Loading...
CIty Council Minutes 08-25-1986MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 25, 1986 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen. Members Absent: None. The August 25, 1986, regular meeting of the Monticello City Council was duly held at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Monticello City Hall. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion by Maxwell, second by Blonigen, to approve the minutes of August 11, 1986. Voting in favor: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen. Abstention: Bill Fair. 3. Citizen Comments/Petitions, Requests and Complaints. During Citizen Comments, Mr. Ken Catton requested an indication from the City Council as to whether or not they would be amenable to amending the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow day care centers in commercial zones. Mr. Catton indicated that he has been involved in day care development for the last several years. He noted that he was in the past affiliated with the Learning Tree Day Care Program. He also noted that in virtually all instances, the day care proposal required zoning changes and conditional use permits to allow the proposal to exist in commercial zones. He went on to say that he would like to start a day care center in Monticello and his experience indicates that it should be located in a commercial zone. Mayor Grimsmo acknowledged that this was not on the agenda but that Mr. Catton had come to him late in the previous week with his inquiry and that Mayor Grimsmo invited him to attend the meeting tonight. Councilmember Maxwell asked if the proposed site was along Highway 25 south of I-94. Mr. Catton stated that there were a number of sites under consideration at present, but all were commercially highway zoned. Mayor Grimsmo asked the Council whether or not there was any obvious objections to such a potential rezoning. He noted that it would be difficult for Mr. Catton to assume all of the financial responsibility to go through the entire rezoning process and then meet with stiff opposition at the Council level. All Council members indicated that there seemed to be no apparent objection, and that the process prescribed in the Zoning Ordinance be followed. Council Minutes - 8/25/86 4. Consideration of Executing a Contract with PSG for the Operation of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Mayor Grimsmo acknowledged receipt of the report on the contract negotiations with Professional Services Grotip and receipt of the final statement from the City Attorney. Mr. Mike Robbins and Mr. Steve Sunt of PSG were present. Mayor Grimsmo asked the Council if they had any questions, this item having been discussed by the Council for several months. Councilmember Fran Fair asked Mr. Robbins if PSG was aware of the City Attorney's recommended language changes in Article VI. Mr. Robbins indicated yes, they were aware of the suggested changes and they had already been agreed upon between PSG and the City. Mayor Grimsmo noted that the process had gone on for a long time and that the discovery and review of the entire process seemed to indicate satisfaction from all parties. Mayor Grimsmo asked if the City Engineer had any conclusory comments. John Badalich of OSM indicated that everything seemed to be in order and that they were satisfied that the process was complete. Motion by Fran Fair, second by Jack Maxwell, and carried unanimously to enter a contract with Professional Services Group, commencing September 1, 1986, for the operation and maintenance of the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant facility. 5. Consideration of Granting an Advance Guarantee that a Non -Conforming Use may be Rebuilt if it is ever Destroyed to more than 500 of its Value. Mr. Mike Lundquist, a realtor, spoke to the Council on behalf of Mike Olson, also present, a potential buyer of property at 106 East 4th Street. Mr. Lundquist noted that Mr. Olson had been having some difficulty securing a mortgage since the property in question is a non -conforming use under the terms of the Zoning Ordinance being located in a B-4 zone. Apparently, the lending institution was reluctant to provide the mortgage if the residence could not be rebuilt in the event of damage to greater than 500 of the value. Mr. Lundquist noted that their first response was to seek assurances from the City Council that if there were destruction by fire or some other catastrophic cause, there would be provisions to allow rebuilding. Mr. Lundquist noted that they had now found a financing resource that did not require such a statement and that such a letter was not a necessity. He did go on to note that a letter indicating the possibility of rebuilding would be considered an asset to the lending institution. Administrator Eidem explained that such a letter should not be provided since one Council cannot bind a future Council and further, such a letter, guaranteeing a specific type of land use, would essentially be rezoning the parcel in conflict with the procedures outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. Mayor Grimsmo and the Council concurred that advance assurances could not be given by this Council, but Monticello's Councils had always been receptive to reviewing case by case requests. -2- Council Minutes - 8/25/86 The Mayor noted that if the block were predominantly residential and a structure was destroyed to more than 50% of its value, a Council might evaluate the merits of allowing