Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 05-29-1979AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Tuesday - May 29, 1979 - 7:30 P. M. Mayor: Arve Grimsmo Council Members: Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Philip White. Meeting to be taped. Citizens Comments ,Ql'' l Discussion of NSP's Nuclear waste Storage. Public Hearing to Consider a Variance to Allow an Apartment/Commercial Use within a B-4 Zone - Fred Topel.✓ n Public Hearing on Consideration of a Variance Request from Hardsurfaced Parking Area - Trinity Lutheran Church. Public Hearing to Consider Setback Variance Request - James Fuller. Pl+ Consideration of Rezoning Blocks 10, 11 and 21 in Upper Monticello from R-3 (Medium Density Residential) to R-2 (Single and Two -Family Residential). j ,6. Consideration of Subdivision of Lots - Ralph Kiffmoyer. PDQ .GP'7. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment requiring all Driveways and Parking i Areas to be Hardsurfaced for Single Family and Two Family Dwellings. 6. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amendments on Subdivisions. Consideration of Approval of Temporary On -Sale Malt Liquor License - Lion's Club. /^� V 10. Consideration of ApprovaL/of Appraisal for Easement to be Obtained from \'V Independent SChoQ1_ DiSrtrict 0882 for Sower Interceptor. �,11. Consideration of Allowing St. Henry's Mena Club to use the 4th Street �4;` warming House as Storage during the Summer Months. �e YConsideration of Adoption of a Resolution on Sower User Charges and Industrial Cost Recovery Charges. :13. Application for variance from Certificate of Occupancy Require ate - (►�eo��v/i The Plumbory - Larry Purcell. `�nga I(y1y l Approval of Bills - May, 1979. �r•J Approval of Minutes - May 10th Spacial MootiniYMay 14th Regular ting. ` �\ J 1{ nfinishod Business /Five I1Roof Def %/CiVll Defense Sirens JPinawood School Sidewalk ProposedImprovements - Old Monticello Ford Oita Ok\`� ��. Now Business - �J TOi Monticello City Council Membera FROMi Gary Wiobar In the agenda aupplemont under item #10 - we indicate that an appraioal from John Sandberg for the annemant is ancloaed. Mr. Sandberg hao indicated that he will not have it available in time to include it with the Agenda, and hopefully will have it in time for Tuooday night'a mooting. You may wish to conaidor pootponing any action on thio item until a later date in order to give you time to review thio appraioal. GW/no I/ C,if� 4 rf/-nfice([o cite'" y 250 East Broadway MONTICELLO, MN 55362 ' TELEPHONE 295.2711 MONTICELLO METRO LINE 333.5739 a century -old city • with o nuclear age view TOi Monticello City Council Membera FROMi Gary Wiobar In the agenda aupplemont under item #10 - we indicate that an appraioal from John Sandberg for the annemant is ancloaed. Mr. Sandberg hao indicated that he will not have it available in time to include it with the Agenda, and hopefully will have it in time for Tuooday night'a mooting. You may wish to conaidor pootponing any action on thio item until a later date in order to give you time to review thio appraioal. GW/no \ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Tuesday - May 29, 1979 - 7:30 P. M. c Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Phil White. Members Absent: None Citizens Comments - Mr. George Kirscht, who has an option to purchase the former Monticello Ford site building, gave a preliminary review of his plans in regards to upgrading the existing building to meet building codes. Mr. Kirscht indicated to the Council that he plans on talking to a structural engineer in regards to supporting the roof with extra pylons and steel beams in an effort to make the building safe for remodeling into office space. Mr. Kirscht also indicated that although the building is old, he is going to contact Federal agencies for the possibility of obtaining Federal funds to save the old Luilding as an historical site in Monticello. No action was taken by the Council on Mr. Kirscht's proposal other than reviewal. 1. Discussion of NSP's Nuclear Waste Storaqe. At the last City Council meeting, Wilbur Eck of Monticello requested that the Council pass a resolution opposing the storage of nuclear waste in Monticello. Mr. Eck stated that he felt NSP Company should live up to its agreement and remove the nuclear waste to a storage site in Morris, Illinois. Mr. Eck informed the Council that contrary to the recent rumors in regards to storage of nuclear waste in Illinois, the Attorney General's Office in the State of Illinois has indicated that they will still accept nuclear waste at their disposal site. Mr. Eck also referred to newspaper articles in regards to research that has boon completed indicating that areas that have storage of nuclear waste aro more likely to have cancer victims than areas without storage of nuclear wanto. fie felt that since there has been a problem in the storage racks swelling at the nuclear plant, the City should pass a resolution asking that NSP start to remove the nuclear waste, per their agreement. Mr. Nevinski, a senior nuclear engineer at the Monticello NSP plant, indicated that the storage facility has capacity for up to sixty years of nuclear waste storage and is completely safe, as sofo as any other facility for storage. Ile indicated that it is a government problem right now in rogardo to what the future will be for those nuclear waste as they could be developed for other fuel. After hearing the discussion, no action woo taken by the Council. a 0 Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 2. Public Hearinq to Consider a Variance to Allow an Apartment/Commercial Use within a B-4 Zone - Fred Topel. Mr. Fred Topel, owner of the Mini -Mall complex in Downtown Monticello, requested a variance to add a 2,600 square foot second story apartment to his property which is currently zoned B-4. The addition of the 2,600 sq. It. apartment would only be for Mr. Topel's personal residence and would provide more security for their antique business they house in the building. Some of the concerns in allowing an apartment in a commercial zone were discussed by the Council, including the additional parking that would be required by the presence of a residence. It was noted that Mr. Topel would have room in the rear of his building to set aside a parking spot reserved for the apartment complex, but that this may also take away from the parking requirements for the Mini -Mall businesses. A suggestion was made that since Mr. Topel will have quite a large apartment complex, possibly some of the antiques could be stored in the new residence and thereby Mr. Topel could remove his old storage shed which is located on the rear of his property to provide parking spaces for the residence. A motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Phil White and unanimously carried to approve a variance to allow Mr. Topol to build a second story addition for his residence provided he would agree to remove the older shed which is located on the rear of his property and use this space for his personal space for his personal parking requirements. 3. Public !tearing on Consideration of Variance Request from 8ardsurfaced Parkinq Area - Trinity Lutheran Church. Last Fall, the Trinity Lutheran Church requested variances to allow them to have approximately ono -half of their necessary parking lot hardaurfaced with the balance being in grass. This variance was approved by the City at that time with the understanding that the area surfaced only with grass would be reviewed at a future date. Since that time, tho Church has gone through the bid -letting process on their new addition, and the bide have come in at approximately $30,000 more than their lender will allow them to spend. As a result., the Church representative, Mr. Don Nagle, requested that they not be required to put in any hardourfncod parking at .all at this time, but be allowed up to three yearn before any hardourfaced parking would have to be installed. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Dan Blonigan and unanimously carried to grant the Trinity Lutheran Church a throe -year variance on any hardaurfaced parking requirements for the Trinity Lutheran Church. 