Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 09-26-1977AGENDA REGULAR MEEl'IniG - KNTICELLO CITY COUNCIL September 26, 1977 - 7:30 P. M. Mayor: C. 0. Johnson Councilmen: D. Blonigen, G. Walters, P. White, A. Grimsmo ,/Meeting to be taped. /Citizens comments. 1. Public Hearing - Review of 1978 Preliminary Budget.' ✓2. Review of Furnishings for Senior Citizens Center. Consideration of Allowing Pet Hospital as a Permitted or Conditional Use Within a B-3 Zoning District. �. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit, Variance from Minimum Lot Size without City Sewer and Water and Building Permit - Dr. Joel Erickson. V5. Consideration of Building Permit - Land Projects. A. Consideration of Building Permit - Heskin'a Electric. .17. Consideration of Building Permit - 2 -car Garage and Family Room Addition - Charles Ritze. Consideration of Building Permit - Fair's Market. �. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment and Consideration of Building Permit - Bill Pemberton for a Roller Rink. ,h0. Consideration of Subdivision and Rezoning of Parcel Along East County Road A39. J 11. Consideration of Residential Street Lighting. ✓ .l� ✓12. Consideration of City's Share of Joint Recreation Program. ✓ V13. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment to Allow Professional and Commercial Offices as Permitted Uses Within a B-2 (Limited Business) District. /14. Approval of bill.. ✓f5. Approval of minutes from 9/8/77 and.9/12/77 meetings. Unfinished es: -1 Change ordrderr 19 1977-1 Sewer & Water project. lot*-( ✓ Combining sale of improvement bonds. �® Change order - Hoskin's ELoctrie n,�M,:'p i �y Rovicw of furnishing. -City Hell . C." Leasehold improvements - D. Kranz 1�,,✓s d+�� -1 �tJ� 3 5Q 7Z� New business: �• ,� r� 0 � Petition - water - Dfrno's Other World pecial meeting - October 6 Regular meeting - October 10 c#M G V Easements - 1977-1 Improvement Project rBuilding Permit Requirements - commercial -industrial buildings ✓ L Public Hearing AGENDA ITEM! 1 - Review of 1978 Preliminary Budget. Flhclosed, please find a copy of the preliminary budget for 1978. This copy of the budget is a more complete copy than was sent out earlier, which was sent to allow the council time to review the major aspects of the budget. Following are some significant points that bear comment relative to the 1978 budget: Increase of Local Tax Levy Local tax levy - 1977 $596,276 Additional tax levy for water 59575 Additional tax levy for sewer 26,875 Additional tax levy for 1977 sewer and water bonds 18,998 $6479724 Decrease in other items 14L-017) Local tax levy - 1978 As you can see, the increase in the local tax levy from $596,276 to $643,707 is the result of levies necessary in the sewer and water funds along with the levy for the 1977-1 and 1977-2 sewer and water improvement projects. When one considers an inflation factor, there would occur a decrease in the budget for other items of even more than $4,017 mentioned above. Sewer and Water Tax Levies. The level of expected expenditures in these two funds will require an increase in sewer and water rates or a lovy in order that revenues match expenditures. Rescue Unit - Fire Department. The budget for the fire fund has been reviewed and approved by the joint fire board. Additionally, the fire department is requesting the city and township to consider budgeting for a rescue unit the cost of which is approximately $25,000. Representatives of the fire board will be hero to answer questions on the fire fund portion of the budget and elaborate on the need for a rescue unit. 4 Mill Mvv - Caaital Outlav Pund A four mill levy in the capital outlay fund is proposed similar to the four mill levy in 1977 to primarily finance the construction and acquisition of land for city hall. Additionally, the council should consider using this fund to reimburse tho General Fund for a portion of the acquisition of a now senior citicens center in the amount of $44,600 and the Park Fund for park improvements in 1976 and 1977 of $41,862. It is estimated the General Fund will have a deficit balance of $18,225 and the Park Fluid a deficit balanco of $26,948 as a result of these improvements. C, /-L 4 !72 If the capital outlay fund was used to reimburse the General Fund for half of the cost of the Senior Citizens Center and the Park Fluid $30,000, this would place both of these funds in a positive balance position. This would still leave approximately $315,343 balance in capital outlay to finance the city hall and possibly other capital outlay expenditures such as a commuter parking lot. Financing City Hall. Estimated cost of City Hall, including land acquisition, is $452,110, recommended financing is as follows: Revenue Sharing Funds Accumulated to 12-31-78 $127,513 ' S 5rorV Liquor Store Funds 150 000 -- Capital Outlay Fund 174.597! Too+n Tt-9 G—.