City Council Minutes 04-26-1993MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, April 26, 1993 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Patty
Olsen
Members Absent: None
2. Consideration of approval of minutes of the regular meeting held April 12,
1993.
011ie Koropchak requested that item #4 be amended to include notice that the
public hearing was opened and closed.
John Simola requested that item #20 be detailed to indicate that Council
authorized that City staff obtain quotes to repair or replace the digester steel
cover.
Item #23 --Brad Fyle requested clarification of the changes to the recycling
program as it relates to individuals receiving lifestyle exemptions from the
recycling program.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to approve the meeting minutes as amended. Motion carried
unanimously.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
Wes Wittkowski was in attendance to introduce himself as the new area
contact person for U.S. Representative, David Minge. Wittkowski outlined
constituents services that he provides on behalf of Minge. He noted that
currently his office is in Chaska; however, he may be opening an office in
Wright County.
4. Consideration of a variance request to allow a detached accessory building to
be placed within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant, Allan Poach.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that Poach would like to
construct an attached garage that is set back 30 ft from the right-of-way.
Under normal circumstances, 30 ft meets the minimum setback; however, in
this case, the homes on the east and west sides of the Poach property are set
back 20 ft and 80 ft apart respectively. Under our current city ordinance, the
setback for the Poach property splits the difference between the 20 -ft and 80 -ft
setback, which creates a required setback of 50 ft.
Page 1
5.
Council Minutes - 4/26/93
O'Neill went on to note that the garage as proposed will be placed on the side
of the property closer to the building with a 20 -ft setback, which will reduce
the impact of the variance. In addition, moving the garage farther back to
meet the setback requirement would create drainage problems for the property.
O'Neill noted that the Planning Commission recommended that the variance
be granted.
O'Neill also reported that the property had recently been used as a site for
construction of fish houses, which is not allowed in a residential zone. Poach
indicated that once he was informed that this activity was not allowable, he
discontinued construction of fish houses, and he plans to use his garage for
residential uses only.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by
Brad Fyle to grant a 20 -ft variance to the front yard setback requirement
based on the finding that requiring the applicant to meet the setback would
create a hardship, as it would result in drainage problems on the site. Also,
the variance is mitigated by the placement of the structure on the east side of
the property. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of reviewing open burning permit ordinance for possible
amendments or enforcement procedures.
City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller, reported that the current ordinance is
somewhat contradictory in that it lists many ways open burning is allowed but
only if there is not a reasonable, practical alternative method of disposal. With
this restriction available, it doesn't appear that anyone should ever be getting
a burning permit, since there is always an alternative method of disposal. It
may not be practical or cost effective in the eyes of the applicant, but there are
landfills that will take tree stumps and other materials that people .request
burning permits for. Furthermore, recent burning permits that have been
granted have opened the door for other requests.
Wolfsteller went on to note that because we have not adhered to all the
provisions of our ordinance in granting permits, staff needs direction on how
to proceed with future requests. He noted that City staff feels that the
ordinance we have in place is better than allowing all burning to be permitted,
and the only provision that we can actually change and still be a local
authority to issue permits might be the 600 -ft distance limitation.
Wolfsteller suggested that the ordinance remain as is, and in the future,
burning permits should not be granted unless they meet the ordinance
requirements.
Page 2
Council Minutes - 4/26/93
Clint Herbst stated that burning permits should be allowed only for burning
of trees or other vegetation moved from the site and that no building materials
should be allowed to be burned. Ken Maus added that whenever we give a
permit, the material to be burned must first be inspected for the presence of
construction materials.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to reaffirm the existing ordinance with the added provision that any
burning permits issued include a $250 deposit to cover possible City
expenditures. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Consideration of approval of plans and specifications for 1993 sealcoating
project and authorization to advertise for bids.
John Simola reported that this year's sealcoating project is somewhat scattered
across the community. It involves some of the streets which are low volume
and haven't been done for quite some time. The largest area includes portions
of the industrial park. This year's project involves approximately 66,220 sq
yds of sealcoating area. Twenty percent (20%) of this area is in residential
state aid streets. Based on an estimated cost of $.50 per sq ft, including
sweeping, the total project cost would be about $33,010.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson to approve the
specifications for the 1993 sealcoating project and authorize advertisement for
bids at an anticipated project cost of $33,010. Motion was seconded by Patty
Olsen and carried unanimously.
7. Consideration of repairs to or replacement of the second stage digester cover
at the wastewater treatment plant.
John Simola reported that as authorized by Council, the second stage digester
cover and top insulation was removed. In addition, sandblasting of the interior
structure was completed to aid in inspection. Upon inspection, it was found
that the vertical skirting on the cover appears to be salvageable. The interior
truss work was not salvageable. It will not need complete replacement. There
are numerous areas inside the steel roof that have a significant amount of
corrosion. This, coupled with the fact that the remaining portions of the
trusses are securely welded to the interior of the roof, will make replacement
of the trusses alone very difficult. It appears at this time that it may be more
practical to replace the steel roof. If this is the case, the only portion salvaged
from the entire cover would be the outer skirt and some of the supporting
angle irons and beam work which keep the outer skin in a circular form.
