City Council Agenda Packet 07-28-1980AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL ✓
July 28, 1980 - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor: Arve Grimsmo
Council Members: Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Ph it White.
Meeting to be taped. a _�
Citizens Comments
P 1. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow a Pylon Sign within a Front
Yard - Jim Maus.
P2. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Lot Width Variance - Kenneth Larson.
i1 3. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Variance Request for Sideyard
C� Setback - Udene Slinde. ^,
P4. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Sideyard Setbac k Variance - Quintin
Lanners.
P5. Consideration of Subdivision Request and Rezoning o f Christopher
Property - Quintin Lanners. p
�6. Consideration of Approval of Final Pi at for Macarlu nd Plaza. Y
A 7. Consideration of Approval of Plans and Specifications for the 1980-1 and
1980-2 improvement Projects, to Serve Macarlund Pla za and a Port on of
Prairie Road. Q Do �.'04S 17 K-10"
Q8. Consideration of Subdivision Request for John Sand b erg in Sandberg's
Riverside Addition.
P9. Consideration of Subdivision Request and Conditional Use for a Church -
t�' First Baptist Church.
0. Consideration of Sign Ordinance Amendment. J
11. Consideration of Planned Unit Development for 36-Unit, Section 8 Sub-
sidized Housing, Variances and Subdivision - Lots 1 2 and Portion of 3, ow
Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace - Reinert Homes, inc. 11
�12. Consideration of Ordinance Amendments Regulating Home Occupations.
t� 13. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request Gary Corrow.
14. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request - St. Peter's Lutheran Church.
15. Consideration of Approval of Simple Subdivision Request for the
1%
Assembly of God Church.
`16. Consideration of Approval of On-Sale ilon- Intoxicati ng Liquor License -
Friends Cafe.
�17. Consideration of Approval of Architectural Contract with McEnary, Krafft
Birch 6 Kilgore, Inc. ,i�
�18. Approval of Bills - July 1980. �?
19. Approval of Minutes - 7/14/80 Regular Meeting. %
Kx,Qy
Unfinishedd Business
Mew Business -
�-.b. M19 - 1.10/e1 1S".M• lb
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
1. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow a Pylon Sign within a Front Yard -
Jim Maus.
PURPOSE: Request has been received from Jim Maus to erect a sign within the
front yard for the present Stor-A-Way building on Highway 25 in Monticello.
According to the Monticello City Ordinance, all structures cannot be built
within the frontyard setbacks without a variance. Normally, structures
are considered to be buildings, but technical reading of this provision
could be construed to also include signs, etc. As a result, all recent
requests for signs have been required to adhere to the setback requirements
that apply to the building, unless a variance is requested.
Jim Maus would like to put the sign as close as possible to the property
line for his proposed tire shop. This sign would conform to all other
aspects of Monticello Ordinances regulating signs.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: At their meeting on June 10, 1980,
the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the
variance, since previous pylon setback requests have been granted.
The Planning Commission did indicate in their recommendation that the
sign should not overhang into the right-of-way, however.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of variance request to allow a
pylon sign within a frontyard setback. (Variance requests require 4/5's
vote of Council for approval.)
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
2. Public Hearinq - Consideration of a Lot Width Variance - Kenneth Larson.
PURPOSE: Previously, a request had been made by Mr. Kenneth Larson for
as simple subdivision of property. Fir. Larson received approval at the
May 27, 1980 Council meeting to subdivide the E-51' of Lot 6 and all
of Lots 7 6 8, Block 32, Lower Monticello, into two equal parcels, each
of which would be approximately 82�' x 183', or 15,097'5 sq. ft., approx-
imately. However, now Mr. Larson would like to request a variance to
have one of the lots 75' in width, which would require a 5' variance
from the City's minimum lot width requirement of 80'.
Reason for the request is that apparently Mr. Larson already had an
agreement drawn up for the sale of this property, and has built a
chain-link fence on the property line, which would create a 75' lot and
the remaining lot would be 90' in width.
Consensus of the Planning Commission at their July 22, 1980 meeting
was to recommend approval to the Council of the variance request. Even
though this was a newly created subdivision, it was felt it does exist
in the older part of the City where some of the lots are only 165' x 66'
in width.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of variance to create a lot that is 5'
less than the City's minimum width standard of 80'. (4/5's vote of
Council is required for approval of variances).
REFERENCES: Enclosed copy of certificate of survey showing the newly
created property line as requested.
