IDC Agenda 02-06-2007•
•
~
~
~
O
~ N
d
d
>
~
_ +~
X
{~,~
'o
U
o
U
a
~
°
~ C
a~
Q
a°i
a
•m
a°i
_o
0
~
~ c N
m ~
cti p
d m °
m N
~ E
S ~ "
°~ _
~ c
c c
~ m
m ~
r
a
H a
~
~ °
~ c c`o U
~ s
• c
a E
~ ~
•~ _
' o m~ v
~ •` = 8 ~ a~
w ~
E
°
W H
~
~ m
3
` g ?:
~
"
m ~
~
C w
d a ~
a d
a° m ;
c
a° a° ~ v
O m
is g ~ c
a m p m
`
° ~ ~
c
i
> U> ~ Y ~ a a` °
a z~ ~
~ z a
~
^
t
~
~
r.
~ `. ._..,_ a'~ ..
o _ ..
-"' ~ k
V ~ ~
:;
c
;,~ ~. ~ ~/
{ .:.
_. .~ ~ w r
{ s
x --~ ,~
' //
:,
~ ~L. 9 {y~~ rte.
(j ~ . ~'
Y :~-~
~ ~ -~ ; ,
_ f~
', ~~ .
Y-
~ •+ ~ • ~
^
r. ,.. ~ ~~~:a ,~J' ^ ~ -, tee.
I ~
,..
:fir ~ 4I~. ~ ,`~ ~ ~ ~ ~, T~ );', ~ .~~
~,
~..~:I~ ^ . ....
r' . <<<
__
P~ V^ ~ ...
Y' ~ `-
~ ~
``__s~..
a _ __ _~ .
_,. , a~ _
}'! Y ~ Z
[tR ~ , , ~ ~,~..~
,~ ~ ~ `~ ~'
. .~ • !
,.
~..~ ~ yy ~ .r ' 3 ~
T ~o
• r _;,, r
~' ~ .. s ! o
.~ ~. ,.,
"'
... _>
_.. r''
# G
.y~
_~,
~,.~ ~ e ~,
~lermer~ts of a Yis~on Statement
~ fear Monticello
Monticello will be the primary regional center between
the Twin Cities and St. Cloud metropolitan areas.
Monticello will be a center of employment, containing a wide range of
employment opportunities with a growing emphasis on jobs at higher wage
levels that allow more people to live and work in Monticello.
A primary focus will be to take advantage of a municipal fiber optic system to
°`~~ offer a unique technological advantage in all forms of development.
'~`
Monticello seeks to provide housing choices that fit all stages of a person's life
cycle.
• Looking to 2030, Monticello seeks to expand the supply of "move up"
housing that allows people to upgrade their home without leaving the
community.
• As the population ages, the elderly will be drawn to Monticello because
of the housing and health care options.
Monticello will conrinue to provide the types and quality of services and
amenities required to attract and keep people in Monticello. Key among
these factors are:
• Monticello will be the primary health care center between the Twin Cities
and St. Cloud metropolitan areas.
• Monticello will have an excellent public education system. N~`N ~"""~`~``~'
• Monticello will work collaboratively with other stakeholders to provide
an excellent system of parks, trails and recrearion facilities.
• Monticello will take advantage of unique amenities such as the Mississippi
River and conversion of YMCA Camp Manitou as a regional park.
• Downtown Monticello will be a successful commercial district, a key part
of community identity and a link with the riverfront.
- ~~ ~ c ow.vr v r ~'''c-
DRAFT-February 1,1007
Council Agenda:l /22/07
,Accent Feasibility Reuort and Set Public Hearing Date for the Reconstruction of
Chelsea Road (CSAH 18 to Fallon Avenue) (Gifu of Monticello Project No 2006-
• 31C~ (WSB)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Included in your packet is a copy of the feasibility report addressing the reconstruction of
Chelsea Road from CSAH 18 to Fallon Avenue.' As part of the overall interchange
reconstruction project, the reconstruction of Chelsea Road to an urban section was
delayed unti12007. Construction was delayed since Chelsea Road would be used as part
of the detour during some of the CSAH 1$ construction. The overall agreement with the
Monticello Industrial Park included a provision to commence reconstruction of Chelsea
Road from CSAH 18 to Fallon Avenue n_o later than the start of tale 2007 construction
season. As development continues in this area of the City, there is a need to upgrade the
street and utility systems along the roadway. We have met. with all of the property
owners along Chelsea Road that would be assessed for the project, including the alternate
project, to describe theproposed project to them and obtain their feedback. Attached is a
summary of their .comments. Prior discussions with the school district were initiated with
the interchange project and staff is in the process of contacting them.
As an alternate, .the feasibility report includes reconstructing and realigning the Chelsea
Road/Fallon Avenue intersection. Realigning the intersection could improve the
. intersection geometrics by creating 90 degree angles at the street approaches to reduce
the curves entering the intersection and improve visibility and. turning movements.
Realigning the intersection now would allow for minimal disturbances to traffic flow
through the intersection during construction bf the future Fallon Avenue overpass and/or
the future extension of the deep. trunk sanitary sewer along Fallon Avenue to the south.
In addition, storm sewer will be extended through the intersection to the City's pond at
the reservoir site with the project, and it would be beneficial to realign the intersection at
this time and only reconstruct the road one time, since. the roadway will be excavated
with the storm sewer construction. Realigning the intersection now would result in a cost
savings of not having to reconstruct the roadway in the future for the Fallon Avenue
overpass or the trunk sanitary sewer extension south along Fallon Avenue.
The proposed infrastructure improvements would include reconstructing approximately
3,300 feet of Chelsea Road from where it was improved with the interchange project,
approximately 800 feet west of CSAH 18, to Fallon Avenue with curb and gutter and
storm sewer. With the alternate intersection alignment, Chelsea Road would be
reconstructed approximately another 740 feet west of Fallon Avenue to an urban section
with curb and gutter and storm sewer improvements. With the alternate, Fallon Avenue
would be reconstructed approximately 450 feet to the south to an urban section. Chelsea
Road would be constructed with two through lanes and a center left turn lane, 44 feet
wide within the existingright-of--way/easement. No additional right-of--way or easement
is anticipated for realigning Fallon Avenue, as the right-of--way was secured with the plat
• for the Fallon Office Complex.
aio~,.~~,~a,~mq,uo,~.,.ors,~r~.~,ory~.~,Frx~owucxrruc~r~xexK~~..muo~~ 43
. Council Agenda: 1/22/07
Storm sewer would extend within Chelsea Road to the pond at the City's reservoir site
_ west of Fallon Avenue. Storm sewer stubs will be provided to accommodate drainage
from adjacent properties to the north as development occurs. The pond would need to be
expanded within the City's site and within the existing low area owned by WSI Industries
to accommodate the future drainage azea. Expanding the pond may impact future
expansion needs at the City's site if it is used for a future water treatment plant and/or.
public works facility. An option could be to purchase the landlocked property north of
the City's site along the freeway, which is currently being utilized for freeway signs. In
addition, the pond would not necessarily need to be built. at this time, but would be
needed as properties develop along the north side of Chelsea Road. An easement for the
pond expansion is needed from WSI Industries if an alternate adjacent ponding azea
cannot be utilized.
It is anticipated that adjustments to the existing watermain and sanitary sewer systems
would need to be made with the storm sewer construction. If the alternate intersection
alignment is constructed at Fallon Avenue, it is proposed to extend the 36-inch trunk
sanitary sewer south along Fallon Avenue just past the construction limits for future ' ,
extension. An 8-foot bituminous or concrete pathway is proposed to extend along the .
north side of Chelsea Road from where it was extended with the interchange project.
City staff has discussed utilizing a concrete pathway for ease of maintenance and
improved aesthetics. However, only the bituminous pathway cost is included in the
project costs. Street lighting costs along both sides of the roadways will also be included
in the feasibility report. Landscaping improvements aze not included with the project
costs.
__ The feasibility report does-not include any boulevazd tree planting. In the past,-the .
Council has preferred to install trees as the property develops for commercial and
industrial areas. If the Council would prefer to include trees, we can modify the plans to
include a tree planting program.
