Loading...
City Council Minutes 11-14-1983MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL November 14, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus. Members Absent: None. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held October 24 and the special meeting held October 29, 1983. 3. Citizens Comments. Mr. Mel Wolters informed the Council that with the recent truck traffic through Monticello hauling loads of clay to the Becker Power Plant site, he has noticed that some of their loads are dropping chunks of clay dirt on Highway 25 in the City limits. It was the Council's consensus to have the City Administrator contact either the contractor for this project or NSP representatives to request that the trucks not be overloaded to eliminate chunks of clay dropping on City streets during this project. 4. Public Hearing - Adoption of Assessment Roll on 82-2 Improvement Prosect - Meadow Oak Subdivision. John Badalich, City Engineer, reviewed with the Council the proposed assessment rolls for the 82-2 Improvement Project for Meadow Oak Subdivision. The estimated total project cost for the construction and all indirect costs has been estimated at $1,008,252.68 of which $702,104.00 was proposed to be assessed to the Meadow Oak Subdivision with an additional $162,978.00 proposed to be assessed for water main running through Mr. Jim Boyle's property from Oakwood Industrial Park to Meadow Oak Development. The balance of the project costs totaling $143,171.00 was proposed to be placed on ad valorem taxes for oversizing. Mr. Badalich noted that the City staff along with the engineering firm held a meeting with the owners of Meadow Oak Subdivision for the purpose of arriving at a suitable arrangement for assessing all the property benefiting from the improvements. From this meeting, a compromise was agreed upon by the City staff and City Engineer that would allow the placement of approximately $95,000.00 in assessments against Outlot G of the Meadow Oak Plat, which is not currently - 1 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 platted into residential lots but will be completed by January 1, 1984. The developers had requested the shifting of some assessments to this outlot in an effort to equalize their assessment cost per parcel within their development. It was noted by the staff that if Outlot G is assessed for part of this improvement project, the developers should be aware of the requirement that the City will not allow future outlots to be platted and built on until a majority of the 15 lots in Outlot G are first developed. After review of the alternatives for the assessments, motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to adopt the assessment roll for Improvement 82-2 as recommended by the City staff, which would place $95,070.30 in assessments against Outlot G with the balance of the proposed assessments per City Engineer's recommendation. The assessments will be payable over a period of ten years at an interest rate of 9.3750. The proposed assessments against Mr. Jim Boyle's property lying between Oakwood Industrial Park and the Meadow Oak Subdivision shall be deferred for one year with interest added to the original assessment amount with the first payment due in 1985. See Resolution 1983 #85. 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of Issuing IRB's - Fulfillment Systems, Inc. At the September 26, 1983, Council meeting, concept approval was granted to Fulfillment Systems' proposal to expand within the City limits and utilize Industrial Revenue Bonds, Tax Increment Financing, and UDAG Funding. The City was recently notified that the UDAG application had been denied for this funding cycle, but the HUD office in Washington, D.C., has requested that the City leave its application active in their office and it will be re- submitted for the January 1 funding cycle. Since Fulfillment Systems, Inc., is still interested in pursuing the UDAG funding for their expansion project, it was recommended that the City continue with its public hearing regarding preliminary approval for Industrial Revenue Bonds. The preliminary approval would simply authorize the preparation of the necessary paperwork for when and if the City gets confirmation of the UDAG funding. If approved, the preliminary application will be submitted to the State and then the entire project will be put on hold until word is heard from HUD regarding the grant funds. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution giving preliminary approval by the City for the issuance of Industrial Revenue Bonds for Fulfillment Systems' - 2 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 proposed expansion project. See Resolution 1983, #86. A 6. Public Hearing - Consideration of Tax Increment Bonds - Metcalf and Larson. Although previously the City Council held a public hearing on the Tax Increment District and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the proposed Metcalf and Larson office building, it was recommended by the City's consultant, Holmes and Graven, that the City Council adopt another resolution approving the Tax Increment Financing Plan for this proposed project whereby all the determinations of fact are listed in the Plan. