City Council Minutes 02-24-1986MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, February 24, 1986 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen.
Members Absent: Fran Fair.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously
carried to approve the regular meeting minutes of February 10, 1986.
4. Consideration of Setting the Terms and Conditions for the Sale of
Bonds for the Construction of a Sanitary Sewer Interceptor.
Mr. Jerry Shannon of Springsted, Inc., the City's Bond Consultant,
discussed with the Council the proposed sale of bonds for the construction
of the interceptor sewer and the appurtenant street work. The project
cost associated with the construction of the interceptor sewer would
be financed pursuant to Chapter 115 of Minnesota Statutes in the
amount of $1,190,000.00. The general improvements consisting of
street curb and gutter, along with storm sewer and water mains,
would be financed pursuant to Chapter 429, which allows for assessments
to benefiting property owners. This bond sale would total $240,000.00.
Because of the proposed federal legislation that may affect the
tax exempt status of municipal bonding for 1986, Mr. Shannon recommended
that the City consider issuing two separate bonds, one for the interceptor
sewer for $1,190,000.00 and wait until later on in the year to issue
the General Improvement Bond of $240,000.00. New federal legislation
requires that at least 50 of the bond proceeds be spent within 30
days after receipt of money; and to avoid any problems in this regard,
Mr. Shannon recommended that the City wait until the next Council
meeting on March 10 to set the bond sale and to award the bond sale
on April 10 for the interceptor sewer portion. In addition, by
March 10, the City will have received bids on the actual construction
cost of the interceptor sewer which would allow the bond sale to
be made using exact cost figures.
Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to delay until March 10 the setting of the bond sale terms
and conditions for the sanitary interceptor sewer project.
5. Consideration of Granting Approval to a Final Plat for a Proposed
Subdivision, Kealy Heights. Applicant, John Sandberg.
Mr. John Sandberg, who was proposing to resubdivide a portion of
the Meadows Subdivision into larger, multiple family R-3 zoning
lots to be known as Kealy Heights, requested approval of a final
Council Minutes - 2/24/86
plat. Mr. Sandberg was present at the Council meeting but noted
that he did not have his final plat completed and available for
staff or Council review.
The Council discussed with Mr. Sandberg the proposed final plat
arrangement and clarified that the City Council expects the plat
to show two additional street alignments consisting of an extension
of Kealy Circle through former Lot 8 to extend to Highway 75, and
also the extension of Marvin Elwood Road to connect to West River
Street. It was noted that Mr. Sandberg would be required to put
in one of the streets as part of the approval, depending on whether
Burlington Northern Railroad would grant a railroad crossing to
County Road 75.
In addition, it was noted by City Administrator that the City staff
and Planning Commission still had concerns over screening that would
be required on two of the lots that abut already developed residential
homes. The Planning Commission had recommended that before final
approval be granted, there would be a covenant noted that no building
permits could be issued on Lots 9 & 10 of the proposed subdivision
until an approved screening plan was presented by the developer
for these lots. It also was rioted that area residents had indicated
concerns over the number of potential apartment dwelling units and
the lack of playground facilities and open space caused by this
development. It was the staff and Planning Commission's recommendation
that each apartment complex proposed be required to provide open
space and/or playground facilities.
After further discussion on the Kealy Heights plat, it was the Council
directive to have the developer prepare his final plat considering
the Council's recommendations for street alignments and screening
and playground requirements and to present the final plat at the
next Council meeting for review and consideration.
6. Consideration of Granting Approval to a Preliminary Plat, Pitt Addition.
Applicant, Doug Pitt.
Mr. Doug Pitt previously presented a preliminary plat for subdividing
two metes and bounds description properties along West River Street
into four residential lots. Mr. Pitt was now presenting a preliminary
plat that would create the four lots with two of the lots on the
river having 12 -foot driveway extensions that front on River Street.
Since the subdivision would create three additional residential
lots, three additional sewer and water assessments were proposed
for the plat based on the original improvement done in 1975 and
adjusted to cover the interest cost that has accumulated over the
past 10 years. The resulting additional assessments would total
$4,344.78 per lot, totaling $13,034.34. In addition, all subdivisions
creating more than two lots are required to pay a park dedication
fee of 100 of the value of the raw, unimproved land, which the City
staff determined at $2,207.33. Mr. Pitt was not in agreement with
-2-
Council Minutes - 2/24/86
the additional three assessments, nor the park dedication fee, and
felt that the property was once assessed for one lot and should
not again be re -assessed. It was noted that originally had the
City known there was going to be four lots, four assessments would
have been placed against the property in 1975 and other properties
that have been subdivided since 1975 have incurred additional assessments
if more lots were made than originally planned. In regards to the
park dedication fees, Mr. Pitt was informed that if he felt the
estimated value of his raw land was not correct, he did have the
option to supply an independent appraisal figure that the City could
review and accept. After further discussion on the assessments,
Mr. Pitt asked that the preliminary plat be approved at this meeting
with continued negotiations to be done on the additional assessments
and park dedication fees at a later date before final plat approval.