4. Public Ilnarinq to Consider Setback Variance Request - James Fuller. Mr. Fullor requested a variance of 3'3" to build a 20' addition to the Coat side of his home at 800 West Broadway. Since this lot is a corner loL, the normal setback from the coot property line which abuts Elm Street would be 20' and the proposed addition would he 16.9' from the Elm Street I right-of-way. Iloaring no opposition, motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to approve the VY variance to Mr. James Fuller for his addition. - 2 - Q L Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 5. Consideration of Rezoning Blocks 10, 11 and 21 in Upper Monticello from R-3 to R-2. Previously, the City Council took up the request of rezoning Block 10 from R-3 to R-2 (Single and Two -Family Residential). The Planning Commission's recommendation was to maintain the present R-3 zoning for Block 10, but the Council decided that the Planning Commission should hold an additional public hearing to reconsider the rezoning of Block 10 and also the surrounding two blocks of Block 11 and Block 21 to a possible R-2 zoning from R-3. Again, the Planning Commission reviewed this item with the consulting planner and recommended that the present zoning of R-3 remain. The primary reasons for the Commission's recom- mendation was that they felt the area in Block 21, which is owned primarily by St. Henry's Catholic Church, would not be susceptible to R-3 multiple family buildings, and that other blocks contain primarily individual ownerships which would make large apartment complexes hard to locate in this area due to the need to purchase property from a number of people. The Commission noted that although there are quite a few single family residences in these blocks, the rezoning of the area would not change drastically the possibility of future apartments as duplexes or four-plexes could still be built in R-2 zoning. Planning Commission also noted that the area has been zoned R-3 for quite a long time and new homes were built in this area making the number of empty lots available for multiple family dwellings quite limited. The following testimony was received in regards to the rezoning: Mr. Tucek, who lives next to the area considered for rezoning, expressed his opposition to the R-3 zoning. Mr. Ron Peters indicated that he felt the area is primarily single family residential now and that R-2 zoning would be a natural course. lie also indicated that his neighbor, Darwin Straw, who owns two and a half lots in block 10, requested a variance previously to subdivide his lots for single family dwellings and now wants to have the lots used for multiple family apartments. Mr. Kon Ilolkor, representing Mr. Darwin Straw, indicated that the land now conforms to the comprehensive plan and should remain R-3 and that Mr. Straw originally purchased his property in Block 10 for possible multiple family uses knowing full wall that the property was zoned R-3. Mr. Holker also indicated that Mr. Darwin Straw and Ron white own approximately 55% of Block 10 and both parties want to see the property remain R-3 zoning. Mr. Darwin Straw indicated that the reason he requested the splitting of his lots into two parcels was so that he could got three driveway approaches under the street improvement project. Ile noted that he was not allowed to have an extra driveway approach unless he would subdivide his property different than it was. lie also indicated that at the time he wan considering a single family dwelling for this additional lot, but now has changed lila mind and is planning a multiple family dwelling of approximately eight units. - 3 - 0 Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 After reviewing the testimony received, a motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen to leave the zoning in R-3 status. Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen, Arve Grimsmo. Opposed: Ken Maus, Phil White. 6. Consideration of Subdivision of Lots - Ralph Kiffinever. Mr. Ralph Kiffineyer requested that he be able to subdivide the went half of Lot 3, and Lots 4 6 5 in Block 38 into two 13,613 square foot lots. A current R-2 zoning would require minimum lots of 10,000 square feet, and as a result, both lots would exceed all City requirements. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve the subdivision request of Ralph Kiffineyer's, provided a certificate of survey is obtained and proof of recording is completed. 7. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment Requirinq all Driveways and Parkinq Areas to be Hardsurfaced for Sinqlo Family and Two -Family Dwellings. Currently, Monticello ordinances require all parking areas including driveways to be hardsurfaced with concrete or bituminous except in the case of single and two-family dwellings. The Planning Commission has received favorable input from a group of citizens requesting that the City amend their ordinances to require that single and two-family dwelling units also have hardsurfaced driveways. It was felt that an ordinance of this nature would provide better aesthetic appearance of the property in question and also would increase the value of the property and neighborhood as a whole. Testimony was received from Roger Mack who felt that an ordinance of this nature would require soma people to limit the size of their homes in an effort to provide enough funds to hardsurfaco driveways. He indicated that he would like to do the same himsolf some day if and when he builds a now house, but would not like to be tied down to improving his driveway with hardsurfaco immediately. After discussion by the Council in regards to a possible hardship this may require in now construction, it was decided to leave the ordinances as presently written, not requiring single and two-family dwellings to have I hardsurfaced driveways. B. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amendments on Subdivisions. The following ordinance amendments were proposed to help bettor provide documentation of subdivisions and to insure their compliance with the County and City regulations, Section 11-4-1-(C)-(7) 7. A statement of the approximate square footage and 1 dimensions of the individual Iota. - 4 - m Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 Section 11-4-2-(A)-(11) 11. An accompanying letter from the County Surveyor's office stating that the plat or land survey has been examined and approved. Section 11-4-2-(C)-(1) 1. A letter from the County Recorder's office stating the final plat has been recorded as approved by the City Council shall be received by the Building Official's office before any building permits may be issued. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to adopt the proposed ordinance amendments on subdivisions as listed above. (See Ordinance Amendment 068) 9. Consideration of Approval of Temporary On -Sale Malt Liquor License - Lion's Club. The Monticello Lion's Club requested a temporary 3.2 beer license to sell beer on the 4th of July as part of the celebration planned. The Lion's Club asked that the license include the allowance of sale of 3.2 beer at the Security Federal parking lot on the morning of July 4th, in addition to the celebration that takes place in Bridge Park. Speaking for the Lion's Club, Councilman Ken Maus also requested that the l Council issue a 3.2 bear license for the June 6th street dance planned along Walnut Street and indicated that the Lion's will be organizing this affair and asked that the approval be given for thin license. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Dan Blonigon to approve the temporary 3.2 bear license for the Lion's Club for the July 4th celebration and also for the Juno 6th street dance along walnut Street. voting in favor were Dan Blonigon, Phil White, Arve Grimsmo and Fran Fair, with Ken Maus abstaining. 10. Consideration of Approval of Appraisal for Easement to be Obtained from the Independent School District 0882 for Sower Interceptor. Previously, the City Council reviewed various routes for the interceptor sewer that would go through the Independent School District's property by the High School. The reason for going through the School property with the interceptor sewer lino was to avoid the more costly route of going down street right-of-ways. Mr. John Sandberg, local roaltor, has completed an appraisal of the easement for the City Council. Mr. Sandborg'a appraisal sot a monetary value of $15,000 for the easement. Motion wan made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to approve the appraisal amount of $15,000 for the easement to be presented to the School Board for Chair consideration and approval. (Sae supplement 5-29-79 01). - 5 - f E Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 11. Consideration of Allowinq St. Henry's Men's Club to use the Fourth Street Warming House for storage Wring the Suer Months. St. Henry's Men's Club requested the City of Monticello allow them to use their warming house facility at the Fourth Street ball park for storage during the summer months. The St. Henry's Men's Club has an annual auction and has had a hard' time finding a suitable location to store items for the event. It was the Council consensus that this type of request would set a pre- cedent for future organizations or other people requesting the same services, and therefore, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Phil White and unanimously carried to deny the St. Henry's Club request to use the warming house for storage. 