C -2-
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
3. Public Hearinq - Consideration of Variance Request for Sideyard Setback -
Udene Slinde.
PURPOSE: Consider request by Udene Slinde for a 5' sideyard variance
to bid a double attached garage to his home on Lot 3, Block 3,
Anders -Wilhelm Estates.
At the time the house was initially built, there was 31�' between the house
and the north property line (the side to which the garage is proposed to
be added). Since the time of its construction, it has been purchased
by a new owner who would like to have a double garage attached on the
north side of the house.
Since this is a variance request, the public hearing is held at the
Council level, and at the time of the writing of this agenda, no objec-
tions have been received from abutting property owners.
At their July 22, 1980 discussion of this item, the Planning Commission,
by consensus, recommended approval to the entire entire Planning Commis-
sion board to eventually be brought to the City Council.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of 5' variance
request. (4/5's vote of Council is required for variance approval).
REFERENCES: Enclosed plat plan. /
- 3 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
4. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Sideyard Setback Variance -
Quintln Lanners.
PURPOSE: To consider a 5' variance for Quintin Lanners to construct a
22' attached garage on Lot 3, Block 1, Kampa Estates.
Mr. Lanners indicates that at the time the basement was dug at this
dwelling, he made a mistake in that the stakes were located in the
wrong place and consequently, the basement was dug 7' too far west,
and thus, it is necessary to have a variance of 5' in order that a 22'
garage can be attached to this house. According to Mr. Lanners, this
mistake was not discovered until recently when the proposed garage
footings were about to be dug. The reason he indicated that it was
not discovered until recently is that the basement was dug this past
winter and the garage was left to be built after the ground had thawed.
Mr. Lanners indicated further that he has reduced the garage size due
to the mistake to 22' instead of 24'.
It should be pointed out that Mr. Quintin Lanners is the abutting pro- 10�v/
perty owner of the adjacent lot. N
At their July 22, 1980 meeting relative to this item, it was the con- Of
sensus of those members present to recommend approval to the ful 1 P
Planning Commission meeting for forwarding to the City Council.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of variance
request for 5' sideyard setback to build an attached garage.
(Note: 4/5's vote of council is required for variance approval).
REFERENCES: Enclosed plat plan.
- 4 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
5. Consideration of Subdivision Request and Rezoning of Christopher
Property - Ouintin Lanners.
PURPOSE: To consider request of Quintin Lanners to subdivide and rezone
the present property owned by Mrs. Don Christopher.
Quintin Lanners is proposing to subdivide the present Mrs. Don Christopher
property, located directly west of the Balboul Estates, into nine lots.
Of these nine lots, his request is to rezone Lot 1 to R-3 and Lots 2
thru 9 to R-2. His request for rezoning Lots 2 thru 9 to R-2 would be
based on his desire to build duplexes on each of these lots, which
would be individually owned by the people who reside within the unit,
rather than to have them owned by one owner and have rental units. These
duplex units would be the same as those which were recommended for approval
at a previous Planning Commission meeting and approved at a previous Council
Meeting for another lot owned by Mr. Lanners in another area of Monticello,
and also would be done at the recommendation of our City Planner.
The square footage of Lots 2 thru 9 range in size from 10,175 sq. ft.,
which meets the minimum lot size required in an R-2 zone, to 29,100
sq. ft., which is approximately three times the size of a minimum lot
allowed in an R-2 zone.
At the time of this meeting, a comment back from Howard Dahlgren Associates
was to recommend this subdivision and rezoning request because of the
reasonable transition between the Freeway and the R-1 zoning.
John Badalich, the City Engineer, has not submitted his comments at
this time; however, if they should be forthcoming before the meeting
Monday night, they will be delivered to you separately so you might
have time to review them prior to the meeting. One concern expressed
by Mr. Badalich was adequate provisions would have to be made for drainage.
At this time, it appears that Mr. Lanners will propose a cash contri-
bution for park dedication.
At the last Planning Commission meeting upon which any action was taken
on this subdivision plat, it was unanimously approved to recommend
approval of the subdivision request and to recommend approval of
the rezoning requests as requested, contingent upon comments from
John Badalich, City Engineer.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of subdivision and rezoning
requests on this plat. (Note: rezoning's require 4/5's vote for approval).
REFERENCES: Plat plan available for review at City Hall. Comments from
John Badalich will be delivered separately if received prior to Monday night.
-5-
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
6. Consideration of Approval of Final Plat for Macarlund Plaza.
PURPOSE: To consider the approval of the final plat proposed by Curtis
Hod, consisting of 9.4 Acres.
