City Council Agenda Packet 01-08-1979AGENDA
RF„GULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
January 8, 1979 - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor: Arve Grimsmo
Councilmembers: Dan Blunigen, Fran Fair, Philip White.
(One Council position to be filled)
Meeting to be taped.
Invocation - Rev. Gerald Oas
Oath of Office - Arve Grimsmo and Fran Fair
Citizens Comments.
TAbIL (1c+�oa DN Q( �/�\Nll O N \4-11-3 'T- ps%j /a; T4.
1. Consideration of Filling Vacancy on City Council. 1(&— NA%S
!� 5" 2. Consideration of Appointment of Camnittee Members and Various City Func-
tions and Duties. Chtt, "m-
3. Consideration of Approval of Additional Billing from Orr-Schelen-Mayeron
and Associates on the Step I Wastewater Treatment Facilities Planning Report
4. Consideration of Advertising for New Public works Director.
vS 5. Consideration of Resolution Ord2 ring Feasibility Report on Projects
1 Petitioned For. pw"1 F P � Vu,e,
✓G. Approval of Minutes - Special Meeting of December 20, 1978, and Regular
Meeting of December 11, 1978.
Unfinished Business -
Now Buaineso -
Conaidoration of Rescheduling January 2'2, 1979 Meeting
due to annual Chamber of CGmmerco Banquet. 1-7.3'19c3' i -M)
A4 Ar
IN 17f. o
�Z
V�/ .
MIIaJTES
SPECIAL ;1EFrING - MOt7fICELLO CITY COUNCIL
December 20, 1978 - 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: C. O. Johnson, Dan Blonigon, Arve Grimsmo, Gene Walters,
Phil White.
Mumbers Absent: Clone
1. Consideration of PUD Develognent Stage Approval and Variance Request on
Cc_rtificate of Occupancy - l'ance's I-94 Amoco Station.
Samuel Properties suhmitted their development stage plan for the Vance's Amoco
Station at the interchange of 1-94 and State llighway 25 in MontlCello.
As Part of the development stage plan, Samuel Properties was proposing to
put up a pylon sign that would be GO' in height. Monticello City Ordinances
do allow a sign of 32' in height and the actual height is determined by the
grade of the road from which the sign gains its principal exposure. At this
point there was a Council discussion relative to which road would be con-
sidered the road of principal exposure for the sign. The Vance's Amoco
Station in effect is on a site that abuts three toads, those being I-94,
State Highway 25 and County Road 117. It was pointed out that the highest
grade elevation in the area would be State llighway 25 as it crosses over
1-94, and even if this paint was used as the arca of the road of principal
exposure, a variance would still be necessary since the height of the sign
which measures Go, from the base would still be more than 32' over the highest
grade elevation on State llighway 25 in the area.
City Administrator, Gary Wiebor, pointed out that although this would be a
variance from the City's height regulation, that thin specific request would
be a part of tho overall planned unit development and would not require a
separate veto. Motion was made by Gane Walters, seconded by Arva Grimsmo
to approve Lhu PUD dovelopment stage plan for Vance's Standnrd Station with
the provision that no variance would bo granted upon the sign and that the
grade elevation to measure the 32' above the rood would be State Highway 25
whore it abuts the proporty owned by Samuel Proportion. Voting in favor:
Gone Walters, Arvo Grimsmo, Can Johnson, Phil White. Opposed: Dan Blonigen.
It should be pointed out Lhat this would allow a height of the sign to My
from the bone to thu top of the sign of approximately 40 - 45'.
2. Public hearing on the Consideration of a Sidoyard Setback - Independent
Lumber Company.
Independent Lumbar Company, in the Oakwood industrial Park, would like to be
granted a variance to allow a storage building up to Lhu westerly proj,erty line
of their lot, lot 1, block 2, Oakwood Industrial ]lark. In an 1-1 zone, Cho
outback minimum on c oideyard io 30' by ordinance.
Council Minutes - 12/20/78
Mr. Richard Zahler, owner of Independent Lumber Company, explained that the
effect of having the storage building built right up to the property line
would be the same as having a fence which is required by the City of
Monticello ordinances to screen open or outdoor storage areas. Additionally,
Mr. Zahler felt that it would be a better use of the land available and allow
for better traffic flow for vehicles loading and unloading materials. Since
there was no particular hardship other than to make a better utilization
of the land, motion was made by Arve Grimsmo, seconded by Phil White to
deny the variance request. Voting in favor: Con Johnson, Arve Grimsmo,
Gene Walters, Phil White. Opposed: Dan Blonigen.