Page 3
Council Minutes - 4/26/93
Simola went on to report that the price to remove and repair the digester
cover, recoat the tank, repair the tank piping, and reinstall the cover will
amount to $101,000 and will have a life expectancy of about 10 years. The cost
to install a new cover with a more corrosion -resistant design would cost
approximately $190,000 and last 20 years.
Ken Maus was concerned about the reason for the excessive corrosion. He
wondered if the corrosion may have been caused by sulfuric acid entering the
site from an upstream source. He wondered if the City should have been more
aggressive in regulating sulfuric acid entering the site. Perhaps this expense
could have been avoided.
Kelsie McGuire indicated that it is difficult to pinpoint a single reason why the
corrosion occurred. It could have resulted in part from incomplete coating of
the digesters to protect them from the hostile environment.
Council went on to discuss the existing capacity of the treatment plant. Ken
Maus asked if the repair or replacement needs to be incorporated into the
design of an expanded facility. Should long-range planning be done now,
thereby assuring us that this investment will have a long-term beneficial
impact?
John Simola reported that the City wastewater treatment plant is at 76% of
its total design flow capacity. It is expected that the treatment plant will be
able to meet the needs of the City for 4 to 8 years, depending on city growth.
The repair or replacement of the digester cover is needed with or without
future expansion of the facility.
Rick Wolfsteller reported that funds are available in the water tower project
bond fund and could be used to help finance the repair or replacement of a
portion of the digester covers, depending on the extent of repairs needed.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad
Fyle to reject the quotes received for repair of the digester covers and authorize
development of plans and specifications for both repair and replacement of the
digester cover. Motion carried unanimously.
Ken Maus directed the City Administrator to include the cost to develop a
wastewater treatment facilities plan in the preliminary budget for 1994.
8. Consideration of amending personnel policy.
City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller, explained that there currently is an
inconsistency between the personnel policy and the personnel section of the
city ordinance with respect to employee use of sick leave in the event of a
serious illness to a member of the immediate family. According to the city
Page 4
Council Minutes - 4/26/93
ordinance, up to three days of sick leave was allowed to be used by an
employee in the event of a serious illness to a member of the immediate family.
On the other hand, the new language in the personnel policy does not allow an
employee to use sick leave to attend to an immediate family member. The
personnel policy states that employees are required to take vacation or leave
without pay for that purpose. Wolfsteller requested that the City Council
review the inconsistency and establish an official policy.
Wolfsteller also noted that state statutues require that the City grant sick
leave to employees that need to attend to a child that is ill.
Ken Maus was concerned that it would be difficult to define what constitutes
a serious illness affecting an immediate family member. What type of
condition constitutes a serious illness?
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley
Anderson that sick leave should be used only for the employee's own illness;
therefore, the personnel policy can be left as is and not amended at this time.
Furthermore, the City Administrator is directed to take steps to amend the
city ordinance accordingly. Motion carried unanimously.
9. Consideration of application for carnival license. Applicant, Monticello Mall
MPrehnnt-_
Rick Wolfsteller reported that the Monticello Mall Merchants Association has
applied for a license to allow a carnival to operate at the mall property May 19
through May 23. The name of the carnival is Chuck's Amusements of Elk
River. In order to conduct the carnival, the City Council must first approve
the application for a carnival, circus, and traveling show license.
Gene Decker, representing the Monticello Mall Association, was present to
describe the carnival. He noted that rides such as a small ferris wheel, a tilt -
a -whirl, and smaller kiddie rides will be featured.
The major point of discussion centered around whether or not to require a
$5,000 surety bond to the City of Monticello. Wolfsteller noted that a surety
bond insures that all applicable federal, state, and city regulations are adhered
to and insures that the carnival meets all other city regulations and pays for
any cost associated with damage to city property that could occur as a result
of the carnival. Wolfsteller pointed out that there is only a remote possibility
that any damage would occur to public property, as the carnival will be on
private property.
Wolfsteller stated that the site has been reviewed for adequate parking, and
it appears that there will be sufficient area available on site for both the
carnival activities and mall parking.
Page 5
Council Minutes - 4/26/93
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Patty
Olsen to approve the issuance of a carnival license to the Monticello Mall
Merchants Association and waive the daily fees by recognizing the Association
as a non-profit organization and waive the surety bond requirement. Motion
carried unanimously.
10. Consideration of bills for the month of April.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to approve payment of the bills as submitted. Motion carried
unanimously.
11. Other matters.
Shirley Anderson indicated that the presence of the two-hour parking limit at
the East Bridge Park parking lot is unduly limiting the use of the parking lot.
She noted that citizens using the senior citizen's center are reluctant to park
in the East Bridge parking area and are, instead, parking on the street.
Anderson suggested that the two-hour parking limit should be adjusted to
allow senior citizens to use the parking area in conjunction with senior center
activities that last longer than two hours. Anderson suggested that an
adjustment to the East Bridge Park parking restrictions is in order.
After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to direct the City
Administrator to discuss the matter with the Wright County Sheriffs
Department and determine the best method for allowing more flexible use of
the East Bridge Park parking area for parking in conjunction with special
events at the senior citizens center.
Jeff O'NeAV
Assistant Administrator
Page 6