A preliminary plat was reviewed by the Plenning Commission and sent for-
ward to the Council and approved at the City Council's October 22, 1979
meeting. This 9.4 acre plat includes an area proposed for townhouse
development for 30 units, and the remaining plat is scheduled for
commercial development, which is compatible with the zoning of this area.
According to Monticello City Ordinance, City Council approval is
necessary for the final plat. The final plat is essentially equivalent
to the preliminary plat approved, and I have forwarded a copy of the
final plat to John Badalich, with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Associates,
for his comments.
Park dedication has been proposed in land with any remaining balance
to meet the City's 10% requirement proposed in cash. I will review
the proposal by the developers for this item and review with the
Council Monday night. Additionally, it will be necessary to obtain
easements for sewer, water and storm sewer for this plat, and the
approval should be contingent upon receiving the necessary easements
al so.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of final plat contingent upon
receiving deed to land dedicated for park purposes, along with amount
due for the balance of the park dedication fee requirement, plus the
necessary easements for utilities.
REFEREiICES: Final plat available for review at City Hall.
- 6 -
Council Agenda - 1/28/80
7. Consideration of Approval of Plans and Specifications for the 1980-1 and
1980-2 Improvement Projects, to Serve Macarlund Plaza and a Portion of
Prairie Road.
PURPOSE: To consider the approval of Plans and Specifications that have
been prepared by our engineering firm. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 8 Associates,
for the extension of storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary sewer along
with the appurtenant street work for Macarlund Plaza, and additionally,
the extension of 700' of 10" sanitary sewer, 550' of 6" watermain and
500' of bituminous street paving on Prairie Road.
Both of these items have previously been the subject of public hearings
as required by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. These Plans and Specifi-
cations have been completed for some time but have been delayed in being
brought forward to the City Council until a final plat of Macarlund Plaza
was presented, which also is on Monday night's agenda, and additionally,
a matter of the rezoning and subdivision plat approval for The Brothers
Plat could be resolved, and this item also is on the agenda for Monday
night. As you may recall, with the extension of Prairie Road, the owners
of the property at that time. Mr. 8 Mrs. Donald Christopher, were opposed
unless they could sell the property and have it developed. In the mean-
time, Mr. Christopher has passed away, however, Mr. Quintin Lanners has
an option on the property contingent upon receiving the necessary approval
from the City Council.
Total cost of the improvement of Macarlund Plaza is estimated to be
$106,100 and the cost of the extension of the Prairie Road improvements
would be $61,080, for a total project cost estimate of $167,180. Addi-
tionally, at a later date, there could be the possibility of servicing
in addition to Prairie Road, the Brothers Plat itself with services, but
�\ this could be within the scope of a change order on this project.
In talking with John Badalich, he advised the City consider the project
at this time although it is relatively late in the year to start a con-
struction project, but John felt because of favorable construction costs,
the City should go forward, although it would be summer of 1981 before the
project would be complete in terms of paving and restoration work.
- 7 -
C._
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
According to the subdivision ordinance, there is a provision that reads
as follows:
"Prior to the making of such required improvements, the City
Council shall require the owner or subdivider to pay to the City
an amount equal to the minimum of 25% up to 100% of the estimated
total cost of such improvements including not only construction,
but all indirect costs."
Purpose of this provision was to require a financial commitment on
the part of the developer since the City of Monticello would, in effect,
be borrowing money to construct such a project. However, in practicality,
it is hard to enforce especially where a developer may request improve-
ments and in order to get to his particular plat, other parcels of land
have to be served with the utilities. In other words, it is pretty hard
to get 25% of the total cost of the improvement project when, in effect,
some of the people who have been served with sewer and water may be
actually opposed to the project or may be neutral, but certainly would not
be willing to come up with a 25% front end cost. Also, if a developer
requests an improvement and is served entirely to his parcel, it is
probably not really fair to have him come up with front end money because
it is practical in one case and not practical in another. As a result,
I would recommend that we waive the front end requirement in both cases.
The Ordinance could still be left as is and if,
after a time, the City decides it might have some merit in some cases,
it could apply it. However, in the future, you may want to consider
amending the ordinance.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of Plans and Specifications
for Improvement Project 1980-1 and 1980-2. The approval for the1980-1
project to serve Macarlund Plaza should be contingent upon receiving
the necessary casements for the utilities and consideration of waiving
front end costs.