-0 $452,11 d3 This would still leave $140,746 in the Capital Outlay Fund. Hand Lew Necessary if Street Imorovement Program Approved and Levied for in 197A. If the Street Improvement Program as proposed (SC% ad valorem, 20% assessed cost of $2,272,000) is levied for in 1978, it would require an estimated $143,000 increase in our levy to retire the bonds or 3.55 mills. Interest Income. Interest income on investments will be approximately $35,000 in 1977 and it is expected that a like amount of interest will be earned on investments in 1978. Street Fund. Included in the street budget for 1978 is a truck with a sander and plow for $20,000. This item should be considered as more and more streets are beAng plowed by the city and a wing plow of the naturo that would be proposed for purchase would eliminate the extra trips that the older Chevrolet truck needs to make to adequately clear the streets of snow. While the pros and cons of this specific piece of equipment can be argued, it might be well to budget the amount and not necessarily label it for any specific use since the size of the street fund equipment inventory would require the purchase of one largo piece of equipment just on a replacement basis on a yearly basis. Revenue Sharing Funds. Although there are relatively few strings attached to the expendi- turos of Revenue Sharing Funds, the new law does require public hearings for the allocation of such funds. The budget hearing hold at Monday's meeting is part of the requirement and its purpose is to allow public input into the budget process and the use of a Revenue Sharing Funds. Any change in the council's decision to allocate these funds that will result in more than a 108 difference as presented in the budget will require another hearing. As a result, my recommendation would be to utilize these funds toward the City Hall or some project which cost can be accurately estimated. It is expected the City of Monticello will receive $689995 in J Revenue Sharing Funds in 1978. �4 POSSIBLE ACTION: Review of preliminary budget with recommendation Y for revisions. It should be noted that the revenue sharing laws require one more hearing based upon y the proposed uses of Revenue Sharing Funds and this could be held at our next meeting in conjunction with final budget approval. REF'FRINCE: Preliminary Budget. AGENDA ITEM 2 - Review of Furnishings for Senior Citizens Center. Currently the senior citizens center has approximately $4,925 built up in their own funds and additionally $796 has accumulated as a result of operating the information center. This is a total of $5021. The Senior Citizens Center Board has approved of the following improve- ments and equipment for the new center: Electrical wiring $ 500 o Partition between ceramic sales and woodworking area 354 Cupboards 75 Q Sink 78 Dishwasher, refrigerator 553 Pool table 554 6 Tables 424 6 Dozen Chairs 592 �,V a\ The Senior Citizens Center has also indicated they would like to keep a baso of $1,000 in their account to allow them to apply for 80% federal Ponding of handicapped bathrooms and painting of the center. The Center would apply for a $5,000 grant and would be required to supply a 208 portion of this grant. V, Additionally, the center would 11ko to paint the exterior and provide landscaping at a later data. Representatives of the Center will be here for questions. POSSIBLE ACTION: Review of improvements. 0 W,G 1-77 AGENDA ITEM 3 - Consideration of Allowing Pet Hospital as a Permitted or Conditional Use Within a B-3 Zoning District. Dr. Joel Erickson is proposing a pet hospital to be built on the east side of Highway 25 and approximately 600 feet south of the I-94 inter- change. Currently, this property is zoned as B-3 (Regional Business) and the permitted or conditional uses of a B-3 do not mention a Pet Hospital. In fact, no zone currently mentions a pet hospital as a conditional or permitted use. As a result, a public hearing is necessary to allow such a use within a B-3 (Regional Business) either as a conditional or permitted use. One other alternative to allowing pet hospitals as permitted or conditional uses would be to allow such uses in an industrial. zone. However, it would then be necessary to rezone Dr. Erickson's property or deny the permit on the proposed site. At their last meeting, the Planning Commission recommended the ordi- nance be amended to allow a Pet Hospital as a conditional use within a B-3 zone with the following conditions. 1. No outside pens or kennels. 2. Annual inspection by City's Health officer at owners expense. 3. All animals must be leashed. 4. Treatment would be limited to small domesticated animals. 5. Side yard setbacks would be 20 feet instead of 10 feet. 6. No outside storage of carcasses. This decision was made at a public hearing and no objections were raised. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of allowing Pet Hospital as a conditional use with above conditions in a B-3 zone. Agenda Item 4 - Consideration of Conditional Use Permit, Variance from Minimum lnt Size without Citv Sewer and Wtter and Buildine Permit - Dr. Joel Erickson. Provided the council concurs with agenda item 3 to allow a Pet Hospital as a conditional use permit within a B-3 zone, Dr. Erickson will need such a permit for a Pet Hospital. Additionally, Ordinance section 10-3-4(C) requires that any parcel that does not have city sewer and water must be at least 2aj acres in order to allow a private septic tank and well. Dr. EricksonIa parcel is 1.39 acres and would require a variance from this provision. With sewer extensions to the general area of Highway 25 and Industrial Drive, sewer and water would still be two blocks from Dr. Erickson's parcel and there are no plans at this time to service Dr. Erickson's parcel. Dr. Erickson has also submitted plans for a 2850 square foot building which will be primarily steel with Featherstone trim. At their last meeting, the Planning Commission recunuended a conditional use permit along with the building permit and variance be granted. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Building Permit. REFERENCES: Enclosed Map. Plan available at City Hall. Letter from Dr. Erickson explaining Pet Hospital. C11Z`/-7-7 Agenda Item 5 - Consideration of Building Permit - Land Proiects. Land Projects, a partnership, is proposing to build a 2,400 square foot detached tank facility on Lots 6, 7, B, and 4 of Block 6 of Upper Monticello for the Wright County State Bank (see enclosed map). The facility is intended to house the Wright County State Bank's main insurance office and to handle deposits and withdrawals. In talking with bank officials, they have indicated that loan transactions are not allowed at a detached facility according to State law. There are also seven drive up bays for deposits and withdrawals. At their last meeting the Planning Commission recommended approval contingent upon review and approval of building inspector and city engineer. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of building permit. REFERENCES: Enclosed Map. Plans (available at Monday's meeting). Agenda Item 6 - Consideration of Duilding Permit - Heskin's Electric. Dave Hoskins is proposing to build a facility for his business, Heskin's Electric, just to the south of Zahler Lumber Yard in the Industrial Park. As you may recall, Mr. Heskin was previously granted a variance on the side yard setbacks in an Industrial Zone to allow a building to be built within 10 feet of the property line (requirement in indus- trial zone is 30 feet). At their last meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the building permit request. Except for the variance indicated on setbacks, Mr. Heskin has indicated he would comply with all the city ordinances. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of building permit approval. REFME14CES: Building plans (J.W. Miller is reviewing and will be available at meeting. AGENDA ITEM 7 _ Consideration of Building Permit - 2 -car Garage and Family Room Addition - Charles Ritze. Normally permits of this nature do not require planning commission and city council review, but this item is placed on the city council agenda for reasons stated below. In February of 1976, Charles Ritze requested a conditional use permit to allow a truck garage be built within an Rrl zone. The City of Monticello granted the permit contingent upon a fence being construc- ted along the side of the garage to screen any equipment still stored outside. The garage was built without a permit and the fence never erected, and as a result, consideration should be given to granting the building permit requested now only contingent upon a permit being paid for on the truck garage and the fence erected as required. At the Planning Commission's last meeting, a recommendation was made to grant the permit based on the above stipulations. Mrs. Charles Ritze agreed to pay for the permit and to plant shrubs (permitted in lieu of a fence) to screen any equipment stored outside. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of building permit. AGENDA ITEM 8 - Consideration of Building Permit - Fair's Market. Mr. Bud Fair is requesting a building permit for Fair's Market to allow an open framework structure to be built to allow adequate amounts of rain, shade and sunlight to his nursery stock. This application was reviewed by J. W. Miller and the Planning Commission, and they recommend approval. (� POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of building permit. I�\VV� REFERENCES: Plans available at Monday's meeting. Agenda Item 9 - Consideration of Ordinance Amendment and Consideration of Building Permit - Bill Pemberton for a Roller Rink. Mr. Bill Pemberton is proposing to build an 11,700 square foot stmt building for a roller rink. The proposed building would be on the north half of Lot 1 Block 1 of Oakwood Industrial Park. It should be pointed out that the area is zoned as I-1 (Light Industrial) and this zone does not allow for a roller rink as a permitted or conditional use. Initially, the Planning Commission felt the use should be allowed as a permitted use within the I-1 zoning district and held a hearing at their last meeting to consider this amendment. However, on the suggestion of Mr. Dick Dwinell, the Planning Commission felt the use should be allowed as a conditional use as opposed to a permitted use within a I-1 zone. As a result of the above action, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the building permit, however, they indicated a planning commission hearing would have to be held on the conditional use permit giving proper notice to property owners within 350 feet on the conditional use permit request.