12. Consideration of adoption of a Resolution on Sever Usaqe Charges and Industrial Cost Recovery Charqes. Prior to the submission of City of Monticello's Step III application for the wastewater treatment plant grant, the City must adopt regulations pertaining to sewer user charges and industrial cost recovery charges. The purpose of a sewer user charge and industrial coat recovery charge is to insure that each City that receives grant funds from the Federal and State governments for updating their treatment planta will charge adequately for the use of these new facilities. The sewer user charge would apply to all properties, residential and commercial, and the i industrial cost recovery charge would apply only to industries. The industricl cr-1-ecovery charge in set up so that the portion of the treatment plant that is built to handle industrial sewer discharges would be reimbursed by the various industries that contribute. Consulting engineer John Badalich presented a suggested sower user charge and industrial cost recovery charge ordinance for the Council's review. Mr. Badalich indicated that an exact ordinance would not have to be adopted at this time, but only the Council would have to approve the resolution stating they would intend to adopt one in the future before the plant is operating. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Pair and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution stating that the City intends to adopt a sewer user charge and industrial coat recovery charge system. (Sao Resolution 1979 p 8). 13. Application for Variance from Certificate of Occupancy requirements by Larry Purcell for the Plumborv. Mr. Larry Purcell, owner of the new Pl,— ry business in Sandberg South plat, requested a temporary certificate of occupancy to allow him to open his now business without hardsurfacod parking or curbing and landscaping being completed. The reason for his request is based upon their wanting to wait until the curb and @treat in Sandberg South addition is completed so they can match the street for drainage, etc., without having to toar out part of their parking lot later. 9 In Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve this temporary certificate of occupancy contingent upon Mr. Purcell bonding for the parking lot and landscaping improvements and that the assessments on the property are paid at the time of occupancy. It was also noted that the hardsurfacing of the parking lot would have to be completed within 60 days after the curb is completed along Sandberg Lane. 14. Approval of Bills and Minutes. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting hold May 10th and the Regular Meeting held May 14, 1979, along with the bills for the month of May, as presented. (See Supplement 5-29-79 #2) 15. Discussion on Fire Hall Roof Repairs. Mr. Loren Klein, Building Inspector, informed the Council of the two estimates he has received for repairing the fire hall roof. The first estimate for completely redoing the present flat roof was from F.A. Tenney Company in Buffalo in the amount of $9,200. Mr. Klein also noted that to install a gable type roof over the present structure was estimated at approximately $9,999. The Council was informed that the fire department personnel and also the Joint Fire Board has met and recommended that a flat roof similar to the Tenney proposal be installed rather than a gable type roof. The fire department and joint fire board felt that a flat roof had a better appearance 1 and also would allow for future expansion if the building was ever to be en- larged. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Fran Pair and unanimously carried to approve the P.A. Tenney Company proposal for a now flat roof for $9,200, contingent upon Township approval. The proposal for the now roof will be brought to the Township Board as part of the Joint Fire Board agreement at their next regular meeting. 16. Discussion on Pinewood Sidewalk. The city Council previously discuesod the possibility of extending the existing sidewalk along Third Street from the School District's property to Elm Street. It was felt by the Council that this additional sidewalk would be a safety precaution because now the kids must walk on the street. Laron Klein, Building Inspector, has received throe estimates for improving the sidewalk. The estimates range incest from $3,015 to 03,087. Motion was made by Phil White, aeconded by Ken Maus and unanimously carried to accept the low bid of $3,015 from Park Construction Company for installing a now sidewalk from the School property to Elm Street along Third Street. _7_ 9 Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 17. Consideration of Ayorovinq Plans and Specifications and Advertisinq for Bids - 1979-1 Proiect. Consulting engineer, John Badalich, reviewed with the Council the final plane and specs for the 1979-1 improvement project. Mr. Badalich indicated that meetings have been held with property owners John Lundsteen, Ken Krienke and Mike Reher, in regards to the easements necessary for the extension of Dundee Road from Oakwood Industrial Park to Highway 25. He indicated that it appears there will be no problem in getting the required easements and an alignment has been worked out. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Phil White and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution approving the final plane and specifications for the 1979-1 Improvement Project and advertising for bids returnable June 22, 1979 at 2100 P.M. (See Resolution 1979 0 9). 18. Discussion on Deeartment of Revenue proposed Chances in the Valuation and Asressment of Electric Utility Plants. The City Administrator, Gary Wieber, informed the Council that the Minnesota State Department of Revenue is proposing changes in the way they would determine valuations for taxing purposes of utility plants throughout the State. Mr. Wisher indicated that essentially, the regulations would transfer valuation from communities with newer utility plants such as Monticello, Booker and Red Wing, to older communities with utility plants such as St. Paul and Minneapolis. He noted that while the percentages affecting Monticello would be minor, he felt the City of Monticello should go on record in opposition to any changes in the valuation an this may leave the floor open for further reductions in the City of Monticello's market value. Mr. Wieber also noted that the result of this type of valuation change appears to be just an attempt to avoid the legislative process in regards to groan earnings tax and also would result in NSP Company paying greater taxes throughout the State. Motion was mado by Phil White, seconded by Pran Pair and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution opposing any changes by the Department of Revenue in their calculations of valuations for utility plants. (Seo Resolution 1979 110)• 19. Miscellaneous. A. ,The Council discussed the present condition of Broadway, or Highway 75. Council members asked that Public Works Director, John Simola, talk with the County Engineer to work out a possible solution to the present condition of the street. B. Loran Klein, Civil Defense Director, informed the Councilmembers that currently the chances are not good for State or Federal funds for installing additional civil defense airons in Monticello. He did inform the Council that the present eiran will be hooked up as soon as the proper controls can be obtained. - 8 - 0 Council Minutes - May 29, 1979 C. In regards to Agenda Item #5 discussed earlier, Councilman Ken Maus asked that the Council reconsider possibly zoning Blocks 10, 11 and l21 in Upper Monticello to R-2 as the action taken previously was only _. to leave the zoning as is. Mr. Maus then entered a motion to rezone the area to R-2, but excluding Ron White and Darwin Straw property in Block 10, but it died for lack of a second. Motion by Ken—luaus, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to adjourn. Jni!t�rat.r 'Rick Wolfsr Assistant RW/na - 9 - t 0 f74) 2-37 Yc7Al�S,Or Or fNf Re �.c.tca / �/y SSS, �.,„t tf/�cn �nfL 1 5� .S'e . ,. (YZ, 300 S� rrCr:r) X . 