REFERENCES: Copies of the Plans and Specifications are quite thick and
elaborate, and as a result, were not sent out, but are available for
review at the Monticello City Hall.
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
9. Consideration of Subdivision Request and Conditional Use for a Church -
First Baptist Church.
PURPOSE: To consider a request by the First Baptist Church to build
a 6,000 sq. ft. church on their property along County Road 75 in
Monticello, along with a subdivision to split the parcel they now have
into one parcel for the Church and another parcel for the existing Church
which would possibly be resold for a Day Care Center, which was pre-
viously approved by the City Council.
According to the plat plan, copy of which is enclosed, there is sufficient
space in the subdivision for both the newly created parcels to be more
than adequate to meet the City of Monticello's requirement of 10,000
square feet in an R-2 zone. As you can see by the Plat Plan, there is
space within the newly created lot for the proposed church that would
allow for an addition.
In reviewing this plan, Loren Klein(Zoning Adm.) indicates that the First
Baptist Church adheres to all zoning requirements including parking, with
the exception that they are proposing a variance on the south side of
their parking lot not to require curbing. This variance is requested
so that if a new church addition is built, the parking lot could be
expanded and would not necessarily destroy the already inplace curb in
order to expand that parking lot. One other alternative in considering
this variance may be to allow this to be the type of curb similar to
that put in at Tom Thumb so that the curb could merely be set back in
the future, although the Church may ideally desire the same type of
curb throughout their development when it is finally completed.
At their July 22, 1980 meeting on this item, the Planning Commission
members presented voted to recommend to the full Planning Commission
approval of the subdivision variance and conditional use permit for a
Church, which is required in an R-2 zone. At the Public Hearing on
this matter, there were no objections to this proposal.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of subdivision and conditional
use permit request, along with the variance relative to the curbing on
the south side of the parking lot proposed. (Variance requires 4/5's for approval).
REFERENCES: Enclosed plat plan for the Church.
C
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
10. Consideration of Sign Ordinance Amendment.
PURPOSE: To consider sign ordinance amendment that deals with those
off -premise signs (billboards) that are 200 square feet or less, and
additionally, the remaining non -conforming signs - that is, signs that
may be too large, or signs that are flashing, etc.
Previously, the City Council of Nonticello did grandfather in those
off -premise signs (billboards) that were greater than 200 square feet,
but required their removal at such time as the particular lot was
developed and the sign is no longer the principal use.
Bob Ryan, of Howard Dahlgren Associates, has sent a memorandum dated
June 20, 1980 relative to this matter. He addresses the following three
items in the matter indicated:
A. The wording "on premise" should be added to the informational and
directional sign definition. The reason for this is to clarify the
fact that the City of Monticello does allow directional signs that
are on premise - for example,a banking facility would be able to
indicate drive in window, entrance, etc., but this should not be
construed to allow off premise signs such as "banking facility 2 blocks".
B. A section should be added to the ordinance that indicates that signs
1 of 199 square feet or less that were in place on or before a date
could continue as a non -conforming use. In this manner, all existing
off -premise signs that are 200 square feet or less would be grand-
fathered in, and unlike the signs that are 200 square feet or greater,
they could continue on the site regardless of whether the sign itself
was a principal use or not. One of the reasons this was addressed
is because some of the signs of this nature are already on parcels
that have another principal use.
C. Provision should be added to say that the temporary use of search
lights and banners shall be done by permit which is issued for a
maximum period of 10 days with a minimum period of 180 days between
consecutive issuance of such permits for any property. This is to
prevent any individual from taking out a temporary permit on a
continuing basis for banners, pennants, etc.
At the Planning Commission meeting on July 22, 1980, there was testimony
received from the Monticello Mall Association that, if the Monticello
fIall had to remove one of its existing pylon signs (only one is allowed
according to ordinance), it would cost from $5,000 to $7,000 for the
removal cost, and they requested that the City consider grandfathering
in these types of signs.
Y
-12 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
The Planning Commission members present at the July 22, 1980 meeting
voted to recommend to the entire Planning Commission the ordinance 5A M
amendments outlined by Bob Ryan above, and additionally, recommended
grandfathering in all existing non -conforming signs which would include
signs that may be too large, too many, flashing signs, etc. Reasoning
for this recommendation is that it was felt that these signs were granted
approval at one time and should not be amortized out since there is not
as much concern with these signs as there are with the larger billboards.
In their recommendation was included the provision that the non -conform-
ing sign must have been erected prior to August 21, 1975 (date of new
ordinance prohibiting these types of signs).