The estimated project cost. totals $2,813,10.0: for the base project, not including he ;<.
intersection realignment. The intersection realignment is estimated at $91.9,300. The.
total estimated project cost with the intersection realignment is $3,732,400. ,These costs
include a 10% contingency and 28% indirect costs. The cost does not include.the cost for
the pond easement if needed from WSI Industries, which is estimated at $30,000. The
project is proposed to be funded through special assessments to the adjacent benefiting
properties, City funds, and assessment agreements with the developers of the Monticello
Industrial Pazk. The assessment agreement with the Monticello Industrial Pazk includes
assessments for Chelsea Road, as well as the interchange project, and also included land
that was donated for storm water ponds. The value of that land should be considered
when reviewing the total project costs. City funding would consist of the street
reconstruction costs above the standazd non-residential street reconstruction rate, general
utility adjustments including extension of the trunk sanitary sewer along Fallon Avenue,
storm sewer upsizing costs, and pond expansion. A summary of the proposed project
funding is shown on the following page: .
44
C:IDveiasnir and&ttlr~gsldaxrtgronLgrrlloce! SsWngslTen~owy btzrrot F7ktIOLIC.iL1GN111f-C7~s4raRdReconFtan01110).Qx
•
Council Agenda: 1/22/07
Base Project -Chelsea Road Reconstruction to Fallon Avenue
Assessments City Funds Project Total
Surface Improvements $556,900 $542,200 $1,099,100
Pathway $100,000 $0 $100,000
Water Main $0 $76,400: $76,400
Sanitary Sewer $0 $53,500 $53,500
Storm Sewer
Street Lighting $465,800
$150,000 $868,300
$0 $1,334,100
$150,000
TOTAL $1,272,700 $1,540,400 $2,813,100
Base AND AlternaEe Project
Chelsea Road Reconstruction and Chelsea Road/Fallon Avenue Intersection Realignment
Assessments City Funds Project Total
Surface Improvements ~ $735300 $817,500 $1,552,800
Pathway $132,000 $0 $132,000
Water Main $0 $93,200 . $93,200
Sanitary Sewer $0 $347,300 $347,300
Storm Sewer
Street Lighting $525,900
$178,000 $903,200
$0 $1,429,100
$178,000
TOTAL $1,571,200 $2,161,200 $3,732,400
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessment methods to adjacent benefiting property owners include the following:
Street Assessment: Includes $70/front foot based on the City's standard non-residential
reconstruction rate plus 100% of the curb and gutter costs, which totals $84/front foot.
The remaining street costs would be City funded. Corner lots at Fallon Avenue would be
assessed 100% of the frontage along Chelsea Road (short side) and 50% of the frontage
along Fallon Avenue (long side) where there is an access.
.Storm: Storm sewer is proposed to be assessed to each property based on the percentage
of contributing drainage area directed- to the storm sewer system. City funds would be
utilized for costs associated with oversizing of the storm sewer. system for the outlet pipe
from the pond at the southeast corner of Chelsea Road and Fallon Avenue as well as for
the pond construction west of Fallon Avenue and the outlet costs for this pond. The
storm sewer assessment rate is estimated at $12,500 per acre of contributing drainage
area.
c.~~a.~m,~~.~w,~.itsm~,u~~,~.o,,r,~~,~.f~o~xtucNmw.cr~t~Qae~~.o.,_ouzoz~ 45
Council Agenda: 1/22/07
Pathway: The pathway along the north side of Chelsea Road is proposed to be assessed
_ at 100% of the cost to properties along both the north and. south sides of Chelsea Road on
a front foot basis. The estimated pathway assessment rate is $15 per front foot for
bituminous and $24 per front foot for concrete, which would result in a total project cost •
increase of $57,000 for the base project and $70,000 for the base and alternate project if
an 8-foot-wide concrete walk is used. The Council should consider contributing to the
pathway costs similar to the sidewalk policy of a 75%/25% City split where regional
benefits are considered.
Street Lighting: Street lighting is proposed to be installed along the north and south
sides of Chelsea Road and assessed at 100% of the cost to properties along both sides of
Chelsea Road on a front foot basis. The estimated street lighting assessment rate is $20
per front foot.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Accept the feasibility report and order the public hearing for February 12, 2007.
2. Do not accept the feasibility report.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator to select Alternative No. 1. As noted
above, the agreement with the Monticello Industrial Park, Inc. stipulates that construction
of these improvements commence no later than the start of the 2007 construction season.
Designated as collector road/frontage-type road within the City, Chelsea Road was •
planned to be upgraded to an urban section to meet the needs for growth within the City.
Is it recommended to construct the alternate Fallon Avenue intersection realignment. at
this time to minimize disturbances with future improvements. Pathway and street
lighting improvements along Chelsea Road could be beneficial for access to City
amenities and pedestrian safety.
Based on discussions with affected property owners and City staff, the Council should
consider the following questions prior to the public hearing:
1. Is a pathway (bituminous or concrete) needed at this time? If so, should the
Council contribute funds to it?
2. Is street lighting needed at this time? If so, should the Council contribute funds to
it?
3. Is it beneficial to construct the alternate Fallon Avenue intersection realignment at
this time to minimize disturbances with future improvements?
4. Would the City deed or sell the excess Fallon Avenue right-of--way to the adjacent
property owner?
5. How will concerns regarding commercial zoning for the 33-acre parcel on the
south side of Chelsea Road be addressed?
46
C.~IQorwrntr ad Sstp6igsWaxngraaNgerlLorn(~1~SITe~omry GUernet FUcs10LR3LIGNRN17r/aeaRdAstamFear-012707dae
Council Agenda: 1/22/07
6. Would the Council like to study reconstructing Chelsea Road to Edmonson
Avenue?
~\ 7. Would the Council like to include boulevard tree planting in the ro'ect?
P J
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Feasibility Report
Property Owner Comments
C:IO~ocmwewmdSsttl~rWo.n.B~l+grN.oul&tangslTenpwmy/Mernet Ff4tIOW1ACN/TI(QelsruRdlpeeaJ~'eypt27071x ~~
PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS:
~' Below are notes from our meetings with the property owners with responses in italics and as
noted in this paragraph. As you will see below, property owners questioned the need for
' upgrading the road to an urban section with curb and gutter and storm sewer. We explained that
the street was always planned to be an urban street with curb and gutter and storm sewer;
however, these improvements were delayed by the developer due to lack of funds. The proposed
storm sewer system is needed to accommodate full development of the properties along Chelsea
Road as the existing ditch system will not accommodate it. Property owners also questioned the
need for street lighting and a pathway. We explained that street lighting is proposed for safety.
Pathways along major roads keep pedestrians off the roadways and allow for access to City
amenities.
Alan Wentland. WCG Building Partners (former Clow site). 218 Chelsea Road:
• Interested in excess Fallon Avenue right-of--way created with intersection realignment for
additional pazking. (We indicated that the Council could consider deeding this property
to him or sell it for a minimal square footage price.)
• Okay with one southern-most access along Fallon Avenue. Currently has two accesses
from Fallon Avenue but prefers one access to accommodate truck turning movements.
• In favor of project and okay with assessment amount. If he pays up front, can assessment
be reduced by construction interest, which is typically 8% of the 28% indirect? (The
Council may consider this.)
• Questioned sewer and water disruption during construction. (We-will look at this with
final design; temporary water service would be provided and sewage pumped out if
needed.)
t Mike Pudil. WSI Industries, Inc., 213 Chelsea Road:
• In favor of road being reconstructed but not with curb and gutter.
• Does not want to be assessed because of increases in his costs and does not see value of
improvements to his property. (Typically, there is an aesthetic value to the proposed
improvements.)
• Not keen on giving pond easement to City, but would if compensated.
• Questioned need for curb and gutter, storm sewer, pathway, and street lighting. His
employees would not utilize the pathway.
• Questioned speed Limit. change along Chelsea Road east and west of Fallon Avenue. He
thinks it's a speed trap. (The 4S mph speed limit along Chelsea Road east of Fallon
Avenue is the statutory limit based on the amount of existing development. The roadway
does not qualify as an "urban district, "which requires buildings to be spaced a
maximum 100 feet apart and would then allow the City to set the speed limit. As
development continues, the speed limit can be evaluated for a reduction. Since there is
more development west of Fallon Avenue, the speed limit is lower - 30mph.)