3. Approval of Bills.
Bills for the month of December 1978 were presented to the Council and
a motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Arve Crimsmo and unanimously
carried to approve the bills.
4. Certificate of Occupancy Variance Request - Bob Mosford.
Mr. Bob Mosford would like to open up his new office complex at the corner
of Third and Cedar street in Monticello, and the only items not finished
at this time are the blacktopping, curb barriers and landscaping which were
uncompleted because of the weather..
Motion was made by Gene Walters, seconded by Arve Crimsmo and unanimously
carried to ioaue a certificate of occupancy provided that the uncompleted
item❑ be bonded for and that their completion date would be July 1, 1979.
Meeting adjourned.
G.��/Y W1�. °r
C,2Y Ainistrator
GW/na
_,_6
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
1. Consideration of Filling Vacancy on City Council.
1/8/79 Council
With Arve Grimsmo taking his elected position as Mayor of the City of
Monticello, a vacancy occurs on the City Council for the unexpired portion
of Arve Grinsmo's term, which is December 31, 1980.
Appointment process is that vacancies are filled by the appointment of the
City Council by a motion. Such a motion must be passed by the majority of
the Council voting on the question when a quorum is present. If the Council
votes on an appointment, and the vote results in a tie, the Mayor may make
the appointment without Council approval. In doing so, he may select any
eligible person for the position; he is not restricted in this choice to those
persons whose appointment was considered by the Council.
To be eligible to fill the vacancy on the Council, a prospective candidate
must x an eligible voter within the City of Monticello, and must be at least
21 years of age. State Statutes provide that the vacancy shall be filled as
soon as possible, but there is no specific time limit indicated.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of filling council seat vacancy.
2. Consideration of Appointment of Committee Members and Various City Functions
and Duties.
Enclosed, please find a current list of the. City of Monticello's commissions
along with various other appointments necessary to be made at the first meeting
of the year.
Except in the case of the H.R.A., committee members whose terms are regulated
by state statute on a rotating five year basis, all appointments are annual.
Please note the asterisk on the sheet which indicates new appointments which
will be necessary. Obviously, in addition to these, any other appointments
can be made. It should also to pointed out that probably several of the
committoos might be reviewed and a decision made whether to continue or not.
For example, the Airport Committee, the Business District Development Com-
mission, which was formed primarily to study a downtown improvement plan in
1977, and also the Historical Society. another issue that somewhat relates
to the consideration of continuing the Historical Society Committee is whether
to continue to utilize one of the two former Men -e1 Gasoline Station struc-
tures for use by the Historical Society. Council may want to consider
meeting with the Ilistorical Society and discussing the future of the commit -
too along with the uoo of that particular structure.
Except for the Business s Industrial Development Committee, which is appointed
by the Mayor with the Council's approval, all Committee appointmonto are made
by the City Council on a majority vote. It may be the easiest to go over
the ontiro list of committees, duties, functions, etc., and obtain a con-
senoua and then call for a veto on the entire list as amended rather than
to call for a motion on each individual cammitt.00, function, duty, etc.
Agenda Supplement - 1/8/79 Council
As the sheet also indicates, it is necessary to appoint a Chairperson of
the H.R.A. Authority. The remaining committees that are formed provide
that the committee members themselves elect a chairperson from their group.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of appointment of City of Monticello
committees, individual committee members, Cfitytofficial
functions and duties.
REFERENCES: Attached list of the same.
3. Consideration of Approval of Additional Billing from Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6
Associates on The Step I Wastewater Treatment Facilities Planning Report.
At the City Council's December 11, 1978 meeting, a letter which is again
enclosed was handed out from OSM relative to reimbursement for Monticello's
facilities planning report Step I Grant.
As indicated in the December 8, 1978 letter from John Badalich, the final
billing involves an additional amount due over and above the contract amount
of $3,432.88. Copies of the invoice for the additional amount plus the
final billing on the original contract amount of $102,690 are enclosed for
your review. For your information, the Step I process is for the study
of the feasibility of improving the City's current wastewater treatment
plant and is funded 750 by the Federal government and 159 by the State
government.