* They also decided to recommend approval of the permit prior to holding the hearing with the under- standing that it most likely would be approved but owner stands the liability of conditional use permit being denied. Any work commenced would have to conform with the ordinance and if the conditional use permit for a roller rink was denied the structure would have to be turned into a permitted use within an I-1 zone. It would seem to me the council should not act on the building permit until a conditional use permit is granted and the necessary hearings held and recommendations have been received from the Planning Commission and approval received from the council. IBLE ACTION: 1. Conaidoration of amending ordinance to allow amusement places (ouch as roller rinks and dance halls) and bowling alleys (to allow Joyner Lanes to be a conforming use) to be a permitted or conditional use within a I-1 zone. 2. Conaideration of a building permit - Bill n Pemberton's Monticello Roller Rink. REFERENCES: Ehcloaed map. Building Plans (available at city hall). • • The hearing hold on the ordinance amendment required newspaper publication only and waa not sent to property owners in the area. Agenda Item 10 - Consideration of Subdivision and Rezonine of Parcel Alons East County Road #39. River Meadow Apartments, a partnership consisting of Ralph Smith, Gary Wieber, and Bob Mosford, is proposing to build a 30 unit apartment along East County Road h59 (see enclosed map). The area under consideration is approximately 7.40 acres and is part of a larger 20 acre tract of land. This subdivision results in two parcels then of more than 5 acres and would have to meet the following subdivision requirements. 1. Review by Planning Commission and review and approval by the City Council. 2. Certificate of survey. 3. Park dedication requirements. A certificate of survey has been prepared and presented to the Planning Commission and they have recommended approval of the subdivision. Additionally park dedication requirements would be adhered to in the form of a 10% cash contribution. Additionally a rezoning request was made to have the area rezoned to R -B (Residential Business) from the present zoning of R-1 and R-3. Reason for request to R -B is that this is only zone that would allow an apartment house of more than 30 units. At the public hearing on this proposal the Planning Comdssion recommended the area be rezoned to R-3 in 1t13 entirety rather than RrB (Residential Business) and to allow a variance for one 30 unit apartment. This recommendation was made at the suggestion of Dick Dwinoll since in this manner any additional apartments of this size would then require a public hearing as opposed to being a permitted use. The apartment house planned for the area will be an all brick non -subsidized unit and would meet all applicablo ordinancea, however, tho developers will have to apply for a building permit at a later date and would require planning commission and city council approval. At the hearing there was one objection from a property owner concerning the impact of valuations, but later withdrawn after a presentation by the developers that the project would be non - subsidized and the area would allow only one 30 unit apartment without another public hearing. POu3I}3LE ACTION: Consideration of rezoning area to Rr3 with varimsce to allow one 30 unit apartment and subdivision approval. REFMMCES: Certificate of survey available at City Rall. Fheloaed map. AGENDA ITEM 11 - Consideration of Residential Street Lighting. At our last meeting, a petition was received from the following property owners requesting a street light just south of Riverside Cemetery and east of River Terrace Park: Lyndon Sonju Gerald Doerr Ronald Goeb It was decided to table any decision on the specific request until an overall street lighting plan could be developed. Enclosed, please find a street lighting plan developed by Mike Rajala in 1976 and updated. As you may recall, in 1976 the City Council ordered street lights in sixteen residential areas which were determined to be essential. These 16 lights were all at intersections and in addition to 5 lights put in at park locations. It was discussed at the time to consider any additional street lights upon a petition of a 2/3 majority of property owners within 200 feet of a proposed light. Subsequently, an additional two lights were put in on W. County Road #39 as a result of a petition from property owners in the area. Mike Rajala was in touch with the St. Cloud Public Works Department, and they have developed a system of rating each possible light on the basis of the following criteria: 1. Road alignment and grade 2. Population density 3. Crime 4. Pedestrian activity 5. Traffic density 6. Lighting effectiveness (spacing, obstructions) 7. Intersection indication 8. Accident prevention While the road alignment of the particular area in question is good and is not at an intersection or densely populated, there is a good amount of pedestrian and traffic activity. As a result, the area bears some consideration, however, there would most likely be several areas that the need is as great as this area. Since the essential lighting portion of Mike's plan has been implemented, it would seem that one possible way to proceed is to judge each additional request on a case by case basis with the overall plan used as a guide in determination of approval of any request that is petitioned for. As you will note, there are 31 additional lights for consideration, and if those were installed, the city's electric bill for lights would increase $2,790 annually based on a utility charge of $7.50 per month per light. Vp POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approving lighting plan, �p yb timetable for implementation and consideration of specific request. L' REFERENCES: Proposed lighting plan. AGENDA ITEM 12 - Consideration of City's Share of Joint Recreation Program. This is an annual item that appears on the city's agenda and it relates to the city's contribution to the School District's recreation program which is a part of their community services fund. Among the activities intended to be jointly shared between the school district and the city are the following: Swimming Lesson Tot lot program Community band Community utilization of swimming pool T -Ball program - equipment needs In 1976 the city voted to contribute $2,000 for these activities and in 1977 a budgeted amount of $2,200 was set up. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of amount (if arty) to contribute toward joint recreation program. MDA ITEM 13 - Consideration of Ordinance Amendment to Allow Professional and Commercial Offices as Permitted Uses Within a B-2 (Limited Business) District. This amendment would allow professional and commercial offices as a permitted use in a B-2 zone. Since B-3 and B-4 zones allow as permitted uses all permitted uses within a B-2, professional and commercial offices would also be permitted uses within B-3 and B-4 zones. Currently these uses are only allowed as "conditional uses" in a R -B (Reeldential Business) zone and B-1 (Neighborhood Business) and thio would appear reasonable to allow these as "condi- tional uses" in these zones since they are quasi-rosidential areas. Howover, there 13 no place that professional and commercial offices are allowed in a B-2, B-3 or B-4 zone either as a permitted or conditional use. To illustrate the point, a low office could not locate downtown or in the shopping center. This item woo reviewed mid approved by the Plmnning Commission. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of ordinance amendment. STREST LIGHT RATING FORA t ' Road Align=--nt t Grade 1 2. 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 Po?elaLion Density 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 crime 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 Pedestrian Activity (Sus Stop, )'arks, Play Areas) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 Traffic Density 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 .Lighting i:f fcctivcnass (Spacing, Obstructions) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10• ---terscction Indication 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 Accident Prevention 1 2 3 4 6 7 0 9 10 " TDTAL RATIt:G now, Circle rating for each criteria. PROP OSB D LIST OF TURN 1 SI I a -NGS d FIXTURES FOR CITY IIALL Council & Planning Commission Chaff rs Se"""rial Chairs Office Chairs - Desks Stacking Chairs for Audience - Counc i I Chambers Desks WO Secrunari.a.l Returns Desks - Off.ices S.i ttNg Coon rs - Lobb• C rcde"Zas iia Inds Conferenr.c T'nble Sri. Ling Chairs - llff.i.ccs rile Cabinets Cuffue Table Sub-ToLal Arccssnrlcs & Ki.srcllancnns T0a'A1. Univ. QuaWty Price Ibt.al 6 $105 S 6 1) 4 91 3114 4 103 420 12 24 258 3 6 14 1 4 3 1 NOTE: Six caLSLi.ng Council (hall's l:o be ll"I iz.cd in Conference Rnom. We 296 330 S4 ;07 71 151 $4 73 56 94) 504 621 I l1011 1sl 336 219 56 $6467 3533 $1(V.lUl1 -REWLWJ-=MIG,bF!fIDWfCEUA) ]CI-TiTCOUNICI Dr., c* b-Vdathrr LKO�j �In to47trjit;�,; Cal 'vo, lia.r W, rid ',p ��-"tlo 00 A - 6- 1 - " r'*?, 4�L�x 4 V lvb34&arp­ ml&ct 4, iNf, I V, 15!!Wbu.;UN 4 V3 %r,nrAtvp cn Rdvcyftfe sliti&I till. of _ a pprOA )v,= rOin by G. Vna,tJdr.'a,- !xecofid, Py;.A. �G#Msmo to on -4 't�;orT VvLjge�-t ais -proatALbd • vii-th tfidi uti -ati -of, U0,ds the City IIbIIIIbuilding :projqq am c mill5ad, G. Xbl.tOra,- F: MO Corel J'so bp�Wbn aiiAtht th arkv skm.%� ' r -L bppl:i4ed t,h iT6tAdh-. N-rTdAiiiFa, for, Senior, C itize ni% 'Cvliterl. , '0 1W ply oFrc�ptly th!q cmiar, IcMv�cnd &M ,tall �miv �NnAc and �040clfs n iy*f6m'v0cA wato . m 4Y $79 , Kdfs� VOUQUItIOU' d Ou t 4A .711, Or6a Aui-its W j'op 0j, MV A de u. Conoidi ration of Conditional Use Permit, Variance fram'Minimum Lot without Citv Sewer and Water and Building Permit - Dr. Joel Erickson. tr. Joel Erickson is proposing ei pet hospital to be built on the east side ,of u --U& wey; .5 and approximately 600 feet south of. the I=94 interchange. 'Sn-ently, this property is zoned as 3=3 (Regi"ondl "Business)' and the, permitted. ar conditional uses of a B-3 do not mention a Pet Hospital. Mn faci, nn cone currently mentions a pet hospital as a conditional or Pe"mi.tted usW. As a result, .the Planning Commission recommended the; =iinande be "amended to allow a 'Pet Hospital as a conditional use within a3-75 zone with the following.. conditions: 1. o mit•side pens or kennels: An.: iel, inspection by City's Health officer at.owners expense. .3. .All animale must- b6 leashed. L. Treatrirsnt would' be limited to small, domesticated animals. 5. Si _'e yard setbacks would be 26 feet instead of 10 feet. 6:, No outsidestorage of carcasses. Additia-nally, Ordinance section 10-3-4(C); require©' that any parcel that does not have 'city• sewer and water must be at least * acres in order to allow e' prfvat-� septic •tank and we -11. Dr. ESrickson's parcel "is 1.39 acres and would require a vaTla;ee 'from. this provision. Y. Whlti� ngia a motion, eezcond by A. Grimsmo and unanimously, carried to amend OrdiAsofl --" '3action 10-13-4('I) to allow Pct Hospitals' 'as a ,conditional use in ? with the •following conditionsv I. '!ID Jut$idd pens or kennels. Annird inspection by City's Health officer at owners, expense. 3. AIA animals met be, loaahed. 