Marv Barrier, Suburban Manufacturing, Inc., 301 Chelsea Road:
• Has no issue with street reconstruction with curb and gutter and storm sewer but does not
see benefit to their property. The property drains fine as is.
• Concern with kids in the industrial park, vandalism, theft, etc. if pathway is constructed.
Also concerned that pathway will end near their property where pedestrians will have to
turn azound.
48
C: tDbcmnena and Seuingsldaan.grossinger~Local Seningrl tanpvrary Intoner FftalOLS31Meeffirg,Semanwy.dot
• Street lighting is a benefit to retail businesses only; however, assessment is minimal.
• Not in favor of potential retail zone along south side if Chelsea Road. ~ i
• Developer of proposed retail site should beaz entire assessment.
Doug Harmon and Patty Haibv. Twin Citv Die Castings, 520 Chelsea Road:
• Concern with truck traffic loads and access during construction. (A construction staging
plan will be developed during final design to address access and detour routes.)
• .Questioned if assessment rates are the same for all properties. (This is the case based on
the City s assessment policy.)
• Concerned that if they expand their building to the south, adjacent potential commercial
sites and/or Ciry will have issues. (Expansion would be governed by City zoning
ordinances.)
• Understand street and storm sewer improvements are needed and aze in favor of project.
• In favor of pathway and lighting; however, concerned it will only benefit future
development.
Bill Taaper, Generaux Fine Wood Products, 212 Chelsea Road:
• Feels project is needed in 5 years and is not in favor of curb and gutter.
• Questioned need for street lighting if speed limit is 30mph.
• Discussed drainage from property to street. (Storm sewer assessment has been adjusted
to include actual drainage to the street, does not include drainage to his private system
on site.)
• Don and Terry Tomann,lJMC, Inc.. 500 Chelsea Road:
• Concerned that the Monticello Industrial Pazk property south of Chelsea Road would be
rezoned commerciaUretail. Does not think it is good long-term planning by the City.
Assumed property would stay industrial and if rezoned to commercial, would affect their
long-term expansion plans. Would set a precedent if rezoned commercial, similar to
outside storage issue. Suggested the site be a training facility with partnership from
existing businesses and the City, driven by the need for more workers along with new
businesses in a campus setting. (An application would need to be made by the developer
to rezone the property, in which a separate public hearing would be held to obtain
comments. Planning Commission and Council approval would be needed.)
• In favor of curb and gutter, pathway, and street lighting only if it supports businesses/the
lazger community and for the right businesses planned based on zoning rather than only
benefiting one big box establishment.
• Questioned storm sewer assessment. (Assessment is based on minimal drainage along
the front of the property. Parking areas and building drain to the pond near the school.)
Dean Olson and Dick Hansen, Rowser (leases to Kaltec of MN, Incl. 307 Chelsea Road:
• Looking at selling the building.
• Questioned potential retail site on south side of Chelsea Road. Keep it on the north side.
Would isolate their business if surrounded by retail.
• Okay with assessments.
•
44
C:IDbrvmmu acrd S~tdrtgsl dowe~grouirtgerlLotal SertirtgslTemportrry Internet FiletIOLK3LSfeeHngSummary.Qoe
Matt Froelich. Fallon Office Comulex. 9766 Fallon Avenue•
• In favor of project. Suggested completing all projects impacting the intersection at one
time, including completing the reconstruction of Chelsea Road to Edmonson Avenue and
Fallon Avenue to School Boulevard. Sees value to property with the improvements.
• Need to build a temporary access to his property from Chelsea Road during construction.
• Okay with future assessment for street lighting along Fallon Avenue.
• Not in favor of pathway construction along Fallon Avenue. Doesn't see the need.
-.~
C:IObeumenaandStalngsidurn.groeringerlLacclSeniegsfTernlwmrylerm~erPlalOLK3lMeeringSumwry.doc 50
O
THE LAND SPEC(AL15T5®
Mayor and City. Council
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street
Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8831
RE: Chelsea Road Feasibility Report:
Chelsea Road Reconstruction,
Fallon Avenue Intersection
Re-Alignment Alternate
Via Facsimile
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
On behalf of Monticello Industrial Park, Inc., we respectfully request that you
approve the Chelsea Road Feasibility Report that deals with Chelsea Road
Reconstruction-Street and Storm Sewer improvements, as well as the Fallon
' Avenue Intersection Re-Alignment Altemate.
By doing the proposed Fallon Avenue Intersection improvements at the same
time as the Chelsea Road reconstruction, the traffic disturbance would result in a
single event. Additionally, the economics will most likely be more favorable and
eliminate redundancy. in roadway reconstruction costs.
By combining these two needed improvements,. future development of the area
served by them will be provided specific definition, thus removing an important
variable from their decision process.
Very truly yours,
~~~~(~
Charles C. Pfeffer, Jr.
cc: Shawn Weinand
• Jeff O'Neill
Pfeffer Company, Inc. 7700 Hemlock Lane, Suite IOl • Maple Grove, MN 55369-5587
.763.425.2930 • Fi{X 763.425.2813 • pfefjerco@ao[.com • wwwpfefferco.com
www TheLandSpecialists. com
January 22, 2007
~J
Doc. Na. A 964085
• OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
WRIGHTCOUNTY, MINNESOTA
Cert~ed Filed andlor Recorded, on
06-21-2005 at 12:32
Check #: Fee: $19.50
Payment Code 04
Return to: Addl. Fee
City of Monticello Lar A. Un er
505 Walnut Street !61 rY g ,County Recorder
Monticello, MN 55313
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
(SW Quadrant of I-94lCSAH 18)
THIS ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is executed thisc~~l-day of
2005, by and between the CITY OF MONTICELLO, a Minnesota
municipal orporation ("City") and MONTICELLO INDUSTRIAL PARK, INC., a Minnesota
corporation ("Owner").
RECITALS
• A. Owner is the owner of certain arcels of real ro ert situate 'n W
p p p y d i nght County,
Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto (referred to as the "Subject
Property").
B. City is considering whether to order City Project No. 2004-1C, (C.S.A.H. 18/I-94
Interchange and Related Improvements) (hereinafter "Project").
C. City and Owner desire to establish the amount that the Subject Property will be
assessed for the Project.
D. City will be relying on this Agreement in making its final decisions to order and
proceed with the construction of the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and in consideration of
the mutual promises and covenants and obligations herein set forth, as follows:
1. Special Benefit. Owner acknowledges that the Subject Property receives a special
benefit from the Project.
2. Assessment Amount. The Subject Property will be assessed a total of
$2,391,006.00 for the Project pursuant to Minn. Stat. 429.011, et. seq. The assessment will be
• deferred pursuant to Section 5 herein. The assessment is also subject to increase pursuant to
115394 1
Section 6 herein. •
3. Allocation. The total assessment will be allocated to the following portions of the
Subject Property as more fully described on Exhibit "A" and shown on the map attached hereto
as Exhibit "B":
a. /$738,966.00 -north of Chelsea Road (adjacent to CSAH 18);
12.1174 ACS./527,833 Sq. Ft. @ $1.40/Sq. Ft.
b. / $1,132,559.00 -north of Chelsea Road;
26.0000 ACS./1,132,559 Sq. Ft. @ $1.00/Sq. Ft.
$383,427.00 -south of Chelsea Road;
32.641 ACS./1,420,100 Sq. Ft. @ $0.27/Sq. Ft.
--~-,.
$85,269.00 -Lot 2, Block 1, Monticello Commerce Center 6`~' Addition; and
7.50 ACS./315,811 Sq. Ft. @ $0.27/Sq. Ft.
~e. $50,785.00 -Lot 1, Block 1, Monticello Commerce Center 5th Addition.
3.151 ACS./137,257 Sq. Ft. @ $0.37/Sq. Ft.
The square footage calculations for each portion are estimated and included for
illustrative purposes. The total assessment for each portion shall be the stated total dollar amount
regardless of actual square footage.
4. Assessment Adopted. The assessment is deemed adopted on the date this
Agreement is signed by the parties.