As indicated in OSM'a letter of December 0th, our engineering firm feels
they are entitled to additional reimbursement funding to cover labor costs
and other expenses for additional work which they were compelled to under-
take to sdtiefy both the Pollution Control Agency and the Environmental
Protection Agency during the course of their review of the facilities
planning study which took place from February of 1977 until August 8, 1978,
the date of final EPA approval.
At our December 11, 1976 meeting, OSM handed out o memo which reviewed
the sequence of events for the wastowator treatment plant Step I Grant,
and this is also again enclosed for your reference.
As pointed out in the December 8, 1978 letter from OSM, the amount of tha
additional billing of $3,432.88 will be submitted to PCA and EPA along with
$423.75 the City has previously paid for wastewater treatment plant sludge
samples. If both of these amounts are approved, tho City of Monticello
will, in effect, receive a savings from the submission of these bills to
EPA and PCA. Reason for this is the City has previously paid the $423.75
in sludge samples, and it stands to reccivo 909 reimburacmant for these
costs, which is $381.30. While tho City will be rosponoiblo for 10i of
the additional $3,432.88 billing from OSM, the City'r 1014 portion is only
$343.29.
It would be my recommendation to approve tho additional cost from OSM on
the billing, contingent upon receiving approval from EPA and PCA. In this
- 2 -
Agenda Supplement - 1/8/79 Council
L
fashion, the City does not stand to lose if PCA and EPA does not approve
the additional amounts.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of additional billing from ill
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Associates of $3,432.88 on its ` I
Step I facilities planning report.
REFERENCES: December 8, 1978 letter from John Badalich, invoices dated Ilrf' 1
December 11 and 13, 1978 relative to the City's final billing f
on the Step I engineering study, and an additional memo 4�
relative to Step I from OSM.
4. Consideration of Advertising for New Public Works Director.
As mentioned in a previous memorandum, Mike Rajala, our current public
Works Director, has resigned his position effective January 15, 1979.
Purpose of this item on the agenda is to receive authority from the City
Council to go ahead and advertise for the position of Public Works Director.
In the past, we have advertised locally in the Monticello Times and
the St. Cloud Times, in addition to the Minneapolis Morning and Sunday
papers along with the League of Minnesota Cities magazine. This pro-
cedure has worked rather well, as we normally would receive twenty to
thirty applicants for any one ponition.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of advertising for replacement
for Public Works Director.
5. Consideration of Resolution Orderinq Feasibility Report on Projects Peti-
tioned For.
As you might recall, the City Council of Monticello did approve a termina-
tion date of January let of each year whereby petitions must be submitted
to the City Council of Monticello for consideration for improvements for
the ensuing year. This is not to say that obviously an area could not
be petitioned for at a later date and given possible consideration for
construction during the same year, but by establishing the January lot
cutoff, it assures a high degree of probability that the project will be
completed during the same year if it is eventually approved, and also
eliminates any potential problems with obtaining essementr, etc.
As of this date, three petitions have been received by the City of Monticello
and they are depicted on the enclosed map and are as followae
Area 1 - bats 3, 4 and 5 in Block 7 of upper Monticello - This area in
owned by land Projects, Inc. and the petition is for sower, water,
permanent streets and -curb and gutter. This extension would run
from the interseetfpn of Locunt and Seventh Street, to the westerly
platted area of Seventh Street.
3 -
Agenda Supplement - 1/8/79 Council
Area 2 - Commercial Plaza 25 - This area is owned by Sam Peraro and when
initially platted, there was concern for the size lots being less
than 25 acres, which is the minimum amount of land according to
the City Ordinances that is required before a septic tank is
allowed. Mr. Peraro indicated at that time he had submitted a
petition for sewer and water and this was on file at City Hall.
Petition is for sewer and water.
Area 3 - Oakwood Industrial Park - area petitioned for by the Oakwood Indus-
trial Park Partnership is for the improvement of Dundas Road with
sewer and water and blacktop. As you may be already aware, this
street is being improved currently with a class five base and
it's getting ready for the eventual improvements planned for in
1979.
