >-3 .., ~ ~
8 8 8 8::: t'j ~ ""0 J. .... ..... :::: {<J ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi -, ~
"' d
n OJ
'"
I:l) :::-~ _, ~; ~~ ~~ ~~
j ~ ~ ~ ~.,:.~. ~ ~ b
~~1@t"'..:;~6i$
dgp)~G)tjSj;~
~(ln::~~~.=.'"
:J ~ ~ ~ >-3N" ~.'.'. ~
:I~ t:i ~ ~ [<j
'" '"
~
.,
'"
OJ
>-' 0
(n .t..
*~3Fi~~~~
'0
~ 8 g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
f; z ~ ~': ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ es rl iJ tI:l tJ:j :;!: ~
OJ r-<
::0 0
on
[~ &;
:::-~ >-3
~: UJ
"
~
'0
.+:.. ~J G-! G-J I-' (,,J f-l
~J ~ :r :~ ~ ~ :c ~ ~~~ ~ ~:; ~ ~ i f-l t; ~ (j ::~ ~ ~; ~ ;;.; ~ ~ a\ -_J ~ ;~~
g~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~r~~~~~~
00000 0 0 0 0
'-'
000000 0
CJ c) C.l CJ Cl c;
C.l L.=:"
6 6 6
,',
000
C.l C.l C.l CJ
000
6g666oooooo
C.l C.l C.l (:) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o C.lC.lC.lC.lC-l
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CJ c.) Cl
Co) 0 c.)
a 0 0 C.l 2, (:) 6 0 6 6
C.l C.l C.l
000
C.l CJ CJ
00
J C.l n C.l 0 C.l 0 0 C.l 0 C.l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000000
IJ1 IJ1 IJ1 \11 \11 \11 l.n \11 (.n l.n l.n 1I1 In WI UI UI l.!'1 U1 \11 ~ ~ LI1 IJl V1 ~
C.l 0 0 C-l 0 0 0 0 0 0 c, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c"J ('l
~ ~ g g 0 6 6 6 6 ~
.'
~~ ~
"'" uJ .+:.. I' I' I L I,' f'~
j ~ ~ r 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ X ~ .+:.. ~ w ~
~~~~~~;::
L> J cD ~,J
o ~:"
~o ..J U1 ~J 0 ~ (!\ (!\ ~ I-' ~
,j'. I,n (l .I:.. I.,,' ~" t.) Ul ,T\ (!.l
_.1 ,_l 1.[1 r:t"J
~',J ._J 0 C!.l
,... c.;
(,,.) -_J
I.U ,j~
o ~,)
I-' t-.) f-l f-l f-l I-' f-l
t-.J ~j 0 \,D I-' Iv f-' I'-J
0"1 (p '=' \11 ...l (n (1
t,., /.,
'" '"
U'I Ul
00
g g
~ t
,... 0
f_o ~J
c_, Cl
"'
'"
'"
OJ
l'J
<.p ID
'" 00
n ~ >-3
p-.. 0
~ r-< r;
" ~ ~
"' r; >-'
m m
'D
~
(j
"
,...
"
:::
u
'II-
.'
,...
o
>-'
'"
"
o
'"
'l~
a
"-
"
~
"<
...-'"
d
,',
~
"
"
ffi
~
u
d
'"
~/
"
'"
C'
'0
C.'
o
"'
~
<)
z:- n
~ 8
f-.I (T
6. 2:
leI \1l
9
" ro
"-
p, "
"
~
j
,~
j
;<:
~
~. :
~
'"
co
~
~
'"
n
"
:j
ffi
:.,
'"
U (...;
'~ 0
~:
d
OJ
n
~
0'
l"
o (~~
.~ 0
t:J '"
,~ c)
rii
tJ >-'
~ 0
n r-<
;T ~
~ "
~ "
"'
ro
'"
"
i;:>
l'J
.
.
.
~
I'
"
o 0 f-l
Cl !.-) 0
~ f-l 0
m
C1 _ _ 0
CJC_\OO'~O
C' C) c") ~-.l 0
f-' f-l I-' I-' I-'
f-l f-l f'
o
:[~
~,
,... I'
f'~ f-l
I' f-'
,...,... ,...
;;
,...
.1",
Of.:::'
\.I.) Ii) \JJ
0) -.J ~.,
o 0 C'
c',) 0 0
C.1 t") CJ CJ
o 0 0 0 I-'
,... ,...
'"
U1 ~
O"! ~
"
06
V'
I' 0
,... '"
r~ C'
I-' f-l f-l I-'
C.l 0
c"' C.l
ID \D \D \[1
1)"1 1)"1 ~.! I'
l!l t-.J..,. IJl
~..l C; 0 (.l
o C1 ("J ,7,) 0 2> _
'--'
lo-! ~.J IJ1 ...'
~ ~j~ t:',,~
~(! lJ'1 (JI l.D tv !\j I-' tv ~.! t.J \.r.) f-' 1') Cl\ Cl\ CT"1 O~ II' ,1, \C! \JJ
8 : : ~ ~ 8 t~ (j r ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : B
n
~
"
,-;:)
r::'
1j
~
n
'"
l'
r-<
o
,... e'
U1 U1 1J1
1I1 (!I UI
o
z1 ~~ ~€
l;1 G! I;,
f-' 0
I' ~,J ~j
o
R ~ ~8,.'
() ri .,'
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
"
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~: ~:
IJ1 n
"
~
:::s: n CJ ~ (')
tIj~;~~~~;
?; I~~ 0 ~
;: ITI tr1 ~; tr:l
o ~ :::r~ @.::c;
~ ~ ~ .^ ~
tJ
"
o
"_J ~
,j::. \[1
~ g b;
CJ 0 0
'.'
~ ~
o L'
l' ;1":<
trJ ~,
"
tv ~. ~',J t-.J \D 1'-) \D f-' c), a, cr, Cl\ '1) I.D cD
"_J f-' Cl\ ~ I-' .J ~ 0 ~ ~ f-' f-' I-' I~ n ~ ~
_J OJ U1 Cl\!J1 I-' \iT W 0., \JJ 0
f-' IJ1 fd I-' I' 0 0 0) --J I,,) -_I (,n tJ.I Ld f....l
o
j;~~f.;~ ~X~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
R ~ ~ ~ ::u ~ iD it1 S ~l ~1
~:~~~~@QQ ~~
o ~ 0 t3 ~ ts r-- L'
~~~ ~~
c; ,., c! 0 0 0 0 Q:l
_ 00 ,:J O::l
o ,".l CJ 0 0 C>
t"l ,"J 0 c; CI 0 0 0
UI Ln .JI
00'_-'
Ul U1 IJ1 ~ ~ ~
r: ~ i~
g; ;~~ ~
?-J ~ r-
~ (I
,,- ~
~:1
ZC;~Y;.~j~~~
~~~~t:8
~
o ()
'\) ;r-< ~__~.
~: -
~ ~
() n
II H
,... ,...
CI V'
(.n l,n
C! 0
t:; ~
'" '"
w '"
o 0
00
f-l 1,,1 f'~ !-' f-l f-l
IJ1 ~ ~ ;;; IJ1 ;; ~ U1
f-l~i.~~3~~~-'
g~~~~CJO~~
f."~~:.;~~~~~~
0'.-' ~.:Jooo
f-l I,' I-' f-l
~ W VI ~ ~ .~ 00 ~ ~J ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~) ~l W ~ ~
IJ1 f-l ~ U1 0 ~) !-' ~ ~ ~ IJ1 m ~ I-' ~ \~ VI ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.j 0"\ UI 0 G-l m ~,) CT"1 f\.l LJl Ul ..J f-l 00 ._J ~ (n -_I tD W C! ~
f-l (n ~ IJ1 _I (), ~ U1 00 IJ1 f-l I-' ~ c~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~l
n
r-:t. t'"
Z ~ Z
LJ
'"
~ 8 ~
~ II
o ~
c.:
:~! ~,
~ ~ :s
~ ~ ~
;.r.J l'J
~ tj
~~ f;" ~
~ ~ Q
~ ~
"
;:;
l'
e,'
o
~
~ ~ ~ 8
lIJ H .:~ ::u
rr1 ~ I-l :,,:J
,,! 7: l<l
~ '" M
~~~~~
A H (!1 tT1
[2 tI:! Bi ~
'" tJ
Z ~
g
',1
0'" '"
c,
c; C!
'" '"
",
c,
60
,... ,...
V'V'
(n III
,... ,...
~~J ~
1"0 ~:,
00
~ 6
666
000
f-> I' f.....
._j ..J.I:>
._J -_J lJI
C, Cl IJl
Cl 0 0
00 g ~
,... ,...
,-,
C.J CJ
" ,...
rl'\ (~
'" ,~
o
00'.:)
000
f-l f-l f-l I-'
~ ;;;;~ IJ1 ~
~ 0\ ~ :-: :::;
~ D 6 ); 0 f-l
0000
I\j ~, ~.! r,.! u..'
Cl 0 f-l 0
~0 CT"1 ~,I ([1
Cl 0 0 0
I-~ 1-'
V'V'
(!1 l!1
00
l-' I.'
._J CT"1
t'" eJ
o Cl
" 0
0'.-'
j\J v'
f-l f-l f-l ~
'"
~ Cl l~
o :~ ~ CC;
\D \D
o f-:-~
00 00
'"
\(1 \()
~ 8
CD ,.
v) IJ\
c., <."J
'"
00
s; G
~1~~~~
~ t'" t'" t'" t.' ti:l
;:; ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~
~:~ H H ~ ,I _.
tI:i t'" t'"' L' tj
~ ~ ~ ~
~
t.,) CJ
,...
IJ) ~,J
,... ,...
CJ 0 0 0
o
8
~
U
"
o
"
o 0 g 0 00 0 g g 6 0 g g 0
C.J CJ 0
cJooooo
00
CD '"
~ j\J
00
1':.0
,... V'
1 f;:j
~ ~
::1" ;;
'" "
'"
~ c,
~ ~ ~~
c:
t'
'"
(:) 0 0 0
o Cl 0 CJ
I' ~,.l f-l )-l f-l I-' f-l I.'
~;;;~~~~~~
~~~~i.J.!V.JI""!~:.J
2, 0 0 0
~ (.J f-l f-' u; ~ i. l;j
CJ 0 0 0 0 I-'
00 ~ IJ1 \.J l-' f" UI I",'
CJ 0 0 0 0
I'
V'
c, V'
c:! G.!
~ ~
86
f-'f-'~~~I.n~:~
IJ1 IJ1 l)"I 111 ul 1.!'I lJ"1
8 ~ 0 0 ~ G' Cl c!
gg~~~::r;~6
~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
CJ t", 0 0 0
ID IJ"\ ~ll <.p I-' f-l
~ ~ : ~ ~ : : ~ ~i ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~
~ ~ ~
[,; (". ~
;; ~ gl
Z
'" CD '"
9. 8 t<
~ ~
~
"
~
,.
"
OJ
"
::u 1:'""'1
o trj
OJ OJ
'"
" '"
~
Z
'"
~
t
t3 ~
>,
o
Z
~e:~~~~2
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
,,~ ~ ~
OJ
:::0:; '1::1 'I)
tj:S :s
'"
tJj c;) tzj '1:j "'Ij "j
;:0 n 'I~ :t=' ~-~ :r-'
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B
~ (l '" .,"'.. .,'-, '
~ ~~
~~ ~ 8 10:: I'~
~ ;..d 0 tJ tj
l'J U"J ::z::t::z::t?:1
'"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~
'" ~,'; ~ H~ ~ :>.~ P.. ~ ~H' OJ
n Z?:ZZ(jJ~ 3
(1 n l.'
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 ti ~
000
tJ tJ "
;.u ::0 ::u
t'j U 0
R'
~
'I') >-l 10:"'
~ ~ U
l ~ :to) L..He;
[]
;:I=' 'IJ Z
tzj t'j
~ N f
~ ~
OJ '"
t'" t"' ()
~ ~ ~
c) c)
t'J U
i;
U 0
::u ::u
'0
t.J
i; i;
tJ.l ;.tJ C.j
::u 2 ~
~ :I='
" b r;
~
~
i:j
t:! t'" c. U"J
~ ~ ~ ~
tI:!:C1 (fl tzj
\(' rTj n ~
:gfi~~~~o
~ t'" ;r=, ~ ~
l' II d c;
" g;;.j 8
~ AI f.]
OJ
j
~~~~~S
:-~~~~~~
c:: :I::!
lJ.l lTj tD::r:
[11 LI t"' 0
{II t'" c:: t"'
>-3 ~ ~ ~ ~;;
Co CJ")
C, 0
Z
>-3 :~ c..,
() >-l;t,
d D n
EO ;; '"
tT1 :i;
~ t"" :;; ~ ~
1.1 ~ ;iJ
.i~j ~_: " ~ ~
~~ i;l I'~
~ p R
~ ~
[2 ~
LJ LJ c.....
~ ~ ~
t: F, <,
~
"
'"
OJ
:j
o
CT"1 t ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1-'~~8CT"1\Drnl\..l~5.;tI:l"Ij"Ij"'ljCj (Ii
;) (") r.)~~~1-=~[J~~f]
~ t~ tl ~ ~..:: ~ ~H~: fH~ r: t, ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 . (J " " '" <) -, " I'
t: '""' r-< "0 ~ < " ~ ~ d ~ ~ Q ~ a ~ ~ V'
~ :j ;j i ~ ;~ ~ R ;J >< 0-:, () () if; rh
U :I=' f-~ ~ ~ ~ Ilj 'D to ~ ;"JJ $1 ;;:; ~ 8 ~ ~ ~e'"-: ~ <~ ~ ; ~
~ t.' t' :?: U U 'I! '\1 S K~ U:, c-' ,-, c'" f~
'0' lJ.! ;.d ;Jj I' [r1 l.') c) () (=)
l'j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
6 ~
ul U1 U1 U1
000 C,l
~
e'
-_J ;:; ~ ~~
_-I m
00 ,j::.
-"
CI
,... ,...
;;:~~~;;~tn,~;:::~
I'
(~ ~ m ~ l-' ~ m d\ ~ ~J
~ ~l ~ 0 ~ ~ t.J .I:>
I-' I-' ~ ~ ~ U1 ~ 00 CT"1 ~
J1 u) I' w r,j r,) ,j:, -_J LlI 111 CJ
00 c".l C:!
C,) ~:.J 0 0 0
ClCJC'OC>O
CJ 0 6 0 0
~ ~; ~ ~
f-l 00 0 CT"1 ~ ID W ~ ~ w
en .!'. f,' lJ'\ ~ ID ID \.J Lv r:o
o 0 0 0 C1 CJ 0 0 0 C> 0 C:J 0 U1 0
G Q 000 n 0 a 0 6 0 0 Q Q
CJ 0
c! 6 0 0 0
o (,1 C-l CJ
C.l CJ <--:., 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 r.J
00 CJCJOO
00
co
g g g g g goo C:J a g g g goo c~ 6 6 g g g goo g 6 g g goo n g g g g g g 0 C:l g g g g g g
r.l C.1 C.,l
Cl CJ C.l
,'J C:J 0 0 0 0
0000
I'
,... 00
I' j\J r'o f-l f-' f-l f-l
o ,j::. f-l (..... u.' 0,
1..>.' \11 0 ~"j f-' 0) f-l
(l~ UI CJ '....' 0"\ I') (1"\ f-l
f-l 00 \0 l)"I ~I W U\ 0
0'-'
c.) Cl
~~~ggg
0000
00'.1 ()
VI U1 IJ1 IJ1 IJ1 ~ l)"I ([1 liT U1 U1 IJ1 ~ l)"I
o '-' (,1 C'J CJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 C,l Cl 0
('::.l CJ
6 ~
~~~~gg
o 0 0 0
(..") c"l
0\ ._J ~ (t',
__) f',J (I, c~
_~ (~ ~ ~ ..J 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~~ ~
~ ~ IJ1 ~ CT"1 ~ .J ~ ~ ~ ~ U1 l)"I en ~ ~ ~
..j q! II'
j\; ~.\ ~
,...