reconstruction. He went on to note that the future development of the neighborhood would have to be evaluated at the time a request for reconstruction came in. Mr. Lundquist then indicated a desire to have an assurance that a building permit would be issued to allow the expansion. Again, being that the ordinance prohibits the expansion of a non -conforming use, the Council indicated that they could not guarantee the granting of a building permit, but would indicate that they would review any request as it comes up. Mr. Lundquist asked about other owners who might face the same problem with mortgages and/or building permits. Councilmember Fair indicated that it seemed that the problem was predominantly caused by lending institutions, and that the City should not be changing its ordinance to accommodate lending institution policy. Upon consensus that the City Council could riot grant advance guarantees or assurances, this issue was closed without formal action. 6. Consideration of Granting an Increase in the Individual Pension for the Volunteer Fire Fighters Relief Association. Mayor Grimsmo made an opening statement that he had attended the last meeting of the Firemen's Relief Association and that they had voted to increase their pension amount from $10,000.00 to $16,000.00 lump sum payment. The Mayor noted that that lump sum reflects a 20 -year term of $800.00 per year of service. The Mayor noted that he had received information from the Finance Director that the increase can occur without the need for tax levy. He noted that the last increase occurred in the early 80's when the Relief Association increased from $300.00 to $500.00. As side notes, the Mayor indicated that the City is looking at engaging a cleaning/custodial service for the new Fire Hall so that the fire fighters won't have to take care of the building, and that service should be provided soon. The Mayor also noted that the City had investigated installing remote switches in the fire trucks that would give them control over traffic signals. He noted that the cost of installing the remote light control would be approximately $33,000.00, and thus felt these control switches would not be considered further. Returning the conversation to the Relief Association, the Mayor asked the Council their position. Councilmember Blonigen indicated he was totally opposed to putting the City at risk to potentially have to levy taxes to fund the Association. Blonigen noted that the Association had the ability to raise their pension amount to $575.00 without Council approval and that the cash on hand would fully fund such a pension. Administrator Eidem indicated that the financial worksheets indicated that the pension amount could be increased to $16,000.00 without levy based solely on the revenue generated, by the State Fire Aid and interest income. The question was raised by the Mayor with regard to if a number of members retired at once, would the funding be depleted. Dave Kranz, member of the -3- Council Minutes - 8/25/86 Fire Department and Relief Association, responded that only two members could retire this year. He noted that the Association required a minimum of 20 years of service to retire and that the retiree must be at age 50 before receiving any benefits. The Mayor asked what would happen to the fund if the two qualified people retired plus there were some injuries such that there was early retirement and payment of immediate benefit. Eidem noted that the Relief Association was funded on an accrual basis and that there was a certain historical pattern built into keeping the Association funded. Eidem noted that it was not uncommon to create a deficit in the accrued liability when projections of state aids and investment income would cover those deficits without tax levy. Motion by Bill Fair, second by Fran Fair, to increase the Relief Association pension from $10,000.00 to $16,000.00. Under discussion, Jack Maxwell asked if it was true that the City would not ever levy taxes to support this fund. Blonigen responded that the City must levy if the fund should hit severe financial straights such that it could not pay the benefits. The Mayor noted that it was projected that the fund would not require levy; and if there was a drastic event, the City and the Relief Association would have to get together to work out a solution. Voting in favor of the motion: Jack Maxwell, Arve Grimsmo, Bill Fair, Fran Fair. Voting in the opposition: Dan Blonigen. 7. Consideration of Awarding the Acquisition of a Loader. John Simola, Public Works Director, reported that the City received two bids, one from Carlson's Lake Equipment and the other from Ziegler. The gross bids as submitted were $89,034.00 for a Caterpillar 936 submitted from Ziegler, Inc., and $79,000.00 for a John Deere 644D submitted from Carlson's Lake State Equipment Company. Simola reviewed with the Council the various alternatives that were included in the bid proposal, including guaranteed maintenance expenses, minimum repurchase in five years, and guaranteed buy back and/or trade-in value of the City's existing 1981 Caterpillar loader. Councilmember Blonigan asked what the actual cash outlay would be if the City were to buy the Caterpillar at this offer. Simola responded that the cash would be $19,634.00. Simola then reviewed the 5 -year depreciation schedule for both the Caterpillar and the John Deere and indicated that over the five year projections, the Caterpillar equipment came in at $2,279.17 less than the John Deere. Motion by Maxwell, second by Blonigen, and carried unanimously for the City to acquire a Caterpillar 936 loader. 