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of Ordinance Amendment which would adopt
the provisions in items A, B d C above, and additionally, grandfather
in all existing non -conforming signs with the exception, of course,
of billboards over 200 square feet, as a non -conforming use which could
remain whether they are a principal use or not.
(Note: Ordinance Amendment requires 4/5's vote of Council for approval).
REFERENCES: Enclosed copy of memorandum from Bob Ryan, with Howard
Dahlgren Associates, dated June 20, 1980.
- 13 -
Council Agenda 7/28/80
11 . Consideration of Planned Unit Development for 36 -Unit, Section 8 Sub-
sidized Housinq, Variances and Subdivision - Lots 1, 2 and portion of 3.
Block 1, Laurinq Hillside Terrace - Reinert Homes Inc.
PURPOSE: To consider a conditional use for 36 -units of Section 8 sub-
sidized housing along with variances from the City of Monticello ordinances
relative to parking and a subdivision of Lot 3, Block 1, Lauring Hillside
Terrace Addition.
Reinert Homes, inc. has received approval from the idinnesota Housing
Finance Agency for Section 8 (low and moderate income) family housing,
to construct 36 residential dwelling units in the City of Monticello
along Lauring Lane. This development consists of 29 two-bedroom units,
6 3 -bedroom units and 1 two-bedroom handicapped unit. Floor area of
the two-bedroom units, except for the handicapped which is 1,179 sq.ft.,
is 1,090 sq. ft., and the three-bedroom floor area is 1,368 sq. ft.
These 36 units are located and interspersed on the parcel in five clusters,
ranging from 5 to 9 units per cluster, similar to a townhouse arrangement.
It is proposed that a Planned Unit Development, which is a conditional use
within an R-3, is the best way to consider such a housing project according
to Bob Ryan with our consulting planning firm, Howard Dahlgren Associates.
In addition to the necessity of obtaining a conditional use permit for the
Planned Unit Development (PUD), it is necessary to obtain variances from
the City of Monticello's provision for parking in that the City of Monti-
cello requires one garage for every two units and only eight garages are
being provided, where the ordinance would require 18, and additionally,
the ordinance requires a total of 2 parking spaces per unit where there
are only going to be a total of 54 parking spaces provided, According
to the July 17, 1980 memorandum from Bob Ryan, copy of which is enclosed,
there is a decreasing number of vehicles per household, and his recom-
mendation is that the 54 spaces being provided, or 1.5 spaces per unit,
would be adequate. Additionally, in the memo, he does allude to the fact
that the City, may in the future, want to consider amending its ordinance
relative to the number of spaces and also considering a portion of the
spaces could be reduced in size to accommodate compact cars. Additionally,
Hr. Ryan recommends approval of the variance for the number of garages.
One other item that is being requested by Reinert Homes, Inc. is the
subdivision of Lot 3, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace. Reinert Homes,
inc. feels that in order to adequately accommodate the project, it was neces-
sary to obtain a portion of Lot 3 making the entire site, if approved.
3.02 acres.
- 14 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
According to a 1980 change by the !Minnesota Legislature, although sub-
sidized housing does not pay full real estate taxes, the City of
Monticello will receive a rebate through the State of Minnesota, which
will be the equivalent of receiving full real estate taxes from any
subsidized housing project.
The Public Hearing on this item was held at the July 22, 1980 Planning
Commission meeting, and no objections were received on the proposed
project. The Planning Commission members present recommended to the
full Planning Commission, approval of the Planned Unit Development,
variances requested, and subdivision, contingent upon the developer
providing an easement to the owner of the remaining portion of Lot 3,
to allow him to have access to the sewer and water stub in which was
put in on the western portion of Lot 3 that Reinert Homes, Inc. is pur-
chasing, along with the contingency that the approval should be subject
to the City Engineer's review of drainage plan, etc.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of conditional use request
for a Planned Unit Development, parking variances, and subdivision of
Lot 3, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace, contingent upon providing
the necessary easement indicated in the above paragraph, along with appro-
val from the City Engineer. (Note: 4/5's vote of Council is required for
approval of variances and conditional use requests).
REFERENCES: July 18, 1980 memorandum from Reinert Homes summarizing
the project; July 17, 1980 letter from Bob Ryan relative to parking; and
site layout and elevation plans enclosed.
- 15 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
-12. Consideration of Ordinance Amendments Regulating Home Occuoations.
PURPOSE: To consider a possible amendment which would make essentially
all home occupations a conditional use rather than allowing some as
permitted uses and others as regulated by a variance.