.J ..J
CD
1'1.' f-l
IJ1 \0 C-'
0; ,.j I'
._1 Q:l '-P t'"
~,J ._1 1\.1 ,j::.
f-' f-' (t',
L-,> I' (~
IJ1 I.n
,.J CJ
~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U1 U1
Cl Cl
00
o 0 C> C,J CJ 0 0 0 0 ,.J
C'] c, ~ 6 0 0 0 0 c~ ,) 6 6 0 0
,... ,...
t: ~
~ ~ r :::; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
f-l ~, l" ~ IJ1 m ~) 0 f-l
,... >,
,.) i.J.!
\..J J.,
ch 00
._J ([1
~ ~ 00 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
\.L; \,w t'J
\0 I.J (.J ()"l
^' ,...
" "
\D \'.>
"
'-< '"
"
Z
CO
t'<
"
e"
I~
10
'" '"
W .~: 8
~ S" ~
l.l..l i'f r-
ro ro
.:-J
,.
n
CO
~
I.'
,...
'"
e'
'"
tj
'I)
ii
,;
,.
".
"
"
~~
ffi
;r-"'
"'"
~
n
i~
rc
o
3
ro
"
,-,
",
"
~/
;;
cD
"
'"
o
I.J
OJ
~
o
:E: n
III c:
1'.111
>-' rc
\g ~
9
;.., I'()
",
0.. I']
"
ill (J
y~ I~
~
r-<
~
~
r-<
~
~:i
()
'"
"
~
:'1
CO
~
~
"'
'"
.?!.~
(Ii
\-;
~
'"
CO
'"
"
'0
"
'"
" '"
~ CJ
c;
tJ '"
,~~
,;
t:J I-'
L% tv
~
() t'
:T W
~ "
" "
"'
"
I(J
~~
l'J
.
.
.
-'
t-' ~.' ~ ~ f-l I'
0"> o:r 0; C'C>
I I I I
:~;j~g~
to!J1 f-" -_I
>-' >-'
_J "_J
~ ~
>-'
.1'. ..,
t-' ~; _J ~ ".1 ~
o ~ to! 0 ~ e Roo 8 0 ~
~ f-l ~! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~l ~ ~ 8
c"; 0 _ ,"" c. C1 t";, 0
c") 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 c") 0
o
C10
2 t;;
0"' \1.'
- 2, g goo
o
C; 0
,',
1,1 ~I
l,,"'
c; c>
v; ""
f'~ i;
o
(.lO
C' c;
>"
o 0
o ,=-
o t"; 0 c; 0
6 ~ 0 ~ G_
'"
v;
" v;
'-'
[1 *
C,
o
"
C"
--,
t')
f-l f..' f-l l-'
IJl III l!1
[ ~ ~ ~
C' CJ 0
f-l ....l 0
0) _.I eJ
o 00
II". lJl I-' ~
o ,.1 C.l 0
~:~~~~I:
f-l f-' ~ f-l I-' f-!
~J f_) v.! 1'.1 t-.J f-.)
~o~g:;80
~:r;6f-lO~)f-;~
0~':J6~~~O
tr; t-'
V; V;
>-' ::;
" '"
~~~ g
I.-J en
" 0
~~ ~
t;; ~ t'1 ~
~ ~ [; ~
cr-, ~ ~ 0
c"lO 0
,0~~~QE
. n Cl
f-l t;; ~
IJ1 V1 Ul
6 1,-' ~
V'1 u,!J1
o ,_"1 c!
o C.l 0
6 ~ ~~
__),D 1.-)
<.:) 0 C')
f-l \' f-l
l!l IJ1 I,SI
IJ1 l)1 U1
~~ 0 I.i:,
rh 0
:3 ~~ Z;
01 1.-.1 G.)
o t,j I-'
8 ~~; ~
, ,
c:; 0 '1
o C.l 0
C,
c") Cl
.I:> v)
l~ ~
>-'
....) 1-'" l...!
C,
f~ ~
.i.:. l.(l
6 ~~
00
o
~ I' :::
00
~ f-' I~
<.p 00 OJ
\D Jo,
g ~~ S
c.,g;=;g~g~
~ ~ ~.
, ,
S ['-.,l ;.; ~~ E;
CIl ..1 G\ I':" ~
Ul ~ t-.J 0) In
goo ~;
c,
:: 1-'
" >-'
V; V;
~: U1
__I ci.J
(,1) I'.!
g ~
I.,L 0
~ ~~
I-' I. f-l I' f-l f.-
Ul IJ1 lil IJl U, IJl
~~~~~~
gg~g~~
['-.).....',\::. I-' .:J ['-.l
~~~-;2~~~
o C) 0 C) 0
~~ ~
~ r~
c,' CJ
~~
~ \,j
<:1 u
0"
g 6
I-' I-' t..
VI l11 IJl
lJ1 IJl U"I
l-' 0 0
1-' 01 _J
en \,D ,.!
o C"1 CJ
o c) 0
10 I-' r)~
:: L:) ~
CJ 0
l-' fl I-'
i~ ~ ~
c" 0 C'l
-_J _J ._J
co ((, ro
o C') 0
C,l 0 r,.l
tv 1'.! lo-!
I-' I' l-'
.!:o- 0"\.1:..
o C,l 0
,-'J Cl
>-' ,.
._J 0"\
\~l ~'i
C') 0
0\"
(, Cl
(.:., 0
>-' >-' >-'
\/1 V1 IJl lJI
U1 IJl lJ) lJ1
~ ~ 8 6
o 0 CJ 0
C) 0 0
;J l-' 01
o C.l 0 0
~., t-J ,j::. \)1
00 c) 0
O~ a,
0>'
~ Cl
0\.....
0:> w Q"l m tJ"\
~Bf~~~
R ~ ~ ~ ~ * E ~ ~ ~ ffi ffi ~ ~ ~ * :
-_J V1 Q"l ~) ~ IJl lo-! \.D UI ,j::. C.l 00 ~'. lo-! l-' 1-'
\.D Ul IJl UI IJ1 (J1 \.D \.D \.D lJ1 \II \.D \p \.D \D \.\)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
onoOO
~t~R~
noOOO
f< tl r< t"' l'
I:I1 ttj L~J tIj M
~~~~g~f;
IJ1 r:n (.:., 0"\ c.; t-J IJl
.1"- l!1 01 III I-" 01 lo-,!
>-rj rTj ~ n I'Jj >~J ~: ;:r::
~~~~~~~~
~~g;cl~Y1~~
~!] tI:I ;Jj 0-< t1:l ~ tI:I lL]
!j C; ~ ~ 10 E1 10 ij
~~~:~ ~~~~
"
~ ~ ~ [.~.~ ~..~ ~ ~ ~.: ~ ~-" ~ ~.~
~ ~ ~ :--. '.. .^.~. ~ ~,'r. ~ r< ~',
11 Z flJ co 'r.I co .".J :...:; " ~ ... '7
~.nr"t"'~ ...:j$~~
q~~~f;(-~n~ 000
;I:~ L<J (Ij tzj ?:I c....: C c:::
li1?'~~~ ~~9
rrI trJ t~)
~ ~ ~
~i ~ ~ ;j :3
L' t"' t"' 0 iC
~ ~ ~ ;,'-~ :
o 0 () ~::>'J
o tj tJ :.r.J
<)
CO
oj
"
"'
OJ
~ ~; ~
...~ r< r<
lJ
"
" if>
OJ "'
t'j 0
. "
::D trJ
o ?::I
n H
l'J ~ ~ ~
;d
R Fr;
~ t1
f}J ;:c1
"' [)
~ q
('J ~
~ ~
l'1 ~
d H
oj
n
~: tI:I
~ :~
;'1 "
if>
~
"
n
'"
~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~d,." ~
~.::H in~~~~ (Ii
l',1 tIj t::I 'll tl:l tj ~--; t:J t'"
S trJ Z l<"1 ;1-"
l<"' ~., ;.1 L! ~:i d LJ ~ Co,
~~~~~~~~~
~~~~< ~ ~
~ ~~ ~
W ~
" z
c; GJ
[ ui
~I~~~~f<~~~
~~~;:~~~~~
~[j~~~~l~
~ iD ~ g ~ ~ [;
~,: ~ ~ ~~ S ~
trJ ~ ~ ~ ~~;
~ t'" ~ H
~ ~
"'
'"
oj
r<
g~
~; ~
~ trj
f:i::j t"'
[)
LJ Z
8 ('J
"
~$Eg~~g~
r~ ~ !~~ '<J ~ n tI:I
~~jl"~~~~'~l<"l
g;~?)~g~ ~
~~;:j ~ ~~
t.j n tI:l
~ ~ ~
y OJ
.0 0 r-3
~ ~
"
n '"
.....:.: t-l
Z r"
H t"'
'"
" '"
;I='
>-3 rfJ [L1
blli H f}l
t< ~
"
,.
~
~~
"'
"'~
8~~~~
t.IJ (...! II:' lJ1
CO
::,' S I] '\) ~:.:: >~j TT1 ()
~i t'" ~ ~ '.0 ~ b; c:::
~9.1.~;":0~t;~
g8~2 ~a~
o 0 rfJ t'"
c::: d Z
~ ~ ~',~
'" '"
~ (~ ~ ~ w Q"l (D ~ ~ m Q"l ~
~ : ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ G 6 ~ *
'"
~~~~~~
~ l..n (:) <J'\ 0
IJ"\ \)1 I-"
"L1 ~: ::r:
~ t<.1 ~ ~
1)~ {tl UJ UJ
>-3 \'I...:j ,I...:j
~ < ~~] ~
f6 ~~ kJ %
"
o
"J
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
?~~~~~~S:~:;:~4C
~ ~ ~ ~ rfJ ~ ~ ~ ~
i"Ij "t.1 ~ II ~ ;..- ,,) C)
~~~~8~ ;l2bt::l
nIJr"JI':J L-:-:C:::C~:
l<l [Ij trJ [Ij t':l rI1;t"'
fBHUO ~~~r<
jl::O i'::1 L') tI:I trj
~ ~ H
~ ~ rfJ
>-3 ~ ~
rJ ::r. ()
II 0
~! ;:-'"
[.]
~J
~
"
l'J
r<
t"
o
~ ~~
~ ~ ~
u
'"
\D "'"
l.! (n
" '"
\.J1 .j:..
d
"
~: ~ ~ r.~
~ ~ ~ g
oJ
u t1 ;T.' ~:
?:I f'.1 q ~J
I'Jj "J I'Jj UJ
;I.<):';:I=' ..,
t'" II t'" J.='
n n () "I
@ B f@ ~
~~~~~
'"
~~6~~
t'""" r) Ii t'" l'
;:j ~ ~ ~; ~
t t=1 E; ?J b
tJj [!l ~
~~~~~
s; ~
~
OJ
'"
'"
@
t"' ~J ~
(') trJ f'Ij
::0 0 .::
1-,,1::0 H
G) '7.
1<"' ~ I'll
CJ ::r:
~; g ~ g
~~_~~JS
~~A
~ ~-
o
"
OJ
"'
'I
l!.,)
:-j
~ ~3 ?:! ~
~ ~ ~ g
?::I l" ~.
"l;:l=';I:' ?J
S~~~.~~
o t ~ f2 r<
f~~ a' ~~
"
~ ~ i~
1-'; Il ~
o I-l i:J
z ?: 1n
[D
~.
p
>-rj "Il Clj
~ r~ E=:
n () n
9 g @
~~~~1
~ ~ ~
'z: :.rJ '~J
~J >-<:
;~ ~
'" ""
C! r:n
~ ;::
(.! e',
~ t.!
\D lJ1 \,D IJl UI IJl III V1 \P \.D ~D lJ\ \.J1
~,t~~~~~~?~,?~~S~
~ ~
~~~~8~
tj r1j rl"J
~" ,.., l:" ::0 >-3
S ~~I"J~~~
8~~~~~
~ ~
"
"
z
,"
t;
~
(J:l \D <'0 ILl \D
Q"l (l ~ ,1", ~,!
ej, -.J ~ 0 \D
-_J f-' ~ ~ ~
o (J s~ u
~ ~ ~ ~
t'" l-; f< t"'
tl:ll<J f'Ij trJ
3~~~~
r) r t'" 1:2
~ ~ ~: tt
G) d h ~
~ [; ;: ij
d ;:I='
~ ~ ~ ~
':<I;.IJ UJ
L<) tI:I 1 ~
U 0 :J
'-1..1 ~ @
{") b ~
~ q tJ
'"
~ ~ trj
o
"'
d '"
~ :.r.J
rl
"
'<J {tl
~~
or<
Z ~
::~ (,1
tij t::I
"
rr) ~
t<:l 0
t' n
II ;.<::
n I"i
t t;=1
oj
r< H
'z: :.rJ
tJ
~ ~
'"
V; ,~
w""
>-'
.!:o- \D ._J -_J
\D Cl ~ ~ \.D
>-'
t-.J -_J I,!
((', \tJ a\
>-'
~ IJl lo-' ~ ~l ~ -~ W \D W ~ ~
.!:o- lJ1 w ~J l~ I. -~ ~ \.D ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
>-' "
!J1 '_J t-.) \)'1 (...! IJ\ \.D IJl _.1 t-) '.J V1 lJ1 ._J (f) ~ \D L.rI ._J (I", ~ ~ -j ll't
~ -_J \JJ I-' Cl ('.) -J lo-! \.p (...! en t-J ~ <.D ,j::. fool ~ .I' OJ IJl I.' ~ \.D
"100
ID In
~i:;~~6~'
\D lo-> \D
l"~ t,.! lo-'
_J 0 C') 0 00 e',
lo-! ('";0 6 CJO
ooggBoog~~goC!O
ogg~=;O:;~
c.) 0 0
o C') 0
og~oogg::;
o 0:..":1 ,.J 0
o OO'-Jon
ClO
CJ Cl r"l
~~ g '" 6 0 g c; 0
C') 0
.:=, '.1
C) CJ
00
o 0 0 0 ~.J 0
o 0 c" C'l
0"
C.J 0
~I ~~
~~~~l;lo-!~'D
00 00 C!
o CJ 0 6 0
o (:) 0
C. C:l 0 0 c")
['-..l r-..J
c." \JJ
~ :::; ~ t; ~: ~~ t ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~,; ~ ~
" >-'
t~ :~
t",) ()
c"J 0
C' CJ 0
C,) 0 0 0
CJ 0
n c."
" 0
o C.l
o CJ <:)
o 0 CJ 0
'.1 CJ
o '0
o ~::~ g
Cl (1 0
(.100 c'."