073 44f W p a �G i L,t f .S S' l 7S, You 0 zyzc.:t, BIDS RECEIVED 79SC-1 Project - Sealcoating (41,980 sq -yds.) 5% Bid Bond Name of Bidder Bid "A" (with sweeping) Alternate Bid (w/o sweeping) x Allied Blacktopping Co. 0.380 sq, yd. - 2 0.334 sq. yd. - $13,853.40 Minneapolis, Mn. $15,952.40 3 x Batzer Construction Co. 0.3789C sq. yd. 1 0.32890 sq. yd. - $13,807.22 St. Cloud, MN. $15,906.22 2. x G 6 L Sealcoating 0.37 sq. yd. J 0.340 sq. yd. - $14,273.20 Anoka, WO. $15,532.60 1 C �L) AGENDA SUPPLEMENT L pE'•100 Discussion on NSP's Nuclear Waste Storage. 4 411 J) IAt the Council's last meeting, Mr. Wilbur Eck of Monticello requested that �• `JP 4' a resolution be placed on the next agenda declaring the City's opposition Up to the storage of nuclear waste in the City. Please refer to the enclosed !) S letter, dated May 14, 1979, addressed to Arve Grimsmo. y In addition to this request, please find a letter dated May 22, 1979 from yv Wilbur Eck outlining his concerns relative to the nuclear waste storage Pel, Y / issue. In addition to this enclosure, I have also enclosed a memo which V y was dated August 8, 1978. This memo came as a result of a request by Wilbur Eck in 1978 to have the City Council look into the matter. It should be pointed out that the city Council, in 1978, did not take V�01 ;} any specific action relative to the nuclear waste at the Monticello NSP f Plant. '991,0 �• POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of resolution opposing the storage of R V04 ot 1 nuclear waste in the City of Monticello. REFERENCES: May 14 and May 22, 1979 letters from Wilbur Eck, and August 8, IV1978 memo relative to the expansion of the spent fuel storage 041 1p►capac ity for NSP. .�0 pay to pa a�, ]ti Public Hearing to Consider a Variance to Allow an Apartment/Commercial Use a v Q Within a B-4 Zone - Fred Topel. Mr. Fred Topel, owner of the Mini -Mall complex in downtown Monticello, is Vl requesting a variance to add on a 2,600 square foot second story apartment. ,This property is currently zoned as B-4. `9 q fIt should be noted that this apartment would become the dwelling of Mr. 1J 1 q and Mrs. Fred Topel. Mr. Topel indicates that because of another business { �✓ P venture, the antique business, they oftentimes are travelling and this 9J arrangement would provide security for their dwelling since it would be „) �� above the mini -mall complex. Thera is concern for the valuable antiques ` 9 that are stored within the dwelling itself, and because of the nature of I C r their business having to be on the road for periods of time, this would VV I-1, b: added protection to secure their dwelling. GL��4iIt should be noted that the size of the dwelling is quite large, but it '1 (� would only house one apartment unit. It should be pointed out that the Planning Commission has previously directed the City Planner to prepare f� L V an ordinance amendment which would allow ouch a mixture of commorcial/ i v residential within the same ntructure as a conditional use within a B-4 zone. yQ However, currently this tyllo of. mixture is not allowed within a B-4 zone, and as a result, a variance is necessary. u In reviewing some of the preliminary criteria which would allow a com- p{ bination residential/c.mm.rciol use, the Planning Commission felt that Mr. Prod Topol would meet the criteria in the following areas, Council Agenda - 5/29/79 A. Parking - the Planning Commission felt that Mr. Topel would have room I to the rear of his building to set aside a parking spot reserved for 1 the apartment complex owned by him. This should be designated as parking -- for residents only so that they would be assured of a parking space that would not be occupied by customers of downtown businesses. B. Garbage/Refuse - Mr. Topel indicated that all refuse would be enclosed inside the building and would not be set out in the alley. C. Access to the Residence - Mr. Topel indicated that his apartment complex would have a separate access that would be compatible to the other entrances to the Mini -Mall. D. Traffic - Mr. Topel indicated that with the alley and the parking space provided in the rear of the building, there should be no problem with pedestrian traffic or other vehicular traffic. One item that the Council may want to consider in addition to this is the fact that right now there is an older type of storage building behind the Mini -Mall complex that now houses apparently some of Mr. Topel's antiques. Possibly, this building which is not in the greatest shape could be removed since Mr. Topel will now have some additional space for storing the antiques above the Mini -Mall complex if the variance were approved. After review of the issue, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the Council approval of the variance request. `.� POSSIBLE ACTION:• Consideration of granting variance request with any of r the conditions above, plus any deletions or additions. bt REFERENCES: Item 7 of May 15, 1979 Planning Commission minutes. 3. Public Hearing on Consideration of a Variance Request from Hardsurfaced Parking Area - Trinity Lutheran Church. Last Fall, the Trinity Lutheran Church requested variances that will allow them to have approximately only one-half of the necessary parking lot hard - surfaced with the balance being in grass. As you recall, this variance was approved by the City at that time with the underatanding that the area sur- faced only with grass would be reviewed. Since that time, the Church has gono through the bid -letting process on their addition, and the bids have coma in at approximately $30,000 more than their lender will allow them to spend. As a result, the Church is requesting that they not he required to put in any of the hardsurfaced parking at this time, but be allowed up to throe years before any hardaurfaeed parking would have to be installed. At the Planning Commission's meeting, a motion was made and unanimaouly carried to recommend approval of the variance request with the undaratanding that the area be hardaurfacod within three yearn. • Requires 4/5'o vote for approval. - 2 - Council Agenda - 5/29/79 There is some concern for the precedent that this type of variance might set since the City has been quite stringent in not deviating from parking v- requirements and already has given the Church a variance on half of its parking area to have it grass. As an example, a variance request will probably be brought to the City relative to the Tom Thumb Superette, which is requesting a variance only from the type of curb barrier that they are providing. Additionally, there is some concern to justify a variance request based on the financial situation as this could certainly be requested by any firm or organization when it comes to meeting some of the City's criteria relative to parking, etc. However, I believe there is also some consideration that might be given the Church in light of the fact that it is an existing use and the parking that is being provided, although it may not be hardsurfaced, is more than the existing parking now provides. POSSIBLE ACTION:" Consideration o approval r denial of variance request. REFERENCES: 5/15/79 Planning Commission Minutes - Item 5. 4. Public !Searing to Consider Setback variance Request - James Fuller. Mr. Fuller would like a variance of 3'9" to build a 20' addition on the east side of his home at 800 West Broadway (Lot 6, Block 42). Currently, this property is zoned as residential R-2. Since this lot is on a corner, the normal setback from the east property line which abuts up against Elm Street would be 20' and the proposed addition would be 16'3" from the Elm Street right -of- way. `- At their Planning Commission meeting of May 15, 1979, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this variance request. POSSIBLE ACTION:• Considerationapproval r denial of variance request. REFERENCES: Enclosed copy of a cert of survey and location of property. 