Listed below is the definition of Home Occupation, and according to the
City of Monticello ordinances, any type of occupation which falls within
the definition is a permitted use within a residential district:
"Any gainful occupation engaged in by the occupants of a dwelling
at or from the dwelling. Such activity shall be clearly inci-
dental and secondary to the residential use of the premises.
Permissable home occupations shall not include the conducting of
a retail business other than by mail, manufacturing business, or a
repair shop of any kind on the premises, and no stock in trade shall
be kept or sold. No other than person residing on the premises
shall be employed, and no mechanical equipment shall be employed
that is not customarily found in the home and no more than one (1)
room may be devoted to home occupation use. Such home occupation
shall not require internal or external alterations or involve con-
struction features not customarily found in dwellings. The
entrance to the space devoted to such occupations shall be within the
dwelling. There shall be no exterior display, no exterior signs except
as allowed in the sign regulations for the zoning district in which
such home occupation is located. There shall be no exterior storage
of equipment or materials used in the home occupation. No home occupa-
tion shall be permitted which results in or generates more traffic
than one (1) car for off-street parking at any given point in time.
Permissable home occupations include, but are not limited to, the
following: art studio, dressmaking, special offices of a clergyman,
lawyer, architect, engineer, accountant, or real estate agent or
appraiser, when located in a dwelling unit occupied by the same;
and teaching, with musical, dancing and other instruction limited to
one (1) pupil at one time."
in the past, the City of Monticello has received numerous requests for
beauty shops as an example, on a variance basis, to allow them as a home
occupation. It was felt by some members of the Planning Commission and
the Council that there are certain uses already defined in the ordinance
as allowable, such as real estate agent, that could be more of a detriment
to a neighborhood than a beauty shop, for example. As a result, the Plan-
ning Commission held a hearing on making all home occupations a conditional
use rather than allowing all home occupations as a p?rmitted use because
in this fashion, the City still would have the control.
16 -
Council Agenda - 1/28/80
At their last meeting on July 22, 1980, relative to this matter, a
hearing was held, and there was no testimony pro or con relative to
the issue. At this meeting, Loren Klein and Ed Schaffer's recommenda-
tion would be to the full Planning Commission that all home occupations
would be regulated through means of a conditional use; however, John �v
Bondhus did not feel that it was necessary to regulate all home
occupations through a conditional use. As previously mentioned, the �P
Planning Cornmission will meet in its entire body on July 28, 1980
at 5:00 P.M. prior to the Council meeting and their recommendation will
be brought forward to the Council.
I believe there is merit in considering ail home occupations as a condi-
tional use, as this will give the City Council control over those types of
uses that may be harmful to a neighborhood and for those that are not,
the process of getting approval would be fairly simple.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of an ordinance amendment to amend the
ordinance requiring all home occupations to be a conditional use with
the same conditions that are addressed in the definition currently.
(Note: Ordinance Amendments require 4/5's vote of Council for approval).
REFERENCES: None
- 17 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
13. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request - Gary Corrow.
PURPOSE: Gary Corrow is requesting a subdivision of the parcel on which
Ti -s tome is now situated along Cedar Street - the site itself is just
west of the Silver Fox Motel .
This simple subdivision would create two lots, one of which would contain
an existing barn and the second lot which would contain his house.
Although no additional variances would be necessary since the newly
created lots more than meet the City of Monticello's minimum requirements
for a lot size within a B-3 zone, the existing barn,as you can see by the
enclosed certificate of survey, is situated fairly close to the sideyard
and rearyard lot lines, but this is an existing condition.
At their July 22, 1980 meeting on this, those Planning Commission
members present recommended to the entire Planning Commission approval
of the simple subdivision.
It should be pointed out that Gary Corrow's home is being served under
the 1979-1 improvement Project that is being completed by Barbarossa
Construction, and initially, the consensus of the Council was to
assess homesteads over 20 years, although the assessment hearing has
not been held and a final decision is still pending. in the case of
the newly created lot on which the barn is situated, it appears that
this could be assessed over a ten year period of time since it would to
no longer be part of the homestead.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of subdivision.
REFERENCES: Copy of certificate of survey showing this parcel is
enclosed.
0
- 18 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
-� 14. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request - St. Peter's Lutheran Church.
C
PURPOSE: Consider request by St. Peter's Lutheran Church to subdivide
Lots 2, 3, 4 8 5, Block 14, into two parcels.