3.. Treatment would be: limited to small domesticated animals. j.c. SlAi y crd estbacks- would be 20 fact instead of 10 fact." E. !'z gut •ide storage of carcasses. AM: to apprave the buildlne perndt for I4r. Ericksoni''s Pet, Hospital as a condi-- tiorlaL u3l�v w'ith..Lhe granting of a, variance from the -provisions :of Sc-t,l c 12��-+,(c) for' septic tank, installations. (6&eOrd. Amendment Omand: ration of -Building Peradt - tand Projects. Lard f'ra,n^tc, a partnership, is proposing, to build a 29400 square, foot ditw�t,.A b&dc fs^.ility on Lots 6, 7, 9 and 9 of -Block 6 of Upper. Monticello '3' ="ty Stats •Bank'. it, i's3l , lay 4,a intended to. house the Wright'Oaunty State Dank'a main incur= v,r, 11'f:c rrd to handle deposits .acid withdranrals. A Vi,' -)r. va rsadt by P. S:'J'ni ta, sloond by D. Blonigan and unanimously cirriid ,j ftn n,vthi- building petiRit for Land Projects, Inti contingent upon final gi.ravr` ,I r°.ars.by htildiop irnspactoi and city engineer. Gonsi,fersLion of Buildina Permit - Heskin's Electric Dave Heski. s is proposing to build a facility for his business, Hoskins' 'aectric, just to the south of Zahler Lumber Yard in the Industrial Park. �h. Heskins has pre% ously granted a variance on the side yard setuacks in an industrial zone to allow a building to be built within 10 feet of the pro- perty 1 Lne. On a .nation by D. Blonigen, second by P. White, it was unanimously carried to approve the building permit for Heskdns' Electric contingent upon approval of the plans by the building inspector. Consideration. of Building Permit - 2. -car Garage and Family Room Addition - Charles Ritze. In Feb:aary of 1976, Charles Ritze requested a conditional use permit to allow a trues garage be built within an R-1 zone. The City of Monticello granted the permit contingent upon a fence being constructed along the side of the garage to screen any equipment still stored outside. The garage was built without a permit and the fence never erected, and as a result, the council considered granting the building permit requested now only contingent upon a permit being paid for on the truck garage and the fence erected as required. A. Crimsmo made a motion, second by P. White and unanimously carried to approve the residential building permit for a family room and 2 -car garage for r'harleo Ritze provided the previous building permit for the truck garage is 1 id and the shrubs or trees are planted to screen any equipment stored out- side as previously agreed to. !, Consideration of Building Permit - Fair's Market. Mx. Bud Fair is requesting a building permit for Fair's Market to allow an Open fra.-iuvork atructuro to be built to allow adequate amounts of rain, shale and sunlight to his nursery stock. Motion was made by D. Blonigen, second by A. Crimsmo and unanimously carried to approve the building permit requested by Bud Fair. �•. Considerntion of Ordinnnce Amendment and Consideration of Duildinri Permit - Bill P}mberton for a Roller Rink. Mr. Bill Penbor..an proposed to build an 11,700 square foot steel building for a roller rink. The proposed building would be on the north half of Lot 1, Block 1 of Oilmwd Industrial Park. The aeon is -cned no I-1 (Light Industrial) and this zone does not allow for a roller rink no a permitted or conditional use. Initially, the Planning i Cannicalon fol*. the use should be allowed as a permitted use within the 1-1 conin;; district and held a hearing at their last meeting to consider tilts a•aendnimt. HowotTr, err the suggestion of Mr. Dick Dwlnsll, the Placusing Carrxdooion felt the use should be allowed as a conditional use as r iced to a permitted uoo within an I-1 zone. As a result of the above action, the Planting Commission recommended approval of the building; perndt, however, they indicated a planning, comnission tea:•ing would have to be held on the conditional use permit 1 cuing proper :notice to property otzzers within 350 feet on the condi- "v oral :tse permit, request. C. Walters made a motion, second by P. White and unanimously carried to amend Ordinance Section 10-15-.1.(D) to allow Amusement Places (such as roller rinks and dance halls) and bowling alleys as conditional uses within an 1-1 zone and approve the building, permit requested for a roller rink subject to a public hearing being held by the Planning Compassion and approval by the committee of the conditional use permit. (See Ord. Amend. 8-15--75 #38). i. Consideration of Subdivision and Rezoning of Parcel Along East County Road #39. Pdver Meadow Apartments, a partnership consisting of Ralph Smith, Cary Wieber p and Bob Cosford, is proposing to build a 30 unit apartment along First County Road #39. z The area under consideration is approximately 7.1,0 acres and is part of a larger 20 acre tract of land. This subdivision results in two parcels then of more than 5 acres mud would have to meet the following subdivision f requ-irements. .. Review by Pl:a::ni-ng Copmdesion and review and approval by the city council. Certificate of survey. t , 3. Park dedication requirements. A certificate of survey has been prepared and presented to the Plmuning t Commission aid they have recommended approval of rho subdivision. Addi- tionally, park dedication requirements would be adhered to in the form of a IQX cash contribution. AL the public hearing on this proposal, the Planning Commission recommended rho area be rezoned to R-3 in its entirety rather than R -B (Residential Suoinoso) and to allow a variance for one 30 unit apartment. P. 1,9nite mecv o motion, second by A. Crimamo to approve the rezoning of the 7.: acre parcel