As a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Maxwell,
and unanimously carried to approve the preliminary plat for Pitt
Addition creating four residential lots with the details of additional
assessments and park dedication fees to be negotiated prior to the
final plat approval.
7. Consideration of a Proposal to Develop a Residential Subdivision
in the Orderly Annexation Area.
Previously, Mayor Grimsmo, the City's representative on the OAA
Board, informed the Council members that Kjellberg's, Inc., had
presented a proposed residential subdivision plat to the OAA Board
for their consideration. Mayor Grimsmo had requested Council member
input as to whether the OAA Board should approve a residential subdivision
as presented in the Orderly Annexation Area which would be developed
under County standards consisting of one acre lots.
It was noted that the City is currently finishing an Orderly Annexation
Area study to determine whether all or parts of the Orderly Annexation
Area should be annexed into the City; and since this property lies
in the OAA area, concerns were raised over whether a subdivision
should be allowed to happen at this time under County standards
when the possibility exists that the City could annex this property.
If annexation were to occur in the near future, the lots could become
difficult to serve with City sewer and water due to their large
size under County regulations; and it may be more appropriate to
have the subdivision be designed to City standards consisting of
smaller lots, etc.
Mr. Jim Metcalf, representing Kjellberg's, Inc., noted that the
developers would like to proceed with some type of residential development
and appeared agreeable to designing the plat under either the County
regulations or the City's regulations.
It was the Council consensus to recommend that the OAA Board continue
to hold off on any approval of this residential subdivision until
a complete review of the annexation study has been completed and
-3-
Council Minutes - 2/24/86
to determine whether or not residential zoning along Highway 25
is the proper use of the land.
8. Consideration of a Request to Install Curb and Gutter Along a Specified
Portion of West County Road 39.
As part of the proposed West County Road 39 improvement from Elm
Street to the West City limits, a petition has been received from
two property owners near the intersection of Elm Street and County
Road 39 requesting curb and gutter in front of their homes as part
of the improvement. Wright County will be doing the construction
during 1986, and the City Engineer, along with the County Engineer,
has indicated that curb and gutter on the south side of County Road 39
would be feasible under this project. The estimated cost of curb
and gutter was approximately $3,000.00; and it was proposed that
half of the cost would be assessed to the two abutting property
owners, Mr. Ed Lane and Mr. Bruce Wachter, with !a of the cost being
picked up by the City, and 14 of the cost paid for by the County.
It was noted that the City's cost would be approximately the same
under a rural design versus the curb and gutter design, as two culverts
could be eliminated from the project if the curb and gutter was
installed.
As a result, motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maxwell, and
unanimously carried to accept the petition for curb and gutter and
to authorize the curb and gutter to be installed as part of the
West County Road 39 improvement proposed by Wright County during
1986.
9. Consideration of Setting a Special Meeting for the Express Purpose
to Discuss Water System Improvements.
Previously, the City Council authorized the City Engineer to start
preparing plans and specifications for water system improvements
estimated at a cost of $1,113,000.00. Prior to the actual bid letting
on this project, it was recommended by the staff and City Council
that a special meeting be held for the express purpose of studying
the proposed improvments with the Engineer and to discuss possible
methods of financing the improvements.
A special meeting was scheduled for Thursday, March 13, 1986, at
7:30 a.m. for this purpose.
10. Consideration of Authorizing a Joint Fire Agreement with Monticello
Township.
On December 31, 1985, the Joint Fire Agreement with Monticello Township
and the City expired. The previous Joint Fire Agreement provided
fire protection services to Monticello Township with their share
of the cost being based on their percent of valuation compared to
the City's valuation. It was previously recommended by the Fire
sm
Council Minutes - 2/24/86
Department personnel and City staff that upon renewal of a fire
agreement with Monticello Township, a more realistic cost sharing
proposal be established. Two methods of providing fire protection
were proposed previously that consisted of renewing the Joint Fire
Board Agreement with the insertion of a new cost sharing formula
more based on usage, or terminating the Joint Fire Agreement and
entering into protection based on a contract only.
Monticello Township Board officials have indicated they would like
to see the Joint Fire Board and an agreement continue similar to
the past 10 years but would be agreeable to a new cost sharing formula
that would be based on usage and valuations of the communities.
This Fair Share Proposal for 1986 would amount to approximately
$16,700.00 being the Township's share for fire protection services.
The City staff prepared a new Joint Fire Agreement which was basically
the same as the previous agreement except that clarifications were
made in the cost sharing formula and in regards to capital equipment
purchased jointly.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously
carried to adopt the revised Joint Fire Board Agreement with Monticello
Township for fire protection services that would include the new
Fair Share cost allocation proposal with 1986's contribution from
the Township in the amount of $16,700.00. The agreement will now
be submitted to the Township Board for their approval.