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution approving the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District #2 to be known as the Metcalf and Larson Project. As part of the financing plan, the consultants recommended that the City Council issue the $32,000 Tax Increment Financing Bonds on behalf of the HRA, rather than the HRA issuing their own bonds. Because this bond will be a general obligation bond wherein the developer will guarantee the total proceeds, it was recommended that the City Council actually issue and authorize the bonds to be sold. The bonds are proposed to be placed with the Citizen State Bank of Big Lake with a maturity schedule of 14 years at an interest rate of 9%. The tax increment generated annually from the construction of the new Metcalf and Larson office building will pay the debt payment annually and, in addition, a guarantee will be made by Metcalf and Larson requiring them to pay the City the difference should the tax increments be below anticipated levels needed to pay off the debt. Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of $32,000.00 general obligation tax increment note of 1983. See Resolution 1983 #87 and Resolution 1983 #88. 7. _Mayor Update - Reconstruction of Highway 25 and Bridge - Minnesota Department of Transportation. Mayor Grimsmo gave a brief review of the present status of the MN/DOT proposal to improve Highway 25 from I-94 to the river and the construction of the new bridge. The Council previously approved the construction of the new bridge proposed by MN/DOT but requested that MN/DOT prepare alternatives for the improvement of Highway 25 without a center median. MN/DOT has officially ---_' - 3 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 indicated that their only alternative for improvements along Highway 25 would be to improve Highway 25 from the Interstate to approximately Third or Fourth Street with the balance of the property to the river being left as is. Mayor Grimsmo noted that the businesses located along Highway 25 near the Interstate are negotiating with the downtown business people along Highway 25 who are opposed to the raised channelization and indications are that possibly an agreement can be reached between the two groups on a proposal for improvements to Highway 25. Mayor Grimsmo noted that the Council will hopefully make a final decision at their December 12 meeting on what improvements, if any, should be done on Highway 25. 8. Consideration of Wine Ordinance. Previously, Mr. Floyd Kruse had requested that the City consider issuing wine licenses to restaurants within Monticello. A wine license ordinance was prepared from a sample ordinance of St. Cloud, Minnesota, which authorizes the issuance of wine licenses and/or a combination wine and 3.2 beer license. A public reading of the proposed ordinance was held by the City Administrator and a motion was made by Maus, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt Ordinance #128, Title 3, Chapter 12, authorizing the issuances of wine licenses. 9. Consideration of Gambling Ordinance. Currently, State laws allow non-profit organizations to conduct certain types of gambling activities such as paddle wheels, tip boards, raffles, and pull tabs or ticket jars. In order for these activities by non-profit organizations to be legal, the City must first adopt an ordinance allowing gambling devices and require licensing of such organizations for this purpose. An ordinance was prepared that would allow the current organizations such as the American Legion and VFW Clubs and other non-profit organizations to conduct legal gambling devices. Council members questioned whether this type of ordinance would be hard to enforce especially for small raffles that may be conducted by churches, boy scouts, and other similar type organizations. It was noted that although State regulations require licensing by the City if gambling is to occur, questions were raised as to whether an ordinance could be established by the City that would allow blanket - 4 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 approval to all non-profit organizations to have gambling devices approved by the State without any fees or licensing requirements. It was the consensus of the Council that the City Administrator check on the legality of an ordinance that would allow blanket approval to all non-profit organizations for gambling activities. As a result, no action was taken on the adoption of the gambling ordinance at this time. 10. Consideration of Transient Merchant Ordinance. An amendment to the Transient Merchant Ordinance was originally generated by inquiries this past summer to allow flea markets and other businesses to set up in Monticello. One issue that was raised was that if the City doesn't allow transient merchants to set up in parking lots, etc., without restrooms, off street parking, or meeting other City regulations, how can the City allow the commons area of the Monticello Mall to have transient merchants. Currently, the City's Transient Merchant Ordinance requires a $50 per day permit fee from any person or company that wishes to rent a motel