along County Road #39 from R-1 to 11t3 (Modium Density Residential) and grant a variance to allow (1) 30 unit apartment building. In fovor: :. Johnoon, A. Crimsmo, P. White, C. Walters. Abotairnint5: D. Bionigen. (Soo Orainanco Amendment 5-15-75 #39) CmnaxiernLic. of Roaideutinl Street lAghtinR. At out Inst weeting, a petition was received from the following ,property owners rc•quvoting a ctreot light gust south of R.iversido Cemetery and east of River Terrace Park: I,yntion son ju or ( Gerold Doerr 4. Ronald Caeb It was d.r:ided to table any decision on the specific request until an overall street lighti .5. Considerntlo:: of Chance Order - 77-1 Sewer & Water Project. A motion as made by G. Walters, second by D. Blonigen and unanimously ( carried to authorize the preparation of plans and specifications for black- u"toppdn6 a..elsea Road and the new road proposed for construction under the 77-1 Sa:oer and Water Improvement Project. .7. Consider axion of Combining, Sale of Improvement Bonds. The City's bonding consultants, Springsted & Assoc. have been previously authorized to sell bonds in the amount of $730,000 for the 77-1 and 77-2 Sewer, Water and Street Improvement Projects planned by the City. In. addition. should the city council decide to implement a permanent street Improvement program including curb, gutter, and storm sewer, another bond issue would .have to be sold for approximately 2,; million. S The bond consultants have recommended that if the council should decide to issue bonds in 1977 for such a street improvement program, all bonds should be sold at one time, rather than separately. t The covrncil consensus was to delay the original bond sale of $730,000 until the council decides on whether to pursue a permanent street improvement pros. am. -1. Consideration of ch etre orders - Worminp House. John Badalich, city engineer, made on inspection of the 4th Street Warming "ouoe to determine if tho rafters used by the contractor are in accordance dth cpecificntions. The contractor installed 2 x 4 truss rafters, while the specifications called for 2 x b truss rafters. The engineer requested additional load specifications from the contractor on the rafters and a change order will be discussed at the next council meeting if determined satisfactory by the city engineer. Revlow of hnnishinco - City Hall. A list of f mishLnga rocently reviewed by councilman A. Crimsmo and City AdmirSotrator, Gary '41eber, were discussed with the councilmen. A Mtion rrao made by P. White, occand by A. Grimsmo and unnnimously carried to authorize the City Administrator to order the quantity of funtishinas li oted. (See supplement 9-26-77 #2). i.enar.hoid inmrovrments - Dnve Kranz. tt-. Dave Kranz woo authorized to complete the following improvemento to the back portion of the centor citizens buildiarg being rented by him: 1. Concroto floor $1,599.00 Electrical 2, 700.00 Ne wtUi ireprovecent costs will bo used as a credit agoinst his future ra-.tal pamcnto. (by council. cancencuo, J. Miller will be asked to supervise and coordinate all !"9orovc ..m'.c done at tho senior citizens building, both by Mr. Kranz and by tho ccnior citizeno. Il.' Pci ititnt for City Water - Dino's Other World. htrr. Floyd Kruse requested city water for his restaurant, Dino Other World. DLriyB 1976, city water was installed within .a few hundred feet of his building by .g a service stub up from Mississippi Drive. Mr. Kruse is now petitioning for a 6" water service to adequately serve his fire protection needs. The city erig:Lneer was instructed to study the feasibility of replacing the V" ser -Ace with a 61'or the possibility of extending a new 6" line from the wastewater, treatment' -plant to the front of hie property.; I Easements - 77-1 Improvement Project. The city has obtained all necessary construction easements, except for one on the 77-1 newer and water improvement project. One remaining construction easement is still needed from A'. Earl Malone, but it appears that a mutually satisfactory _agreement will not be reached without proceeding with eminent domain procedures. P. White entered a motion, second by G. Walters and unanimously carried to proceed with eminent domain procedures in an effort to obtain the neces- sary easement from Earl Malone. �,. Hiscellaneous. By council consenpus, all remodeling building permits for commercial or industrinl r.rvperty will -nob require Planning Commission and council approvol prier to istraance. Only new construction or structural alterations need Plsrring ;, 7 s3ion and council approval. .. "Ity AImILAateatur wag instructed to check with the Post Office on the possi- bility of requiring the grouping of residential mail boxes at various locations thmia.put t!:e city rather than each residential property having their own wail box. A Wecial carurcil meeting will be held at 4:00 P.M. October 6, 1977 to -review c:y5rw of city employees for 1979. L(/ A=_.�:ri.lr��;t?.