11. Consideration of a Proposal for a Private Developer to Install Public
Utilities in Ritze Manor. Applicant, Jim Ashwill.
Mr. Jim Ashwill has executed a purchase agreement for the acquisition
of Lots 36-47 in Ritze Manor that abut on the platted Kenneth Lane.
Mr. Ashwill requested approval to design and install the public
utilities and street construction for Kenneth Lane as platted.
Several months ago, the City Council indicated to Mr. Charles Ritze
that the City would consider financing and constructing the Kenneth
Lane improvements and assessing the cost back to the lots if in
exchange Mr. Ritze would dedicate Kenneth Lane as a through street
to connect to County Road 75. At that time, it was the Council's
opinion that a through street connecting River Street and County
Road 75 would be desirable in that currently there was approximately
4,000 feet between intersections. It was felt this through traffic
would eliminate some traffic from West River Street onto Otter Creek
Road.
Mr. Ashwill felt that the replat and extension of Kenneth Lane to
County Road 75 may not be most desirable for the development of
Ritze Manor and requested that he be allowed to install the improvements
as originally platted.
In reviewing the matter, the Council discussed whether the Kenneth
Lane extension to County Road 75 would be desirable, as it may not
divert as much traffic as originally thought from River Street.
-5-
Council Minutes - 2/24/86
It was noted that before an actual need could be established, a
traffic study would probably have to be done in the area. Because
of concerns over the actual need for the road, a motion was made
by Blonigen, seconded by Grimsmo, to consider the Kenneth Lane extension
to County Road 75 as a non-essential through street and to not require
the replatting for this purpose. Voting in favor was Grimsmo, Fair,
and Blonigen. Opposed was Maxwell, who thought the through street
still had merit. As a result of the previous motion, a motion was
made by Maxwell, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried
to allow Mr. Ashwill to develop plans and specifications for utilities
and street improvements for Kenneth Lane as originally platted provided
the improvements meet City specifications.
12. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for the Purpose of Making
Application for the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant.
Pyro Industries, Inc., Seattle, Washington, is in the process of
purchasing the vacated Best -in -Webb building in the Oakwood Industrial
Park to establish a business which would produce a pellet burning
stove. A program is available through the State of Minnesota that
can help small industries locate in Minnesota by providing financial
help. In order for the City to be considered for this grant, a
public hearing must be held allowing for an application to be submitted
for the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously
carried to set a public hearing for March 10, 1986, for the purpose
of making an application for the Small Cities Community Development
Block Grant for Pyro Industries, Inc.
13. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications
for the Construction of an Urban Street on Locust Street.
As part of the interceptor sewer project and appurtenant work scheduled
for 1986, 51� Street from Highway 25 to Maple will be constructed
with a curb and gutter, and the only remaining street near the new
Fire Hall would be Locust Street between 51� and Sixth Street. It
was recommended by the Public Works Director that the City consider
adding to the interceptor sewer and appurtenant work project the
construction of Locust Street with curb and gutter in the amount
of approximately $16,000.00 that could be financed from excess proceeds
of the Fire Hall construction project.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to authorize the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications
for the improvement of Locust Street between 512 and Sixth Street
consisting of an urban design that could be added to the proposed
interceptor sewer project.
14. Consideration of a Request for a Gambling License. Applicant, Monticello
Legion.
The American Legion Post 260 has requested approval to apply to
the State Gambling Board for the issuance of a Gambling License
Council Minutes - 2/24/86
to be conducted at Monticello Liquor, 130 East Broadway.
Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Bill Fair, to notify the
State Gambling Board that the City did not oppose the application
submitted by the American Legion Post No. 260. Voting in favor
was Maxwell, Fair, and Grimsmo. Opposed was Blonigen.
15. Department Head Reports.
The Council reviewed and discussed Department Head Reports submitted
by the City Administrator, Building Inspector, Public Works Director,
and Economic Development Director. In addition, the Council held
discussions with other department representatives including the
Liquor Store, Fire Department, Senior Citizen Center Director, and
YMCA representative.
16. Discussion on Fire Hall Construction Completion Date.
City Administrator Eidem informed the Council that the Fire Hall
Construction Committee, along with the architect, had completed
an inspection of the Fire Hall building to determine whether the
building was completed enough for the City to take over occupancy.
It was noted that the architect felt the building was substantially
completed and should be taken over by the City, but it was noted
that numerous items on a punch list had to be completed by the general
contractor; and as a result, it was recommended that the item be
turned over to the City Attorney for an opinion as to whether the
City should accept the building prior to all of the items being
completed on the punch list.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to turn the matter over to the City Attorney for an opinion
as to whether the City should abide by the architect's recommendation
of City acceptance of the building prior to completion of all items.
17. Consideration of Bills for the Month of February.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maxwell, and
carried to approve the bills for the month of February
with the notation that Check #21989 will be voided.
Rick Wolfste er
Assistant Administrator
-7-
unanimously
as presented