CJ 0 0
o (l 6
og;::;O~ggg
C'" 0
0"
VI ~ !J1 IJ1 IJl U\ !J1 III V1 IJl ~ !J1 Ul \.J1 (II
o 0 0 c~ 0 c:J 0 Q t~ 0 ,~ 0 ~l 0
C) 0 C.1
o I:"..l 0
o y: ~
~ ~ 0 U1
~~~~oIJ16~\.J1
~..:. f~ I-' I' t-' f' ~
Cl"J CD .I.. Ul I',) t-.J ._J
~ ~. \.D 0 m \.D w \D
~ 1-' )-' I-' ~ I-'
..J ~,~ j:: C;-~ ~; ~I ~ I-' ~j ~ ~
I,.! ('f) I'~ lJ1 a-, (,) 'D
f'J cr, \~ t-J l..n C) l.oJ 1-' lo-! I.!
:i;: C.; ~
f~~~~~~I~
~ \t!
_J t-.,)
c") 0
0"
6 C! n g g g
o ('l
U 0
o C) CJ 0
no
CJ g g goo 0 ~ goo 0 g ~ g g 0 6
o ~s g 0
oono
o n 0 (l
~ 2 ~~
.:j~~:;~~~~~:~
l-' I-' I' I-' I-'
~~:;t>\D:;~\JJ
IJ1 IJl ~ IJl UI
o 0 c. 0
o
o CJ
CJ 0
"
V; '"
'.l6
IJ1 IJl Ul IJl lJl \.l1 \.l1 lJ1 LJI
r~ 0 0 c~ 0 ~ 0 n 0
<:) CJ 0 0 '-' 0 0 (,) c;
c" 0 0 ,_, 0 0 ,.J 0 ,1
(,10
o c,")
~; g
o .!:o- ('.l ~ U1 \.~ t-.) t~ t-j ~ ~'
t;"J 0 I.U Q"l 1-' U1 \~ ch 0 ~ -_J
tJ; 6 ~ ~.; ~
,...; (1.) fd .~ \D
~t~~~\D
t,) \,j Ul
(D ._J W
I'r<
Z ~
~s
G f; ~
~ en Cl\
t-) 0 ,t~
.:-J
o
'D
s
"
Il
,-,
"J
"-
>-'
>-'
'"
"
"'
H
lJ
1<
'"'
>-'
oj
~
o
'"
~,
0.
0.
"
~
"
"
tt. "I)
"'
n
"
g
o
q
~
cj
,-,
,~l
'"
~
>-'
"
"
o
'"
lJ
l'J
r<
"-'
~ n
~ c
i.: y~
~-
~ ~
3
;>.. ro
0.
p, ~,)
"
~ n
j
S
j
~
r
~
I,'
Il
OJ
'"
:.~
~~
~:
:-;
~
tJ lo-I
"a 0
"
>-'
'j
'"
t".
"
"'
OJ
8
"
,-,
oj
LJ <.l'1
"~
I:'"J \\'J
.~ 0
~
t"J foo'
,~ t-.)
~
n t'"
:T \l.!
w "
, ro
"'
"
n a": ...:j
::>,.. 0
~ r< "
~ ~ ~
(q IT 1-'
" ro
'"
"
,"
OJ
.... 0
0 ....
'"
n C, '"
L=" --,
OJ '" --, n
'" O' '"
~ n CJ ~,
n
. u 6 0 () >-'
c, 0 ~ ....
0 .... <.' ..
.... .... ::: ....
oj I,TI co 0
co co tJ ,.
" :g '"
;r
OJ .... "
'" 0
co " "
.... '0
~~:l C' 0
".1
'0
",
0
'd
-_J '"
".
,., ....
'D .1"-
~ - "
~ EJ 0,
Q.
<, ~
EJ " ~
z
0 "'
~ lJ
,. "
0',
~
n
~
.
'-'
"J
q
~
n
to
t'
tc
o
I'j "J
Cl o.j
~ .! 'Z
:r-~ :C'
tc t'
~
.~.l
::J='
tc
U'
,.
.-1::.
~
00
~)
~
~ (I
o rr1
j~
f.i ~
r+ ::d
tc OJ
o ?:
..:~ n
" '"
L"' i\J
r. ~
'" ~
tr:l ~
;" ::r:
'11 trj
~ "
", en
~
() 'D
-... \D
o :z:
C'
~ ~
"" ~
:.::: 0
Z
n
o tJ
?:t ('.1
'd
.'
1\) ~.l
~., ~
-_1,.J
.J \D
,.
it'd
~
~
"
o
"
m
~
"
9
ro
o
,,'j
"
..,
o
,0
"
OJ
tc
,-,
?. n
~, ~
~....L i"'T
>-
(,~ ~
:c' ~
"
0.. t,j
"
CO 0
" ~
'"
b
to,
~
:::
tc
~
a~
n
to
"
;:j
::1
,-,
"
::;
~
,"
tJ '0
.:~ CJ
"
'"
,1
'"
\-;
:.-;
l"
~
"
"
l<J
~ t '.j
~ 0
.\, " 0 ,,'
'J , 0 '-'
\
tJ 'D
X n >~ CJ
i CJ "
I
I
\ tJ ....
~ "
* 0 '"-' n
n c,
I
~ n tc
<.II U; I,ll ~,f :;;
" " 0 W
" 0 " ro
"'
2; 0 "
.
~
I:)
l")
;--
o
-J
~
..
_J
..,. ,1'_
"_J -.1
..1 Il:>
u ~~.. (;
w r+ (I
I ~ ill ~IJ
1..0 rt t...J
m m
'"
:r:<
~
.
.
.
City Council Agenda - 7/28/03
8.
Publicllcarin - Consideration to ado
Loan of Small Cities I'~conomic Develo
City. (O.K.)
A. Reference and background:
Doug Harmon, Vice President and CFO 0 Twin City Die Castings (TCDC), requested
the City Council hold a public hearing for onsideration to adopt a resolution amending
the Business Subsidy Agreement within th ~ Loan Agreement between the City and
TCDC. The amendment request is two-f Id: First, to extend the "Compliance Date" and
secondly, to modify the job and wage lcve requirements.
The City of Monticello entered into the A reement 1()[ Loan of Small Cities Economic
Development Fund with TCDC on June 8, 2000, following the award of a $500,000
Grant to the City of Monticello. The City greed to loan the $500,000 to TCDC for
purchase of equipment at a 4% interest rat over seven years. Because the State Grant
was allocated from the federal (IllJD) po I of dollars, this means TCDC must comply to
the Low to Moderate Income Persons (L I) requirement, in addition, to the Business
Subsidy requirements.
Initially, TCDC agreed to create 85 perma ent full-time jobs by June 30, 2002, (the
"Compliance Date"). The "Compliance D te" was amended from June 30, 2002, to July
26,2003, on September 26,2002. With th~ LMl requirement, fifty-one percent of the 85
jobs or at least 43 jobs must be filled by p rsons with household incomes based on 2003
Section 8 Income Levels. Example: Ann al Llmily income of $39,550 or less for one-
member l~mlily, $45,200 or less for two-m 'mber family, etc. In ajob creation report
prepared by the Minnesota Department of rade and Economic Development on May 14,
2003, the State accepted 19.5 permanent fLlI-time jobs of which 10 were taken by the
LMI criteria. ^ total of 34 permanent and temporary full-time jobs were created and
reported by TCDC; however, temporary fi II-time jobs are not acceptable by Federal
criteria. In this scenario and if TCDC woulcl pre-pay the loan, the City would keep
$263,500 of the principle payments ancl in erest accumulated and the remaining $236,500
returned to the State. If the 51 <YrJ LMI is 11( t met, the full $500,000 is returned to the State
and the City retains only the interest accul ulated.
[n a presentation to the HRA, Mr. Harmon noted the following reasons for non-
compliance of job and wage creation: Ove -all economy, global competition particularly
China, and the change ancl use of robotics' n die casting which requires higher technical
skills but less jobs. Additionally, 'fCDC h. res a number of temporary full-time persons
because of the volatility of their business a d temporary full-time jobs arc not acceptable
by J.'ecleral criteria.
City Council Agenda - 7128/03
.
Mr. Harmon, Carol Pressley-Olson ofMN DIED, and the Economic Development
Director met on July 9, 2003, and discusse the situation and options: Pre-payment of
Loan, declare default of Agreement, exten the "Compliance Date", and/or modify the
job and wage level goals.
Attached is a letter of request from Mr. Ha mon and a completed Employment Data Form
outlining the revised job and wage level gals and jobs available to LMI persons. first,
the company requests the "Compliance Da e" be amended from July 26, 2003, to July 26,
2004. Secondly, the company requests m difying the number of full-time permanent
jobs for creation from 85 to 42, thereby, re ucing the LMI criteria from at least 43 to at
least 22. The average hourly wage of the roposed 42jobs is $19.37 without benefits.
For a comparison, the total annual wages of the original 85 jobs was $1,604,720
compared to the total annual wages of the roposed 42 johs at $1,69],798. Bottom-line,
the total annual wages available to spend ithin the community does not change
significantly.
PUBLIC JIEARING
.
The Mayor is asked to open the public hea ing for comments and questions relating to
amending the Business Subsidy Agreemen within the Agreement for Loan of Small
Cities Development Program Funds betwe n TCDC and the City. The public hearing
notice appeared in the Monticello Times n eeting the requirements of the Business
Subsidy Law. Mr. J-Iarmon and the Econo ic Development Director will be present to
answer questions of the Council Members l' the public.
Assuming no public opposition to amendi g the Business Subsidy Agreement, the Mayor
is asked to close the public hearing for con'ideration to adopt the attached resolution.
Assuming the Council adopts the resolutio , the resolution will he forwarded to OTEO
for approval and thereafter, a Second Ame dment to the Agreement for Loan prepared by
the legal firm of Kennedy & Graven. TC C agreed to reimburse the City for the costs
associated with publication of the hearing otice and preparation of second amendment.
The HRA approved extending the "Compl ance Date" at their July meeting and will
consider amending the job and wage goals within the Contract for Private Development
at their August meeting. The EDA-GMEF Loan of $1 00,000 was prepaid by TCDC in
June without penalties.
B,
Alternative Action:
1.
A motion to adopt a resolution am nding the Business Subsidy Agreement within
the Agreement for Loan of Small 'ities Economic Development Program Fund
.
2
City Council A~enda - 7/28/03
.
between TCDC and the City ofMon ieello extending the "Compliance Date"
from Juty 26, 2003, to July 26, 2004, and modifying the creation of the new full-
time equivalent jobs on the Develop ent Property from 85 to 42 new full-time
equivalcntjobs; forty-two (42) ofth new jobs must pay a wage of at least $12.25
per hour, exclusive of benefits; at lea't twenty-two (22) of the new jobs must be
filled by people who, at the time of hiring, reside in households of "low to
moderate income" as defined by Fed ral Section 8 guidelines; and subsequent
modifications as deemed necessary b Kennedy & Graven.
2.
A motion to adopt a resolution amen ing the Business Subsidy Agreement within
the Agreement for Loan of Small Cit"es Economic Development Program Fund
between TCDC and the City ofMon ieello with changes to Alternative No.1.
')
_J.
A motion to deny adoption of a resolltion amending the Business Subsidy
Agreement with the Agreement for loan between TCDC and the City of
Monticello.
4.
A motion to table any action.
C.
Recommendation:
.
Alternative No.1 is the recommendation of he City Administrator and Economic
Development Director. The total annual wa es of the projected 42 jobs are expected to
be equal to or greater than the initial 85 jobs the company expects to comply with the
LMI requirement, the Monticello manufaetu 'ing plant is profitable, and the City of
Monticello wants to work with and eneourae businesses like TCOC. Given the recent
economy, amendments of this nature are not uncommon states the HRA Attorney.
D. Supportine Data:
Letter of request, employment data form, pu Iic hearing notice, excerpts from
Agreement, and resolution for adoption.
.
3
07/16/2003 WED 16:16 FAX
flI 002/003
.
.
.
III \~I~,tl
i'''I' ~III
Twin City Ole Castin !5 Company
1070 s. e. 33id a enue
minneapolis. mlnneso a 55414
(651) 645-3611
July 14.2003
Ms Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
Monticello City Hall
505 Waluut Street - Suite # I
Monticello MN 55362-8822
RE: Agreement for Loan of Small Cities Developme t Program Funds
Dear Ollie:
Twin City Die Castings Company requests that the onticcllo City Council please give
consideration for an extension of the Jobs Creation greement for one year. We would also Iike
to reque.o:ot a modification in the loan agreement as it ertains to the number of jobs created. With
the manufacturing rece..'~sion and the offshore comp<; .tion Twin City Die Castings Company
feels that we can obtain 42 permanent full-time .:;ob~ year from now. We also believe we can
meet the 51% criteria for the State's LMI requi.eme t. Attached is a completed Employment
Data Form showing the 42 jobs that would be creare and whether they would be eligible for
LMI status.
Please contact me with any questions.
Sincerely
?
Douglas D Hannon
Vice President & CFO
cc: Carol Presley - Olson
Senior Loan Officer
DDH/lkk
1)
JUL 15 '1213
.
0)
=i
-'
CD
'is
iii
.
-
-;s
"\l
~
0
. c:
:i
5
s.
i
2"
Q,
-
It'I
-
i;
1
g-
o
.1;
-r
.2
1!
cg
c
m
E 5
~
:.. 'E
.!! lIlI
" .E
0 eE;"
-.J
II: ~c..
ID zS!
E "'w
. ir .-
&Ii
A. .!it:
tfi !~
!tIU
Ltt-:J
coo/coo III
08:00RM CITY OF MONTICELLo
, I I I
'!.t I
II ~
~~
.. ,
:I
..=~ :l. 2. <- <. y ,-2 "l. '2 )-
~.
~i;.9
.....
lD
':*
.:;lO
1:::
I>> ef
E : :. .. " .. ~ . =
.~ ; : - !
i 'r t!
. a-
Z'g ::;
- ~ ,g
; ::: ~ - ~ -
)j ..:: :: -: IlL
y- l!
I~ t
.1
~ : .. .
: .:: ': - ~ -
:r :: ."
12: ~5
i "fSi ..
i ~ ~ .: ~ . :: ~ 1 .:: I
~i )- - j ..
= i I.
~ ..; 0 ... .... :--5 . ~ o!"
,f .a ....e... ~ <:> ' - j: ::I
--.:::.. ~ ~ ~ ~..~ ...0. ~
:r:S ..::::. ~i~ '? III
T " - "e:- :: ....., ~
. Gl
~ a:
~~
ft
~ti
:J:CII
e, 101') J Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C> I
8' ~ii ~ '-'I - ,..l \JJ
0 ") .., '(I
im ~ e- ';'l -i c.:. ~ ~ e
z l':'" ~ ~ CJ
:Ei 1<) rJ ~ - 1"'7
0 CD
.Il
i -. () S
UJ ~; c. :. ~ .. \ . ..!!. ~ : .a
i I:! ~ : - - I :;. Ji.
, :i
ffi :1 - , - ~
,.. .- - -"; - - - \}
2- -
~
> ~ ....
~ ~ .) ..
"ti 1 .J ...:r. ~ 1
Q) '1 ~ .; ~ .~
iQ ~ '> 4 ~
f! s- ~ 0 \~ ,;1- ~ .. .,
l5i ~ ~ "S 1..