5. Consideration of Rezoning Blocks 10, 11 and 21 in Upmr Monticello from R-3 (Medium Density Rosidontial) to R-2 (Single and Two -Family Residential). As you may recall, the City Council previously took up the issue of rezoning Block 30 from R-3 to R-2. The Planning Commianion'o recommendation at that time woo to maintain the prosent R-3 zoning for Block 10. When the Planning Commission's recommenda- tion came forward to the City Council, the City Council did decide to lift a previous moratorium It had imposed on lots 8, 9 s 10 of Block 10, for a multiple family dwelling unit. This moratorium was lifted to allow the developer, Ron White, to continue with his pians for an apartment in that area. However, the Council decided not to take any specific action on the rezoning request, but rather requested that the Planning Commission hold a hearing on the two surrounding blocko of Block 10, that io Block 21 to the north across the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and Block 11 to the east across Maplo Street. • Requires 4/5'a vote for approval. - 3 - Council Agenda - 5/29/79 At their meeting of May 15th, the Planning Commission reviewed this item with John Uban of Howard Dahlgren Associates. Mr. Uban felt that the area has been improving in the past years with single family homes, and the existing homes have been upgraded, which he felt was due primarily to the new streets in the area. Ile also stated in the area of concern most lots are owned by separate individuals, except for the Block 21 which is mostly owned by the St. Henry's Catholic Church. Since these lots are under individual ownership, Mr. Uban felt that large apartment buildings would be hard to locate in this area due to the need to purchase the property from a number of people. He felt that the area in question would primarily remain in a residential single family status with the existing empty unbuilt lots being good sites for future duplexes or fourplexes. A copy of Mr. John Uban's entire report is enclosed for your reference. At their hearing on the subject, testimony was received both in favor of the present zoning and in opposition. After reviewing this testimony and the Planner's report in which he recommends that the property stay as R-3, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the rezoning request and to maintain the areas in question as R-3. POSSIBLE ACTION:• Consideration of rezoning blocks in question from R-3 to R-2. REFERENCES: Agenda item 2 on May 15, 1979 Planning Commission Minutes, and John Uban's report of May 14, 1979. Z Q� 6. Consideration of Subdivision of Lots - Ralph Kiffineycr. �- Mr. Ralph Kiffineyer in requesting that he be able to subdivide the west half. of Lot 3, and Lots 4 5 5 in Block 38 into two 13,613 square foot lots. The current R-2 zoning would require lots of a minimum size of 10,000 square feet, and as a result, if thin variance was approved, both lots would exceed this requirement. At their meeting of May 15, 1979, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve of this subdivision contingent upon providing a certificate of survey and proof of recording of same. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of subdivision of Iota. REFERENCES: Enclosed plat plan and map depicting area. May 15, 1979 Planning Commission Minutes item 08. 7. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment recluirin9 all Driveways and Parkinq Areas to be Hardaurfaced for Sinqlo Family and Two Family Dwsllingo. Currently, Monticello Ordinance Section 10 -3 -5 -(D) -(8)-(k) requires all parking areas, including driveways, to be hardsurfacod with concrete or bituminous, except in the cone of single and two-family dwellings. At one of their meetings, the Planning Commission received favorable input from a group of citizens that this ordinance be amended to require single family and two-family dwelling units to have their driveways and parking areas hardourfacod also. An ordinance such as thio has merit and justification for the following reanona: • Requires 4/5'a veto - 4 - for approval. Council Agenda - 5/29/79 A. Improves aesthetic appearance of the particular property in question. B. Increases value of particular property in question. C. Improves aesthetic appearance of the neighborhood and community as a whole. D. Improves property values in the neighborhood and community as a whole. E. Controls Dust. F. As a result of controlling dust, reduces the City's cos[ (taxpayers dollars) regarding street maintenance and street sweeping. r At their meeting of May 15, 1979, the Planning Commission voted unpnimously to recommend that the City Council amend the ordinance to include hard - surfaced driveways for single and two-family dwellings. It was noted that if this ordinance amendment was adopted, it would apply only to new construction rather than existing homes. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of amending ordinance which would require all single and two-family dwellings to have their parking area and driveways hardsurfaeed. REFERENCES: May 15, 1979 Planning Commission Minutes - Item q3. a. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amendments on Subdivisions. The following ordinance amendments wars proposed to help provide better documentation of subdivisions to better insure their compliance with County and City regulations: Section 11-4-1-(C)-(7) This Section should ba amended to require a statement of the approximate square footage and dimensions of the individual lots within a subdivision. Section 11-4-2-(A)-(11) This Section would be amended to add a statement indicating that an accompanying letter from the County Surveyor's office stating that the plat or land survey has boon examined and approved. Section 11-4-2-(C)-(1) This Section should be amended to add that a latter from the County Recorder's office stating the final plat has been recorded as approved by the City Council shall be racaivad by the Building Official's office before any building permits may be issued. ordinance Amendment Section 11-4-1-(C)-(7) would, if adopted, be the guide used in determining the coat of various improvements based on square footage, and would also be vary useful in insuring minimum lot aizos and dimensions aro adhered to. C Section 11-4-2-(A)-(11), if adopted, would insure that the County Surveyor's have had an opportunity to review the proposed plat to insure its compliance with Minnesota Statutes. - 5 - Council Agenda - 5/29/79 Section 11-4-2-(C)-(1), if adopted, would insure that the proposed subdivi- sion has been recorded according to its approved final form before any building permits could be issued, thus insuring that the buildings weren't built on unrecorded lots. This provision would also insure that property records are used for future assessment purposes. At their meeting of May 15, 1979, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of these ordinance amendments. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of ordinance amendments. REFERENCES: May 15, 1979 Planning Commission Minutes - Item 04. 7) p p r ,e. A,a—OA 3_ rn— bV Consideration of Approval of Temporary On -Sale Malt Liquor License Lion's Club. The Monticello Lion's Club is again requesting a temporary license to sell ^'I 3.2 beer on the 4th of July as part of the Independence Day celebration. �h This celebration takes place in the bridge park, and this is where the beer would be sold. In addition to this location, the Lion's Club is also asking ?� that the license include the allowance of sale of 3.2 beer at thegeca&LL.y /u4`u Federal o LQ9-&&. on the 4th of July. This parking lot is the location prior to the parade of various antique cars that are reviewed by the public. The Lion's felt that it would increase their beer sales if 3.2 beer were also available at this site. It should be noted that during the past years that the Lion's Club have been given a license, no incidents have occurred and they have been very responsible in assuring that no minors were s rued with 3.2 beer. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of temporary 3.2 beer license. 10. Consideration of Approval of Appraisal for Easement to be Obtained from Independent School District #882 for Sewer Interceptor. Previously, the City Council reviewed various routes for the interceptor cower that would go through the Independent School District's property by the Iligh School. As you may recall, it was necessary to obtain those casements to avoid the more costly route of going down street right-of-waya. I have asked John Sandberg to give the City an appraisal of the easement to be obtained from the School District. It should be further pointed out that the School District did approve of the route which was entitled Route #5, which would run along the School's property against the railroad tracks and along the wooded area to the coot of the running track. If the appraisal is approved by the City Council or another figure is act, than this matter will be brought to the board mooting of the school district for their conoidaration. //////`'' POSSIBLE ACPIONi Consideration of anprovaalf appraisal or another figure for the anacme to -I* tainod from the school district. REPERENCES, Copy of appraioal frz.John Sandberg ancl000d. - 6 - council Agenda - 5/29/79 11. Consideration of Allowina St. Henry's Men's Club to use the 4th Street i Warming House as Storaqe durinq the Summer Months. St. Henry's Men's Club is requesting the City of Monticello allow them to use their warming house facility at the 4th Street Ballpark for storage during the summer months. Apparently, St. Henry's has an annual auction, and it receives various contributions throughout the year and it has a hard time finding a suitable location to store these items. Although the specific request is rather of small significance, there is some concern for the precedent it may set. Generally, the City has taken the policy of not providing the same service that a private party may offer in the City of Monticello. For example, there are various businesses in Monticello that offer storage - Curt's Storage and also D S R Storage in the Oakwood Industrial Park. Additionally, if the City does allow this organization to store their materials at this site, a similar request could be forthcoming from other organizations to use the City's facilities. POSSIBLE ACTIOG: Consideration of approval or denial of request, and fee, if any, to be charged. 