Loading...
City Council Minutes 07-08-1991MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, July 8, 1991 - 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: Clint Herbst 2. Approval of minutes. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held June 24, 1991. Voting in favor of the motion: Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Ken Maus. Abstaining: Dan Blonigen. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. Mickey Peterson, manager of the Professional Approach Beauty Salon, informed Council that she was treated poorly when dealing with a problem with her water bill. She indicated that she will be sending a letter that outlines the problem in detail. She noted that City staff involved with customer service should be required to take classes to develop public relations skills. Ken Maus thanked Peterson for her comments and noted the importance of bringing problems to the attention of Council. Rick Wolfsteller indicated that as soon as he received the letter from Peterson that he would look into the matter and report back to Council. 4. Consideration of reviewing the Economic Development Authority's (EDA) approval of Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Loan No. 003 for Aroplax Corporation. 011ie Koropchak reported that Aroplax Corporation has applied for a loan in the amount of $30,000 to assist with the purchase of machinery and equipment. The interest rate on the loan is 6.5% to be amortized over a 7 -year period, and the loan approval is subject to Companion Bank and Small Business Administration funding of the remaining project costs. Koropchak indicated that the facility will be approximately 23,000 sq ft and will bring 25 new jobs to the community. In her summary, Koropchak noted that the Economic Development Authority reviewed the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund Page 1 Council Minutes - 7/8/91 Guidelines and voted to approve the loan request, as the request meets all public purpose criteria noted in the fund guidelines. Ken Maus asked if the proposed loan is a result of a gap in financing, or was the loan being provided as an incentive to attract Aroplax to Monticello. Koropchak responded by saying that although the financing gap is difficult to completely prove, the financial statement indicated that the $30,000 injected into the plan, although a small part of the overall finance plan, provided an important source of funds. Council took no action on the matter; therefore, the Economic Development Authority's recommendation is supported by the City Council, and the loan may be issued. 5. Consideration of adopting a resolution calling for a public hearing on the proposed modification by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, the modification of the tax increment financing plans for Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1-1 through 1-12, and the adoption of the tax increment finance plan for Tax Increment Financing District 1-13, all located within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (Shingobee TIF Planj. After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Brad Fyle to adopt a resolution calling for the public hearing on July 22, 1991. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 91-23. 6. Consideration of renewing animal services agreement --Patty Salzwedel. Rick Wolfsteller reported that since July of 1988 the City has had a contract arrangement with Patty Salzwedel of Monticello to perform the animal control functions for the City, including the daily dog pound maintenance. Both the pound and the animal control agreements were for a one-year time period and were automatically renewable for additional one-year terms. Since the agreement is up for renewal in July, the contract and her compensation should be reviewed by Council. Wolfsteller went on to note that Patty and Tracy have been doing an excellent job in both cleaning and maintenance of the dog pound facility and have provided excellent animal control services. City staff has had very few complaints regarding animal control services, and Patty has been instrumental in recommending numerous changes to our animal control ordinance, Page 2 Council Minutes - 7/8/91 including a requirement for dog license renewals and vaccination for rabies. Patty has also organized and held two rabies clinics for the Monticello public, which have seen favorable response from our citizens and has also resulted in increasing the number of licenses issued. Patty's record keeping has been excellent with well-maintained and accurate information regarding impoundment and retrieval of animals from the other 11 cities and townships that contract with the City of Monticello for using our shelter. Dan Blonigen concurred that Salzwedel is doing a good job and noted that an annual increase is appropriate. Council discussed raising the price charged to other cities for use of the Monticello dog pound. Salzwedel noted that the present charge of $7.25 per day is probably an average charge or slightly below that which other similar facilities charge. Ken Maus recommended that City staff do additional research regarding what other nearby dog pound facilities charge prior to adjusting the current $7.25 per day charge. After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Brad Fyle to adjust the monthly compensation for cleaning the pound facilities from $272.50 per month to $300 per month, and increase the animal control service fee from $654 to $700 per month. Motion carried unanimously. 7. _Consideration of proposal for architectural engineering services for developing long and short-range building requirements and space needs for the public works department. John Simola reported that over the past several months City staff has been preparing site plans outlining options for development of the public works facility located on Golf Course Road. Footprint drawings have been prepared of the existing buildings, and staff has looked at space requirements of existing equipment as well as future needs. In addition, the public works department has looked into the possibility of adding on to the existing masonry public works building along with various combinations of removing the old pole building or letting it remain. There appear to be a great number of options in regard to building additions, none of which appear to solve all of our needs. Simola went on to suggest that the City Council enlist the assistance of the engineering firm, TKDA, to assist in selecting a cost-efficient alternative that would address all Page 3 Council Minutes - 7/8/91 of the work study issues. TKDA would also prepare conceptual site and floor plans for an option to be selected by City staff and Council. Simola noted that TKDA has given us an attractive lump sum price of $2,750 for the study with an estimated $150 additional cost for mileage and reproduction costs. This item is also budgeted