5. Deferral of Assessments.
a. Subject to the terms of this Section and all other terms of this Agreement, the
assessment will be deferred without interest until January 1, 2011 at which time
the assessment will then be payable over ten (10) years, including interest
commencing January 1, 2011 at the rate of four percent (4%) per annum simple
interest computed on the unpaid balance with the first installment collectable as
part of the payable 2012 taxes.
b. If the property is subdivided prior to January 1, 2011, the assessment will be
equitably apportioned to individual lots on a square footage basis in accordance
with Minn. Stat. §429.071, giving due consideration to any portions of the
property which may be undevelopable or subject to ponding or other
infrastructure requirements. In recognition of the fact that certain parts of the
"Subject Property" may benefit more from the Project than others, the City will
allocate a greater proportion of the assessment to certain lots as they develop upon
request of Owner.
115394 2
• c. As each subdivided lot is either sold or developed, whichever occurs first, the
apportioned assessment for the lot will then be payable over ten (10}years,
including interest commencing July 1 of the year the property is sold or develops,
with the first installment collectable as part of the following years payable taxes
(or the next year if the transaction occurs to late in year to certify assessments to
county}. A lot is "developed" when a building permit is issued.
d. The assessments on all lots not sold or developed by January 1, 2011 shall then be
payable overten (10) years, including interest at the rate of four percent (4%)
simple interest computed on the unpaid balance commencing January 1, 2011,
with the first installment collectable as part of payable 2011 taxes (or 2012 year if
it is to late in the year to certify the assessment to county for 2011).
e. If the Project and the future Chelsea Road project are not fully completed and
finally accepted by the City by December 31, 2008, the January 1, 2011 date for
the end of the deferrals will be extended by one year for each year beyond 2008
that the Projects are not completed.
6. Additional Assessment. Any part of the Subject Property located south of
Chelsea Road described in Paragraphs 3 c., 3.d., and 3.e. herein, which is rezoned for retail use at
the time it develops shall pay an additional assessment for the Project of Fifty Cents ($.50) per
square foot of the net acreage of the property rezoned for retail use.
• 7. Waiver. Owner hereby waives unconditionally all procedural and substantive
objections to the Assessment in the amounts set forth herein, including, but not limited to, any
rights of Owner to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment does not constitute a
special benefit or that the amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the Subject
Property. The Owner further waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes § 429.081 or other laws.
8. Conveyance of Easements. Owner will convey to the City at no cost
contemporaneously with the execution of this Agreement, the temporary and permanent
easements relating to the future Chelsea Road Project, trail, and trunk sanitary sewer, all of
which are described on Exhibit "C" hereto. The easements shall include the necessary consents
from any mortgagee or other party having an interest in the easement area.
9. No Additional Assessments for Chelsea Road or Fallon Avenue. The Subject
Property will not be further assessed for the projected 2006 Chelsea Road reconstruction project,
the proposed future improvements to Fallon Avenue, the Fallon Avenue Overpass or the
proposed traffic signal light at the intersection of C.S.A.H. 18 and School Boulevard.
10. Relocation of Pond. The temporary storm water pond located on the north side of
Chelsea Road will be relocated to the City drainage easements located west of this site. The City
will release the easement for the temporary storm water pond.
• 11. "School Pond" Credits. The storm water ponding credits for what is known as the
115394 3
"School Pond" will be released by Owner, and Owner waives the requirement that the School .
District complete the grading of the School Pond to the agreed-upon capacity.
12. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning. Owner may initiate a
comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning of all or a portion of the Subject Property located
north of Chelsea Road to a B-4 zoning district (which includes any other future zoning district
established by the City allowing equivalent uses) at any time during the term of this Agreement.
The proportioned assessment will be abated for any portion of the Subject Property located north
of Chelsea Road for which Owner has made such a formal application for rezoning that has not
been rezoned to B-4 by the City prior to the end of the term of this Agreement. In addition to
such abatement, the City will make a payment to Owner in the amount of $100,000.00 (or a
prorata portion of the $100,000.00 based upon the portion of the Subject Property not rezoned)
within thirty (30) days after the City's failure to rezone the property within the time frame set
forth herein and after formal application by Owner. The assessment will also be abated on any
portion of the Subject Property that during the term of this Agreement, the City rezones (after
rezoning to B-4) other than at Owner's request, to a zoning designation other than B-4.
13. Chelsea Road Design. City will cooperate with Owner on the design of Chelsea
Road in order to make sure service stubs and curb cuts are reasonably located to accommodate
future development. The City's final design of the proposed improvements will be provided to
Owner for its review on or before 20 days prior to the proposed bid date.
14. Trunk Fees. The City's per acre charges for trunk sanitary sewer, trunk water •
charges and trunk storm sewer will not increase during the term of this Agreement by more than
two percent (2%) per year from the year 2005 rates for any portion of the Subject Property that is
rezoned to B-4 or a future district allowing equivalent uses. The rates will not increase from the
2005 rates during the term of this Agreement for any portion of the Subject Property zoned
Industrial. The 2005 acreage rates are $2,228.00 for trunk sanitary sewer, $1,752.00. for trunk
water, $6,436.00 for trunk storm sewer (industrial) and $6,804.00 for trunk storm sewer
(commercial).
15. Term of A egr ement. This Agreement shall terminate on January 1, 2011. The
term of the Agreement will be extended to correspond to any extension of the January 1, 2011
date pursuant to Section S.e. herein. As to any portion of the Subject Property that has not been
rezoned to B-4 (or future district allowing equivalent uses) as requested by formal application by
Owner, the termination date will be the earlier of ten (10) years from the Project and Chelsea
Road completion date or the rezoning to B-4 of the Property as requested by Owner.
16. Recording. This Agreement will be recorded against the Subject Property and
will run with the land and bind Owner's successors and assigns.
17. Project Contin ency. This Agreement is contingent upon the City ordering and
constructing the Project. Nothing herein obligates the City to do the Project. If Project is not
ordered and constructed, Owner's obligations under this Agreement are terminated.
115394 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day
and year first above written.
CITY OF MONTICELLIfO
By: ~~4e~
' t Herbst, ayor ~~_.
By:
Rick Wolfsteller, ity Administrator
MONTICELLO INDUSTR L PARK, INC.
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF WRIGHT )
. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Day' day of
2005, by Clint Herbst and by Rick Wolfsteller, respectively the Mayor and
City Admi 'strator of the City of Monticello, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of
the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
,~ PAULA ANN MASTEY
~•4~~ N~JTARY PUBLtC • AAINNESt1tA
,My Comm. Exp. Jan. 31, zoos
Not Public
~'Y
115394 5
STATE OF MINNESOTA }
}ss.
COUNTY OF l~.r~-t )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2.3 day of
/ ~. , 2005, by Sh~~Jw~ (~ c i~~d and ,
respecti ely the f0i~ S, ~/~~'l~f-- and of Monticello
Industrial Park, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of said corporation.
~~~~,~~
Not Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
651-452-5000
TMS/cjh
KiM K. LABELLE
NOTARY PUBLIC • MINNESOTA
MY Commission Expires Jan. 31,2010
•
•
115394 6
IDC Agenda - 02/06/07
• 6. Reports•
A. Economic Development Report.
Leads: Via verbal commitment Walker In-Store has agreed to purchase Lot 2, Block 1, Otter
Creek 3`d Addition. The company proposes to construct a 10,240 sq ft building and will
employ 11 full-time permanent people at an average hourly wage of at least $18.81 per hour
without benefits. I'm waiting for return of the executed Preliminary Development Agreeme~it
and deposit prior to engaging Ehlers and Kennedy & Graven. Spring construction. ~~"'"'~~`'
* Big Lake Htg & Plg -Call from lender looking at $1 land price. Suggested other land
options in Monti.
* Karlburger Foods - I visited their new facility on January 23 with Mike Maher. It is a great
project and certainly astep-up for them. Project on schedule for completion end of February
and move-in soon after.
* 43,000 sq ft FSI building for sale - I talked with Jack Peach on January 17. 16,000 sq ft
warehouse, 12,000 sq ft office, and 15,000 production/open work space. 7.5 acres.