0 ~ s:.. ~ ~ >f
. ..... ~ 1 .. ~ ~
UJ i= "'1 ~ ::1 0; '-1
.," ~
~ ~ '"
"1 "~ ~ ~ +-
.z l 'l% ...s 1 1 j
en ~ J ~~ ~ ~ ); C"
~ 0 ~ ..0::.
a. "-0 \,) :1:'
!B'd Des-J.
EOI
~
!!!i
..
~
"'lI';;
,~
"I:IIS
.!!i
1O-
S ...'"
1. "5!. ti
;#is
Qel)
g" -..E: c;I
~ --'I
ts -:s:;
· JJ:
j ..I~
i -'i(,)
~ Q, 1:
8" ~i!
i G!:'~
15 -!~
;i.~'ri';~~
'lilUBllog ....
;oeia::b;
C i;' " .. en
i"Q. ~~J
.b."-='3'
"'a.D~ID.e
j!5j ;.i Ii
o,,"~!i.i
....lfw~
~f- '~Co
!JI it .s8
l5 = c:Io_ ;~
io;;;15C~-
I!: 15.iii.! ;,: '!
'i;i i:!::
'i Ii ~ t~ ~
-= !-~ 0 52 ~
"S """II ~ ;:: .e
:- ..:!I.~
r.c;rt'"
elDje i
.-:: 15 "= Si .
~s:>GlI1a
~~ ...~..
i ~ fa t~ i
il~iH
Joi_m i as
.. ~* ,jg ~1.
..t;l~i
~1i..!'5
s.sI';S~
'i"'-;:~~
~"8Sc::o~
l'ili~i
~.. I~
~ti"C.s~ lD
e..,.,?,
: r! I!f! ~
,; it )0 = 1I7
'x 6 ~ ".!! :!IOo
D.~': s e ;.
CD~;S.:J8iIP
~~t:.eJij
il~.si.
~.....rn 0
- 1&
.. % ~ l...c::
p.4/4
.!!
i
G;
"'CI
c::
.
o
oS
.,
'-
;
'ii
E
!
1
",..
o
l
lD
.
-s
..
5
~
-e:
IIJ
u
I!lI!)
N
co
z
- I
! i
. e
<.:1-
Q
ai10-lOJ~ md!l-ED !O-fl-tnr
XYd SZ;Ll 3lll COOZ/Sl/LO
JLL 1S '03
.
G:I
'"CI
'j
;
-
..
ell
-
1
....
-ts
0
. c:::
:i
Cl:I
8
-
u
tg
I
-m
-
~
CD
"ii
.S:
g-
et
:E
~
.
:;;z
.a
~
CIJ
c
m
e e
~
If -
1:
.1! G)
,.. IDE
Q E~
-
c mC.
. ze
e ..w
. I III _
" c
Q,. ~;
~
mY
1 ~t-~
f;OO/ZOO ~
08: OOI=lM CITY OF MONTICELLO
j
~t i
c.ilf
~;;=
al
!I )- r
..~~ )- ,- .,... ~ )- )- 2- )-
,>>..
~~s
~
-.=.
.50
1::
u i
E .. : ~ .:: ... ::-
~ :: - ~ ...
r .
;! -
ID
~
In ='
u ~
&1 :: :' ~ = ; ::-
y :' : ~ t
..::a
I~ :!l I~
8
I: c;: ... ~ ;- , ::
~ )' .. .... : .. ~
I~ .=' - :: ~
:55 -
I~
i ..! ..
- e
'E.I! ,... !t "' - ~ '" ~ =: :: :: I
.. t5i
'"
~e ~
, .!
,;;Ci .
::co I)
! I
~= ~
Ii
.,;;;
0 :-1
'ii~ ";1 1) Clo ';1 b; M 0 ...,
- ';i ~ ..... 0
~ -" '-1 ~ . ~ e
-gm o:J . - ~ ~
~ n .... ..,.,.. .,. ~ - -u
~~ - ... - -'" I - .s
~ 10
l~ () I -
w i
i l~ IJ_ :::: ~ ;. - f'" : .: = -:.
ct - I'- ]I!
0:: Cl
~.; ~ , ~ cJ 1-.."
~ r-J Qo ~ "-J ~\".1 - -
...-
0
f!'
1 -:t l '> '9 j
..... .. ~
"1 \,. i
! j ~ I,. .~ . 4- t> t
u ~ ~ ~ ~
CD 11.' ~
f- <::l C at.. .t
m ~ '" \.of ) j '2 I'
{!! z :. '.;.. -t
-I ~ -t, ~ ~ \j ..J " - ~ .. ~
~ H 2- Z. . 01;1 -s s ,)
en ~ -- <::C"
.., 0 \J \l ... V)
Q,..
EO'd BES"1
.-..
EOI
5 ~..
~ -:;:II
; -8e
_c .!!6
41-
5 ..-
_ _i~
";Iii CI.D.. ...
; ~ti;
lIIl CI.
~ -.1::0
8 ;s~
!'! !.f...
it .. .E ~
"Ii ID" r;s
j .D'is
~ -; ca,.!
~ E ioR-
G }J!!!i
.e o:::u
~~i.D~ 5
1 E-gi~i;
i~l ili
!!1..:~"'Ii.e
! ~i J i)
~':1i "S 4i
~:~i~:
co:; So
'i ~ a. lIiN
,,-is "'-
li-mlli
Dlfnl"'~'"
i l i:" ii!r i
4i Q'!! (!2 ~
~'i5..0 ......:::,l!;.
f?E.c::'!I....~
'lPlPC:c~"
J!&.ii
~~~~:5';
:J">~~II::
E ~~....
!jfalij
jrr3"l:1lii1otl'l
.iU~~a.
iClUi'E=~
III "E,IU .~:
. e lEI .e 1: -
!:t;I~j
~~i.5A1i
S.JSiS"~
'i~-i~~
'i ::a.!'~ Q~
~-Ili~!
10 ~.. ~.lI:l
u~"'.I.!! .
e .. i - ..:!:
:t-!!'s!
..: ~i-"i
-! 1Il~~1II
- cc.!!~
3 illlitraUlll
Do"~ ~ i Cl.
If~ · ..II I
=;::,gt.!!-.I
J~'E~~:
-t-.-~1;
.! If i,.c;
P.4/4
i
CIlI
f!
..
ClI
oS
.!!
I
E:
i
i
-
.s!
~
Gl
e
5
..
=
2:-
€
..,
...
tJO
N
C
'Z
W
i I
is ~
1i &
u_
'b
a31Q-IDJ~ mdBl=ED E~'l.l"r
IYd tZ:L1 3fiL f;OOZ/S1/LO
I
.
I
/
/
~gals
I
i
/
/
~I'
onticello (Minn.) Times-Thursday, July 17, 2oo3-Page 15
$60,bOO. The developer stated their
assessment was in excess of that
amount and was closer to $71,000. City
Administrator. Rick Wolfsteller will check
on the assessment.
Environmental Cleanup: Ken Barthel
stated there was removal of contaminat-
ed material consisting of batteries and
treated lumber. The developer is request-
ing a letter from the City stating that the
cleanup was done. It was noted that
there was a Phase I environmenta~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
assessment done. Vaughn Veit stated he CITY OF MONTICELLO
was not concerned about the cost h COUNTY OF WRIGHT
incurred in clean up but with that he be STATE OF t.!'INNESOTA. .'
released of liability. NO ICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that t~e City of Monticello will hold ~ public hean.ng
Sign: There was some additional dis- on Mon :'lY' July 28, 20q3, at approximately 7:00 p.m. at th~ Counc!1 Chambers In
cussion on the liquor store sign. Bruce the Mo tlcello C~mmunlty ~enter, 505 Walnu.t f:?treet, Monticello, Minnesota, to
Thielen and Robbie Smith felt the sign on ar:n.men the BUSiness Subsidy Agreement wlthl~ th,,: Agr~emen~ for Loan of Sr:nall
the liquor store building was large CltIe~ evelopment Program Funds between TWin City Ole Castings and the City of
enough and questioned whether there Montie: 110 dated June, 8, 2000, and ammended September 23, 2002.
was a need for any additional signage. A!II terested persot!s ma'i appear at th~ hearing and present their views orally
John Simola pointed out what the ordi- or pnor ~o the meeting In ~ntlng. For more Information call Ollie Koropchak,
nance allowed for signage for properties Ec~no IC Development Director, 763~295-2711.
on a major highway, like TH 25. Vaughn -Rick olfsteller, City Administrator
Veit said that between $12M-$13M were (July 1 ,24,2003)
spent on the Towne Centre site and
liquor store remodeling and that it was a
shame that signage and landscaping
was detracting from it. Bruce Thielen felt
it might be worthwhile to have a sign
company look at the existing signage at
the liquor store. Pat Cruikshank stated
that the tenants along the back of the
Towne Centre development were looking
for additional signa\:le and suggested
that perhaps some kind of compromise
could be reached on the signage. Bruce
Thielen suggested that Vaughn Veit
come up with a proposal and the City
would look at it. Rick Wolfsteller cau-
tioned that any sign in excess of the pro-
visions of the ordinance would have to
be . approved by the Planning
Commission.
2. Adjourn: The meeting was
adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
Missy
Missy is a 1 O-montli-old spayed
female black and white cat. She
has a very sweet and youthful
look with a feisty and playful
personality. She has a lot of self
confidence for such a young
cat. She gets along with every-
one but may be better suited to
~ f~n"Iih, u,ith""lt C"r'Y"'oll "hil.....Io'......""
Public Notices
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
NO ICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids will be received by the City of
Montic 110 at the office of the City Administrator until 1 0:00 a.m., Friday, August 1,
2003, t the City Hall and will be publicly opened and read at said time and place
by rep sentatives of the City of Monticello. Said proposals for the furnishing of all
labor a d materials for the construction, r:omplete in-place, of the following
approx mate quantities:
65 LF 18" Sanitary Sewer and Appurtenant Work
2,8 0 SY Sodding
. Th bids must be submitted on the Proposal Forms provided in accordance
with t~ Contract Documents, Plans, and Specifications as prepared by WSB &
AsSOCI tes, Inc., 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN
55422, which are on file with the City Administrator of Monticello and may be seen
at the ffice of the Consulting Engineers or at the office of the City Administrator.
Co ies of Proposal Forms and the Plans and Specifications for use by contrac-
tors s bmitting a bid may be obtained from the Consulting Engineers, WSB &
Assoc ates, Inc., 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN
?5422 upon depo.sit of Thirty-Five Dollars ($35.00) (non-refundable) per set, which
Includ s Twenty-FIve Dollars ($25.00) for the Standard City of Monticello .
Specif cation. The Standard Specifications for the City of Monticello have been
updat d. Potential bidders will be required to purchase a copy of the Standard City
of Mo ticello Specification. Once a Standard City of Monticello Specification is
purch sed, .future purchase of plans may not require additional purchase of the
Stand rd City of Monticello>specifications for the year 2003.
N bids will be considered unless'sealed and filed with the City Administrator of
Monti ello and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, or certified
check, or bid bond made payable to the City of Monticello for five percent (5%) of
the a ount bid, to be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event that the bid be
acce ted and the bidder fail to enter promptly into a written contract and furnish
the r uired bond.
N bids may be withdrawn for a period of forty-five (45) days from the date of
openi 9 of bids. The City of Monticello reserves the right to reject any or all bids.
-Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
(July 7, 2003)
DISTRICT COURT
PROBATE DIVISION
TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Estate of Court File No. P9-02-3647
Ga David Eide, NOTICE OF INFORMAL APPOINT-
MENT OF PERSONAL REPRESENTA-
Decedent TIVE AND NOTICE TO CREDITORS
(INTESTATE)
NO ICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an application for informal appointment of per- ~
sonal r presentative has been filed with the registrar. No will has been presented for
probat . The application has been granted.
No ce is also given that the Registrar has informally appointed Suzette L
r'\,..........f:.....,..,I ,~.'"',..,...... _......J_~..._ :__ ,...,..".. "'JI~I~ A......~ ".' .' I. ~.~..,-~- ~-~-
.
.
.
ARTICL 6
Provision of Evidentiar M terial Re uirement
Section 6.1. Provision of Evidentiarv Materials. n addition to those materials described in
Section 5.2 of this Agreement, the Developer shall p ovide the City with all evidentiary materials
according to the format and timetable cited in the G ant Agreement. The City will forward these
materials to the Grantor Agency and assist in expedi ing reviews leading to a release of the Loan.
Section 6.2. Documentation of Use of Funds. he Developer must provide the City with
necessary documentation that the Loan and the Le eraged Funds have been used for the items
and purposes stated in the Grant Application prio to submitting the final progress report and
requesting grant closeout from the Grantor Agency.
Section 6.3. Equipment Cost. The Developer must ocument that the Equipment is of reasonable
cost.
ARTIC E 7
Provision of New P rmanent obs
Section 7.1. Business Subsidv Agreement. The provisions of this Section constitute the
"business subsidy agreement" for the purposes of t e Minnesota Business Subsidy Act.
(a) The parties agree and represent to e ch other as follows:
(1) The subsidy provided to the De eloper includes the Loan.
(2) The public purposes and goal
City and maintain the Development Pro
including office space related to and necess
years following the Service Date.
of the subsidy are to increase net jobs in the
erty as a machining and die casting facility,
for such manufacturing uses, for at least five
(3) If the goals described in claus (2) are not met, the Developer must make the
payments to the City described in Section .4.
(5) The subsidy is needed be ause acqmsttlon and interest costs for the
Equipment make the Project economically infeasible without the Loan.
(6) The Developer must continu operation of the Development Property as a
machining and die casting facility, includi g office space related to and necessary for such
manufacturing uses, for at least five years' fter the Service Date.
(7) The Developer does not have parent corporation.
DJG-177418v2
MN 190-84
8
~
.
(8) In addition to the assistance prov'ded under this Agreement, the Developer
expects to receive for the Project and related evelopments on the Development Property
(a) tax increment financing assistance from t e Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota in amount of approximately $225,000; (b) a
loan from the Monticello Economic Develop ent Authority ("ED A") in the amount of
$100,000; and (c) the proceeds of bonds issued by the Minnesota Agricultural and
Economic Development Board. Nothing i this paragraph constitutes a contractual
obligation by the AUthority, the City or the ED with respect to such assistance.
~
(b) By no later than June 30, 2002 (the" ompliance Date") and continuing through
at least the Compliance Date, the Developer shall c eate at least eighty-five (85) new full-time
equivalent jobs (the "New Jobs") on the Developm nt Property. Seventy-one (71) of the New
Jobs must pay a wage of at least $8.50 per hour, ex lusive of benefits. The remaining fourteen
(14) of the New Jobs must pay a wage of at least $12 00 per hour, exclusive of benefits.
(c) Notwithstanding anything to the contr ry herein, either
(1) at least forty-three (43) of the New Jobs must be filled by people who, at
the time of hiring, reside in households 0 "low to moderate income" as defined by
federal Section 8 guidelines (hereinafter "Lo to Moderate Income Persons"); or
cr
(2) the Developer must provide ocumentation within thirty (30) days of the
date that all eighty-five (85) new jobs have b en filled that:
.
(A) the skill level of the ew Jobs does not exceed that of an average
Low to Moderate Income Person;
(B) the education and ex erience required of the New Jobs does not
exceed that of an average Low to Mo erate Income Person;
(C) training provided by e Developer for the New Jobs, if training is
required, will make the New Jobs a ail able to Low to Moderate Income Persons;
and
(D) advertisement, recrui ment, and other outreach efforts have been
made to contact and hire Low to Mo erate Income Persons to fill the New Jobs.