According to Minnesota Statutes, the City does not have to extend sewer
and water to the areas petitioned for regardless of the majority of
property owners in favor or opposed to a particular area. However, there
is a provision within the statutes that does provide that when abutting
property owners own 35% of the land to be improved, they can petition the
Council to consider such an improvement. In the case of Area 1 and Area 3,
abutting property owners account for more than 356 of the land abutting the
proposed improvement. In the case of Area 2 with Commercial Plaza 25, it
would appear that it is somewhat less than 256, but the Council on its own
initiative can still order the feasibility report. The only magic in the
356 requirement is that if a feasibility report is ordered and a hearing
is held on a proposed project, it would take a 4/5's vote of the Council
to put an improvement in where it is not petitioned for by at least the
above referenced 356 of the property owners.
It would be my recommendation to adopt the resolution which is enclosed
calling for a feasibility report as provided in Minnesota State Statutes,
and after the feasibility report is prepared, a hearing is held and at
that time the property owners in the Commercial Plaza 25 area could make
their feelings known. It should also be mentioned that there has been
quite a lot of interest in thin area for further developments in addition
to tho dovelopments that currently exist along the proposed improvement,
and I would think it would he appropriate at thin timo to considor the
extension of sower and water to the area.
POSSIBU ACTION: Consideration of adopting Resolution calling for
feasibility report on the above-mentioned improvements.
REFERENCES: Resolution enclosed. Map enclosed.
- 4 -
ORR-SCHEIEN-MAYERON &ASSOCIATES, INC.
December 8, 1978
Mr. Gary Wieber
City Administrator
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota
Re: Final Billing 6
for Monticello's
Planning Report,
C270855 01
Dear Garya
55362
Reimbursement
Facilities
Step I,
I appreciated your letter of December 6 and our several con-
vereations regarding the closing of this account so that final
payment can be made to us as well to the City of Monticello.
As I have indicated to you on several occasions, I believe that
both the City as well as ourselves are entitled to additional
reimbursement funding to cover labor coats and other expenses
for additional work we were compelled to undertake to satisfy
both the PCA and EPA during the course of their review of the
Facilities Planning- Study which took place from February, 1977
until August 8, 1978, the data of final EPA approval.
In order to fully understand our request for additional reimburse-
mont, I have enclosed a memorandum describing the events, cor-
respondence, and conversations that took, place during this
EPA -PCA review period.
First of all I have enclosed a corrected billing that was ,sent
to you under date of May 23, 1977 which reflects time and
expenses incurred by OSM from November 16 through March 31, 1977.
This billing would be in the same amount of $15,853.37 which
constitutes the balance due on the agreement foe of $102,690.00.
From the date of March 30, 1977 when I received the first latter
from the PCA (Item 3), certain costa wore incurred which I
believe are extra services and wore not required under our
agreed scope of study and the agreement.
Mr. Gary Wieber
December 8, 1978
Page Two
3431.98
The total extra charges are $3,340.6 and are shown on the
enclosed invoice for extra services - from April 1, 1977 through
August 26, 1977.
To this amount and prior to your submitting these costs to the
PCA and EPA, you will also add Monticello's cost for laboratory
analysis of sludge samples performed by t�Qrgoa Laboratories
under dates of May 5, 1977 - $165.00; June 6, 1977 - $165.00;
and October 20, 1977 - $93.75. This amounts to $423.75 and this
would be added to this request for reimbursement for extra
services.
I would request that this matter be brought to the attention of
the City Council for -payment _if required and further that this
request for extra eervicesrpaymsnt be transmitted to the EPA and
PCA for reimbursement.
Yours very truly,,
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
ASSOCIATES 'INC
John P. 'Badal"ich— P: E.
Wice President
JPB/gg
Enclosures
3
INVOICE
ORR•SCHEIEN• MAYERON &ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
Land Surveyors
December 11, 1974 - xt:4sed
To City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
COMM. No. 2569
Pr, fession,l EnpiCir sarrics In conjuaetion with Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Works - Dacil�ties Planning
Report - Step I. Time and cxpen&es for
the period from November 16,
1976 through March 31, 197.
Principal
J. Badalich
87.00 hours
W. Long
18.00 hours
Total
105.00 hours
,
105 hours x $13.22 {ate....,.�...,.............
............ .S 1,388.10
Senior ftaineer '
JNorton
2.00 hours
A.. Javinsky
54.00 hours
J. Johnson
25.00 hours
Total
ul.OU hours
81 hours x $8.51 rata ........................................ 609.31
Design Enqineer
K. Haider 164.00 hours
K. Nolson 240.50 hours
C. Wu 206.00 hours
Total 610.50 hours
610.50 hours x $6.92 rate ................................. .. 4,224.66
CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON b ASSOCIATES, INC.