12. Consideration of Adootion of a Resolution on Sower User Charpes and Indus- trial Cost Recovery Charqes. At a meeting with the Pollution Control Agency, our City Engineer and myself were informed that the City must adopt regulations pertaining to sewer user charges and industrial cost recovery charges prior to the submission of its Stop III application. The Stop III application for the improvement of the sewer plant is duo June 1, 1979. Previously, it wan the understanding of our City Engineer that this was not due until the Stop III process was underway. As a result, John Badalich in preparing a suggested sewer user charge and industrial cost recovery charge. John Badalich is currently working on thin and will have it available for review at Tuosday'a meeting. After the Council reviews this item, it is ouggostod that if approved, the sower user charge and industrial cost recovery charge system be adopted by resolution and at a later data, adopted by ordinance. The reason for this is the sower user charge and industrial cost recovery charge has to be approved by the EPA and the PCA and if there are some modifications, these will have to be revised, and later adopted permanently by the City of Monticello. Purpose, of a sewer user charge, and industrial coat recovery charge is to insure that each municipality that receives a grant from the Federal and State governments for the updating of its treatment facilities will charge adequately for the use of those facLlitios. The sower user charge applies to all proportion, residential, commercial and industrial, and the industrial coot recovery charge applies only to industries. The sower user 7 - Council Agenda - 5/29/79 charge is to be designed to insure that the operating expenses of the treatment facility are being met by the revenues of that facility and a proper rate is set. Industrial cost recovery charge is set up so that the portion of the treatment plant that is built that was to handle industrial sewer would be reimbursed by the various industries to recoup this capital investment. There is no requirement that a City recoup the capital investment of a treatment plant that is due to residential and commercial properties. However, it should be pointed out that the word "commercial" is not necessarily the same as the word "commercial" according to a zoning use. For example, a laundry would be considered industrial user according to the EPA's definition and not a commercial establishment. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of adoption of sewer user charge and indus- trial cost recovery charge system resolution. REFERENCES: John Badalich will have documentation and a suggested sewer user charge/industrial cost recovery charge. 13. Application for Variance from Certificate of Occupancy Requirements The Plumbers - Larry Pur" U_ A representative from "The Plumbery", a new plumbing business in the Sandberg South Plat, will be at the meeting to request a temporary Certificate of Occupancy to allow them to open about June 4, 1979, without their hardsurfacing, curbing or landscaping being done. This request is based upon their wanting to wait until the curbing and new street is in so that they can match the street for drainage, etc., without �• having to patch in later. They are willing to bond for this through the Wright County State Bank, and they will pay the estimated assessments in full upon receipt of the temporary certificate of occupancy. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of allowing the temporary certificate of occupancy contingent upon the asnesaments being paid and a bond being posted. -©" wilbgr S. Eck 'fit. 3, Box 280 Monticello, Minn. 55362 May 14. 1979 Mayor Arve Grimsmo, Monticello City Council Monticello, Minn. 55362 Uear Sir, T would like to request that the ''lonticello City Council place on the agenda of its neat regulnr meeting, the consideration of a resolution that would declare its opposition to the storage of nuclear wastes in this city. Sincerely, C Wilbur S. Eck Rt. iia, Boz 280 Monticello, Minn. 55362 May 22, 1979 Monticello City Council Monticello, Minn. 55362 Dear City Council, Thank you for placing the nuclear waste storage issue on the May 29 council agenda. I am sure you will agree that this is a difficult and important matter to discuss. I hope that your decision will make Monticello an even nicer place to live. I would like to present some questions that may help you in your deliberations as to whether the council should oppose the continued storat?e of nuclDar wastes to Monticello. I hope that ,you are not prejudiced uy the pre -conceived idea that there may be no public antagonism to the storage other than mine. You will also have to overlook whatever concern ,you may have that a decision by you against the storage could have a detrimental effect on the local economy. You will have to explore the possibility that if the council declares onnosition to the storage and then does not take overt -ction +*­ hive th.— ctorgge removed, it may be liable for future malfeasance of office charges if environmental damages are later nr•oven. Also, if ,you do not make a declaration against the etor- age, will you be unfairly thought of as being in favor of the storage or of owning stork in the company, etc. Can our municipnl government speak out against a federally regulnted industry that is storing a dangerous by-product in our city? In it time to exert some of our local government's rights and powors? Should i:aohincton have the last'and only word on how miich radiation we are able to tolerate, on how much the plant can "snfely" emit, or on how and when we are to be notified of acci- dents or defects? Should we wattanother five or ten years while the government in Washington tries to decide what to do with the wnstes? In all of my reswirch on the subject, I have never seen a comment by n scientist or engineer outside of the industry, and not in any wny nffiliated with the industry, state that there is a completely "safe" storage procedure. Is that our problem, or is the location of the waste at the present time, our ,problem4 Whnt about the power company's original agreement not'to'" " store over six months supply of wastes on the rear"tnr site? Why does the company keep saying the storage ie "tempurary", and then build facilities for local storage into the mid 198 a? Why to every ounce of waste/spent fuel that they ever created still in Monticello? C, L believe that even though tho Wastes are stored in the ground in Monticello, that. they are casting an ominus shadow on this city and its future. What will we tell our children? Someday, theyare going to ask us why we never spoke up loudly against the storage. Will we say we wero afraid? Will we say that we thought it would make no difference? Will we say that we thought there was no danger? Or, will we have to tell them we didn't care? Sincerely,, l TO: Monticello City Council FROM: Gary Wieber 1w DATE: August 8, 19788 SUBJECT: Expansion of Spent Fuel Storage Capacity — NSP. This memorandum is intended to be a report to the City Council relative to a matter that was brought to the City Council by Mtn. Wilbur Eck at the July 24, 1978 meeting. As ycu will recall, Mr. Eck was concerned about the expansion of the capacity of the spent fuel storage pool at the NSP Plant in Monticello. One thing should be made clear at the outset, and that is, the City of Monticello has no jurisdiction relative to the expansion of the capacity of the spent fuel operations. There is no construction to obtain a permit for, and it would be dust similar to a rearrangement of the existing plant equipment similar to a retail store rearrangW, their fixtures to allow greater inventory. There is no modification whatsoever of any structure. The pool in which the spent fuel is stored is neither enlarged nor altered. However, the racks, which is part of the equipment within the NSP Plant is being modified to allow further capacity within the pool itself without restructuring the pool. Furthermore, even if there was construction, the local government would not hove authority over this, this is quite well spelled out in the following otatutes. Minnesota Statute 116.05 relative to the control of the MSnnosota Pollution Control Agency over such new construction and Minnesota Statutes 116.C.61 relative to the Minnesota Fhvironmental Quality Board's control whereby all local government control is superseded, and this is specifically a part of the statute, and finally by the 1954 Atomic EhorFj Act. Again, it should be pointed out that there is no new construction being initiated, but these regulations are duet reference for your background. On August 7, 1978, the Mayor, Loren Klein, Greg Erickson, of the Monticello Times, and I met with Northern States Powur Officials, Ward Ring, Doug Nevinaki and Leon Elisson, to review the enlargement of the spent fuel capacity at the NSP Plant. During our review and tour of the plant, the following items were brought out: 1. License approval for the modification of the spent fuel Storage capacity comes from the Nuclear Regulatory Oowda ion. 2. When the Plant was initially built, it was designed for 740 spent fuel bundled. 