Section 7.2. Employment Documentation. The D veloper shall annually complete and provide
to the City notification of employment of hiri g each new employee. This notification
requirement shall terminate on the Compliance D te if the Developer is not then in breach of
Section 7.1 of this Agreement.
Section 7.3. Job Creation Documentation. Com encing on September 1, 2000 and continuing
until the Compliance Date, the Developer shall su mit to the City a written report by September
I of each year in sufficient detail to enable the Cit to determine compliance with this Article 7.
. This information shall be provided by the Develop r and must include at a minimum:
DJG.177418v2
MN190.84
9
8
.
(a)
the number of New Jobs created an the dates on which each were created and
filled; and
(b) the job title, wages, and benefits an hourly value of such benefits for each New
Job.
Section 7.4. First Source Em 10 ment Referral A eement. The Developer shall list any vacant
or new positions with the jobs services of the Co missioner of Job Services or a local service
unit operated by a county or counties operating u der a joint powers agreement, one or more
cities of the first class operating under a joint powe agreement, or a city of the first class.
Provision of Monitorin
8
Section 8.1. Provision of Progress Information. The Developer shall provide to the City
information for incorporation into progress report , as required by the Grantor Agency and as
needed by the City, to monitor project implemen ation for compliance with Grantor and local
guidelines.
Section 9.1. Nondiscrimination. The provisions f Minnesota Statutes, Section 181.59, which
relate to civil rights and discrimination, shall be c nsidered a part of this Agreement as though
wholly set forth herein and the Developer shall co ply with each such provision throughout the
term of this Agreement.
.
Develo
resentation and Warrants
Section 10.1. Acknowledgments. (a) The Deve oper acknowledges that the City, in order to
obtain funds for part of the City's activities in co nection with the Project, has applied for the
SCDP Grant to the Grantor Agency under the Sm II Cities Development Program, Business and
Community Development Division, and that the Cty has entered into the Grant Agreement with
the Grantor Agency setting forth the terms, con itions, and requirements of the Grant. The
Developer further acknowledges that the Deve oper has made certain representations and
statements as to those activities of the Project to e carried out and completed by the Developer
which were contained in and made part of the rant Application and that the Developer is
designated and identified under the Grant Agreem nt.
.
DJG-I77418v2
MN190-84
10
?3
.
been used for the items and purposes set forth in th Grant Application, such documentation to
be in the form required by the Grantor Agency in its s Ie discretion.
Section 11.5. Review of Documents. The Develop r shall not be entitled to any disbursement
of Loan Proceeds until the City's legal counsel an the Grantor Agency have reviewed and
approved this Agreement and the exhibits attached h reto.
Section 11.6. Effect on Other Agreements. Nothi g in this Agreement shall be construed to
modify any term of any other agreement to which the City and the Developer are parties.
Section 11.7. Release and Indemnification Co enants. Except for any breach of the
representations and warranties of the City or the neg igence or other wrongful act or omission of
the following named parties, the Developer agree to protect and defend the City and the
governing body members, officers, agents, servants nd employees thereof, now and forever, and
further agrees to hold the aforesaid harmless fro any claim, demand, suit, action or other
proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity wh tsoever arising or purportedly arising from
the acquisition, construction, installation, owner hip, maintenance, and operation of the
Equipment and the Developer's activities on the Dev lopment Property.
*
Section 11.8. Modifications. This Agreement may be modified solely through written
amendments hereto executed by the Developer d the City and approved by the Grantor
Agency.
.
Section 11.9. Notices and Demands. Any notice, demand, or other communication under this
Agreement by either party to the other shall be ufficiently given or delivered only if it is
dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage repaid, return receipt requested, or delivered
personally:
(a)
as to the City:
City of Monticello
City H 11
505 W lnut Street
Suite 1
Monti ello, MN 55362
ATTN City Administrator
(b)
as to the Developer:
Twin ity Die Castings Company
1070 S.E. 33rd Avenue
Minne polis, Minnesota 55414
or at such other address with respect to any party that party may, from time to time, designate
in writing and forward to the others as provided in t is Section 11.9.
Section 11.10. Conflict of Interests' Re resentat"ves Not Individuall Liable. No officer or
employee of the City may acquire any financial int rest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the
Equipment or in any contract related to the Equip ent. No officer, agent, or employee of the
. City shall be personally liable to the Developer or any successor in interest in the event of any
DJG-I77418v2
MN190-84
13
~
.
CITY OF MONTICEL 0, MINNESOTA
RESOLlJTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BlJSINESS 'UBSIDY AGREEMENT WITHIN THE
AGREEMENT FOR LOAN OF SMALL CITIES DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FtJNDS
BETWEEN THE TWIN CITY DIE CASTI GS COMPANY AND THE CITY OF
MONTIC LLO
ASSOCIATED ITH THE
SMALL CITIES ECONOMIC DEVELO MENT PROGRAM GRANT NO.
CDAP-99-012 -H-FYOO
WHEREAS, on January 5,2000, the City of M nticcllo, Minnesota, was awarded a
Minnesota Investment Fund Grant through the Sm 11 Cities Economic Development Program of
the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development for the Twin City Die Castings
Company expansion project, and
WHEREAS, on June 8, 2000, the City of Monti ello (the "City") and the Twin City Die
Castings Company (the "Developer") entered into he Agreement fl)f Loan of Small Cities
Development Program Funds (the" Agreement"), ' nd
.
WHEREAS, on September 23,2002, the City a proved extending the "Compliancc Date"
within ARTICLE 7, Provision of New Permanent, obs Section 7.1. Business Subsidy
Agreement, (b) of the Agreement from June 30, 2( 02, to July 26, 2003, and
WHEREAS, on July 17,2003, and July 24, 20 3, a notice of public hearing was published in
the local newspaper meeting the requirements oft e Minnesota Business Subsidy Act, and
WI-IEREAS, on July 28, 2003, the City Counci of the City of Monticello held a public
hearing to amend the Business Subsidy Agreemen within the Agreement.
NOW, THEREfORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TIlE CITY COUNCIL that the Council
hereby approves amending ARTICLE 7, Provisio of New Permanent Jobs, Section 7.1.
Business Subsidy AI.1Jeement, (b) and (c)(l) ofth Agreement as follows:
I. By no later than July 26, 2004 (the "Co pliance Date") and continuing through at
least the Compliance Date, the Developer 'hall create at least forty-two (42) new full-
time equivalent jobs (the "New Jobs") on he Development Property. Forty-two of the
New Jobs must pay a wage of at least $12.25 per hour, exclusive of benefits.
.
2. At least twenty-two (22) of the new jo s must be filled by people who, at the time of
hiring, reside in households of "low to m derate income" as defined by federal Section 8
guidelines (hereafter "Low to Moderate I come Persons")
'1>
.
.
.
Resolution No.
Page 2
Adopted by the City Council of Monticello this
_.~".....-------',-,~_._.._'~'-'_.~
City Administrator
Mayo
___ day of July, 2003.
,._,~-~~.~~._'--'-
'{
.
.
.
Counci I Agenda - 7/28/03
9.
Review of si ns erected on uhlie sidewal downtown. (FP)
A. REFER[~NCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City Council is asked to review and disc ISS ordinances and policies regarding the erection of
signs on the public sidewalk in the Broadwa area of the Central Community District area
downtown. T'he City Council and staff have een lenient in enforcing temporary sign ordinances
whi Ie there has been extensive road work do ntown. Now that the Broadway street reconstruction
project is complete, the shopkeepers would like to continue to erect sandwich board type
temporary signs on the sidewalks.
The Chamber of Commerce and the Design dvisory 'Team have supported the sandwich board
displays because they support a pedestrian 10 k and character, and bring back an old time form of
advertising.
City staf1 is concerned that the signs are not Howed by city ordinances and may cause a hazard to
pedestrians. City Council is asked to advisem what course of action staff should take.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Options may include:
1. Motion directing staff to enforce the rdinances and ensure the removal of all signs from the
public sidewalk; or
2. Motion to direct staff to prepare an at endment to the zoning/sign ordinance to be
considered by the Planning Commiss on and City Council to allow sandwich board type
temporary signs that do not interfere ith pedestrian traffic on public sidewalks downtown;
or
3. Motion to: (take some other course 0 action to be determined by City Council)
.
.
.
Council Mccti ng -()] /28/2003
10.
located at the Fourth Street Park. Cit
A. REFERKNCE AND BACKGROUND:
At a previous meeting City COlmcil revicwcd the plan" and specs f()r the construction of the pumphouse
for Wcll No.5 located at Fourth Street Park. The bl i1ding as proposed had a f1at roof matching the
pumphouse in the Industrial Park. After a short discu 'sion the council rcquested that the roofdesign be
changed to a hip to be similar to the existing park buil ing. That change has been made. The plans and
specs were advertised for bids and bids were recciv d at 2:00 P.M. on Wednesday thc 2310 of July.
Four bids were received ranging from a low two hun red, ninety-two thousand, five hundred dollars
($292,500.) to a high of three hundred, forty-sevcn tho sand, eight hundred dollars ($347,800.). Thc low
bid was rcceivcd from Magney Construction, Incorpor, ed ofChanhassen, Minnesota. This bid includes
all of the construction for thc bui Iding, pump motor a d site work with the exception of the telemetric
control and alaml system and the emergency generatorhich are being purchased directly by the City and
are estimated to cost twenty thousand ($20,000) and tw nty-llve thousand dollars ($25,000) respectively.
The low bid from Magney Construction is slightly less t lan the estimated construction cost of$300,00.00
to $325,000.00. 'fhe project engineer, Jim Bullert, tron Licsch and Associates has work cd with Magney
Construction in the past and fi nds them to be a well q alified responsi ble bidder. A copy of the bid tab
including the four bids is included for your review.
B. AL TERNA TIVE ACTIONS:
I. The first alternative after review of the bids is to award contract to Magney Construction
Incorporated for the construction of pump and 1 otor and well house and site construction for Well
NO.5. Based upon their low bid of two hundred, ninety-two thousand, five hundred dollars
($292,500).
2. The second alternative would bc not to awar the project.
C. ST AFF RECOMMENDATION:
[t is the recommendation of the City Administrator and ublic Works Director, Water Superintendent and
the project Engineer, Jim Bullert ofT ,iesch and Associa es that the City Council award the bid to Magney
Construction Incorporated as outlined in alternative # I. A copy of the letter of recommendation is
included for your review.
D. SlJPPORTING DATA:
Copy of bid tab.
Copy of letter of recommendation from the project ngineer for award of contract.
07/23/03 16:39 FAX 763 559 2202
.
~
LleYlH
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NO TH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55441 7631489.a100 FAX: 763/489-3101
July 23, 2003
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monticello
505 W alnut Avenue
Montieello,MN 55362
RE: Bids for Pumphouse No.5
Dear Mayor and City Council:
Liesch Associates has reviewed the bids for the cons ction of Municipal Pumphollse No.5 and
hereby recommends award to the low bidder, Magn y Construction, Inc. of Chanhassen in the
amoill1t of $292,500.00.
Liesch has worked with Magney Construction on p projects and finds them to be a fully
competent contractor. We have been in contact with Magney since the bid opening and they
. indicate that they are ready to begin work immediat ly.
Sincerely,
Cd, SCH ASSOCIATES, INC-
. ~~.uJ
J es M. Bullett, P .E.
13045\7.23.03 ltr monticello
.
f\
',---,
07/23/03 16:39 FAX 763 559 2202
BA LIESCH
~ 003/003
Bid Tabulation
MontlcelJo Pllmphouse 5
July 23, 2003
.
Bidder Bid Amount
J, R Ferche, Inc.
13265 25th Ave NW, P.O. Box 129 $340,389.00
Rice, MN 56367
Magney construction, Inc.
1401 Park Road $292,500.00
Chanhassen, MN 55313
Nelson Building & Development, Inc.
1100 N Hwy 25, Suite 3 $296,700.00
Buffalo,~ 55313
Rice Lake Construction Group
CtyRd 12, P.O. Box 517 $347,800.00
Deerwood, MN 56444
.
11071
Liesch Associates, Inc.
7/23/2003
.
10
11071
3 16:39 FAX 763 559 2202 BA LIESCH raJ 00
BidT a ulation
Monticello ] nmphouse 5
July 2~,2003
Bidder Bid Amount
J. R Ferche. Inc.
13265 25th Ave NW, P.O. Box 129 $340,389.00
Rice,M:N 56367
Magney Construction, Inc.
1401 Park Road $292.500.00
Chanhassen, MN 55313
Nelson Building & Development, Inc.
1100 NHwy 25. Suite 3 $296.700.00
Buff&o.~ 55313
Rice Lake Construction Group
Cty Rd 12, P.O. Box 517 $347,800.00
Deerwood. MN 56444
Liesch AsSl C iates, Inc. 7/23/200
I
.-..---.- -...-..
3/003
07/23/0
.
.
.
3
o
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 7/28/'3
12.
Consideration of under round electrical con ersion ro.ect - Broadwa . (RW)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In early June, the Council had discussed the fea ibility of converting the overhead power lines
along Broadway to underground as part ofthe ounty Road 75 project. The estimated cost of
the conversion was $851,000, which did not include an estimated $100,000-$150,000 more
for rewiring residential services and providing derground connections to individual homes
and businesses. After considerable discussion n financing alternatives, the Council wanted
more information on financing options from Xcel Energy and a public informational meeting
was authorized with a 30 day comment period t get feedback from the public.
On June 30th, an informational meeting was hel at city hall to review the proposed project
and obtain feedback from the public. The mee ing was not well attended by the public, but
those in attendance did not necessarily oppose e project if the monthly fee was reasonable.
Darrin Lahr, Xcel Energy representative, explai ed Xcel's position on the conversion project
and noted that a number of communities are in ituting a franchise fee to help pay for such
conversions and also for general revenue purpo es. Mr. Lahr also indicated that various
financing options were available that ranged fr m a basic flat fee that would apply to all
customers to a varying fee per month dependin on the type of customer and also a percentage
based fee depending on the amount of electric it used by each customer. Samples of the fee
structures are enclosed for Council review, alth ugh they should be looked at as examples,
and not the final financing plans.
With the 30 day comment period now nearing e end, the Council is asked to decide whether
staff should proceed with trying to implement conversion project along Broadway yet this
year. If the underground project is to happen a part of the CSAH 75 project, a decision will
be needed soon to enable a portion of the unde ground work to be completed by Xcel Energy
prior to the sidewalk improvements being com leted. As you may recall, the sidewalk portion
of the CSAH 75 project was deleted from that ontract and included in Phase I of the Core
Street Reconstruction project to allow for this ecision to be made. It is possible that if a
decision is made Monday night regarding unde grounding the utilities, the sidewalk could still
be constructed yet this year. It is also possible hat even ifundergrounding is decided upon,
the sidewalk may have to be again deleted fro the Core Street Reconstruction project and
included in next years Phase II Core Street Rec nstruction project.