8. The Mayor suspended the agenda at this time to make room for members of the Monticello School District Administration and School Board. The Mayor noted that the School Administration had approached him with respect to the development of the selected middle school site, Council Minutes - 8/25/86 80 acres south of the City lying west of County Road 118. Grimsmo noted that the school had concerns because they hope to be ready to accept students and start classes in the fall of 1988 and that they had concerns with respect to the delay caused by the City/Township conflict over annexation. The Mayor noted that the Minnesota Municipal Board had scheduled an annexation hearing for September 10. Eidem informed the Council that he had been notified by Pat Lundy of the Minnesota Municipal Board that they had received a request to delay the hearing. He noted that the request had not yet been acted upon by the Municipal Board. The Mayor noted that it seemed that the school district had two options. First, the school district could wait for the annexation to be complete before taking any construction action, or second, the school district could build in the Township and request the City to provide public services beyond their corporate limits. The Mayor noted that there is a third option that seems unrealistic, and that is for the school to build in the Township and construct their own sewer and water systems. Sheldon Johnson, Superintendent of the school district, stated that the real concern of the school district is over public utilities, namely, can the school be served before annexation is complete. Councilmember Fran Fair asked if there were any legal problems with extending services beyond the City limits, providing there is full agreement on how such extension would occur. Eidem indicated there were no legal problems. The Mayor noted that there was no action required on this issue, only that he wanted the Council to be fully aware of the school's position as the City enters the annexation hearing procedure. 9. Consideration of Ratifying an Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the Maintenance of Traffic Signals. A joint agreement between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Monticello was presented for adoption. The agreement calls for joint financial participation for the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of County Road 75 and Highway 25, the intersection of 7th Street and Highway 25, and the intersection of Oakwood Drive and Highway 25. Financial participation required of the City will be $13,300.00 for the City's share of the three brand new signals, and an additional $8,842.00 for the City's share of the temporary traffic signal which was installed at Oakwood Drive and Highway 25, making the total local share of $22,142.00. Simola noted that the City expects to enter an agreement with Wright County to pay approximately one-half of the local share and consequently, the City's liability would be $11,071.00. Eidem noted that the formal documents had been signed by the Mayor and the Administrator the previous week when a Council quorum could not be assembled for formal action. Not wanting to delay construction any further, Eidem indicated he sought the advice of the City Attorney about signing the agreement with Council ratification to follow. Eidem noted that the City Attorney had indicated the procedure seemed acceptable since the lighting agreement was ancillary to the major Highway 25 reconstruction project agreement which the City had already executed. -5- Council Minutes - 8/25/86 Motion by Fran Fair, second by Jack Maxwell, and carried unanimously to ratify the traffic signal agreement with the State of Minnesota. See Resolution 86-20. 10. Consideration of Granting Final Approval to the First Phase of a Planned Unit Development Known as Victoria Square. Mike Reher was present to present a final plat for the Planned Unit Development to be known as Victoria Square. Administrator Eidem explained to the City Council that this PUD had already been given final approval by the City Council, but due to the time lapse, it required additional approval. He noted that the only significant change from when the PUD was originally approved was with respect to timing and phasing. Mr. Reher would like to go to final platting and recording on Block 1, but leave Outlots A-E at the preliminary approval stage with final recording to come in development stages. Mayor Grimsmo asked if the PUD could still handle a commercial day care center, and Mr. Reher responded that it could in Phase II. Motion by Councilmember Bill Fair to grant preliminary approval to the Planned Unit Development known as Victoria Square. Second by Jack Maxwell. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Fran Fair, second by Bill Fair, and carried unanimously to grant final approval to Block 1, Lots 1-55, in the PUD, Victoria Square, contingent upon final conformance with engineering design standards. 