City of Monticello
Page Two
December 11, 1978
Revised
Technician
D. Campbell
53.00 hours
M. Morse
••3.00 hours
S. Cieplinski
27.50 hours
J. Rhoden
6.00 hours
C. Robertson
-3.00 hours
G. Atkinson
41.00 hours
R. Duval
171.00 hours
S. Ferris
159.50 hours
Total 464.00 hours
464 hours x $6.27
rate .......................................
2,909.28
Sub Total
$ 9,211.35
Direct Labor Overhead: .581 x $9,211.35 ................
5,351.79
Gen'i & Admin. Overheads .958 x $9,211.35 ...................
8,824.47
Transportation
68.70
Printing b Reproduction
5,366.30
Total Cost
$28.822.61
Profit: $19,826
divided by $82,864 . 23.98 of $28,822.61
6,888.60
Total Amount Now Due
$35,711.21
Less: Portion of
Fee that is in excess of
Maximum Feo
of $102,690.00 ($86,636.63
was billed
previously)
(19,857.84)
THIS INVOICE
$15,853.37
TOTAL AMOUNT OF THIS INVOICE IS $15,853.37.
3
INVOICE
t+� _W
ORR-SC HELEN -MAYERON &ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
Land Surveyors
December 13, 1978 - Revised
To City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Comm. No. 2569
Professional Engineering Service In conjunction with Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Works -- Facilities Planning Report - Step 1, Grant No. C270855 01.
Extra time and expenses for the period from April 1, 1977 through
October 20, 1977 which is for work involving sludge analysis and dis-
posal which is beyond the scope of study and for which no Program Guid-
ance Memorandums from the EPA were available during the course of study.
Item No. 1
Period April 1, 1977 through April 27, 1977 extra services
required to evaluate and define land application of sludge
as requested in PCA letter of March 30, 1977.
J. Badalich, Principal, 15 hours x $13.22 rate ...............$ 198.30
C. Wu, Design Engineer, 100 hours
K. Nelson, Design Engineer, 3 hours
103 hours x $6.92 rate.......... 712.76
S. Ferris, Technician, 5 hours x $6.27 rate .................. 31.35
Sub Total, Direct Labor 5 942.41
Printing 6 Reproduction 30.00
Transportation 13.50
Sub Total, Direct Expenses $ 43.50
Item No. 2
Period May 1, 1977 through June 30, 1977, extra services
required to evaluate sludge disposal and prepare an
addendum to the Facilities Planning Report entitled
'Final Disposal of Residual Sludge" and transmitted to
the PCA on June 30, 1977.
J. Badalich, Principal 6 hours x 613.22 rate .................$ 79.32
C. Wu, Design Engineer, 56 hours x $6.92 rate ................ 387.52
ORR-SCHELEN-NAYERON 6 ASSOCIATES, INC.
City of Monticello
Page Two
December 13, 1978
T. Lauer, Technician 16 hours
S. Ferris, Technican, 3 hours
C. Dressen, Technican, 7 hours
26 hours x $6.27 rate ................ 163.02
Sub Total, Direct Labor $ 629.86
Item No. 3
Period July 21, 1977 through August 26, 1977, extra services required
based on PCA letter of July 21, 1977 re: PCB's, growing of crops, soil
tests, heavy metals, sludge analysis, etc. Response to PCA on
August 3, 1977 and August 26, 1977.
J. Badalich, Principal, 2 hours x $13.22 rate ................$ 26.44
V. Stelmack, Senior Engineer, 8 hours x $8.51 rate........... 68.08
K. Nelson, Design Engineer, 6 hours x $6.92 rate ............. 41.52
C. Wu, Design Engineer, 10 hours x $6.92 rate ................ 69.20
Sub Total Direct Labor $ 205.24
Summar
x of Costs
Item No. 1, DLrect Labor ....................................$ 942.41
Item No. 2, Direct Labor ................................... 629.86
Item No. 3, Direct Labor • •.
... . 205.24
TotalSubTotal,Direct Labor 51,777.51
Direct Labor Overhead: 0.581 x $1,777.51 ................... 1,032.73
Gen'l 6 Admin. Overhead: 0.958 x $1,777.51 ................. 1,702.85
Total Labor Cost 51,735.58
Total Direct Expense 43.50
Profit: $19,826 divided by $82,864 a 23.99 of $2,735.58 653.80
TOTAL AMOUNT, EXTRA SERVICES $3,432.88
TOTAL AMOUNT OF THIS INVICE IS $3,432.88.