~
Only a few comments have been received fro the public during the 30 day comment period
and a copy of those comments are included for the Council's review. Approximately 8
comments were received with some opposed t the project and some in favor. Options the
Council could consider if we were to proceed ith this project is to limit the project scope to
Broadway only at this time and to develop a fi ance plan that would repay the estimated
$1,000,000 over a set period of time, such as t n years. Future underground projects could be
considered at a later date after Broadway has b en reimbursed or could be considered later
with an additional franchise fee at that time. It seems that during the informational meeting
the idea of limiting the scope of the undergrou d conversion proj ect to just Broadway might
be more acceptable to the public with a define cost and time frame for the franchise fee to be
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
implemented.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Council could proceed with the progr of converting only Broadway to underground
and establish a finance plan to recove the costs through a franchise fee to be
determined.
Under this alternative, a franchise fee could be established that was either based on a
percentage of utility bills or a flat fee qual for everyone that could run a definite term
of ten years and would cover the Bro dway conversion only. Future conversion areas
would have to be dealt with separate! and additional franchise fees or other sources of
revenue would be established later.
2. The Council could proceed with a ph sed program of converting Broadway to
underground and establish a franchis fee and/or additional tax levy to fund a reserve
account for future areas to be convert d.
Under this alternative, the Council w uld be intending to do other areas in the future
and the franchise fee could run indefi itely for this purpose. It may also result in an
additional tax levy to fund a reserve a count.
3.
Do not proceed with underground co version at this time. ~ <:>
~s
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
With the 30 day comment now over, Council needs to decide whether converting to
underground is going to happen along Broad ay. Since this is the most visible area ofthe
community and the most traveled segment 0 road, the Council may want to consider
establishing a franchise fee for recovering th cost of converting only Broadway at this point
and deal with other areas in the future if desi ed. With the City under levy limitations for
budget purposes next year, adding an additio al tax levy for underground conversion purposes
will compete with other necessary programs d services, and it is therefore recommended
that if the Council is supportive of convertin Broadway, the program be financed with a
franchise fee only over a defined length ofti e.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
· Copy of survey responses received.
· Examples of various types offranchi e fees that could be implemented.
.
.
.
FRANCHISE FEE EXAMPLES
The following (3) examples of franchise fee options: ow different ways of collecting a monthly fee from
each electric customer to raise $130,000 annually. (lfBroadway was the only area to be converted through
a franchise fee - The amount needed annually would e 30% less).
These examples are meant to give the Council an ide of some options that could be considered. (Outside of
a straight monthly fee that is the same for all custom rs)
#1 A monthly fee that ranges from $1.50 for residential to $75.00 for a high demand
commercial/industrial user.
#2 A monthly fee for most customers of 2A5/month, regardless of electricity used.
#3 A monthly fee that is based on custOJ er usage (2.13%)
A fee schedule can be created to cover the annual cost through any method the Council chooses!
':1>
.
.
.
EXAMPLE # 1
City of Monticello - Electri( Franchise Fee Estimate
Information Based on ' ear Ending April 2003
FRANCHISE PERCENT FLA T FEE
CUSTOMER FEE OF ELEC (PER ACCOUNT
CLASS ACCOUNTS kWh REVENUES REVENUES PER MONTH)
Residential 3.470 28,850,902 $62,460 2.87% $1.50
8m C & I - Non-Oem 372 4,348,555 $8,928 2.82% $2.00
Sm C & I - Demand 145 17,355.474 $26,100 2.47% $15.00
Large C & I 34 47,493,973 $30,600 1.25% $75.00
Public Street Ltg 13 405,837 $1,872 2.61% $12.00
Muni Pumping - N/D 3 - $0 0.00% $0.00
Muni Pumping - Oem 4 634,665 $576 129% $12.00
Total 4,041 99,089,406 $130,536 ,.'
,
Typical Monthly Bills by Customer Class
Residential Without Space Heatinq
Kilowatt-Hours 277 416 554 693 901 1,109
Monthly Bill $24.12 $3387 $43.61 $53 36 $67.98 $82.60
Franchise Fee $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50
Percent of Bill 6.2% 4.4% 3.4% 2.8% 22% 1.8%
Residential With Space Heatinq
Kilowatt-Hours 740 1,110 1,480 1,850 2,405 2,960
Monthly Bill $52.39 $75.51 $9863 $121.76 $156.44 $191.12
Franchise Fee $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50
Percent of Bill 2.9% 2.0% 1.5% 1.2% 1.0% 0.8%
8m C & I - N/D
Kilowatt-Hours 487 584 779 974 1,461 1,948
Monthly Bill $40.98 $4779 $61 .40 $75.02 $10905 $143.09
Franchise Fee $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00
Percent of Bill 4.9% 4.2% 3.3% 2.7% 1.8% 1.4%
Sm & Larqe C & I - Demand
Kilowatts 24 25 273 116 .290 2030
Kilowatt-Hours 9,476 9,974 109,719 46,563 116,407 814,848
Monthly Bill $493 $517 $5,467 $2,333 $5,799 $40,461
Franchise Fee $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $75.00 $75.00 $75.00
Percent of Bill 3.0% 2.9% 0.3% 3.2% 1.3% 0.2%
Jd.-
-.---..-.---.-.. .. -. _n__._."."....__..__
.
.
.
EXAMPLl # 2
City of Monticello - Electric Franchise Fee Estimate
Information Based on 'r ear Ending April 2003
FRANCHISE PERCENT FLA T FEE
CUSTOMER FEE OF ELEC (PER ACCOUNl
CLASS ACCOUNTS kWh REVENUES REVENUES PER MONTH)
Residential 3,470 28,850,902 $102,018 4.68% $2.45
Sm C & I - Non-Oem 372 4,348,555 $10,937 3.45% $2.45
Sm C & I - Demand 145 17,355,474 $12,789 1.21% $7.35
Large C & I 34 47,493,973 $3,998 0.16% $9.80
Public Street Ltg 13 405,837 $382 0.53% $2.45
Muni Pumping - N/O 3 - $88 8305% $2.45
Muni Pumping - Oem 4 634,665 $353 0.79% $7.35
Total 4,041 99,089,406 $130,565 ~
Typical Monthly Bills by Customer Class
Residential Without Space Heatino
Kilowatt-Hours 277 416 554 693 901 1.109
Monthly Bill $2412 $33 87 $4361 $53.36 $67.98 $82.60
Franchise Fee $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45
Percent of Bill 10.2% 7.2% 5.6% 4.6% 3.6% 3.0%
Residential With Space Heatino
Kilowatt-Hours 740 1,110 1,480 1,850 2.405 2,960
Monthly Bill $52.39 $7551 $98.63 $121.76 $156.44 $191.12
Franchise Fee $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45
Percent of Bill 4.7% 3.2% 2.5% 2.0% 1.6% 1.3%
8m C & 1- N/D
Kilowatt-Hours 487 584 779 974 1.461 1,948
Monthly Bill $40.98 $47.79 $61.40 $75.02 $109.05 $143.09
Franchise Fee $2,45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45 $2.45
Percent of Bill 60% 5.1% 4.0% 3.3% 2.2% 1.7%
Sm & Laroe C & I - Demand
Kilowatts 24 25 273 116 290 2030
Kilowatt-Hours 9.476 9,974 109,719 46,563 116,407 814,848
Monthly Bill $493 $517 $5,467 $2,333 $5,799 $40,461
Franchise Fee $7.35 $7.35 $7.35 $9.80 $9.80 $9.80
Percent of Bill 1.5% 1.4% 0.1% 0.4% 0.2% 0.0%
Jd-.
.-.-. - -- _n. --
.
.
.
EXAMPLE # 3
City of Monticello - Electri( Franchise Fee Estimate
Information Based on ' e ar Ending April 2003
FRANCHISE PERCENT FLAT FEE
CUSTOMER FEE OF ELEC (PER ACCOUNT
CLASS ACCOUNTS kWh REVENUES REVENUES PER MONTH)
Residential 3,470 28,850,902 $46,444 2.13% $1.12
Sm C & I - Non-Oem 372 4,348,555 $6,758 2.13% $1.51
8m C & I - Demand 145 17,355,474 $22,564 2.13% $12.97
Large C & I 34 47,493,973 $52,319 2.13% $128.23
Public Street Ltg 13 405,837 $1,529 2.13% $9.80
Muni Pumping - NID 3 - $2 2.13% $0.06
Muni Pumping - Oem 4 634,665 $949 2.13% $1978
Total 4,041 99,089,406 $130,565
Typical Monthly Bills by Customer Class
Residential Without Space Heatinq
Kilowatt-Hours 277 416 554 693 901 1,109
Monthly Bill $2412 $33.87 $43.61 $53.36 $67.98 $82.60
Franchise Fee $0.51 $0.72 $0.93 $1.14 $1.45 $1.76
Percent of Bill 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 21%
Residential With Space Heatinq
Kilowatt-Hours 740 1,110 1 ,480 1,850 2,405 2,960
Monthly Bill $52.39 $75.51 $98.63 $121.76 $156.44 $191.12
Franchise Fee $1.12 $1.61 $2.10 $2.60 $3.33 $4.07
Percent of Bill 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 21% 2.1%
Sm C & I - N/D
Kilowatt-Hours 487 584 779 974 1,461 1,948
Monthly Bill $40.98 $47.79 $61.40 $7502 $109.05 $143.09
Franchise Fee $0.87 $1.02 $1.31 $1.60 $2.32 $3.05
Percent of Bill 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1%
Sm & Larqe C & I - Demand
Kilowatts 24 25 273 116 290 2030
Kilowatt-Hours 9,476 9,974 109,719 46,563 116,407 814,848
Monthly Bill $493 $517 $5,467 $2,333 $5,799 $40,461
Franchise Fee $10.50 $11.03 $116.53 $49.73 $123.60 $862.38
Percent of Bill 2.1% 21% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1%
/ ;~
..
-22-Q3 15:Q6 MONTI CHAMBER
_, .i"ONTIC~LO
, ",' B.t.Rof
, <'M~RCE
.
Chamber Member u
IO-76329527Q5
PQl/Ql
e". l\!TIC~I..LO
~:<",",'\" BERo!
00", CE
On Monday evenin~ the City Council held public comment/informational meeting at
the Community Center regarding the burial of the Ii es on Broadway. Susie from Chamber was
there, and there was very few others. There was g information, however, That came forward.
Xcel Energy was present and gave some in restins comments regarding underground
wiring. The life of underground wires is approx. 25 ears, compared to 50 and up for overhead. It
has to do with the sheathing that is used in Wldergo d. Xcel would prefer to have all lines
overhead. It is more costly to maintain, and lI'ouble- hoot undergroWld wires. But Xcel
acknowledged that a lot of cities are going strictly derground, as Monticello is with all new
developments that are being built at this time.
When someone has underground service to eir home or business there is a small
surcharge that is attached to their bill each month. ost people are unaware that this charge even
exists. There are approx. J25 homes affected by the urial of the underground on Broadway. Of
special note, the main three blocks of Broadway bus nesses, have their power served from the
rear of their storefronts - so this project does not iDC ude most of the business disttict.
Various methods of paying for the project e on the table. All Xcel customers in the City
of Monticello would assist in the paying of this proj t. The Council has uked for a 30-day
comment period from the public and business comm it)'. The infonnational meeting was not a
decision making venue, just a place to learn about th options.
Financing options on the table are:
1) A $1.95 monthly franchise fee to all X'" I customers plus a $30,000 annual tax levy
to City residents, industrial customers d $10 per month for large
commercial/industrial
2) A varied monthly ftanchise charge acco . g to the following formula: $1.95 per
month for residential Xcel customers, $. .95 per month for small
commercial/industrial customers and $1 per month for large commerciaVindustrial
3) $2.50 per month for all Xcel custou;,ers and no additional city le\ly).
Should the wires be buried under&rOund? It' up to you and public comment that comes
in during the 3o-day period. Would the Br way area look better with the telephone
poles gone? Of course it would, but it will st to bury them and your opinion on this is
wanted. Conduit was buried during the Bro way project, SO there will be no digging up
of the roedway to do this projec1. Residents n Broadway would not have to pay for the
conversion, just a monthly service fee for un erground. If you currently have
underground service, you pay this amount thin your Xcel bill right now, even though
you may not be aware of it. It's about $2.00 month.
Please issue your comments directly to the City - fax 295-4404 or
50S Walnut St., Soite 1, Monticello, M:N" 55 62.
.
Any additional questions, give City all a call at 295-271], either Rick or Jeff.
Or caIl the Chamber office, and we can fax y u the whole information packet from the
meeting.
Susie Wojchouski
.
~ I cJ--.
J d,
96-23-93 19:32 MONTI CHAMBER
ID=76329S279S
110
Chamber of ommerce.
205 Pine Street, P.O. Box 192 Monticello, MN 55362
Phone (763) 295-2700; F x (763) 295-2705
Website: w tic lIoc er c
E-mail: info@monticellochamber.com
Respected Council Members and S'taff.
P92/92
The Clwnber has conducted an educatio poll regarding the burial of the
underground electrical on Broadway to its memb businesses. The results of those
responding are listed below. However, I see you a special session, and the formulas
have changed dramatically. We would re-issue poll if you so desire. Our poll stated
the sample fonnula submitted by Mr. Darrin LaM and also stated that the formula was
flexible and may be changed.
Susie Wojchouski, Chamber President
Burial of electrical on BI'oadway poll: As of M nday, June 23"', 10:30 a.m.)
Yes: (1) Simonsons
No: (24)
Von Hanson Meats. UptO\VIl Eyecare, Studer C . pra.ctic. Gould CheVt'olet, Primerica,
Purcell Plumbing. Steele's Collisic1n. Mosford..8 elf Tricon ConstruCtion, IDS,
ProComm, Dan Wi~ Country Grill. Maus oods. Steve Conroy, Harry Auto. Royal
Tire, Moon Motors, Oagnon-Kloubec, Ultra Lub . Perkins, Southside Dental, Monti Pet
Hospital. Standard Iron
.
.
) ~
.~ JUL-09-03 10:e7 AM
. .-
~
N
THICKPENNY AND A$SOC
612 295 e07e
p.el
.
July 9, 2003
Regarding burial of electric lines on I3road\lJ8 '.
We arc nol ill favor of burial of the electric iiI es on Brumlway. Our power worksjusl as
well whether the line!i are buried or not. The ces are bwken down to a dollar amount per
month witl, comments thallhese are $0 mini, al fix what we are getting. In fact all the
minimal Ices add up lo a significant sum.
Brian & IJam Thickpcnny
Primcric.a
76:l-295.0070
.
.
',\
I'd
, :i
.
.
.
. STAND RD
iii IRON & WIRE
III WORKS, INC.
QUALITY FABRICATIONS SINCE 930
July 10, 2003
Monticello City Council
505 Walnut Street
Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Council:
207 DUNDAS ROAD
MONTICELLO, MN 55362-8916
763w295w8700 · Fax 763-295-8701
www.std-iron.com
Standard Iron would like to go on record as obj cting to spending a significant amount of
money to bury the electrical lines on Broadway. Although burying the lines would be an
aesthetic improvement, I have to say that in the years I have been in Monticello, I've
never even noticed the lines. Standard Iron does not believe that individuals or businesses
will have a negative impression of Monticello cause of the overhead lines or move to
Monticello because the lines are buried.
Xcel Energy is the expert in this area and it is 0 r understanding that Xcel's position is
that the lines should remain overhead as these r es last twice as long and are less costly
to maintain and troubleshoot.