11. Consideration of Granting a Variance for a Reduction in Required Parking Spaces for the Monticello VFW. The VFW has submitted a request for a variance to allow a parking lot providing 28 spaces less than is required. The VFW had not had a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The VFW had presented to City staff a statement signed by all adjacent property owners within 350 feet waiving their right to a public hearing in front of the Planning Commission. Councilmember Fair expressed some concern that the statement of waiver did not address the variance in detail, but rather talked about the proposal of the VFW to expand their building. He stated that the property owners were asked to sign a statement waiving objections to the VFW's building expansion. Mayor Grimsmo asked the VFW representatives if the adjacent property owners knew, in fact, what they were waiving. Sandy Tanner, representing the VFW, indicated yes, she told them what the variance request was about. She indicated that Gary Anderson, City zoning Administrator, had instructed her on how to go through this process. City Administrator Eidem indicated that the point raised by Councilmember Bill Fair was significant. He noted that on one earlier occasion, in order to facilitate the parking lot expansion for the Hospital District, the City staff had attempted to streamline the process by utilizing statements of waiver. He noted that the earlier attempt was, in his estimation, reasonable since the majority of adjacent property owners in the Hospital District issue were party to the construction activity. Eidem admitted that it was a side stepping of the formal procedure, and the process had now come back to haunt City staff. Council Minutes - 8/25/86 Eidem noted that this was not meant to be an option for other property owners, but simply a reaction to an emergency situation on behalf of the Hospital District. Motion by Blonigen, second by Bill Fair, to send the entire issue back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Zoning Ordinance. Voting in favor: Dan Blonigen, Bill Fair, Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell. Voting in Opposition: Mayor Grimsmo. 12. Consideration of Bills for the Month of August. Motion by Fran Fair, second by Dan Blonigen, and carried unanimously to pay all bills except final payment to Fullerton Lumber for the construction of the City Fire Hall. 13. Consideration of a Proposal to Extend Sewer and Water Utilities Down Minnesota Street. John Simola, Public Works Director, explained that the City anticipated receiving a petition signed by 1000 of the affected property owners requesting the installation of sewer and water on Minnesota Street. Tom Holthaus, one of the affected property owners, indicated that they had not yet received 100% of the signatures. Eidem informed the Council that without 100% of signatures, the Council was not in conformance with Minnesota Chapter 429 and no project decision could be made at this time. Simola did ask that the Council consider the design standard at this time since a number of property owners in the Orderly Annexation Area south of I-94 were present to hear discussion. Simola stated that the question at hand was whether or not to install the sewer line at a depth sufficient enough to allow the extension beyond I-94 and into the OAA in the future should annexation occur, or should the line be installed at a much shallower depth for the exclusive benefit of the property owners submitting the petition. John Badalich indicated that the assessable portion of the sewer would cost approximately $13,000.00, while the City cost could be substantial based on the depth and the amount of dewatering required. The decision the Council is faced with is whether or not to incur the added City cost for future re -assessment to properties that may benefit after annexation. Several OAA property owners indicated that before making any decision or agreeing to anything, they would like to know the amount of the assessment. Eidem indicated that there would be no assessment at this time, but simply that City cost would be recovered in the form of an assessment when the services actually were extended into the OAA. No individual assessments had been computed or realistically could be computed at this time. Stuart Hoglund and Mel Wolters felt that the City Council should install the proposed sewer line at the shallow depth thereby keeping it cheapest. Eidem noted that such an action would necessitate a brand new sewer line in the event there was an extension into the OAA. Eidem stressed that the only ISM Council Minutes - 8/25/86 question that really ought to be addressed at this point is whether or not the property owners currently in the OAA would be receptive to eventually being served in the future, or would they be opponents to annexation for an extended period of years. Eidem noted that the City ought not consider extending any lines if the City would meet with substantial opposition to the eventual growth. John Michaelis, a property owner in the OAA, indicated he had talked to some neighboring property owners, and that their position differed from that of Hoglund and Mel Wolters. He indicated that he hoped the City would install the line at this time to accommodate eventual expansion, hopefully in the near future. The Mayor concluded the discussion by saying that perhaps the completed petition would be available at the September 8 meeting, and that perhaps additional information might be available after the annexation hearing. He noted that since the Council could not take action, he would close this issue. 14. John Simola provided a brief update on the softball field construction. He noted that the construction goal was to begin the seeding as of September 10. 15. There being no other business, the Mayor adjourned the meeting. Thomas A. Eidem City Administrator