* 500,000 sq. ft. manufacturing user (wet industry). Sixteen sites identified. Don't know name
of company or much else. Only listed as a lead. Monticello currently does not have water and
wastewater treatment capacity to accommodate their needs.
* Local contractor - on behalf of manufacturer -looking for 10-15 acres, 100,000 sq ft
building. 1-19-07
* Another local contractor - on behalf of clients -looking for land for 32,000 sq ft facility and
• 100,000 sq ft facility.
BRE (Business Retention & Expansion):
* Precision Technologies, Inc. -Thanks to everyone who attended the Welcome/Open House
on January 18. Photo booklet mailed January 26.
* Washburn Computer Group -Moved in. Isn't it good to see cars in the parking lot? They'll
be in City Hall to expand parking lot and are interested in excess city land when and if Fallon
Avenue is re-aligned.
* I sat in on the meetings with individual businesses and WSB, Inc. (Bret Weiss and Shibani
Bison). WSB explained the proposed improvements along Chelsea Road and provided each
business with an estimated cost. WSB's summary is attached under agenda item #5. On
January 22, the Council accepted the Feasibility Study without the pathway and lighting as an
option paid for by fees and called for a public hearing date of February 12.
* I attended a meeting between the Mayor and Don Tomann, UMC. Don expressed his
concerns about a potential re-zone of the property to the west from I1-A to Commercial
(retail).
* Darrin Lahr, Xcel Energy, has taken a new position within the company. He will now be in
the transmission power line division rather than community relations manager. He'll remain a
resident of Monticello and wishes to continue as a member of the HRA and EDA. For those of
you who knew Arnie Hendrickson, Minnegasco, he is retiring after 34 years with the company.
•
`~.~"~
",~~
~ ~_
IDC Agenda - 02/06/07
* Attended the annual meeting of the Wright County Economic Development Partnership on
• /
January 19. I'm no longer on the Board of Directors as I maximized my term limit. The
Partnership has matured and provides educational seminars to members and businesses. Prior
to being a board member, I helped to initiate the formation of the Partnership.
* Attended the first Comp Plan Task Force meeting of January 11. The next meeting of
February 1 will focus on industrial. Members were given some homework questions.
* Attended the Manufacturer's & Food Processors Round Table Discussion on January 31.
Tips for dealing with amulti-generational workforce and new apprentice training program.
* Paul Mastey and myself attended the annual Public Finance Seminar, February 1 and 2, put
on by Ehlers & Associates, Inc.
* Fiber Optics Task Force -Declined the Blandin Grant. The task force was further ahead in
the process to benefit the Blandin program. Next Task Force meeting January 25 a.m.
* Marketing Committee -Met on January 17. Decided to further explore a better site for the
billboard. Mike Benedetto attended. The Small Business Development Center, SCSU,
accepted the request to prepare a Feasibility Study. Based on the graduate/under-graduate
students schedule, the Marketin Subcommittee and students will meet sometime the week of
February 8. See attached. ~~-' ~ ~ '~
* MN Real Estate Journal - Copy of article.
'~ ~~ ~~
~~~ ~~
• 2
MONTICELLO
January 3, 2007
Mr. Barry Kirchoff, Director
Small Business Development Center
616 Roosevelt Road, Suite 100
St. Cloud, MN 56301
Re: Request for your participation in a feasibility study to be performed for the City of Monticello
identifying current assets and shortcomings of Monticello as a potential location for a high
tech/life sciences industrial park.
Dear Mr. Kirchoff:
The Joint Marketing Subcommittee of the Industrial Development Committee and the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of the City of Monticello are seeking the assistance of the Small Business
Development Center and St. Cloud State University (SCSU) to research and present a feasibility study
• regarding critical factors related to the establishment of a possible future high tech/life sciences industrial
park for the City of Monticello.
Specifically, this feasibility study shall identify the characteristics of a high tech life sciences industrial
park and shall determine the availability of local and regional assets to support such an industrial park.
Further, the study shall catalogue the critical shortcomings for the possible development of such a park
in the City of Monticello
The outcome of the feasibility study shall provide a data base of information to be used to determine
whether a high tech life science industrial park can be developed in the City of Monticello. The base of
information in the feasibility study must include, but will not be limited to, the following:
I. Definition of high tech/life science industries.
II. Identification of the critical attributes for the establishment of a high tech/life science
industrial park, i.e.:
A) Labor force requirements and availability to support the above:
•
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1, Monticello, MN 55362-8831 • (763) 295-2711 • Fax (763) 295-4404
Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362 • (763) 295-3170 • Fax (763) 271-3272
mil/ `
Mr. Kirchoff
• January 3, 2007
1) Identification of skills or training/education necessary.
2) Identification of existing skilled labor force availability.
3) Identification of local and regional training/education opportunities for
developing a high tech work force.
B) Transportation requirements and availability.
C) Access requirements and availability.
D) Telecommunication requirements and availability.
E) Land use attributes.
F) Expansion or other financing requirements and availability.
III. Identification of additional amenities required for or within a high tech/life science
industrial park and their availability.
IV. Identification of additional local and regional "quality of life" assets and resources
desired and their availability:
• A} Education requirements and availability.
B) Housing requirements and availability.
C) Recreational requirements and availability.
The Marketing Subcommittee has identified this feasibility study as a mutually beneficial project between
the City of Monticello and the Small Business Development Center and SCSU. This feasibility study is
viewed as an important tool in shaping the vision for the future economic development in and around the
City of Monticello.
We look forward to obtaining your confirmation of participation in this partnership by January 9, 2007.
The time-line for completion of the feasibility study shall be May 29, 2007, or as mutually determined by
the Small Business Development Center and our subcommittee.
At the conclusion of the feasibility study, the Marketing Subcommittee shall be provided two copies in a
booklet form of the results of the study. No later than May 29, 2007, the graduate and undergraduate
participants shall also provide a presentation of the study results to the Marketing Subcommittee as a site
to be determined. It is our mutual understanding that there shall be no cost to the City of Monticello for
the production and presentation of the feasibility study as described above.
Mr. Kirchoff
January 3, 2007
As your staff contact person, I can be reached at 763-271-3208 or at
Ollie.koropchak(~ci.monticello.mn.us. for further information. Should you wish to speak with one of the
subcommittee members, I would suggest Paul Kleinwachter, 763-263-7460, or Brad Barger, 763-295-
5635.
Barry, the subcommittee looks forward to working with you and the selected student participants on this
exciting project! Please confirm you commitment (and the student participant commitments) to this
project by no later than January 9, 2007.
Respectfully yours,
CITY OF MONTICELLO
V~~~
Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
(On behalf of the Marketing Subcommittee}
Clint Herbst, Mayor
Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator
Industrial Development Committee File
Housing and Redevelopment Authority File
Business Consulting 498/598
• Spring Semester 2007
3:30 - 4:45pm Tuesday/ Thursday
BB 321
Professor: Barry Kirchoff
Office: BB 161
Phone: 320-308-4059
Email: bckirchoff@stcloudstate.edu
Week of: Tentative Course Schedule
Jan. 18 & Jan 23 Course Introduction
Jan. 25 & Jan. 30 Business Consulting: What's it All About?
Project introductions
Feb. 1 & Feb. 6 Client Communications and Statement of Purpose Guidelines
Project assignments
(Meet faculty advisors/First meetings with client)
~cs~^~
• Feb. 8 & Feb. 13 Business Description/ Business Assessment Criteria ~~ ~~
(First meetings with client /Status Reports)
Feb. 15 & Feb. 20 Team Building
(Status Reports)
Feb. 21 & Feb. 23 Written Report Criteria
(Statement of Purpose and Project Timelines Due)
(Status Reports)
Feb. 22 & Feb. 27 Guest Speaker -Bruce Miles of Big River Consulting Group
(Business Descriptions Due/ Status reports)
Mar. 6 & Mar. 8 Spring Break - No Classes!!
