Loading...
City Council Minutes 05-11-1992MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, May 11, 1992 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None 2. Approval of minutes. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle, seconded by Shirley Anderson, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held April 27, 1992. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. None forthcoming. 4. Public hearing on improvement project 92-02, School Boulevard, and consideration of a resolution accepting bid, awarding contract, and ordering improvements for Projects 92-02, School _Boulevard, and 92-07, phase II of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Ken Maus opened the public hearing on Project 92-02, School Boulevard. Bret Weiss, City Engineer, informed Council that based upon the low bid, School Boulevard construction cost is $229,725 for grading, street, curb, and gutter; and $87,758 for storm sewer, for a total of $317,483. The construction cost for the Cardinal Hills phase II utilities, streets, and storm sewer is $348,911. These costs do not include the 5% contingency or 24% indirect costs. Weiss went on to note that the low bid is less than the engineer's estimate after plan design and very near the prices as estimated in the feasibility study. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the proposed resolution and noted that administrative details relating to the project need to be completed prior to signing the contract, which included official recording of the final plat of phase II of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision and recording of associated development agreement, execution of the terms of the development agreement governing phase II of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision, and City acquisition of title to the School Boulevard right-of-way. Page 1 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 After discussion, the public hearing was closed, and a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to adopt a resolution ordering Projects 92-02 and 92-07 and awarding the contract to Brown & Cris, Inc., of Lakeville in the amount of $666,394.50. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 92-14. 5. Consideration of approval of final plat of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision, phase II. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that the final plat has been reviewed and accurately reflects the preliminary plat approved by Council at a previous Council meeting. O'Neill noted details relating to the plat that needed to be completed prior to City signatures being placed on the plat. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve the final plat of phase II of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision contingent upon the developer providing a roadway easement extending from Starling Drive to School Boulevard, contingent upon the developer providing additional utility easements as necessary, and contingent upon completion and execution of the development agreement. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Consideration of a counteroffer for the purchase of the Marvin Kramer property - future 7th Street right-of-way. Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator, reported that he has been informed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation that in order for state aid funds to be used to purchase this property, an up-to-date appraisal must be completed. Wol f stel ler noted that the cost to conduct the appraisal would be paid by Minnesota Department of Transportation state aid funds if the property is purchased. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council that the City should have an appraisal conducted on the Kramer property as required by MN/DOT guidelines. 7. Consideration of adopting Prairie West development contract. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed development contract and has suggested that certain sections of the contract be amended. Therefore, staff recommends that consideration of the contract be tabled until the next Council meeting. Page 2 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to table consideration of adopting the Prairie West development contract. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Consideration of bids for West Bridge Park warming house and restrooms. John Simola, Public Works Director, informed Council that the lowest bid from Haymaker Construction is $78,450, which is $26,000 over budget. He noted that no local home builders or small contractors bid on the project. Simola stated that the low bidder, Haymaker Construction, indicated that there was some room for negotiation in their bid, especially if the City is willing to consider some alternatives with regard to the heating system or the wood paneling. Clint Herbst stated that he would rather see more interest in public use of the park before we build a new building. He noted that it might make sense to improve the rink first and then see if there is interest there for the building. Brad Fyle believed that the construction of a warming house at this location is a good idea, but we should seriously look at changing the building design to reduce the cost. Clint Herbst supported the concept of the City staff doing more of the construction work in order to reduce cost. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Dan Blonigen to reject all bids for the West Park warming house and restrooms. Motion carried unanimously. It was the consensus of Council to work with the architect on modifying the design of the building to cut costs further and potentially utilize public works employees to assist in construction of the facility. 9. Consideration of approval of plans and specifications and confirmation of advertisement for bids for phase I of the public works facility expansion. Bret Weiss, reviewed the plans and specifications with Council. Page 3 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 Clint Herbst indicated his concern regarding the cost ($62,000) to allow natural lighting to light the interior of the maintenance building. He asked what percent of the work done by the maintenance crew is actually done inside and wondered why natural lighting is so important given the amount of work actually completed inside the structure. Ken Maus asked if the natural lighting is nice or is it necessary. The City has had bad experiences with leaky roofs in the past. How is the skylight designed to assure the City that leaks will not occur? Bret Weiss reviewed the skylight design and noted that leaks should not be a problem. It was noted by John Simola that the interior space of the maintenance building will be used for more than just storing vehicles. During the day, the space will be used for vehicle maintenance, sign maintenance, and other activities that require adequate lighting. Council discussion then focused on recommendations made by the Planning Commission with regard to the site plan. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that during a sketch plan review, the Planning Commission recommended that the City consider changing the proposed location of the gas dispenser from the proposed location on the west side of the property near the entrance to the garage to the west side of the property. Planning Commission believed that this change should be considered because of the potential impact of the gas dispensing activity on the adjoining residential property to the east. O'Neill went on to inform Council that technically, public works facility expansion does not require a conditional use permit because the City ordinance states that all uses existing at the time of the establishment of the PZM zone are allowed as permitted uses in the PZM zone. Due to the fact that the public works facility was in place when the PZM zone was established, technically the expansion of the public works facility need not require a conditional use permit. O'Neill went on to note, however, that it was his view, as well as the view of the City Administrator and Planning Commission, that a mistake was made in the drafting of the ordinance regulating the PZM zone. He noted that under the existing language, all uses, including the Ruff Auto parts business, would be allowed to expand into any PZM area without a conditional use permit. It was Rick Wolfsteller's recollection that the PZM zone never intended to allow uses such as the Ruff Auto parts business to be allowed to expand Page 4 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 into any area in the PZM zone. Rick Wolfsteller also informed Council that in 1981, the public works facility expansion completed at that time did require a conditional use permit. It was his view that requiring a conditional use permit meets the spirit of the ordinance and the ordinance should be corrected accordingly. O'Neill went on to note that the Planning Commission has proposed to correct the situation by abolishing that section of the ordinance that would allow otherwise non -conforming uses in the PZM zone to be allowed as permitted uses in the PZM zone. In addition, the Planning Commission is proposing a zoning ordinance amendment which would allow a maintenance facility as a conditional use in the PZM zone. Dan Blonigen stated that the Planning Commission had no business providing input on the site plan for the public works facility. John Simola noted that he was unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting; therefore, he was not able to outline various reasons why the fuel dispensing facility needed to be located on the west side of the property. He noted that the location as proposed is the most convenient and efficient location in terms of vehicular movement on the site. At this location, vehicles can be fueled prior to entering the garage. Maintaining a secure area around the dispensing facility can be easily accomplished at this location with a fence. This fence can be opaque, which would thereby screen the fuel dispensing area. The location as proposed by the Planning Commission on the east side of the site would make it very difficult to secure the area and more difficult to screen as well. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve the plans and specifications and approve the component of the site plan which would result in the fuel dispensing facility to be located along the western side of the property as proposed in the original site plan. Fuel dispensing at this location is acceptable because impacts on the adjoining property can be minimized through installation of a screening fence; furthermore, the proposed location of the fuel tanks will allow for adequate security of the fuel dispensing area and will result in optimum traffic flow. Final design of the fuel dispensing area screen is to be established via the conditional use permit/Planning Commission review process. Motion carried unanimously. Page 5 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 10. Consideration to review for adoption an amendment to the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Guidelines --A non- performance provision. Economic Development Director, 011ie Koropchak, requested that the City Council consider adopting an amendment to the revolving loan guidelines. 011ie Koropchak noted that the loan guidelines do not include a provision that allows the Economic Development Authority to withdraw approval of a loan request in the event the loan applicant does not follow through with the project. 011ie went on to note that the Economic Development Authority recommends that the proposed change to the guidelines be adopted because it places more responsibility on the developer, serves to increase accountability of the GMEF appropriations balance, and allows the ability to maintain one set of terms per loan. Ken Maus noted that Brad Fyle and Clint Herbst serve on the EDA and have provided their input on the proposed revision to the GMEF Guidelines. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Dan Blonigen to adopt an amendment to the GMEF Guidelines as follows: Non-performance Provision. An approved GMEF loan shall be null and void if funds are not drawn upon or disbursed within 120 days from date of EDA approval. Motion carried unanimously. 11. Consideration of participating in funding a portion of the proposed community recreation needs survey. Assistant Administrator O'Neill requested on behalf of the Parks Commission that Council consider participating in funding a portion of the proposed community recreation needs survey. O'Neill reminded Council that the request stems from the joint meeting of the School District, Monticello Township, Silver Creek Township, and City of Monticello conducted in late March. O'Neill noted at that meeting the group reached general agreement that each local jurisdiction should consider funding a portion of a survey, the results of which would enable the community to establish park and recreation programs and facilities that meet the needs of the community. Page 6 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 O'Neill went on to outline some of the reasons for conducting the survey. 1. He noted that the information can be used to better allocate money spent on parks. O'Neill reported that in the past five years, the City of Monticello has spent over $1 million on park maintenance and capital improvements. Information resulting from the survey will enable the City to direct park funds where they are needed the most. 2. The survey will define the community need for a major recreation facility which might feature one or a combination of the following: a. civic center b. water park C. ice arena d. none of the above e. other 3. Savings Through Cooperation. Information obtained through the survey will identify common recreation needs and issues that can become the basis of future cooperative efforts between units of government. 