M E 14 O
STEP I - MONTICELLO FACILITIES PLANNING REPORT, C270855 01
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Item 1. 2-3-77 -- Facilities Planning Report prepared by
Orr-Schclen-Mayeron (OSM) submitted to Minnesota Pollution Con-
trol Agency (PCA), six copies submitted.
Item 2. 2-7-77 -- Letter from OSM to Duane Anderson (PCA)
correcting estimated construction cost in 2-3-77 letter to
PCA.
Item 3. 3-30-77 -- PCA letter (Warner) to OSM (Badalich) regard-
ing:
1. I/I Analysis
2. Interceptor Alternatives
3. Wastewater Flow & Loading Projections
4. Recommended WTP Alternative Design
(7) Land Application of Sludge
5. Industrial Costs Recovery
6. Sewer Ordinance
Item 4. 4-27-77 -- OSM letter to PCA (Warner) regarding:
1. 1/I Analysis
2. Interceptor Alternatives
3. Wastewater Flow 6 Loading Projections
4. Recommmended WTP Alternative Design
(7) Land Application of Sludge
- No program guidance memorandum was
available from the PCA or EPA for
guidance on land application of
sludge during the facilities planning
report study.
5. Industrial Costs Recovery
6. Sewer Ordinance
Items 1 through 3, 5, 6 and part of Item 4 above would be re-
quirod under the Facilities Planning Study but Item No. 4, sub-
paragraph 7, regarding land application of sludge was not con-
templated under the original scope of study or agreement and no
,.rogram guidance memorandum was available from the PCA or EPA,
therefore, the period of time from 3-30-77 to 4-27-77 would be a
period of extra services primarily in regard to the sludge
question.
-1-
Item 5. 5-23-77 -- Billing to Monticello for the period 11-16-76
Coo 4-30-77. This indicates a total cost incurred by OSM in the
amount of $124,942.58. The grant amount was $102,690.00.
Therefore, excess costs in the amount of $22,252.58 will be
absorbed by OSM (note, this invoice will be corrected, deleting
that portion of work for the period April 1 to April 30, 1977
whereby part of this work is considered as extra costs).
Item 6. 7-12-77 to 7-22-77 -- Based on telephone conversation
wi T 0arner (PCA) on 7-12-77 in reference to NPDS permit.
Response back to Warner by letter dated 7-22-77, regarding:
1. Equalization Tanks
2. Allocation of Costs 6 Industrial Cost Recovery
Item 7. 6-30-77 -- Addendum to Facilities Planning Report in
response to 3-30-77 PCA letter and OSM letter of 4-27-77. The
Addendum entitled "Final Disposal of Residual Sludge" was sub-
mitted at this time. Note: The period from 4-27-77 to 6-10-77
would be considered as extra work in that the entire addendum
was researched and prepared regarding the final disposal of
residual sludge. This work regarding final disposal of sludge
was not considered as part of the original study.
item 8. 7-19-77 -- Letter from OSM to Anderson (PCA) request -
in' g uJgot period to be extended to August 15, 1977 because
of additional documentation requested by PCA from time to
time.
Item 9. 7-21-77 -- Letter from PCA (darner) to OSM (Badalich)
re7,)ar ing review of 6-30-77 Addenda regarding: PCB's, soil
tests, crops, buffer zones, subsurface injection, drying beds,
heavy metals, sludge analysis, and agreements with landowners.
Item 10. 8-3-77 -- Letter from OSM to PCA (Warner), respond-
ing to 7-21-77 letter. The period of time from 7-21-77 to
8-3-77 is considered as extra work. This extra time pertained
to questions regarding final disposal of residual sludge which
was not part of the original scope of study of the Facilities
Planning Report.
Item 11. 8-5-77 -- Letter to PCA (Anderson) from OSM (Badalich)
regarding requot to PCA to increase Stop II grant request from
$125,625.00 (EPA) to $132,000.00. Project listed EPA assistance
at $32,720.00 corrected to $99,000.00 assistance from the EPA.
-2-
Iter, 12. 8-10-/7 -- Letter from PCA (Beaton) to Monticello
Olieber) indicating that interceptor reaches A-1055 and A-1060
are grant eligible. Also interceptor reaches A-1070, A-1400,
A-1410, A-1090 and A-1110 are not grant eligible.
