Loading...
City Council Minutes 06-23-1986MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, June 23, 1986 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair. Members Absent: Dan Blonigen, Jack Maxwell. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held June 9, 1986. 4. Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. The public hearing was held to consider adopting amendments to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan which was recently revised. The proposed amendments consisted primarily of three areas, including updating the inventory of existing City facilities including the graphs and maps in the plan along with statistical changes to reflect the most recent data available. An additional amendment proposed concerned changing the number of multiple units of housing that will be allowed as a percent of total single family units within the City. It was recommended that the multiple housing percentage of single family units be increased to 45% as a guide rather than the current 30% figure. An additional amendment to the Comprehensive Plan relates to the future extension of City boundaries and annexation. It was recommended that the annexation position be clarified to indicate that the City has no desire to enter into conflict and confrontation with the Town Board regarding the Orderly Annexation Area established and recommended substituting a new position on annexation that would allow for areas outside the City to petition for annexation in the future but set a policy that the City would not continue to develop and plan for utility extensions to areas that may never become part of the City. Hearing no comments from the public regarding the proposed amendments, the public hearing was closed; and then a motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt the proposed 1986 amendments to the Comprehensive Plan as submitted. See Exhibit #1. 5. Public Hearing to Consider the Making of Public Improvements Appurtenant to the Interceptor Sewer and in Conjunction with the Rehabilitation of Trunk Highway 25. UW -1- Council Minutes - 6/23/86 6. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Ordering the Making of Improvements, Assessing the Cost, and Setting a Bond Sale. A public hearing was held on the interceptor sewer appurtenant work and the Highway 25 improvement project so that the City could combine both improvement projects under a single bond issue. The work appurtenant to the construction of the interceptor sewer is the extension of sewer and water to specific sites and the construction of street improvements along such areas as Fifth Street, Chestnut Street, and Locust Street. The assessments against the benefiting parcels would range from a low of 20% for certain street improvements to 100% depending on the area. In regards to the Highway 25 improvement project, it was recommended that parcels abutting Highway 25 be assessed a portion of the cost of installing new curb and gutter and sidewalk based on the City's participation in the project. The reconmiendation was that 20% of the City's cost be assessed against parcels that receive replacement curb and gutter and sidewalk which is estimated at approximately $2.00 per foot. For those properties that have never had curb and gutter and sidewalk, the recommended assessment would be approximately $4.00 per foot, and the balance of the City's share of the project would be picked up by ad valorem taxes. The public hearing also addressed the proposed installation of water main on Chestnut Street between Broadway and River Street as part of the street improvement project. It was recommended by the Public Works Director that the City install a water line on this street now that the street is being improved to eliminate long individual services for three homes that have connected to either River Street or Broadway. The installation would eliminate future problems that may require the street to be torn up to replace these water services, and the cost was recommended to be assessed to the three benefiting property owners. If only three parcels are assessed, the assessment would be approximately $3,200.00 per parcel if awsessed at 100% of cost. The assessments would be lower if a djwf-rent formula was used for assessing. In addition, it was noted that Mr. Del Emmel, who owns property on Chestnut Street, had previously requested a lot split to create a new housing site; and if this request was approved in the future, Mr. Emmel would share in the cost of the water line extension for the newly created lot. The request had been withdrawn at this time, but may be considered at a later date. After the close of the public hearing, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution ordering the improvement. See Resolution 86-15. Motion was also made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution setting a bond sale for the cost of the project. See Resolution 86-17. -2- Council Minutes - 6/23/86 7. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Adjusting the Territory Proposed to be Annexed to the City of Monticello. At the previous Council meeting, Mr. John Sandberg requested that 34 acres of land he owns adjacent to the easterly City limits be included in the territory proposed for annexation. The Council recently adopted a resolution proposing to annex approximately 400 acres south and east of the present City limits. A portion of the property initially proposed for annexation was petitioned for by Mr. Jim Boyle, who owns approximately 230 acres, of which 80 acres is proposed for the new middle school site. Mr. Sandberg requested that since he has development plans for his 34 acres he be included in the initial annexation procedure. Some land owners in the proposed annexation area were in attendance and questioned whether annexation of their lands would cause their taxes or assessed valuations to increase being in the City, and they were informed that if no changes occurred to the property, their taxes or assessed valuation should be similar to their present conditions. In addition, it was recommended by the Administrator that individual property owners in the proposed annexation area could meet with the City staff to discuss their individual concerns at any time. A public hearing would be held by the Municipal Board after receipt of the annexation resolution. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution amending the area proposed to be annexed to include the 34 acres owned by Mr. John Sandberg. See Resolution 86-16. 8. Consideration of Adopting an Ordinance Regulating and Controlling Open Burning within City Limits. In order to provide for better enforcement of the open burning violations that occur within the City, it was recommended that a new ordinance be adopted that regulates and controls open burning that would allow for the City to site a violator and charge them with a misdemeanor. The proposed ordinance amendment had been reviewed by the City Attorney; and as a result, a motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt the ordinance amendment regulating and controlling open burning within the City. See Ordinance Amendment No. 151. 9. Consideration of Financing Alternatives for Construction Cost Overrun for the Improvement of Sixth Street. Mr. Chuck Lepak of the City's consulting engineering firm reviewed with the Council the cost overrun that had occurred on the construction of Sixth Street between Highway 25 and Cedar Street. Mr. Lepak explained that soil borings taken in the area apparently weren't indicative of what the actual conditions were; and as a result, extra fill material was needed to provide a proper base for the street. And the cost overrun on the initial $66,000.00 construction cost is now $18,000.00. Since this improvement project was part of the tax increment district -3- Council Minutes - 6/23/86 for the Raindance Property development, it has been determined that the City would have sufficient funds in the original bond sale to cover the cost overrun and additional financing at the present time would not be needed. It was also recommended that because of the extra work involved on the Sixth Street improvement, the contractor requested additional time to complete the project from June 15 to June 30, 1986. As a result, a motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to approve a change order for the construction project extending the completion date to June 30, 1986. 10. Consideration of Authorizing a Replacement of a Section of Force Main. Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed with the Council the problems the City encountered in testing of existing force mains along Elm Street, Third Street, and Chestnut Street. During the 1977-3 Improvement Project, a segment of force main was installed for the purpose of connecting to a future interceptor sewer that is currently being constructed. In testing the force main, the pipe would not hold pressure and numerous areas were excavated to find the cause of the problem. Portions of the pipe had ruptured as the result of water being in the shallow line and freezing. Public Works Director, John Simola, recommended that a portion of the force main on Third Street between Chestnut and Elm be replaced at a cost of approximately $15,000.00 since it had already been repaired a number of times and the integrity of the pipe was in doubt. In addition, after this repair, the balance of the pipe would be again retested and the hope was that the pipe would be repairable and not require the replacement of the entire line, which would cost approximately $60,000.00. Consulting Engineer, John Badalich, noted that their firm plans to work with the City to correct the problems with the existing force main and indicated that they would take responsibility for the cost of repairing or replacing the force main since they were the engineer who inspected the project when it was initially installed in 1977. As a result of the discussion and the engineer's willingness to take responsibility to correct the problem, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the replacement of the force main at an estimated cost of $15,000.00 along Third Street, and to authorize further testing of the balance of the force main along Elm Street not to exceed $5,000.00. 11. Consideration of a Cooperative Agreement with Wright County for Construction of West County Road 39 from I-94 to Elm Street. The County has recently received bids on improving West County Road 39 and Wright County wishes to enter into an agreement with the City that would cover the City's 30% cost sharing of the grading, blacktopping IM Council Minutes - 6/23/86 and restoration of County Road 39 within the City limits. The estimated cost of the City portion based on the bids received would be $86,747.00, with the City's cost for the street construction along with engineering and miscellaneous costs at $40,053.00. In addition, due to problems with slopes of the right of way, additional storm sewer in the neighborhood of $5,000.00 would be borne by the City and bring the City's cost to approximately $45,053.00. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to approve entering into a cooperative agreement with Wright County for the City's share of the West County Road 39 construction project from I-94 to Elm Street. 12. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use to Allow Multiple Dwelling Structure in Excess of 12 Units, and Ordering the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Public Improvements in and near Construction r; Arleiif- inn_ Construction 5, Inc., requested a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of one 24 -unit and one 30 -unit apartment buildings on 5 lots in Block 1 of Construction 5 Addition. Since the apartment structures would overlap lot lines, the City would be required to vacate the drainage easements currently platted. As part of the request, off-street parking spaces for the development would be placed within the 30 -foot easement along the west side of the property, and it was recommended by the staff and Planning Commission that the developer agree to be responsible for replacement cost of any asphalt or repairs that would be necessary if the City is required to enter the utility easement. The request was approved at a public hearing held by the Planning Com,iission with conditions attached regarding landscaping and screening plans and a condition that a play area be established prior to occupancy. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to grant za conditional use permit to Construction 5 for the one 24 -unit and one 30 -unit apartment buildings contingent upon the following conditions. 1. An approved landscaping/screening plan be submitted prior to building permit application. 2. Relinquishing of easement rights between Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. 30 Allow construction of 36 off-street parking spaces within a 30 -foot utility easement right-of-way with the condition that the City is not responsible for placement of any of the parking lot within the right-of-way if the City needs to get in to do some work within the 30 -foot right-of-way. 4. A designated play area be established and put in before a Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the second building. The motion also included holding a public hearing on the vacating of the utility easements around Lots 1-5, Block 1, Construction 5 Addition. -5- Council Minutes - 6/23/86 A motion was also made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to order the preparation of plans and specifications for public improvements in the Construction 5 Addition to include the extension of Lauring Lane with curb, gutter, storm sewer, and sewer and water utilities. See Resolution 86-18. 13. Consideration of an Appeal for a Variance to Allow Placement of Entrance Lights and Sign within a Street Right-of-way. Applicant, Monticello Americ Inn. Mr. W. J. Murphy, owner of the Monticello Americ Inn Motel, withdrew his request for a variance to allow for the placement of a sign and lights in the street right-of-way and has indicated he will be relocating the sign and lights to his own property. 14. Consideration of a Request to Respread Assessments in the Meadows/Kealy Heights Subdivision - Applicant, Dan Frie. During the fall of 1985, Mr. John Sandberg purchased the Meadows Subdivision and requested that the delinquent special assessments for the years 1984 and 1985 be re -assessed to allow for the property to be replatted into a combination of multiple housing sites and single family sites to be known as Kealy Heights Subdivision. The assessments were respread and the property was sold to Mr. Dan Frie and Dayle Veches, who were now in the process of recording the new subdivision plat. As part of the recording procedure, the County requires that all current year taxes and assessments be paid, which amounted to approximately $30,000.00, and the new developer's requested again that the City lift the assessments and respread after the plat is recorded. The developers indicated they did not have sufficient funds to bring the assessments current at this time, but felt that they would be able to complete enough homes in the near future to pay off the assessments entirely within a year or two. Council members noted that they certainly understood the situation the developers were in, but since they had already re -assessed the delinquent assessments approximately six months ago, they felt they should not continue to respread assessments for a project they already have done. It was noted to the developers that the original plat known as the Meadows is still the legal property description and that if they did not wish to record the new Kealy Heights plat, the property could be developed as originally platted with all single family homes, etc. As a result, it was the consensus of the Council that no action would be taken to re -assess any of the assessments against this property. 15. Consideration of Accepting the Annual Audit Report for the Financial Condition of the City of Monticello. Mr. Kim Lillehaug of Gruys Johnson & Associates, the City Auditors, was present and reviewed briefly with the Council the 1985 Audit Report recently completed. Mr. Lillehaug noted that the report would be submitted to the State Auditor by July 1 and noted that if the Council wished to review in detail the Audit Report at a later date, they would be available. Council Minutes - 6/23/86 Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to accept the 1985 Audit Report as presented and that a further discussion of the financial report may occur at a later date after all. Council members have had a chance to review the report. 16. Consideration of Approving the Plans and Specifications and Ordering a Request for Bids for the Annual Sealcoating Project. Public Works Director, John Simola, proposed that seven areas in the City be seal coated during 1986 that totaled approximately 35,756 sq yds. The estimated cost of the seal coating program would be approximately $212000.00. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the specifications for seal coating the seven areas totaling 35,756 square yards and to authorize advertising for bids for the annual seal coating project, with bids returnable July 14, 1986. 17. Consideration of a Proposal to Acquire Lawn Mower Replacement. The Public Works Director, John Simola, recommended that a new riding lawn mower be purchased for use by City ground maintenance employee, Tom Schumacher. In addition, Mr. Simola proposed to purchase a small trailer that the mower could be transported on to different locations. Two quotes were received for a replacement mower, one from Moon Motor Sales for a Honda in the amount of $1,709.00, and a Snapper Riding Mower in the amount of $1,599.95 from Seitz Hardware. It was the recommendation of the Public Works Director and Street and Park Superintendent that the Honda mower be purchased from Moon Motors in that the engine had, in their opinion, better lubrication which would provide a longer life than the other model, and that the Honda mower would not need any alterations to allow the ground maintenance person to use the machine. In addition, it was recommended that a utility trailer at approximately $200.00 be purchased to transport the mower. The present Cub Cadet mower would be sold rather than traded in. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the purchase of a Honda riding mower from Moon Motors in the amount of $1,709.00 and to purchase a trailer in the amount of approximately $200.00. In addition, the motion included the authorization to sell the present Cub Cadet mower. 18. Consideration of a Proposal to Acquire an Automatic Blower for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Public Works Director, John Simola, recommended that an automatic control device that would control the air blowers at the Wastewater Treatment Plant be purchased in the amount of $2,020.00. The automatic controlling of air blowers would eliminate Plant personnel from being present to control the air blower operation and should result in annual electrical cost savings of approximately $1,440.00 per year. -7- Council Minutes - 6/23/86 Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the purchase of automatic air blower equipment at a cost of $2,020.00. 19. Consideration of Pursuing Negotiations for the Acquisition of the Northern States Power Maintenance Building. Northern States Power Company representatives have indicated the company may be interested in selling their maintenance facility and relocating to a larger area. Since the property is adjacent to the City's maintenance garage, they have approached the City to see if the City has any interest in acquiring their property. After discussing the proposal, it was the consensus of the Council to have Council member Jack Maxwell estimate the approximate value of the property and to further pursue negotiations with Northern States Power for the purchase of their property. 20. Consideration of Approving the Location of the Sherburne/Wright County Cable Commission's Administrator in Monticello. Recently, the SWC4 has hired a full-time Cable Administrator who will beginning work for the Cable Commission on July 1, 1986. The Cable Commission members have indicated a desire to have the Administrator located in Monticello if the City Hall could accommodate her. It was noted by City Administrator, Tom Eidem, that no additional expense would be incurred by the City other than allowing the Cable Administrator to be located in City Hall with all equipment, supplies needed by the Cable Administrator being paid by the Commission, including salaries. After further discussion, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the location of the SWC4 Administrator in Monticello City Hall and to order the execution of an agreement that would allow for the City to make payment for personal services on a reimbursement basis with the SWC4. 21. Consideration of Membership Renewal in the Coalition of Outstate Cities. Currently, the City of Monticello is a member in the Coalition of Outstate Cities, but Administrator Eidem informed the Council that the Coalition's position regarding local government aid distribution would be a detriment to the City of Monticello and recommended that the City no longer remain members of the Coalition of Outstate Cities and pay a membership fee that would, in effect, support an organization that may cost the City money in the long run. As a result, a motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously carried to terminate the City's membership in the Coalition of Outstate Cities organization. 22. Consideration of Ratifying the Union Contract. After a recent mediation session with the City and the Union representatives, the City's final offer on a new Union contract did not change from Council Minutes - 6/23/86 its original offer, which would grant language changes, along with additional dental insurance and holidays, plus 60� per hour pay increase the first year and 42� per hour the second year of the contract. Initially, the Union rejected the offer; but after the mediation session, the Union did accept the City's final offer. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the new Union contract for the 2 -year term as initially presented and accepted by the Union. 23. Consideration of Bills for the Month of June. Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the bills for the month of June as presented. Rick Wolfstell° r Assistant Administrator