Mar. 13 -Mar. 15 Individual Team Meetings with Barry
(Status reports due)
Mar. 20 -Mar. 22 Individual Team Meetings with Barry
(Status reports due)
Mar. 27 & Mar. 29 Project Discussions
. (Initial Drafts of the Project Due /Status reports due)
April 3 & Apri15 Presentation Organization and Preparations Criteria
• (Status Reports)
April 10 & April 12 Individual Team Meetings with Barry
(Second Draft of the Project Due/ Status reports)
April 17 & April 19 Individual Team Meetings with Barry
(Finalize Reports)
(Schedule presentation with clients and advisors)
(Status reports)
April 24 & April 26 Final Projects Due this Week. No Exceptions!!
Failure to meet this deadline eliminates the team potential
for an "A" grade.
May 1 thru May 8 Final Presentation to Clients
(Peer evaluations, status reports, all required paperwork due)
Course Requirements:
1. Each consulting team is responsible for preparing a written report for the project and for
conducting a final presentation to the client, faculty advisor, and Barry.
2. Each consulting team should meet with the faculty advisor at least on a bi-weekly schedule
and more frequently if necessary. Advisors must receive copies of status reports.
3. Each consulting team should meet with the client at their place of business if feasible at least
once during the semester.
4. Each consulting team is responsible for completing the following paperwork:
• Statement of Purpose
• Confidentiality Agreement
• Weekly Status Reports
• Consulting Log
• Peer Evaluations
• Final Report
5. Consultants will be evaluated by the faculty advisor and Barry based on the following criteria:
• Quality of final written project and oral client presentation.
• Degree of individual participation at class meetings, consulting team meetings,
client and faculty advisor meetings.
• Timely submission and quality of all required paperwork
• Initiative, attitude, and attendance.
6. Class attendance and team representation is a must due to the hands on nature of this course.
\_J
•
M
a~
rn
..
U
LL
O
c
1
0
w
a°~
0
0
a~
c
c
.~
`~
O
•
0
0
0
a
~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ y 'C c~ N p 'C bq bA >, ~~. r; ~ ~ c~5 c'.'i N N bq ~
v" p., `~ 30 ;moo ~~~°o~'~ ~O ~ ~
~°3 .,off ~~"~,~~„ ~~~;~~ o~~a>~, ~
~ o
• ~. `i' ~ ~ ~ ~ 'O ~ ~ .d • ~ • c~ N y O acct. ~ ,~ ~, O s„ `i' ~ U ° +..~ ~ vO ~ ~;
~~
•~ a~ ~ ~ a
~~ ~ 7 ~' U ~ ~ U ~. ~
V
.~
~~ ~°
H V
a~
o •-
~3
~ ~~
0~ ~
3}
Z °a
z '^ y ~ ce w a~ ~ ~ ^o ~ 3 ~
0 3
~ }
o ~
~ ~ o ~ •~ ~ ~ •~ Q
~ ~ an v ~ U
}
W a ~
o .
~ .. a> ~ ~ y • ~ p ~ ^~
Q~ o~~ -
~~
~
N o
~,
o
U •
a
~ ~
m •a y x v' 0 ,.~ ~ ~
~ ~
'
~ d p y
r., ~ O ~ ~ Z
~ ~ ~ ~
~N .
>,
~~0'03
~~`0~ '~~
~ ~
} a
C . .
. ~ ~, ~. ° ° ° ° ° ~, ° ~,
..-, C1+ ~ ~ v O ~ bA i-i
~
s a ~ 0 3 3 i
~ ~ ~ ° ~
°
a ,~
~
~°~3~.~~
a
"~~o
o
r .~
,
E~- ~ ~ = .~
~~,o.~•~ ~ ~ ~•~ ~ o.~ ~
w 'a
i ~ ~.
~ ~ ~"~ O a~ a~ ~ Z O ~ ~ N >'
~
'
F- v
i ° .~ >, on ~ O x ~
O ~ L~
~~ ~~~~ oz~ao~c3~~~ a~0~~~
° ~ v-. ~ ~
~ a, a~ ~•aAV~ 3 ~ ~ ° a~ ~ o~u~ c 3 a o o ~ ~ o
-94 plan
!,might hit
fast lane
Parfi of road would be widened to 6 lanes
sy Lawrence schnmacher
ST. PAUL -Gov. Tim
Pawlenty's plan to borrow
$1.7 b~7lion for state roads and
bridges world speedup p~aas
to widen Interstate Highway
94 to six lanes between Rogers
and Clearwater.
Pawlenty's transportation
budget groposal would move
construction on the $112 mil-
lion Interstate 94 widening
project up fi~om 2024 to 2009,
said Tim Povich, a tranaporta-
englaeer for the Mumesol~.
artmeat of Transportation
in St. Ciond
The project would combine
repaving of e~usting lanes with
construction of an additional
lane in each direction, using
the erasting right of way in the
median, Povich said
°Without a significant in-
crease in transportation fund-
ing, preservation becomes a
more and more critical need,"
he said. "If we're going to do a
major pavement preservation
project oa I-94, we decided
now would be a good time to
addthatthirdlane.'
Pawlenty's proposal has no
funding for a proposed Missis-
~PPi River erossingto connect
I-94 and U.S. Highway 10.
The crossing would cost
about the same amount as wid-
I-94, but it has no pro-
]~ start date because Mn-
Tim Pawient~r
Proposal would
move uptfinetable
DOT has not identified'a way
topayforit.
-Debt.pa the 10-year. bond
would be gaid from the motor
vehicle sales tag revenue voters
elected lest ia11 to dedicate do
transportation.
In addition to the i-94 wid-
ening, the proposal would ac-
ceIerate 24 other state. road
Projects, including a $212 m1-
lion plea to repave I-94 from
the Stearns County Road 75
exit to just west of Clearwater
and a $9 m~~lion plan to repave
1.6 m~1es of Interstate 94 from
near the CoIlegeville exit to the
Minnesota Highway 23 exit
MnDOT officials in each
district in the state submitted
a list of top candidates for ac-
celeration.
About 60,000 vehicles per
day travel I-94 between Rogers
and Clearwater, Povich said.
The proposal is a starting point
for fhe Legislature's discussion
of transportation fiundiag.
lawmakers have introduced
bills that would raise the gas
tax by 10 cents a gallon and
increaseothertransportation-
related tagesandfees.
0
•
AGENDA
MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
(FEBRUARY 6TH, 2007)
6:00 PM
Commissioners: Rod Dragster, Lloyd Hilgart, William Spartz, Barry Voight,
Charlotte Gabler
:]
Council Liaison: Brian Stumpf
Staff: Jeff O'Neill, Angela Schumann, Gary Anderson, Ollie Koropchak,
Kimberly Holier and Steve Grittman - NAC
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings of December 5`t', 2006.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizen comments.
5. Public Hearing -Consideration of a Request for a Simple Subdivision in an I-2 (Heavy
Industrial) District.
Applicant: Steve Birkeland
6. Public Hearing -Consideration of a Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Comprehensive
Sign Plan for a retail strip center in a B-3 (Highway Business) District.
Applicant: Miller Architects and Builders
7. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for Final Plat approval, Development Stage
Planned Unit Development approval for amulti-tenant shopping center, and Conditional Use
Permit approval for a drive through lane in a B-4 (Regional Business) District.
Applicant: Ryan Companies U.S., Inc.
8. Adjourn.
•
° °
.-
o °
o
w~°n
c o
o
w~°a
~~ ~c«o
o ~.