room, etc., for the purpose of conducting sales of merchandise. One alternative or possible amendment to the Transient Merchant Ordinance would be to license annually a facility such as a motel or hotel, shopping mall, service club, wherein the transient merchant could lease or occupy space from that business. The daily fee could be somewhat lower in this case provided the annual permit has been obtained by the motel or shopping mall facility, etc. The Council discussed whether an ordinance should be established to regulate areas such as the mall, which is an indoor facility. The discussion centered on whether any type of permits would be necessary if these activities were done inside a building rather than outdoor as associated with a flea market. If the transient merchant were to conduct business inside a current establishment indoors, possibly the only regulations that would have to be met are that the present establishment needs current zoning and business regulations. A public reading of the proposed ordinance amendment was held by the City Administrator noting that a daily permit would be required for a transient merchant and the transient merchant would have to be located within a permanent structure with no outdoor sales from parking lots, etc., being allowed. In addition, no holder of an annual permit such as a motel, shopping mall, or other business establishment, shall allow more than 12 vendors or merchants to operate per day without permission from the City Council. The ordinance would also establish daily permit fees from each transient merchant and also an annual fee from those - 5 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 businesses which permit transient merchants to operate from their business. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to adopt Ordinance Amendment No. 129 regulating transient merchants. Voting in favor: Grimsmo, Fair, Maus, Maxwell. Voting in opposition: Blonigen, who felt that this type of ordinance would prohibit many activities currently taking place at the shopping malls for people setting up booths or displays for their crafts and hobbies. 11. Consideration of Resolution Setting Fees for New Licenses and Permit --,_ A resolution was presented whereby fees would be established by the City Council for the new on -sale wine license and the transient merchants. A fee of $1,000 annually for an on -sale wine license was recommended by the City staff based on the assumption that wine is 1/3 of the product sold by the current liquor license fee of $3,300 annually. The current liquor licenses allow wine, beer, and liquor on -sales. The Council questioned what other communities who have on -sale wine licenses charge annually. It was noted that a comparison of other communities was not made but could be researched before a decision was made. Concerns were also expressed by the Council that a wine license can only be issued to establishments that serve food and wine would more than likely be looked upon as a service for the restaurant customers rather than a money making proposition. It appeared to be the consensus of the Council that the City may not want to establish too high of a fee because of this. It was the consensus of the Council to table any action on setting fees for the wine licenses or transient merchant licenses until a review of other communities could be researched. 12. Consideration of Planning Commission Appeal to Build a Garage in Excess of 1,000 Square Feet - Marvin Scherer. Mr. Marvin Scherer, who currently owns a one acre parcel directly north of the Bridgewater Telephone Company building on County Road 39 West, had requested a Variance to allow for the construction of a 4,860 sq. ft. building to store cars. The Planning Commission at their last meeting granted a Variance to Mr. Scherer for the 41860 sq. ft. building under the assumption that all that was needed was a Variance from the City's Ordinance requiring a building to be 1,000 sq. ft. or less. - 6 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 After Planning Commission approval, the City Administrator researched the Zoning Ordinance further and found that a Variance could only be granted for this type of a building in an R-1 residential zone if the building was an accessory use to the principal structure on the property. Normally, an accessory building of this nature would be accessory to a residence but the property in question is currently vacant; and as a result the Planning Commission approval of a storage building would actually be the principal use of the property and is not allowed in a residential area. The Council and Planning Commission representatives in attendance at the meeting noted that the surrounding property adjacent to Mr. Scherer's property is zoned residential but currently exists with non -conforming uses such as the City's Public Works Garage, Northern States Power Service facility, Bridgewater Telephone Company building, and Griefnow Sheet Metal. As a result, it was the recommendation by the City Council that the Planning Commission and City Council seriously take a look at this area for possible rezoning to a commercial area. If the property was rezoned, Mr. Scherer's request for a storage building would appear to meet City regulations. As a result, a motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to deny (reverse) the Variance granted by the Planning Commission and to refer back to the Planning Commission for the purpose of reviewing the Comprehensive Plan for possible rezoning of the J property in this area to commercial. 