in the 1991 budget at an amount of $4,500. Ken Maus emphasized the importance of developing a functional facility rather than a hodge podge of unorganized working spaces. In addition, he reviewed the importance of creating a green or site barrier between the public works facility and the adjacent residential area. Dan Blonigen suggested that the City Council and City staff can work together to best determine the needs of the public works department and that an architect will be needed only at such time that the building is designed. The representative from TKDA noted that some of the issues that would be addressed in the study would be 1) the viability of the existing site; is this the proper spot for the location of the public works facilities given the future growth of the community; 2) is it possible to split the public works facility into two locations, one near the industrial park and the other location to remain on Golf Course Road; or 3) maybe an entire new site is the best option given the residential character of the area where the existing public works buildings are located and given the development pattern in the community. Dan Blonigen noted that it's not that complicated. A consultant isn't necessary to determine an answer to the issues noted. He noted he would like to serve on any committee addressing the public works facility issues. Brad Fyle concurred that maybe a committee could adequately address the issues. John Simola responded by saying that the quote submitted by TKDA to do the study is an attractive price, but he is certainly open to addressing the issues via a committee made up of Council and staff. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Ken Maus to table a decision to authorize TKDA to work with City staff toward development of a public works Page 4 Council Minutes - 7/8/91 facilities plan and appoint a committee made up of Dan Blonigen, Brad Fyle, and City staff members to review public works facility preliminary issues and report back to Council. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Consideration of expansion of City Hall parking lot. John Simola reported that at the last meeting it was the consensus of City Council that the preferred parking lot expansion should follow plan U. Suggestions made were to delete the westerly circular driveway which created the island around the transformer and delete the center island on which the existing locust tree was located. Simola also noted in regard to internal landscape areas or island delineators, the City ordinance requires internal island delineators equal in size to a single parking space and bounded by concrete curbing; and in any parking lot over 5,000 sq ft, the area that was originally on plan #3 around the transformer and locust tree island would have met the ordinance requirements for internally landscaped island delineators, as they were part of the parking lot and were curbed. If all the islands are to be deleted from the parking lot, we would be required to obtain a variance and state the non-financial hardship under which the variance should be granted. Council discussed the island delineator issue and indicated that City staff should prepare an ordinance amendment which would eliminate the need for island delineators on smaller parking lots. Ken Maus noted that although the Pratt house directly to the south of City Hall is better than the Cole house, the best parking lot plan and the plan that is in the long-range best interest of the City is to place the lot directly adjacent to the existing parking area per plan #3, which would result in the removal of the Pratt house. In the meantime, the City can consider refurbishing the Cole house. Dan Blonigen noted that he is opposed to taking out the Pratt house to the south; however, he concurred that in terms of parking plans, alternative #3 is the better plan. City Engineer, Bret Weiss, noted that the parking lot project could be combined with the project currently out for bids, which could result in the City obtaining a favorable price. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to adopt alternative #3A. Staff is directed to obtain quotes on the cost to refurbish the Cole Page 5 f 10. Council Minutes - 7/8/91 house and to explore options for demolition or moving of the Pratt house and remove the house accordingly. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of improvements or replacement of the information center/museum/public restrooms. John Simola reported that City Council has asked staff to examine the existing information center/museum building to see if it could be remodeled and added onto with new restrooms to serve as not only the information center but as offices for the Chamber of Commerce. Simola reported that City staff has examined the building site and found that the existing information building is structurally sound and could be added onto. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to develop preliminary plans for constructing office space through demolition of the existing restrooms and refurbishment and remodeling of the information center for use by the Chamber of Commerce. Plans are to be developed with the assistance of an ad hoc committee, including Shirley Anderson and Clint Herbst, with final architectural drawings completed by OSM after the preliminary plans have been approved by Council. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of concurrence with Wright County to post "no parking" along County Road 117 east of Highway 25. John Simola reported that at the last Council meeting, staff presented information to the City Council regarding Wright County's proposal to post "no parking" signs on County Road 117 just east of Highway 25. Simola noted that staff continues to recommend that "no parking" signs be installed in this area, as parking of large trucks along County Road 117 on the paved shoulders conflicts with the bicycle and pedestrian traffic in the area. John Simola reported that property owners in the area were contacted, and only one of the property owners indicated that the "no parking" signs are not necessary. After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Brad Fyle to concur with Wright County on the posting of "no parking" along County Road 117 east of Highway 25. Page 6 Council Minutes - 7/8/91 11. Other matters. Ken Maus noted site line problems at certain intersections in the community, most noticeably the intersection of River Street and Sandy Lane. He mentioned that lilac bushes create a site line problem and, therefore, they may need to be trimmed back. Dan Blonigen noted the same problem at Fourth Street and Vine. Ken Maus suggested that the Sheriff's Department look at those intersections and provide input. John Simola reported that he would review the site lines at the intersections and contact property owners affected. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 7