3. Current inventory of spent fuel bundles is 616. 4. NSP applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on August 17, 1977 for expansion of the stored fuel capacity from 740 spent fuel bundles W 2,237 spent fool bundles. Memo — City Council August 8, 1978 Page Oft 5. On April 14, 1978, permission was received from the Nuclear Regula— tory Commission to amend the Northern States Power license to allow for increased capacity to 2,237 span: diel bundles. 6. It is expected that the increase in the spent fuel storage capacity will allow NSP storage capacity into the 1990'x. 7. The modification in the license was necessary as a result of Presi— dent Carter's decision on April 7, 1977 to defer indefinitely the reprocessing of spent fuel. Prior to this time, General Electric had a contract with the Northern States Power Company to utilize its spent fuel and store it in Morris, Illinois in the hopes of being able to reprocess the spent fuel. S. Leon Eliason indicates that technology is here today to allow for the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, but because of the mandate set by the President, who is concerned with the proliferation of nuclear waste, the technology cannot be used at this time. 9. There are several countries that are now reprocessing spent nuclear fuel without any parti.ular problems, according to Mr. FDiason. 10. The Attorney General for the State of Illinois has ruled that no further shipments of spent fuel can be shipped into Illinois, including Morris, Illinois, that come from outside the state of Illinois, including Minnesota. 11. According to Mr. Elfason, there is no more danger with the increased capacity from 740 stored fuel bundles of spent nuclear fuel, to 29237 bundles. Quite an amount of research has bean done by Loren Klein and I in reviewing various regulations and various phone calls to State and Federal Agencies, and there is an extensive filo at City Hall if anyone cares to review the materialo contained therein. GW/ns �.r p$CL' RE4 J y V8 FUja IJ Bit, •jl}y `�, �_ `l (• a • e t r� L r`'..,,.yu �((]�+.,, i•t • .n. sr `•+.u..'^.t, `•rrY .• .� `,'�,j/t JJJ L, ry�-r��•i jq7 ; a. r� •C � -w. .r4•. �,' !.�•+, �' .J t. _�'1IL t«r .'t �; \�• j//t/.'a jp� ll�!i� �' 't .J�•+f 1 ^�% /" �t �DIV1810N_-•188 �., ,�, j) r••... •!a� C .r.f•�'' �;J f '{':� u a _., pi! i.+r- , ,. .t- ~••�'+ HIGHWAY `• -»: .. N0. 90 1 t q ol / 4„ I PIC MEYER-ROHLIN) ENGINEERS -LAND SURVEYO IfIf Hwy. 25 N, BuffOlo, Alinn. HOWARD DAHLGR£N ASSOCIATES r(( CONSULTING PLANNERS 14 May 1979 Gary Wietter, City Administrator City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, Minnesota 55362 RE: Rezoning of Blocks 10, South Half of 11, and 21 in Monticello from R-3 to R-2 Dear Gary: 1 have inspected the general area of concern in Monticello in regards to Lhtc rozoning proposal and have prepared the followinq report. All parcels of land that are presently occupied by nnartments or proposed apartments should rcmtrfn zoned R-3. A mix of R-2 and R-3 7Anes is not spot zoning but rather a fluctuation in density of { the same basic residential use. `- The newly curhrd and paved streets have grr_ntly impiovod the appearance of the area as well as providing safer traffic flow in the neighborhood. There appears also to be it visible improvement of homes as well as the construction of now homes on I>,evi.nusly vacant lots. This vilrrlity is important to the r�ty on.l rhnuld be ell Coll ragod: Typically, each City block in I'orr.ic•:llo has ten lot:. I.rid out on A nrid r:ystr_m. In 00 area of Contv7771, const lots are owned by nelara Le individunls except for Block 21 which is mostly %rued t.,y Saint Henry's CaLholic Church. Apartment bull•ii!"45 rnn:d to ho placed on a larger piece, of land with adrquatn s•ttl.^.,q:a, par kiim, .apen sLace, etc. in cider to ncconmudaLe the hiuher density. 1;. would be difficult at beat for a developer to purchnne enough contiuuoun lots At a reasonable price, for proper apartment sites. domes Are heinq fixetl up and thus the price of purchanr, would be prohibitive. Aparttment builders will lurk for large Open lots with no previous devrl,rpment to remove. Thus, the nren of concern will nnturAlly perpetuALn the eXhAtinq land use And may accommodate in the future, duplexes or four-pl.xxen, In the process or considering this r.^zoninq n few Lhiuns should be reviewed. I Gary Wieber, City Administrator City of Monticello 14 May 1979 Page Two The owners of the land to be rezoned would lose some development rights in the form of added density when rezoning from R-3 to R-2. However, these owners would have to bundle their land into a "package deal" in order for that extra density to he worth anything to a prospective developer. Also, the tax revenues for the City from apartments on a per acre basis are about 2� times more than for a single family home. Single family homes also demand more total services from the community thar. do apartments. If the loss of R-3 zoned land is of great concern, then possibly expansion of this zone to the west, buffering the B-3 Zone from the R-1 Zone, would�be appropriate. The upgrading of the neighborhood streets (Sixth Street in particular) provides adequate traffic capacity for the existing apartments. Single family homes generate on the average ton trip ends per day whereas an apartment unit generates less than six trip ends per day. Six single family homes equals ten apartment units in the amount of traffic generated. The neighborhood shows the very healthy trend of re-inventment in homes and properties. This was encouraged by Monticello's steect improvement program. To rezone this neighborhood to R-2 would probably encourage more rehabilitation rather than neglect and decay. A more reasonable area to rezone would be to include the residences south of Sixth Street up to the apartment lots within the area of concern. The exclusion of the proposed seven unit apartment building from the rezoning is also appropriate. Sincerely, HOWARD DAHLGRSN ASSOCIATES, INC. C, - C. John Uban enclosures I IN S _. "� r" '• �: ' ,'/-�.,:.. cam' j ., tt �' ;1,.,� "'�."" l �r-j• �-•tt• TM1P.•.+.'•� w.. +' �� .I . i�.r .' I7 ,• �f ..1 , r t�t� "i .: r' `fit :[ l,.,y...