The proposal by the Church is to subdivide Lot 5 and the W35 of Lot 4
from the entire parcel of land on which the present parsonage, garage and
Church is situated on, to create two parcels. The westerly parcel then
would be the site of the existing parsonage plus the garage, which accord-
ing to the plat plan enclosed, does straddle the newly created lot line
if approved. However, the Church's intent is to remove the garage and
the parsonage and build a new parsonage on the south half of this newly
created lot.
At their meeting on July 22, 1980, those Planning Commission members present
by consensus recommended approval of this subdivision to the entire
Planning Commission.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of simple subdivision con-
tingent upon removal of existing garage and parsonage prior to occupation
of the newly proposed parsonage. This contingency would then take care
of the matter of the fact that the current garage straddles the newly
proposed property line, and also the fact it eliminates the possibility
of having two houses on one lot.
REFERENCES: Copy of the certificate of survey.
- 19
1-7 �p Or LOT A
0O
N OR T
4.1
lw
.., Ir
oe LOT
ti
MEYER-ROHLINi
ENGISrERS-LAND SURVEYO
1111 Hwy, 2sm. suffato. Minn.
(_1
G
Council Agenda 7/28/80
15. Consideration of Approval of Simple Subdivision Request for the
Assembly of God Church.
PURPOSE: Consider request by the Assembly of God Church to subdivide
the east It of Lot 9 and all of Lot 10, Block 35, into one parcel of
14,335 square feet and the remaining 1,800 square feet would be added
to the Assembly of God Church parcel to the south on which the existing
Church sits. The parcel of 14,335 sq.ft. is currently where the existing
parsonage now is situated.
This subdivision does not require any variances and the subdivision
does meet the minimum lot requirements.
At their July 22, 1980, those members present of the Planning Commission V/
recommended approval to the full Planning Commission. L O
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of simple subdivi- _A�1
sion contingent upon receipt of a certificate of survey. o Y'
REFERENCES: Enclosed drawing showing the lots and proposed subdivision.
-20-
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
16. Consideration of Approval of On -Sale Ron-Intoxicatinq Liquor License -
Friends Cafe.
PURPOSE: Consider a request from Ms. Betty Frazier, owner of the Friends
Cafe, for a 3.2 beer (non -intoxicating liquor) license.
Previously, this establishment has had an on -sale non -intoxicating liquor
license, and at one time, also had an off -sale non -intoxicating liquor
license. Hs. Frazier indicated her only request is for an on -sale non -
intoxicating liquor license to allow patrons of her restaurant the oppor-
tunity to have a beer with their lunch.
The Friends Cafe does meet all the requirements of the City of Monticello
ordinance for a non -intoxicating liquor license.
POSSIELE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of non -intoxicating
liquor license for the Friends Cafe.
- 21 -
C
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
17. Consideration of Approval of Architectural Contract with McEnary, Krafft,
Birch 8 Kilqore, inc.
PURPOSE: To consider approval of a contract for architectural services
for the proposed library.
This item was taken up at our last meeting, and it was tabled until some
issues relative to fee could be worked out.
Since that time, 1 have talked to Merrill Birch, and he has agreed that
the fee .should be changed to $42,000 for a 6,000 sq.ft. building and for
every additional square foot, there would be a charge of $5.00 and for
every decrease in square footage, there would be a resulting decrease in
the architectural fees of $6.00 per sq.ft. Additionally, he has agreed
to add provisions in the clauses relative to reimbursable fees and
consulting fees to indicate that this would only be after approval in
writing from the Owner. lir. Birch's main concern was that they would
be picking up these fees as part of their contract, except that if the
City made an unusual request such as visiting a library in Duluth or
some related incident like that. There is also a provision where that
the City would only be responsible for the schematic design fee, which
is 15% of the total contract, should the City not decide to go beyond the
schematic design phase due to a defeat in a referendum or something of
this nature.
i have sent the revised contract to Gary Pringle for his review and 1 will
have his comments by Monday night's meeting.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of revised contract with
architectural firm of McEnary, Krafft, Birch 8 Kilgore, Inc. for
architectural services for the proposed library.
REFERENCES: Copy of revised contract.
. 22
�
`. T J
{� ^t.,+.1 l• V 4 �• r 4 x+17
C
Ap
vim.
V
�P
of
r
,, o +
9
•
-1•
t = t
:0 i
t
1 � ro•
s t
1
p8�
4
r
a ..
lowajy.�-
Wofteee eowiteuctiom Co.