Item 13. 8-26-7'/ -- Letter from OSM to PCA ((darner) based on
August 8, 1977 telephone conversation, reference to:
1. Capacity of Sludge Drying Beds
2. Cost to Cover Sludge Beds or Alternatives
Here again this period between 8-8-77 to 8-26-77 is considered.
as extra work and reimbursement is being sought.
Item 14. 10-5-77 -- Letter from PCA (Davis) to OSM in refer-
ence to planning section review - seven comments were presented.
Item 15. 10-19-77 -- Letter from PCA (Beaton) to OSM regard-
ing NPDES permit and requirement to install and operate chemical
feed equipment.
Item 16. 10-20-77 -- Letter to PCA (Warner) from OSM regard-
ing PCB analytical sample performed by Serco Laboratories
(9-30-77 in -sludge sample). The cost of analyzing this sample
by Serco is considered as an extra and reimbursable cost.
Item 17. 11-1-77 -- Letter to PCA (Davis) from OSM regarding
10-5-77 Davis letter including attachments:
1. 9-16-77 letter from Minnesota Historical
Society
2. 4-27-77 letter from OSM to PCA (Warner)
3. 3-30-77 letter from PCA (Warner) to OSM
Item 18. 12-12-77 -- PCA (Beaton) letter to CPA (Alexander,
Chicago) certifying that I/I in Monticello sewer collection
system is not excessive or poseibily excessive with carbon
copy to OS21.
Item 19. 12-12-77 -- PCA (Beaton) letter to Monticello
(wieber), approval granted on Monticello's Facilities Plan-
ning Report. Project to consist of upgrading of wastewater
treatment plant and constructing interceptor oewer.
Item 20. 1-30-78 -- EPA (Dawson) latter to Monticello
TJ_oFn_son) indicating that it has been determined that this
oanitary sewer collection system is not subject to oxcesaive
I/I.
-3-
Item 21. 8-8-78 -- EPA (Dawson) letter to Monticello
Jo nson) indicating that the Facilities Planning Report has
been approved by the EPA -- please submit a final payment
request for all allowable incurred costs. Upon receipt and
review of the final Step I grant payment will be processed.
-4 —3
RESOLUTION ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT
ON 1979-1 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, IT 1S PROPOSED TO IMPROVE THE FOLLOWING:
1. Seventh Street from the intersection of Seventh and Locust Streets
to and along Seventh Street to its platted westerly limits with a permanent
:;treet, curb, gutter, sewer and water.
2. Cedar Street (formerly Highway 25) from Oakwood Drive (County Raid 117)
to Minnesota State Highway 25 with sewer and water.
I. Industrial Drive from the intersection of Industrial Drive and
Chelsea Road south to the intersection of Industrial Drive and Dundas Road;
and Dundas Road from the intersection of Industrial Drive and Dundas koad
to the intersection of Dundas Road and Oakwood Drive (County Road 117) with
sewer, water and blacktop.
WItEREAS, IT IS PROPOSED to assess the benefitted property for all or
a portion of the cost of improvement, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 429.
NOW, TIIERE ORli, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Monticello.
MinneEO tat
That the proposed improvement be referred to John Badalich for study
and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient
spud advising the Council in a preliminary way ao to whether the
proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made
as proposed or in connection with soma other improvement, and the estimated
cost of the improvement as recommended.
Adopted by the Council thio day of
1979.
Gary Wicber, City Administrator
S
i-'
+�•,�_ r--�„�, '• t �'�-� )q ""`�K:T •ll��ss��,,�� �+� :�, r,� "", ;;, ' ' .`yam,
•i„t- Al V'. s.,..•o:.--�: .'1`^�r ':`� •�J�J . ���Y: t t'o ��
' ' ,.� •'"-•.,.t h. "„`''+'••CCC���1 � �• ' • 1.. _ ���°'fig ,.�";�
�. A �� 'Paosc.rf .• r':`:,•+s `a 1 � •+'�.+�,j7�i.'Lt r'Fl. .. ,` +'t.
HiCiiWAY r • ° w\
NO, 94
..f�.,_ „� � •.ate •� •
Ce y s
+ J
�- �o Q7{��� r '� • • • • cif
• ate.-
001
5}+.4�,•,r.. •�N i tow
i