0
yu
°
'. ~
° ~~
° v
,
~ ~
N Ors `-
° H
a
N p«
.p~ b o ~N C a°i O.O.N
u 4
va c °u u~
E ~~`~ °
`'' c c°i'"o~
E m~`v
•-.O In«OO
u O ~;..OO
OO
OL .~
O
' p
V ' pp
b
M
°
°' Qr
d
°ow h
o ~ 3
o ~
O
°
"
o
A _
_
Q O
~ c a
O~ C p
a^ ~
3
~ h _
°a
O M U p
ap
,~..°- ~,~°~ n° ~~od
r u° °
$ b °v'-
z° r~ ~~
~ ~ ° m`
z°~°r
*
^r~
0
a°~
° t
EE
3 uc°~
c °t %
° `
' °~
w
rn°
a u°p~
c
~«°~ °°
~
W
c o~
n° -
~a
~a o. c
~ q
«a ~a
~ I"'I
~ ~ M.t.. NNO~ 0D ~NOa
Q
~ °~ mo`° ,~ ~~aa
I ~ C o ~ lD ~ ~ 4 ~ m G] ~ in
~`I
fT
'
r`yl ,
[Tl .c
rn ap
~O
u ~d W
p c,~
Jo
o oc
~~ ~ °p
orDpW
Jo
o
C
( h 3 q a aV c
~
w,
C ~_ O,
Oa O C_
a~ J OO
a
W o_ 4 ohu°u ~~ '~'M p0
ac u o Y~
v "v° ~~
~~ u $5 ~`$~
j ,
N O~ U
p ° C .`
°
Q
N~
Y U ~ U
y"oy
O N~ % W
•~
01
O ,,
~
3 °
a~`r n u ~
m ~ ZtV ~
j ~
o
a
~ $
W~
w ~
~ ~
~ ~ c
~
p
U ~ ~ ~ W 22 ox
m V ~j k ~ G
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °
` ~ ti ~
Ci Ea
ry
u _m
CM
I I Cuoi o^ a
a~o° JZ
° ~ 3
%~
~ ~ °
o; %
U
~ ~ ~ .~ ~ Q ® ® v r o
~ ~~w ~~ ~
"o
Qm I. I o
`° ~ p n
I
I ~~
.
p .^l
~~ O n a
"
,Z'w
~o I I 40 a
'C ° h ~ c ~ ~ ..
~Q- °p~~o ~ ~ ~
q C
~
`~ 0 <
U
Cj
Zz
Q •
O ~ ~~
p
tl t
J O °
.,. Q ~ m ~
~ __.
__ _ O f O _. _ -. ~_-„ N- --
~QO
~
m ~J
~ 1
~Y ~ N
~ ~
h ~
N~ °
2 =
~~~
~
~ Z~
~W W z
~
' w ~ `a
c
o
O ~ ,
U O ~~
~~~
ce
' °~~ • N 2 ZJ
c3
~
' i'
i
/~ i
°
~ O z
~0
veic~r ~ ~ e y z~ h
~'~y W ~ _ ~ O ^~ N N O O
. ~
~ - 00
~ ~•-
C9 w N
O $ O ^ r0 y p, O M (n ¢ I
5m o
° ~~' p~%'D~ a oo p~°^'ro~ a Ol~il ~~_ ( w c~wti
q] ~ c a'~a c c ~ ~ p,~v c o N OzNo
'o eci c.° .-' $ ~ no as J u .. ~ ~ cn zzin~
.6 0 • w~~ O ONOO
o ° p'" °a-o ` °'" "aa Qc ~ " I
'-~ .°J w ~ 43 % O V ~ w Q1 43 % O V U x ~- I J lV w J J
' 1-O~ I ! 2 z~»
U~ I Z 4~ ~ I ~ I h ~~ Z?
O :~°~~ ter; ~ ~a~~
Hard irlatsnara ooc>MHro ____-- ~ m ~ I~ o ~ ! ,
_ _.... _-.. _ _.. ..-.._...-ZM~O'IB '910~d03Nf11SV3' -`+-.._... _ _ iJ /3! Zp ~..-
i i , ~ ¢
l (~v i ~ ~
HW 'NV
:. - .- `_ .. yg9 3 i44,Sl.~o N yg6-~ ! f - - ~` f'~\I- I ~
_ ~ _~ x ~nl1i.~L1V. NOT~E~3_ _' -~ _ - ---- 5!'0£9 ---- ~ ~~ - -;- - , - =;-~-: - i - - -
-'----1 ~ _' ~^~=T- ~ -~_t--l~-~-ry.6_ -----i -~c~-r=~ 1--""3~,1=~rJ ~ 1.. ~ 1.~~ it
\ ~ - - - -~ i ~ ~-SS6~ •'!O!'Oft _ _.955- _' -- ~ \ ,~ ~ ~` - a ~~ ~,
~ /n IF~w~ ~ ( ~ ~ ' ~---LL'fS6~'ANI ~ - x-950- ~1 ~~ ``i ~ ~ o4N',
1 SL'L98~'ANI--' d'W'~ .Sl I
~ , ca
~ ,4 ~ ~~
f
I ~ ~ I I vi z > .> F:
1~1 ~1. ~ ~~.. ~~ 1~i1W ~ QN ~ I ~: Y \ `2~~ i1 ro+ ~ ~~.I l:. I
l hfl ~'~S''-- ~ v 3N '~z. I ~. O~j' °~' ~: y :\~ to N .,'~~ T'.. I .
I m r •\ O ^ayi N
! ~ ~ Cyr ~+~ ~ ~ IS) ~ \,"~i`~`\\\ ~ ~1 i" ~ ~~'. °c~il' ~~ ^'iI
~NIII ~~~__- I - \,~Gb~_'s~ ~<: ` n• \ z~~yl DWI a~
NMI ~. ~tr ~~' \ ~__-~~ / ~ j h ~' • ' y` ~ \`. h 'O ~ N'- S ~",, • I 'ai
~ 1 _ ~ --. I , ; 13
II III` i Ql'' ,.. ~ j-~' 1 H1n0S ~ 1'i '' I
~' 4 I F ~ to ~ ? j NOLLD3NN0~ ~ ~'
I I (r l '^ ~ ~ a3M3S ONr a31rM 3an1ltd --_'~ _ _-_.`
~'i I ~ O ~ 1 it a0d NpLLr~07 3lBI5SOd I`
vii I. w~ ^ . ~ t Ii ; `~....~J ~ I i
II!I ~ tY ~ ~~ ~
_ I., ~ I ,~, n , .-~, I ,, I ~~.
_ ~ i t
iNarlasv3 unrin __- ---'."' ti I ~ , ~ ~ I ~ y
ill I ,I ~- ~ ~ 1 -- ';. ~; I ; ~•I I ~~
~A1I ~j l it-I'~- ----oo'o£s---- ~ a, - - ' ~ ~ I I ~ ~
~i Cs o,l a I I ~I ' /l \/ I I I j ~j I ,~ I In N
~rilai,'I,~ `` ; ~ ~' 'r'I i I
iii 1, i
~Illi'~i!I~I IIf,~ I I
• ~ ~
• ~ ~
°
U N
--i
O
O
~ '
..y
0
0
°
° O
U"
°
U
° ~ ~
~" ~ ~"
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
U 0 U aS U ~ ~ ~ G VI
'C
O ~ ~ O OU
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ° ~ ° ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ U °
N
• ~ O U ~
~ .
v- ~ ,~
~ ~
~ ~
~
~
O ~
c~ ~ ~
~ '~ v~
° ~ ~ S4 ,~ ~ N
~ ~ v~
'~ ,~
~ ~ ~
O ~ U ~ ~ .
,U., ~ ~
a , ~' '~ ~,
'~ 3 ~ ~ 3 `~ a ~ o ~ ~ O
~
, a~ ~ ..,
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
w .~.-
"' '~ ~ ~ ~'
'~ a4 "C T ~ "~ .~ 'C3
~
M ~--~
~ O O
v1 O ~/•~
N N
~ O
O N
00 O
~O ~
N ~--~ M
V7 V7 O~
O~ •--~
~--~ O
~C
O
~ '--~
'-+ ~O ~-+
~ 00 ~
l~ 00
'~t M
O N
r-+ ~
l~ N
N ~ ~
M N'1 ~--~
N N
N O
V7
w
Z
N
~
~ °~
~
O
~
Q1
~
~
~ O~
O~
l~ ,
l~
O N N N N N t~ N N N N N N N N N
N M M M M N M M M M M M M M M
O~
N Q~
N
a
~
~
'
~
i
~ M
~ M
~
a i~ .
.~ i
r i~r i
i 1
i
•
W r
O
~,,., ~
~
U
w ~
~
~
°~
~
~
~
~
a
.