These are difficult economic times for individu Is and businesses. We hope that the
Council will not decide to increase the financial burden of members of this community by
going forward with this project. Thank you for he opportunity to express our comments.
Sincerely,
Bill Demeules
V ice President
Cc Chamber of Commerce
Jd
6Th
.~
CONROY LAW OFF CE, Ltd.
Stephen R. Conroy
Attorney at Law
261 East Broadway
P.O. Box 999
Monticello, MN 55362
(763) 295-6667 Telephone
(763) 295-6666 Fax
July 1, 2003
Monticello City Hall
505 Walnut Street
Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear City Council Members:
Aesthetics are nice, but not
a huge waste of taxpayer I s
Broadway underground. I
underground wires during the
necessary. I think that it would be
money to put th8 overhead wires on
have also heard that repairs to
winter are difficult or impossible.
Stick to the basics. Please do no waste our money.
.
Sincerely,
~)
s~'?PX~roy
Conroy Law Office, Ltd.
.
Id
,
..
SAMPLE SURVEY UESTIONS
.
Do you support the City Council's long rang plan of eliminating overhead power
lines wherever possible by placing utilities LIl derground?
x
Yes
No
If you support the elimination of overhead Ii es. which finance plan option do you
t~lVor to cover the costs of underground eonv rsions. both along Broadway and in
other areas of the community.
Option # 1- $1. 95/month for all customers an a $30.000
annual tax levy
Option #2 ~ $1. 95hnonlh to $1O.00/month fra 1ehise fec and
a $20.000 annual tax levy
.
Option #3 - $2.50/monlh for all customers wi hout
additional levy
.
--X-
j;l
.
.
.
SAMPLE SlJRVE QUESTIONS
_ Do you support the City Council's long ran -re plan of eliminating overhead power
lines wherever possible by placing utilities nderground?
'X
Yes
If you support the elimination of overhead
favor to cover the costs of underground co
other areas of the community.
No
ines, which finance plan option do you
versions, both along Broadway and in
Option # 1- $1 .95/month for all customers nd a $30,000
annual tax levy
Option #2 - $1.95/month to $1O.00/month ranehise fee and
a $20,000 annual tax levy
Option #3 - $2.50/month for all customers ithout
additional levy
x
);;.,
~..
.
.
~'"
-----..----...
~--
.
July 14th, 2003
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite #1
Monticello, MN 55362
Subject:
Under Ground Electrical Project
Public Comment
Gentlemen:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on t e proposed electrical project.
City Questions:
1. I could support the program if it were limited to the Broadway segment.
Additionally, The Broadway sco e should be increased to include the
Hospital area.
2. Ofthe three funding proposals I ould prefer Option #3. However, a
better method would be based 0 a percentage ofthe electricity each user
consumes; or, a percentage base upon the composite formula of
electricity used and the individ I property tax base as a percentage of the
city's total tax base. In consider tion oftms last proposal, as the tax base
increases with new residents or usinesses they would share in the
project's cost; and, the project i funded but never over allocated.
During the public hearing I pointed out that tm project is difficult to justifY on a true
Benefit - Cost Basis. Additionally, the installati n should address the issue of property
owner safety, since a retrofit project of this nat re does not follow the normal property
lines; and, the insulated wire may be covered th less that two foot of soil to each
properties service.
s;:
"'-
763-295-0611
/)
..-
.
.
.
Jfyo
SAMPLE SURVE
Do you support the City Council's long ran re plan
lines wherever possible by placing utilities l11deru:
Yes
tJ
If you support the eliminatiAf overhead Ii
favor to cover the costt~ underground con
other areas of the CO\~ity.
Option # 1- $1.95/rl). o\uh tor all cus
anf\.lfax Ie
Option #2 - $1.95\10nt
a $20.000 a
s, which finance plan option do.you
rs' ns, both along Broadway and in
11' comments by July 14.2003 to:
City of Monticello
50S Walnut Stre ~ , Sui e # 1
Monticello.
I;)
~Monticello-
"V</ Big Lake
. HOSPITAL
July 8, 2003
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
c/o City of Monticello
505 Walnut St., Suite #1
Monticello, MN
Dear Monticello City Council Members,
The Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital Dis nct is in support of removing the overhead
electrical poles and transmission lines along Broad ay by having Xcell Energy bury the lines
underground.
It is our understanding that this will be a phased pr . ect over the next few years.
.
The first portion would be the elimination oflines ong Broadway from Washington St. to
Chestnut Street.
The Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital Dist ict Board of Directors is requesting that the
hospital property along Broadway be considered in his project or a follow-up project.
The overhead lines in front of the hospital currently e at the edge of the helicopter safety
zone. Theses lines have had to be moved in whole r part in our past and current construction
projects.
It would be helpful to have Xcell Energy plan for th underground lines for the hospital and the
cost involved.
Please let me know if you need further information.
Sincerely,
~
Barbara Schwientek
Executive Director
BS:kl
.
!J
1013 Hart Boulevard · M nticello, MN 55362
Phone (763) 295-2945 · Fax (763) 95-4593. www.mblch.com
.
.
.
City Council Agenda .... 07/28/03
11.
RRFI<~RRNCE AND BACKGROU D
Following is the most recent stafTrep rt, along with a previous report provided to
the Planning Commission relating to proposed amendment to the sign
ordinance. This amendment was prop sed by the Planning Commission
subsequent to an earlier decision to all w the Home Depot/Retail B to construct a
60' pylon sign as a term of the planne. unit development. The intent oftbc code
is to provide a consistent rule defining the conditions when a larger/higher pylon
sign is acceptable.
Attached is a revised Sign Ordinance' mendment, based on the previous draft, but
with two changes. The first alters the Ilowable height of the pylon to 60 feet,
based on Planning Commission discussion. The second change adds language
that attempts to define pylon and mon mcnt signs, terms used within the
ordinance. Thc dcfinitions arc not pre ise, but should provide a basis fi)f
distinctions wben reviewed as a part 0 a pun shopping center.
The Planning Commission recommended alternative 1.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to approve the amendt ent to the Sign Ordinance section of the
Zoning Ordinance, based on a mding that large shopping center areas
require separate options for sig 1 communication.
2. Motion deny the amendment.
STAFF RRCOMMENDA TION
Staff and Planning Commission recommend adoption of the amendments. The
language will help to distinguish betw en large shopping centers and small-site
development and should minimize sig clutter in busy commercial corridors.
SUPPORTING DATA
Sign Ordinance Amendment
Previous Planning Commission agend item and associated meeting minutes
Draft minutes from meeting held on 7/ /03
.
.
.
Planning Cornrn ission Agenda - 06/03/03
7.
IH~FF.lH~NCF, A NO RACK(;R01JNO
The City has been presented with numerous reluests for pylons signs that are larger in both
area and height than the ordinance would allo . The most recent request was made by Home
Depot, and raised concerns related to the ratiO! ale that would be applied when considering
larger-than-standard pylon signage. In that ca e, the City chose to approve the sign plan based
on its consideration of two primary factors. Fi st, of the two permissible signs, the applicants
were willing to downsize one of them and con truct it as a monument-style freestanding sign,
rather than a pylon. Second, the devclopment ncompassed several acres and included more
than 200,000 square feet of building space.
This sign was approved under the umbrella of he site's Planned Unit Development request.
However, it was felt that an amendment to the sign regulations codifying this concept would
be a preferable method for future sign requests. As such, planning staff has prcparcd thc
attached amcndmcnt for the City's considerati n.
ALTFRNATIVF ACTIONS
Decision 1: Amendment to the Zoning Ordin' nce establishing a specific method for
permitting shopping center freestanding signs.
1. Motion to recommend approval of the ame lChnent, based on a finding that the larger
developments justify larger signs due to is" ues of scale and communication to street traffic
over a greater distance.
2. Motion to recommcnd denial of the amend nent, based on a finding that the sign ordinance
provides an adequate method of commerci I communication as currently written.
STAFF RF.COMMF,NDATION
If the City believes that additional sign allowa ces are appropriate for larger project, staff
recommends an amendment to this section oft 1e Ordinance. Relying on a pun analysis
makes it diJTicult to justify variations in busin ss signage, and particularly impacts the City's
interest in maintaining consistent sign regulati ns betwccn competing commercial properties.
At this time, the attached draft is provided as starting point for discussion, and is not
intended to bc prcsented as the final draft. OtI er considerations may be of interest to the
Planning Commission, including freeway visi ility, and architectural enhancements to sign
construction that may hlcilitate more attractive freestanding sign construction.
SI)PPORTIN(; DATA
Draft: Ordinance Amendment
II
.
.
.
City of Montice 10, Minnesota
Ordinanc
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3-9 [E] E. (b) OF THE MONTICELLO
ZONING ORDINANCE, BY PROVIDING FO REGULATION OF FREESTANDING
SIGNS ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OF M RE THAN TWENTY FIVE ACRES.
The City Council of the City of M
hereby ordains:
1.
Chapter 3, Sect. 9 [E] 3. (b) is h reby amended to read as
follows:
(b)
In the case of a building
uses and which, by general
definitions, is considered
shopping mall, a condition
granted to the entire buil
overall site plan indicati
height of all signs presen
here there are two (2) or more
y understood and accepted
to be a shopping center or
I use permit ~holl may be
ing in accordance to an
g the size, location, and
ed to the Planning Commission.
A maximum of five percent (5%) of the gross floor area of
the front silhouette shall
building~ where the aggr
equitably distributed amon
the case of applying this
building, the building may
freestanding sign identify
conformance with this ordi
determining the gross area
principal building~, the
that area within the outli
building~ as viewed from
related public street(s)
apply to the principal
gate allowable sign area is
the several businesses. In
onditional use permit to a
have one (1) pylon or
ng the building which is In
ance. For purposes of
of the silhouette of the
silhouette shall be defined as
e drawing of the principal
the front lot line or from the
9._:(~_0_,_
I ~
.
.
.
This Ordinance shall take effect a d be in full force from and
after its passage and publication.
Bruce Thielen, Mayor
ATTEST:
Dawn Grossinger, City Clerk
AYES:
NAYS:
!(
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
13.
Consideration of callin ublic heari on the sidewalk im rovemcnts from Washin ton
Street to Dayton Street. (RW)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the CSAH 75 project, new sidewa k was proposed to be constructcd on thc north sidc of
Broadway ending at Washington Street (Spu' Station). With the hospital district's recent completion
of the segment of sidewalk from Dayton Str et to the hospital entrance, the only section of sidewalk
that is still missing is one block between Wa 'hington Street and Dayton Street. The City Council is
being asked to call for a public hearing on c nsideration of adding this segment of the improvement as
a change order to the contract,
The sidewalk portion ofCSAlI 75 project is now included in the Buffalo Bituminous's contract on the
Core Street Reconstruction Project Phase L The estimated cost for extending the sidewalk the
additional block is $7,281,00 Since this si ewalk is part of our grid system, the property owners
have been responsible for 25% of the projec costs and the City picks up 75%, It is assumed this is
the same process we would use for this last ection, if it is added to the contract. The proposed
assessment would be $5,5 1/ft for the proper y owners affected,
The public hearing date for this improveme t is proposed for August 11 III council meeting.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Call for a public hearing on August I, 2003 to consider sidewalk improvements between
Dayton and Washington,
2. Do not call for the public hearing at his time,
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
With this one block area being the only mis ing link from Chestnut Street on the west to the hospital, i1
is staffs recommendation that a public bein conducted to consider adding this last block, Our
normal past practice has been when the Cit determines a sidewalk is necessary and it is part of our
grid system that 25% of the project be asses cd to the property owners with the City picking up the
balance.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Map of proposed improvements
EAST BROADWAY PROP SED SIDEWALK
(North Side from Washington St eet to Ramsey Street)
COST ESTIM TE
AUGUST 20 3
.
CQS1\PER":'TOTAl2
',".',' "'..',,',,'..',,'.,,....,,'..,,',..,,',.,,',..,,'u..''.'..'.,~.'..:,..j.:.I:.:~..::..:.,. .,.,.""", '.",.,.,.:::, :::.:::.:.::.::.::.c.O"..'..s....,.".::.::.:"
I~ ::1; :: :::::::::: :::::::::::<<<< :., :-: .::.. ::(:::::::::::::::l::::
3,875.00
600.00
1,350.00
....,""".................
. , , " , ". . . . .,. .,.
..... '" ...............
. . . , , , , , " ' . , . .
.......",,'................
$,ija$.tJO
$7,281.25 DIVIDED BY 330 ASSESSIBLE FEET =
22.06' X 25% ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT =
$
22.06 FEET
5.52 PER FOOT
.
.
BROADWAY -SIDEW AL -COST -EST -2003.xls
\~
.
0'-
....
~u;.
;:'"i,
~C'l
~r'
....
Cl . ;..
~-
-'
. ' 1....----...
..i;-...~.,. ..'
_ ,... '~.,' ~...t
. ....
..-.. . ~
-,'. '
:, ,
.
.
\.
. .
.
.'
'v
..
.
.
\
.~. .
I
I
\
,
.
.
\
,
\.
.
\....-.....- '\: '\'
........-....... 1"\
; i
r-...... I. \
l ,; - !
\..J \'
('.
.. .
- .., . ~!~\.'- ~ .~.:~.~ -
"j"" . ,-;;:,o.T::'::=:~'~"'''' ...-
.
\
fl
.... "PRO SED SIDEWALK. NORTH SIDE EAST BROADWAY
~r'
%
". ,~,:'~----'-T~~':
I ..;..~.~=-,.'~,:,-,..~.-~~
\ . O~'fTON s\R ....
I....~
\ . . ...:-..~\\:-"~
. I I '. ',,", ..-----~~_. ..-'
\ '~.~~~,:~">.... f'\ '\ .. \
. : <:..~/~"''''..r. \" I.~ \ ~
\ I, ". -".. '. \' ...\ '. \
T ...., 1 it.... \
,.. 'lII" ~., ~ '\:~ "l:Jj '\
T ~,\ . (.,.....
. . '"-.. .....: ~ I. ....
, ..,,~;~.- 1-" ; .....!'
. I' ,.: ~', "
\.. .- r \
I I I ......... ""'''~~,~._.'':lY
\' ,;0 ,~ , ' .~
Eft I ~\ I ~ -"'__m .._.I!~..) \.
1 i .~ ~'~ :~) ~.~ ~._~'''.'~
t. . .. """,~ v ..
IT. \.~ 1 Q 1:\.......,,,.\
...--....
~,._,...: ~".':" ".
.- ~ ..
-'.: -
...--..~,,,:.
/
"":'''</'
~_.......~ ~---
I
X
~" ..
\t .;"\
'0
\
,
\
I
"\
\
~ '.
\ \,
, \
\
?OO~O.
. .H
\
.
l
\ .
\ \
.
\
I
\
,
\
I
t
I
\\
\ '. I'
I,',
,
\
.>-
\
,
\
I
\
"."
-
,.
\~
g'
.
.
.
14.
Council Agenda - 7/28/03
Consideration of authorization to obtain otes for Briar Oakes Pond Restoration and
Finishin!!. (WSB)
A. REFf,:RENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In an effort to address erosion and vegetation issues in our stormwater basins, the Council
authorized the preparation of a report for the E Briar Oakes pond restoration. The issue are
related to pond storage, capacity and vegetati n. The attached report outlines 3 options f<.)[ repair
of the pond from total regrade and restoration to site specific repairs. A presentation will be
provided at th meeting. It is likely that some fthe residents will be on hand to provide input.