-� Asaiatarlt SPECIAL MEETING - CITY COUNCIL Monticello Jr. High Auditorium September 28, 1977 - 8:00 P. M. Members present: Johnson, Grimsmo, Blonigen, Wolters, White. Also present were John Badalich and Keith Nelson of the consulting engineering frim of Orr-Schelen-Mayeren & Assoc. The purpose of the meeting was to hold a Public Hearing; on the permanent street improvement program proposed for the City of Monticello. John Badalich, consulting city engineer, reviewed the proposed permanent street improvement program which would include curb, gutter, storm sewer improvements and a 36 foot bituminous street. The tonal project was recommended for construction in 2 phases; Section I being the area west of Hwy. #25 and Section II being the arca east of Hwy. x/25. The estimated costa of the improvements were as follows: Section I - area west of Hwy. 25 --$1,413,600 Section II - area east of Hwy. 25 - 1,077,200 Total estimated. cost $2,490,800 Gary Wieber, city administrator, presented an explanation of the proposed assessments and tax increase for a typical parcel being served by the improvements. The current consensus of th® council would be to assess 20% of the total project costs to the abutting property owners. Using this percentage, a typical parcel of 66, x 1651 would be assessed $7-30 per foot or $483.00 for street improvements and .01194 per square foot for storm sewer or $130.00. This would amount to approximately $613.00 r or $55.00 per year for 20 years including interest. In addition, 80% balance of the project costs would be placed on ad vatores taxes and would result In it property tax increase based on the market value of the 'home as follows: Market value: $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 Approximate $10.91 $33.84 $47.85 Anevease : The Public 1learing wag opune.d up to citizens cosuenls and the following persons were ,heard: Wilbur Eck ---- Inquired as to whether he could get a deferred assessment. Also asked whether it is necessary for the city to hold a referendum on the improvement. Mr. Eck opposed the project due to the high assessment on his parcel. Also felt the need for the improvements had not been established. Ben Smith ---- Inquired as to the city's current total indebtedness and what future projects would do to the real estate taxes in Monticello. Caroline Ellison ----- Asked if assessments against property owned by Senior Citizens could be deferred until the properties were re -sold. The city would check into the deferrment of assessments if legally possible. Mrs. Ellison expressed support for the project. Jeff Rowan ----- Inquired as to why the project would in- elude re -paving 3rd Street since it was recently resur- faced in 1973. The engineer stated that 3rd Street would have to be widened to 36' and .re -graded to provide for proper storm sewer drainage. Mr. Rowan did not see the urgency of a curb and gutter program and opposed the project. Harry. Schaffer ---- felt the reason our streets, especially 3rd Street, have been deteriorating is because of the heavy truck traffic. Cindy Rasmussen --- Asked whether there would be any guarantee that the streets would not fall apart within 6 months to a year. She also asked whether the streets would ever be torn up after they were completed. She was assured that a quality improvement should not show signs of deteriorating for many years and that all. underground utilities would be installed before a permanent street was constructed. No opposition to the project, was given. Paul Dahl ----- Asked whether permanent street construction might cause damage to individual. wells. Was informed that under normal ei.reumgtaneeo, no permanent damage should Occur. Ile also questioned why utilities such as telephone and electric lines wouldn't be installed first in the streets. The engineer commented that, these utilities could be An - Stalled along the ci.ty'■ right of way without disturbing any permanent streets. No opposition to the projeot was expressed by Mr. Dahl. -2- 9 Arlene McIntire - ---- Voieed opposition to the project because property owners not receiving the improvements 1, would be asked to still pay for a portion of the costs through ad valorem taxes. John Mitchell ----- Asked whether any allowance would be made on the storm sewer assessment since his property drains to the river already. It was indicated that no allowance would pr6bably be made. Bud Schrupp ---- Felt that the project was a needed im- provement and that the assessment, policy proposed was fair. William Sandber% ---- Questioned why a referendum wasnIt considered by the council. Also expressed concern on what might happen should gross earnings legislation become effective. He was informed that all of the recent gross earnings legislations have included the grand fathering :Ln of all outstanding bonds issued by the city and would continue using the utilities, present valuation, thus *,here should be no noticeable effect on taxes Por the project. Mr. Sandberg oleo felt that water drainage, is not a problem in Monticello and opposed the project wf th- out a referendum. Mario 'Peterson ----- Inquired as to whether property not receiving any improvements would be assessed. It was stated that only parcels being benefitted by the. improvements would be assessed. UnIter Klatt ---- Asked whother a 66' wide lot could be built on. lid was informed that a building permit could be obtained provided all city ordinances were met. _ Fran Fair ----- Did not feel a public referendum was necessary ,a as council members were, already elected by the citizens to make decisions of this nature. She expressed support of the �. ;project and feltit should be done now while our tax 'Use ie still. here. Hcaring no other citizens comments the hearing was adjourned by the council. A decision .will, be made by Clio counell at � a 1 cr date. ick Wolfsto cr Adm. Assistant RW/1g -3-