� f�•:TT+: '••':.'l - `�+- n ++I l��rjl�JJw � .. tL 1. -11 COT Lor low .t tj t +� a` i � - � � � � utr�t..t� �'dRq'•� w'lz dor 3 Lars 5 '3a '' BLk LIQUOR FUND 61 �y AMOUNT CHECK ( MAY DISBURSEKilM - 1979 l- NO. Bd Phillips & Sons - Liquor 2018.33 8723 Griggs, Cooper - Liquor 1234.42 8724 Fd Phillips & Sons - Liquor 1318.46 8725 Old Peoria - Liquor 746.14 8726 Northern States Power - Utilities 336.97 8727 Yonak Sanitation - Contract 30.00 8728 Fd Phillips & Sons - Liquor 1447.52 8729 Twin City Wine - Liquor 609.28 8730 Johnson Bros. - Liquor 3710.87 8731 Comm. of Revenue - State Withholding tax 149.50 8732 Wright County State Bank - Fed. Withholding tax 331.50 8733 MN. State Treasurer - PFRA 217.69 8734 Comm. of Revenue - Sales tax 1754.70 8735 Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins. 153.18 8736 Johnson Bros. - Liquor 1887.76 8737 Twin City Wine - Liquor 356.43 8738 Ed Phillips & Sons - Liquor 1082.04 8739 Griggs, Cooper - Liquor 1328.26 8740 Fd Phillipe & Sons - Liquor 1634.99 8741 Monticello Office Products - Store expense 4.55 8742 Thorpe Dist. Go. - Beer 2269.70 8743 Bernick's Pepsi Cole - Misc. mdse. 95.20 8744 Grosslein Beverage - Beer and mist. mdse. 10791.25 8745 Dick Beverage - Beer and mist. mdse. 2739.30 8746 7 Up Bottling Co. - i3sc. mdse. 298.25 8747 Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse. 342.40 8748 Dahlheimer Diet. - Beer 6295.39 8749 Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse. 109.34 8750 Jude CAndy & Tobacco - Misc. mdse. 311.31 8751 A. J. Ogle - Beer 450.65 8752 Day Dist. Co. - Beer and mist. mdse. 158.15 8753 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 45.98 8754 Refrigeration Systems, Inc. - Ice machine 675.00 8755 Thermal Products - Repair to walk in cooler 22.00 8756 Granite City Cash Register - Store expense 84.00 8757 City of Monticello - Utilities 31.60 8758 Leifort Trucking - Freight 208.03 8759 Our Own Hardware - Misc. expense 24.48 8760 Payroll - April 2290.86 TOTAL DISBURSIat S 847,595.48 61 �y MAY (A'NI'.KAI I'11Nl> 'Wright County Sheriff - Police contract for April ti Of M. - Seminar for Judy Alcott ,cen, Batten, Hudson & Swab - Seminar for L. Gillham U. S. Postmaster - Postage Ed Lange - Custodial services Dept. of Nat. Resources - Lie. Center - Dep. Reg. fees :.'right County State Dank - Investments Wright County State Bank - Investments League of Imo. Cities - Annual Conf. for Mayor and Adm. -VOID- Ga_7 Wieber - Mileage & conf. expense State of YN. - Documents Section - Pamphlets Security Federal Savings & Loan - Investments James Preusse - Cleaning city hall Ind. School District tr882 - Library rent Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary Dr. Phil Whito-Council salary Ken Maus - Council salary Dan Blonigen - Council salary Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary Yonak Sanitation - Contract Gwen Bateman - Animal Imp. expense -'l0I D- Loren Klein - Mileage for Civil Xfenae meetings Loren Klein - Mileage for Public ''Works conf., civil def., etc. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Lie. Center - Dep. Reg. fees - ^. of Rovenue - Stas W/H tar. Y•i ht County State Dant - Fed. WfH tax h^f:' State Treasurer - PERA Mgmt. Center - :seminar for Nancy Spivak Burlington Northern R. R. - Const, costs for R. R. crossings Howard Dahlgren Assoc. - T A reports h;:Y. Planning Assoc. - .membership dues Brenteson Const. - Repair broken waLcrma_n at l,th St. Moore Publishing Co. - Govc. budgeting book O:M - RISC. ang fees for March Wright County Journal Press - Subscription Comm. of Revenue - Water excise tax Banker's Life Ins. - Croup Ins. Lce Richer'. Plumbing & Heating - Chemical feed equip., etc. Mo-In-Fnty, Inc. - Chemical feed equip. at Diap. plant Richard Cline - Milcaf c for seminar at No. Henn. College Fd Lnnge - Custodial service_ Dept. of Nat. Resources - Lie. Center - Dep. Reg. fees Lymica Cillhnm - MUcage for seminar Wait Mack - Mileage for seminar D-,vt. of Nat. Resources - Lie. Center - Dep. Reg. fees Nur0dale Const. - Payment 115 * To be reduced from Arcon payment I q \Null\ I' C'III'f;K Nli. 5838.00 55.00 95.00 176.00 210.00 73-00 600000.00 85000.00 120.00 179.28 10.30 45000.00 180.00 147.00 125.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 2936.50 240.75 53.04 120.00 113.00 961.50 1915.30 1426.52 50.00 6850.99 75.00 40.00 * 460.40 11.00 642.70 7.00 4.97 1273.00 4558.50 5752.15 49.20 108.50 96.00 19.00 60.00 60.00 71055.09 11475 11476 11477 11478 11479 11480 11481 11482 11483 11484 11485 11486 11487 11488 11489• 11490 11491 11492 11493 11494 11495 11496 11497 11498 11499 11500 11501 11502 11503 11504 11505 11506 11507 11508 11509 11510 11511 11512 11513 11514 11515 11516 11517 11518 11519 11520 11521 11522 (:1'.NH1,'A1. 1'11ND AMOUNT CHECK N(i. i John Simola - Seminar expense in Brainerd i 92.88 11523 Deo+. of Mat. Resources - Lic. Center - Dep. Reg. fees 57.00 11524 ti. ire Dept. - Salaries for March and April 2008.00 11525 'st Publishing - MV. Session Law 79 I 40,00 11526 Smith & Pringle - Legal for April 514.50 11527 M. Growth Exchange - Contract renewal 126.00 11528 U. of MN. - Seminar for Loren Klein 40.00 11529 Duro Test Corp. - 12 traffic light bulbs 209.96 11530 The Patco Co. - Liquid fertilizer and weed killer 425.75 11531 Trueman - Welters - Repair parts for loader Ted -)ark equip. 7.79 11532 Flectromatics - Traffic light repairs 205.00 11533 Suburban Gas - Dog pound gas 24.69 11534 American Nat. Bank and Trust - 1960 St. & Sewer bonds 5472.50 11535 Gould Bros. Chev. - Repairs to fire trucks and sludge truck 448.26 11536 Hayden - Murphy - Snow plow parts 203.69 11537 ecd Rite Controls - Chlorine, floride, foot vnl.ve, testing 1407.47 11538 Water Products Co. - Hydrant extension & 2 clamps - 7th & Walnut 256.14 11539 3 M Business Products - copy machine paper 214.00 11540 :.coal 1/49 - Union dues 33.00 11541 Jerry Schmidt - Straw and cleaning compound 23.45 11542 international Harvester - Repair for loader, parts book & manual 65.88 11543 Northern States Power - Utilities 2856.93 11544 Monticello Times - Publishing notices 330.67 11545 Centra Sota - grass seed 3.00 11546 Hoglund Bus Co. - Repair parts for sludge truck 15.32 11547 Wright County Auditor - -r police fineo for April 706.00 11548 Mnus Foods - Dog food, coffee, filters, soap, mist. supplies 61.78 11549 ( usser Sand & Grave'_ - Class 5 24.13 11550 i� her Sign co. - 40 sign posts 234.48 11551 Lindberg & Sons - Mdneral spirits for painting 3.14 11552 St. Cloud Fire FrIulo. - Fire extinguisher and signs at Mtee. Bldg. 42.45 11553 Independent Lumber Co. - Planks, formica, insulation 94.79 11554 Our Own Hardware - Nozzle, valve, rings, nipplos, couplings, etc. 27.55 11555 Carlson 'Welding - misc. we'.dinp & materials for equip. 15.90 11556 VanceIsStandard - Gas for fire truck 29.40 11557 Heskin o Mlectric - Repairs to lights at City Hall 196.50 11558 Monticello Office Products - Misc. office supplies 79.48 11559 National Bushing - Lin assortment, welding rods, spark plug, etc. 56.55 11560 Bufj'alo RcnderLng Service - Sanitary service 20.00 11561 Badger Moter, Inc. - 36 motors & 1000 ft. wire 1701.48 11562 Harry's Auto Supply = Rings, washers, grease gun, screw driver, lite, 26945 11563 Central McGowan, Inc. - Cyl. oxygen 7.95 11564 Amoco Oil - Water - 16.38; Sewer - 69.58 115.96 11565 Cordae Link - !tinsel fuel 108.74 11566 Curtis Noll - Misc. supply of washers, screws, etc. 89.94 11567 Monticello Ford - Repair to 75 Ford pick up 313.86 11568 Bridgewater Tolephone - Telephone ($89.27 to be rrimbursod by OSM) 584.19 11569 Gross Industrial - Laundry , 105.25 11570 No. Central Public ;crvico - Gas 670.49 11571 J y :VNI,RAI. FUND ANIMINT CIIFCK N". Olson & Sons Electric - Wiring at Bandstand, re::crvoir, lift station) 813.42 11572 and disposal plant (� thwestern Bell - Fire telephone � 17.47 11573 ?Oster's Ins. Agency - Add'l. premium on sweeper 238.00 11574 Mrs. Betty Adkins - Eldg. Ins. fees 52.50 11575 Marn Flicker - Postage for fire pager repairs 18.98 11576 Phillips Petroleum - Street - 72.05; water - 60.33; sewer - 90.49 I 222.87 11577 Anconco - Steel cage= for dog pound 760.51 11578 Coast to Coast - screwdriver and paint for snow plow 6.88 1=579 Fidelity Bank & Trust - Parking facility bonds 13807.18 11580 Miller Davis Co. - 5CO purchase order forms 37.39 11581 Fyles Backhoe - Repair to water line and broken sewer service 702.50 11582 Mobil Oil Co. - Street - 348.88; park - 13.13; tree -5.69; fire -26.21 393.91 11583 Willard Farrick - Fire school expense 96.40 11584 Ted Farnam - Fire school expense (plus mileage) 135.46 11585 Accountants Supply House - 1 do%. col. pads 32.34 11586 Rick Wolfstoller - Mileage to Fin. Officers seminar 53.00 11587 Fair's Market - Fertilizer and grass seed 77.18 11588 Castle 0-Mical - 5 gal. Lignasan 66.94 11589 Curtis Noll - New supply of nuts, bolts, etc. 250.23 11590 North American Chemical - Street supplies 130.80 11591 ZOp Mfg. Co. - 35 gal. degreaser 232.50 11592 Flexible Pipe Tool Co. - sewer rods for rodder 757.20 11593 Ansel Aydt - Stumps removed 84.00 11594 Copy Equip. - Metal detector locator 510.00 11595 Payroll for April 10709.20 :b=AL DIC-ru33rA•_ QTS $887,396.89 0 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday - June 6, 1979 - 5:15 P.M. Members Present: Dave Bauer, Ed Schaffer, Dick Martie. Members Absent: Jim Ridgeway, Fred Topel. Purpose of Meeting: Consideration of a Simple Subdivision Application for Lot 4, Block 1, Sandberq South - Larry Purcell. Mr. Larry Purcell proposed to subdivide his property - Lot 4, Block 1, Sandberg South - into two lots of approximately 24,000 square feet each. On a motion by Ed Shcaffer, seconded by Dick Martie, it panned unanimously to recommend approval of this subdivision. Motion was made by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Dick Martin and unanimously carried to ad urn the meeting at 5:20 P.M. i Lorori'D. Klein Building Official LDK/no