B. AL TERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approval to bid Option 1 as outlined in the report.
2. Approve to bid Option 2 as outlined il the report.
3. ^pproval to obtain quotes for Option as outlined in the report.
4. ^pproval of a variation of Options 1- .
5. Do not authorize any action at this tin e.
C.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Enginee that Option 3 be approved. ^fter examining the site
and verifying the storage, it makes the most s nse to complete site specific repairs. If the neighbors
on the south end would like to regrade that e d of the pond to generate more back yard space while
maintaining the pond and drainage attributes t their cost, wc would assist with the design issues.
S8
&Associates, Inc.
Memorandum
To:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From:
Bret Weiss, P.E., City Engi eer
Phillip Elkin, P.E., Project ngineer
Date:
July 23, 2003
Re:
Briar Oakes NE Storm Wa er Pond Restoration and Finishing
City Project No. 96-02C
The following report has been prepared to valuate the existing conditions and recommend
options to the City of Monticello for resto ng and/or repairing the storm water pond located
in the northeast comer of the Briar Oakes nd Addition between Briar Court and Briar Oakes
Boulevard. We have surveyed the existing pond, conducted field surveys of existing
conditions, compared these findings to the riginal storm water pond plans, conducted a
neighborhood meeting, and offer the folIo ing assessment:
. Our study found that the pond is bilt to adequately manage storm water runoff as
designed and is functioning proped . Further evidence supporting this finding, is the
first-hand observation made during the June 26, 2003 rainfall event in which the pond
did not flood, lose side slopes, or t reaten existing structures.
. There are some irregularities from he original plan that may need to be corrected.
. Original plans show the width of t e pond at the normal water level to be 30 feet in
width at its widest section, where c. rrently the widest open water area is 60 feet in
width. .
. The bottom of the pond was desig led to be at an elevation of958 and is currently 949.
The existing pond width and eleva . on could have been constructed at these elevations
or they could be the result of settle ent once the pond was built.
.
end of the pond that have a slope steeper than the
ere are also spots with sparse vegetation growth
There are some sections at the no
designed 4:1. Within these areas,
revealing bare soi1.
. There is a small open channel of w ter flowing at the bottom of the pond from the
adjacent wetlands which, while no identified on the original plan set, could have been
expected to occur since there is a I ge watershed which is slowly released to this
pond.
. The southern two-thirds of the pon have well established wetland vegetation with
cattails dominating the pond botto
E I 0 t"t F'..E'\WP1 WINl/OIO-53\070703-memo-briuruuks.doc
Minneapolis. St.Cloud" qua ppor unl y r'lip oyer
.....
.....
.n.
~."
....
E
-
..
.l"...
F
."
."
....
...
....
...
."
.....
..
.
..
...
F
.
.l"J
IE
F
.'
....
Bret Weiss, P.E.
Storm Water Issue Status Update of the Wild eadow Project
July 23, 2003
Page 2
· The middle portion of the pond at 509 Briar Oakes Boulevard has been extensively
landscaped to remove all wetland egetation with sod placed along both sides of the
pond banks.
· While the landscaping performed t 2509 Briar Oakes Boulevard does not
compromise the pond's volume or tability, it does provide an unrealistic expectation
for the owners on the north end wh re the slopes are steeper. Pond banks at a slope of
4:1 or steeper need vegetation with deeper root systems so that it will stabilize the
banks. It is also difficult if not dan erous to try to mow a yard at these slopes.
· On June 30, 2003, we held a neighb rhood meeting with residents to hear their
concerns and input on the pond Con itions and determine what issues need to be
addressed as part of this report.
· The homeowners at 2515, 2513, and, 2511 Briar Oakes Boulevard expressed a strong
interest in grading the existing veget' tion and creating a site similar to 2509 Briar
Oakes Boulevard where both sides 0 the pond have short, maintained grass. This
storm water pond will have standing water and saturated soils along its banks.
Maintaining a groomed lawn under t ese conditions, will require extensive efforts by
the homeowners to keep cattails and aturaIIy occurring wetland vegetation from
overtaking the area.
At the north end of the pond, which has the st epest slopes, the homeowners at 890 Briar
Court have been mowing the top 8-10 feet of he slope, and would prefer vegetation which is
not as tall as the current growth. The homeo ners at 910 Briar Court have let the wetland
vegetation grow to the top of the pond and do ot have an interest in maintaining vegetation
on the slope.
After examining this issue from the various vi wpoints, we have prepared three options for
consideration.
Option 1 - Total Re-grade and Restoration
E ngi nee r' s C os t Es ti ma te. ...... ......................... ............................................... ........... $ 97,983
This option is designed to address the residents equest for a more uniform look to the storm
water basin. This work involves removing the xisting vegetation (with the exception of2509
Briar Oakes Boulevard) and seeding a new low r growing wetland vegetation seed mix. [n
addition to grading and removing vegetation, this plan would also involve excavation and
filling on the north end of the pond to restore th banks to a 4:1 slope in all areas. These new
pond slopes would also be re- vegetated to estab I sh a shorter wetland vegetation (12" to 18 ")
mix. This work would also provide a foundation for OWners on the southern half of the pond
who would prefer to install sod at their own cost. Extra costs may be included with this
F: \ WPW1Mf 0 I 0-53\0 70703-memo-hriar oaks. doc
Bret Weiss, P.E.
Storm Water Issue Status Update of the Wild eadow Project
July 23, 2003
Page 3
option such as trees, sprinkler systems, et .; landscaping and bituminous trail would need to
be replaced due to the construction activit
Benefits of Option 1:
. Homeowners would have the veg tation options they are seeking.
. Plan would restore bank slopes on the north end and install more desirable plantings.
. Would correct any areas of the po d which have silted in or settled out
Disadvantages of Option 1
. All established vegetation would
the site susceptible once again to
Additional costs may be incurred
and property.
The pond functions, as planned n w, additional rain will deteriorate the storage
capacity of the pond.
City sets precedent in regrading p nding areas previously left alone. Future changes
to pond vegetation patterns, reside ts will expect regrading on this pond and others.
.
e removed and take 2-3 years to grow back, leaving
roslOn.
ue to damage to the existing bike trail, landscaping,
.
.
Option 2 - Re-grade Northern One-Th'rd ofthePond
En gi n eer' s Cost Es ti ma te............. .... ...... ........................................ ........................... $ 66,693
This option is similar to Option 1, howev r, would limit work to the north end where areas
deviate from approved design. This optio would involve importing fill material, regrading
the slopes to a 4:1 slope, and re-vegetatin the north end of the pond with vegetation (12" to
18"). The affected yards would not gain I ngth, only a more manageable slope so that it
would be easier to maintain.
Similar to Option 1, this work requires ex avation in established areas and repair costs that
include replacing trees planted on site by omeowners, repairs to sprinkler systems, and
bituminous repairs to the path.
Benefits of Option 1:
. Would stabilize banks which are oticeably steeper than design and remove erosion
threat
. Allow a new, more desirable seed mix to be planted
. Correct any areas of the pond that have silted in or settled out
Disadvantages of Option 1
. All established vegetation would e removed and take 2-3 years to grow back, leaving
the site susceptible once again to rOSlOn.
. Potential damage to existing bike ail, landscaping, and property.
. Pond functions as planned now, a ditional fill may deteriorate the storage capacity of
the pond.
F:\WPWIMl 0/ 0-53 \0 70 703-memo-briar oa/ov,doc
Bret Weiss, P.E.
Storm Water Issue Status Update of the Wild eadow Project
July 23, 2003
Page 4
Option 3 - Site-Specific Repairs
En gin eer' s C os t Es tima te...................... .......................................... ........................... $16,895
This option would only address those are s where specific problems have been identified and
perform localized repairs. Work would u e mechanical materials to stabilize pond banks,
remove undesirable vegetation, and re-se d with the low-growing wetland seed mix.
Benefits o/Option 3
· Pond dimensions will essentially s ay the same.
· Homeowners on north end will ge new desirable vegetation.
· Open water will remain same size.
· Pond operations will not be jeopar ized, in-place landscaping will remain in tact.
· Will keep the City's cost at a mini urn and put the responsibility of extensive
landscaping on the homeowner.
Engineer's Recommendation - Option 3
In reviewing this project and weighing the ptions, it is our opinion that the best solution is to
perform localized repairs as needed. With few exceptions, the side slopes of the north end
of the pond are close or at a 4:1 slope. The result of this project does not offset the cost of
additional grading work, the potential to d age to existing landscaping, park trails, and
established vegetation.
F: \ WPWfNl/ Of 0-53\070703-memo-briar oaks. doc
1311'0
31 V 0 ~ ). !l ). dOJ a!:lo J 310
ION }J3ro!:ld ;,l.903M:)]>-t;)
; Ag III!) I s~_o_ '"'"
If10S]NNIi"j jO 31'1f15 )Hl ,:jD sM,,/,'l 3Hl
l::I30NI"l 1:l]]NI~N] lYNOISS]jO!id a3!:l)lSI~3lj Alno It '"I IltHl
aN'/' NOISI^l:l3ddnS l:)]l::IIO ...~ ~]aNn !iQ ,1.13 G3l:1\1d3l-il"i S"v"M
HlOd3tl tlO 'NOI~'V'~I:!I::Hd5 'N'tld SIHl l'tHl AJlltl3:J A.Em:l]HI
31yQ
~Ol!j;1^31:l
3lVJS
\
\
\
\
S. '" S('
~
~
B
~--
-~-~-~~~~------~~
/
(
L
I
J
------
-~
~-
~--
\
9
\
\
\
,
\
f---
\
(-\
~
~~~~
\-------
-r
or~
)>'\
~--
,,^/
G
/
/"-.~
"''';:I!!I~"i~~..r;..._;t':S:I!:IIIJIWJ,,-=..t;i.....~~::
OOH.~t9-€9L XV.::l ":JII] 'S31f1.':lOS'~.V
OOIlrC_9L
IW '0'1'13;)I~NOW
IS30 ONOd
1I3~ V O~S S)lVO-lIVrna
0'1'13 I~NOW ilO A~I;)
llv99 Nrl '",lodB9UUlrl
OO€ BI!ns
^eM~5IH le~OW9l1\1 UOSIO 09 ~ V
9S~
...
~
19E5S 1l10S~UU!W
Lt
,(IlMpll
011t1::lIlNOJ\
~---~-
OT13JlH
I.IIIR
'f__
-".
...
~-~---
-----~~~-
IX-
Z '"to
I_d ,.-'<
J Q'
Jill
4.
Ln
\.0
~::~L
I \
I "
~----l-----\
~____~~- I
--.-\
c-
u
':::.l Si.. \
\ ...."-,
(~ [C-
is (JJ \
or;:2 \
",
('.J J
\
~
InN .~3l:l ;3111'Q
IJ\l 'OT13:JI~NOW
IS3a aNOd
O~S S}IVO-lIVnUI
I~NOW .iO A~I:J
Rt::~I~II:'~.I:"~UI~.~~tihiilll.J:J1:l':"I;::
~1'V'1J IM,I "dOJ c~aBtI
10111 D3ra/ij"l ;,,1I03)1J31-1:1
OOl~-~vg-E9L }(Id,~
OOBl'"'"~1t9-t9.L
.r1l1j .S3~~!~()SW
31'r"a
.OlollolOISI1I3l:j
;3111':15
'1jO!,;:1I11NI~ JO 311t1S 31-11 .:10 !'iM'tl ]1-11
l::I3f1l11fl !l33NIDN:3 lItNCrS!:;:1.ml1d 03!l]lSI~]~ ^ 1M 't NY I j....Hl
Ol<l\j' NOISIi'll::I3ddI"lS 1:;l]l:j1(] Arl ~]aN(1 l:lO AEl 03l!9"d]ljc '<.'1;;"
1l:l0d~1j tlO 'I'lOllY:Jldl:>3dS 'N'V''1<:l SIHl l'tHl Ajll~]:> '\/H~:OI-II
1I3~V
O"YI3
~~~99 N~ 'SIIOd.euu!1/'j
OO~ el!ns
^8M451H leUOw.~ UOSIO 09 ~ ~
g$~
....
O!~
)>\
~-
^/
z
~
19m 1lIOS~UU!W
Lv
AllMplll
0113:JIlNOW
3l~JS
_ ...l
,~
os' n Sc
j
!
8
-----
-----~~
----,......---
cD
O'I'I35IH
r-rIt
'1'_
--~
.,.
I
L
[c
2<t
u.J\-'.....
Irc
_.I Q'.J
.0:.:1:
I'
-~------
------~
cD
('J
-----------,......-
J
" -~
,----
9
._._.~\
---~-------- \-"-
U
jl cr~. \
-o::L",:J.
\ ,_....
.,-;)0::
fsl{l \
C)I~\..
('J
'r----
c~
~
,----
\
\
-t7
/
"
I _______--......................
......~.....,....~
I
I
___----------+1-
-~------
I
I
I
I
I
_____ 1')>9>_ I
~..... C" / I
. '........
I) ----_,_ I
- (; ty'---- _ I
<\J:\; : (Y u --I --'-v,
~~)Ol
\
/"
VI
c
;0111 "!)'3!l
Rt.CI~I~~..n:_~U'-="~l:~~.llI1iiiim:l!
OOH.U'~.CgL)('v'.:l .:JIII '!..al_r:':.~_s::.r..
OOQ1r- ~ 1"Q--[91
.:?~___,~!~II\~~ I
ClJ(O~ '1>11" 1]1'1;:)5
V1Q53NNI~ JO ]1\1'15 3kl .:10 SlAvl ':lH(
1:I3QNn ~3lNI:)N3 'lVNOISS3JO~d a]~]lSID3~ A 1M 'I rrl't"l lVHl
(IN't" NQISII'I~3ddnS 1;)31:110 J.ri ~3CJNn ljO AS (J3!fl11l],!jd <;'1;;"
11:l0d31:1 ~O 'NOlj't;lI;lI;l3d5 'NV'ld SIHl l....Hl ^.:I11~3;) Ae~~'lH 1
IW'OTI:tl;:)I.1NOW
IS:tla ONOd
H3.1 V O.1S S}lVO-HVIHH
0'1'13' I.1NOW.iO A.1I;:)
U~99 Nr/ 's"odeaUUllIi
00. al!"S
~8M451H 18uowaV1l UOOIO 09 ~ ~
aSh
T
:Aa AdO:) OIjO:j3~
:o~ J:)]t'O!lo:! ;Ae 03)1:1.3HJ
~HI N!)InO all Nnd
1
8
\
\
\
~
19m B10S~UU!l^I
Lt
ABMpBl
0113:JIlNOW
3l~JS
I
o 5' G I (;(~
---------
-----
------------
01TilJIU
1-
'T__
-~
.,.
z
-----~-
rJ
________-- f-~
U
cr
"7 --:L
LLt .-....
I Cr:
~{CD.. \\
'.0
Ln \
_C~I
,
_.--'~---
--------
I
L
J
, ~--
r----
\
\
\
9
,
\
\
[---------
(\
~
\
\
\
\
I
t
0'\ -----------
, --------
r--------
\ ~
)>~--~
^)
\
/
""---.
, ......
/ --......
.---"'---~
I
I
I
! ,) ';;;>--" :
/')1[; /''10 '-,l"
I! 9"
~~__l
(