4. Demonstration of Cooperative Attitude. Not all citizens agree on what types of facilities are needed, but most agree that the City/Township/School need to be working together. Development of a citizens survey is a first step toward that end. 5. The proposed survey design, which includes a telephone survey done by an independent third party at a cost of $9,600, would provide a high level of credibility and would allow the City to obtain a variety of reports as needed. All information can be broken out by city, township, or any other demographic factor as desired. 6. The survey results will give a voice to those citizens that do not have a special interest in terms of park and recreation needs. This information will help balance the requests made by special interest groups. O'Neill also noted arguments against conducting the survey. 1. Survey Cost. The expenditure of $9,600 is significant. Council could take the view that this money would be better invested in park facilities Page 7 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 2. Information contained in the survey is only valuable if Council feels that data is needed. Council could take the position that the present method of decision making is adequate. 3. Council may not be interested in conducting a referendum of any type on any type of facility at this time given the current economic climate. If there is no intent on placing a bond issue before the voters, there is significantly less reason to conduct the survey. 4. Council could take the view that the best way to survey opinion on a major facility is simply to conduct a referendum. This alternative would save $10,000 but could result in a referendum not passing because the facility proposed via the referendum may not be consistent with the needs of the voters. O'Neill then went on to inform Council that the Parks Commission is recommending that the City fund 60% of the cost of the survey, with any funds received later in excess of the total needed to be allocated to the City. It is the Parks Commission's opinion that the City should pay a higher share of the total cost because the City will receive greater benefit from the information than the other participating governments. The City will be able to use the data pertaining to facilities development and will be able to utilize data relating to general park and recreation needs. Usefulness of the data to the School District will be somewhat limited to the data pertaining to the civic center/ice arena issue. Dan Blonigen noted that parks should pay for themselves through generation of user fees. Ken Maus stated that the information contained in the survey will give us the data we need to apply our resources effectively. It is quite possible that the information will enable us to save money by discontinuing certain park -related projects or activities or by not undertaking a project due to the information contained in the survey. Maus also noted that it's nice to say that parks should generate income to pay for themselves; however, it is not possible to expect that we will be able to recover the cost to operate and maintain certain parks. For instance, it's not realistic to expect people to pay $1 at the gate everytime they wish to use Ellison Park. Certain park activities will not generate any income and must be funded by general taxation. Page 8 12. Council Minutes - 5/11/92 Brad Fyle stated that conducting a survey will allow the majority opinion to be heard, which will balance the requests made by groups interested in a particular project or program. Pastor Bob Rusert stated that if you don't have accurate information regarding citizens needs, you're out guessing. He noted the importance of obtaining community input and the importance of providing constructive outlets and activities for young people. Shirley Anderson stated she's not opposed to the City paying a portion of the cost of the survey; however, she noted that she does not believe in the accuracy or validity of survey information. Clint Herbst concurred that he is not sure that surveys are necessarily accurate. Dick Frie noted that the survey is a tool to provide the Parks Commission and City Council with data that will be valuable for three to five years. He reminded Council that the decision as to whether or not to move forward by conducting a referendum at some point in the future still remains with the City Council, and ultimately any decision to develop a facility must be placed officially before the voters. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Ken Maus to approve an appropriation equal to 60% ($51760) of the cost to conduct the $9,600 community survey. Funds eventually contributed by the City of Otsego are to be used to reduce the City of Monticello's share. Voting in favor: Brad Fyle, Ken Maus, Clint Herbst, Shirley Anderson. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. Review of bids for annual sealcoating project and award of contract. John Simola reported that the bids for the 1992 sealcoating project were opened on Friday, May 8, at 10 a.m. The bids received are as follows: Item I: Item II: Unit Base Bid A Unit Without Name of Bidder Per Sq Yd With Sweeping Per Sq Yd Sweeping Astech Corp. $0.407 $33,199.80 $0.367 $29,936.92 Allied Blacktop $0.5217 $42,556.11 $0.4584 $37,392.60 Caldwell Asphalt $0.54 $44,048.88 $0.50 $40,786.00 Company, Inc. Page 9 Council Minutes - 5/11/92 Simola recommended that Council award the contract to Astech Corporation based upon a unit price of $.407 per square yard, which results in a base bid with sweeping of $33,199. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Dan Blonigen to award the annual sealcoating project to Astech Corporation. In addition, due to the favorable bid, a separate contract should be prepared with Astech Corporation for sealcoating of Chelsea Road. Motion carried unanimously. 13. Other matters. Rick Wolfsteller reported that in conjunction with the expansion of the public works facility, the City will be removing subgrade material from the existing site. The City can reduce our cost to dispose of the subgrade material if we can place it on Outlot A of Country Club Manor. At this point in time, the City does not have authority to place material on the site, as the City has not yet acquired the property through the tax forfeiture process. Wolfsteller noted that the County may act to expedite the matter if the City agrees to pay the delinquent county and school taxes, which make up a very small part of the total taxes owing. Wolfsteller suggested that it may make sense for the City to pay delinquent school and county taxes because, as a result, the City may obtain the right to use the site for disposing subgrade material and thus save at least an amount equal to the school and county taxes. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to grant the City Administrator authority to pay the delinquent school and county taxes if it will enable the City to deposit material on the site as needed. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 000000,05, 6 t� F' /-1- i6ff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 10