13. Consideration of Planning Commission Appeal - Denial of Request to Rezone an Area from R-1 to B-4 - Murfin Lanscap ing. Murfin Landscaping had requested rezoning from R-1, single family residential, to B-4, commercial, a triangular piece of property located between Hart Boulevard and County Road 75 currently owned by John Bondhus. Mr. Murfin would be leasing the land from Mr. Bondhus for the purpose of establishing a sales area for landscaping, shrubbery, decorative rocks, etc. To allow for this type of activity, the property would have to be rezoned to commercial and a Conditional Use Permit be granted. In addition to the rezoning and Conditional Use Permit Request, Mr. Murfin also requested a Variance from the hard surfacing of the parking lot and the re- quirement to screen the property from abutting residential areas. The Planning Commission, at their last meeting, denied the rezoning request. A motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to also deny the request of Murfin Landscaping to rezone to commercial. - 7 - City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 14. Consideration of Planning Commission Approval of Simple Subdivision of Residential Lots and Variances Granted With It - Marilyn Lanz. Marilyn Lanz requested approval to subdivide the two houses located on one parcel, Lots 9, 10, 11, and 12, Block 1, Lower Monticello. Previously, a smaller home had been built on parts of Lots 11 and 12, but the property had never been officially subdivided into two separate parcels. Mrs. Lanz would now like to sell the properties to separate individuals and, as a result, would need City approval for the subdivision to allow a smaller home to have a lot area smaller than the minimum 12,000 sq. ft. required by the City. In addition, variances would be needed,as the existing small home would only be 8.4 feet from the sideyard lot line where 10 feet is required under City Ordinances. Also, the garage located on Lots 10 and 11 would need a Sideyard Setback Variance, as the proposed subdivision lot line would only be 12 feet. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to approve the simple subdivision request of Marilyn Lanz regarding Lots 9, 10, 11, and 12, Block 1, Lower Monticello, and to approve the Sideyard Setback Variances for both parcels as requested. 15. Consideration of Transfers from Capital Outlay Fund to Library Construction Fund. Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to authorize the transfer of $28,068.88 from the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund to the Library Construction Fund for the purposes of closing out the recently completed library project. 17. Consideration of Approval of Retirement Letter - Richard Brooks. The City Council was informed that Mr. Dick Brooks tendered a resignation effective January 1, 1984. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to accept Mr. Brooks' resignation effective January 1, 1984. 16. Consideration of Authorizing Help Wanted Ad. In light of the recent resignation of Mr. Brooks effective January 1, Public Works Director requested that the City authorize advertising for an operator/mechanic position. Motion made by Blonigen, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to authorize the Public Works Director to advertise for an operator/mechanic for the Street and Parks Department with applications to close November 29, 1983. City Council Minutes - 11/14/83 18. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Ordering the Preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Meadow Oak Subdivision. The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board through the Minnesota Code of Agency Rules stipulates that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet must be provided for any residential development in excess of 150 units in any city of the fourth class. While the Meadow Oak Project is proposing less than 100 units per phase, the overall effect of the phased action would be well in excess of the limit and, as such,the City Council must order the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet on this subdivision. The EAW is a standard form prepared by the State of Minnesota, and it was recommended by the staff that McCombs -Knutson, engineering firm for the Meadow Oak Subdivision Plat, be responsible for providing all the data needed to fill out the form and complete the process. The EAW would then be reviewed by the City or its consultants before being submitted to the State. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution ordering the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Meadow Oak Subdivision and requiring the developer to be responsible for all costs associated with the EAW. See Resolution 1983 #89. Rick Wolf ste ' er Assistant Administrator - 9 -