~
~
~
w
~
~w
~ ~
°~
U
~
W N 0 ~ ~ ~ a ~
U ~ a U ~rs. d ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ '~ ~
a vi v~ a~"v~ ~ ~ w v~ ~ S ~~ v~ x U ~ U
on
~
~ '
o ~
~
~
w ~
~ ~ ~ °~ ~
w ~
C7 ~ p Q ~
r.~ ~
~
'~ ~
x •~
~ ~
H c~~~'
~~ ~ U •~
x ~
x
~
~ w ~ ~, p v~
~ N E~ A~- ~ r~ ~ ~ a Q ~A A ~ a U ~
Q;
W
G4
~ ; ~ •~
~ 0
0 0
0 0
0 '~
~
~
~ U
~
~ ~
~ .~
~ .~
~ ~
~
z ~
~
H U
A U
A U
Q ~
~
°z ~
•
•
0
N
M
N
M
•
•
~ ~
O
U
O
O _
~
~ O
~ ~
~
O
.,. O ~
O ~ ~~-, C7
~.
O
U
O
Q cd
N
, ~
~
.
.
U
O,
. W V1
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
2006 ACTION STATEMENT
Mission Statement
To increase the industrial tax base, to create jobs at liveable wage-levels, and to maintain a favorable
and desirable industrial environment in the City of Monticello.
Purpose
To operate as an independent lobbying organization structured to influence and assist industrial
development in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota. In the broadest context focus on overall
industrial development and developers.
Goals and Direction
1. To provide a continuous stream of available industrial land with infrastructure potential.
2. To review and assess the implementation of the industrial marketing plan developed in
conjunction with the HRA for the City of Monticello.
3. To rate the effectiveness of the use of the industrial marketing plan.
4. To assign time and effort when and where it is deemed necessary to accomplish industrial
development.
~J
MONTICELLO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
ORGANIZATIONAL AND MEMBERSHIP GUIDELINES
I. Meeting Time and Place: Regular meetings are held the first Tuesday of each month at 7:00
a.m. in the Monticello City Hall, Bridge Room. Special meetings maybe called by the
Chairperson and Executive Director.
II. Objective: As written and adopted by the Annual Industrial Development Committee Action
Statement.
III. Committee Size: While there is no set or definite size established, it is generally understood
that the committee will not exceed 16-18 members.
IV. Make-up the Committee: Committee members must either work or reside in the community of
greater Monticello. Individuals who are involved in an occupation or profession that provides
services to the community of Monticello but is not headquartered within the community may
also serve as members of the committee.
~ ._}_
'`~~~ Standing Committee Members: ~-k~~-- ~ ~"^~
'(LjoQ"~"`~J of the Monticello Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Voting.
Mayor of the ity of Monticello. Non-voting.
~ ti City Staff Members: Non-voting.
Administrator of the City of Monticello.
Assistant Administrator of the City of Monticello.
Economic Development Director of the City of Monticello.
Chief Building Official of the City of Monticello.
V. Officers: The Chairperson, the Vice Chairperson, and the Secretary shall be elected annually at
the January meeting. Length of office term shall not exceed three consecutive years.
Minutes of each meeting are the responsibility of the Secretary. Committee correspondence
are the responsibility of the Economic Development Director.
VI. Length of Membership Term: Members shall serve for three year terms on a three year
rotating basis so that approximately one-third of the membership expires each year. Individuals
wishing to continue serving on the committee may so indicate prior to the expiration of their
term. Any member wishing to relinquish his/her position on the Industrial Development
Committee may do so by submitting a letter of resignation.
IDC ORGANIZATIONAL/MEMBERSHIP GUIDELINES.
PAGE 2
VII. Filling a Vacant Position: A list of potential committee members shall be kept by the Executive
Director. The Industrial Development Committee must confirm all new members by a majority
vote.
VIII. MPmbershi~ Attendance: In order to make a positive contribution to the committee, each
member is expected to attend at least 75% of the meetings in any given year. A year is defined
as beginning on the 1st of January and endir:g the 31th of D:,cember.
~7
IDC MISSION STATEMENT
To increase the industrial tax base, to create jobs at liveable wage-levels, and to maintain a
favorable and desirable industrial environment in the City of Monticello.
20061'~C GOALS AHD TASKS
GOALS:
~~
Provide support for recruitment efforts of additional industrial businesses to locate in Monticello
(recruitment of industry).
TASK:
1. Request Marketing Committee provide an annual report to evaluate the effectiveness of the
marketing efforts for the Monticello Business Center.
2. Monitor need for additional purchase of land currently under Contract for Deed in the
Monticello Business Center and the need to authorize feasibility study for construction of
Phase II infrastructure.
3. Continue participation in the industrial business prospect tours.
4. Recognize new industrial businesses via an open house when appropriate.
2. Continue business retention and expansion (BRE) programs for the industrial business sector
(retention).
TASK:
1. Encourage and provide process for mayor and council members to acknowledge industrial
businesses.
2. Develop "yes/no or check box" survey to communicate between local industries and
city/council regarding specific operational issues such as transportation/traffic, fiber optics,
skilled work force, utility (electrical/telephone) reliability, etc.
3. BRE visit by IDC member(s) and Economic Development Director to individual
manufacturers.
3. Coordinate with the Chamber of Commerce the annual Industrial Luncheon, recognize an
industrial business, and develop criteria for recognition.
4. Encourage local newspaper to feature an industrial section or individual business articles.
5. Schedule tours of local manufacturers (outside normal IDC meetings.)
t
O
3. Provide a continuous stream of available industrial land with infrastructure potential (land).
TASK:
1. Research sites for future industrial. development (through comprehensive plan/orderly
annexation.)
1. Develop funding source(s) for future land purchase and encourage the HRA and Council to
establish annual matching Fund account.
2. Discuss trends of future industrial parks.
4. Research transportation and traffic issues (transportation).
FUCUS:
1. I-94 to six lanes.
1. I-94/Orchard Road Interchange.
2. Intra-city traffic circulation including round-abouts.
3. Trunk Highway 25 upgrade to four-lanes between Monticello and Buffalo.
4. Light rail and/or expansion of commuter bus system from Rogers to Monticello.
TASK:
1. Invite WSB Traffic Engineer or someone other for purpose to gather information on current
and proposed transportation projects.
1. Form partnerships with Wright County, Mayor/council to lobby for joint transportation
goals.
2. Develop lobbying network amongst IDC members, local industries, and legislators.
3. Research lobbying effort with local chamber(s).
b
U .~ ~ ~
"
~ ~ ~ ~ O ~
~t ~ ~ ~
W N ~ ^d y
~ ~ ~" U ~
¢ Q-I ~ ~
o o
O ~ ~ ~ , ~
o
~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~
A x >
~ ~ °
, o ° v'
W
F ~' ~ ~ ~
'~" Q., ~
O ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
N
o
~
z ,
~ p cn
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •
~w
3
a~
yx.., ,~ U ~ N b O O ,-
~ ~~.,
Q~.i O p0 O p ~ ~ ~ O U •., ~
:,
'r
w
z M
x
~~ ~° ~
_ _
/ ~ ~ N N cn '-+ ~ ~--~ ~ O p M ~ N
a
O ~ Q '-" 01 01 ~ N ~ x ~
y ~ w O
F"~
'-' W
~ ~ ~ O ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O N ~ ~ O
~ ~
a~ ~1 ~ ~ ~1 ~ H~ N ~ ti ~ ~
O
U
~ ~
v1 •~
o W
z
~ O (~ O , 4; M ~--~ N
N x ~-~' ~ ¢ ~ N ~
~ ~. ~
U a ~
oo ~ v' ~`~' ~ ~
A a Q
ov', ~ ~ A~ i ~ o
~
x ~
N
M ~
U N
M N
~ M H
,"''...i ~
N
~ '~
o ~ ~ ~
O " _
~ '
'.+" ~ '~ 'd U
cd N -b O • ,-,
b ~ O N ~ O '-' O O •~
.~
~ . ~ ~ ~ ~
¢' Q
W o ~ ~ o
Z ~ O b
F O
E' ~ O
~
~ U
~
~
~ ~
° ~
•
o `~
~
~ d ~
~ C7
°'
o ~
o o
~ ~ '
~
~ ~
~ ~-'
~ o
o
~'
~' ~
a U Q'' G~
~ ~ v~
rx ~ ..~ o •r~+
o ,.~ w ~
U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ZZ a
A
¢ U •~ w
0.! ~ •~ Q ~ ~ ¢ ~