MONTICELLO. MINN. 55362 • PHONE 2955801
R
��� 3 r3f�1��C'3
,�--t �. � i / t � t't n rc •rt ,•r �= S w «rs �1 i'�'ci
C5 µ' N t
3
i
l
dor 3- ELL (
pam •Pa csvmes
t _
r -�-
i
1?t•6
y
71il_• 73, 1990
ORR-SCHELEN• MHERON ItASSOCIATE& INC.
Division of Kidde Consultants, Inc.
.:J. (;nr.•+ t•liouer
Cit.•• A"!'.1iaigtrator
City of r:onticcllo
1-5. L'aot ;:roalway
-Monticello, Ninnenota 51352
Ras Revised Preliminary Flat, ]he Brothers
Dear Garys
The rovin,�d prelininary plat of The Brothern addition receivel
by our ufficr recentl;), Iwo been reviewed by my utaff. The
followini: ars: ny co:,santa relative to the plat :ia ;ua on our
previoits corliontn and the rnquirorionts of t:onti-•rllo 3ubeivi•+iun
Ordinanrt•.
1. The rovinnl prclicainary ,plat Goes not ahoty ilho roviaio.i
date.
2. I'M vNim;v in ,•roponud in the zoning, vur I roviuua le%tte>:
under Ontr. --f dune 10, 1700 oxhlainad our 1.onition rcgnrdin-;
thn ronontnv; change in thin arca.
3. Accorttin'I to ^.ieLion 11-4-1 of the City's Suhdiviuien
Orelinnnce, ra coil survey has been included and tho aerial
plunto n1v-1we no trees in the area.
4. Ilo erosion control plan has boon included in thin sub-
minrion.
5. rrcvinionc yove boon made to retain storm water runoff
from tho rroposod plat and this should prove adoguate in the
event we do not experience reoccurring rainfalls on successive
dates.
G. Thare is ntill sono question regarding the contour linan
presented on the grading plena around KLcholas Circle, which
at-wo to be incorrect. The grading contours in the vicinity of
the ponding area appear to be proper. Bae notations in red on
the enclosed plan.
n,'f f , . .,: • ti� ,,, ti xd 5541:1
July 23, 1900
Pn,je 2
Thi6 eoi:cludes our co—ants regarditty the revised preliminary
plat of The Brothers addition. A copy of the marked -up pro-
Jiminary plat in being returned for your review and the other
copy is Doing retained by our office.
Yourn vury truly,
C:UL-SC11i:LL1:N-I:AYZROU
C i Ly Dicjineur
Jpb^'1111,
�.ucicaurcn
cc:Lo_cn ::lr.iu, Bldq. OUici•:J
:,n,�r-i:uLlin, Inc.
'4,e 'J '4
SUBDIVISION of LOT 3
BLOCK 1, SANDBERG
.1
-4AL4' '
J.jaip—
0
I
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
8. Consideration of Subdivision Request for John Sandberq in Sandberq
Riverside Addition.
PURPOSE: John Sandberg has submitted a request to have a simple sub-
division of Lots 3 & 4, Sandberg Riverside Addition, made into three
lots.
Currently, Lot 3 is 18,800 square feet and Lot 4 is 25,750 square feet.
He would create three lots ranging in size from 12,340 square feet to
16,325 square feet, all meeting the City of Monticello's minimum require-
ments in an R-1 zone of 12,000 square feet.
Technically, according to Monticello City Ordinances, when more than two
lots are created, it is necessary to go through the entire subdivision
section relative to preliminary and final plats. However, Mr. Sandberg
would like to request a variance such that he only submits the preliminary
plans for Monday night's meeting and then ultimately submits a final
plat but does not have to require all the detailed grading which has
previously been submitted and other engineering aspects on this plat.
At the July 22, 1980 meeting of the Planning Commission, two residents
in the area - Sherrie and Ron White and Mel Wolters - were opposed to
the subdivision since they indicated they originally purchased their
lots in Riverside Addition based on the initial platting of the land
in that there would be no new lots created. However, they both did
indicate that there were no covenants to this effect. Enclosed, please
find a July 22, 1980 letter from Sherrie and Ron White.
It should be pointed out that there are currently eight lots in Sandberg
Riverside Addition, and these lots are of the following square footages:
28,550; 14,200; 69,000; 15,230; 18,750; 18,800; 25,750. 27,700
Additionally, there was a concern expressed that if the lots were created
as proposed with Mr. Sandberg, a variance would be necessary from setbacks,
etc. It does appear that Mr. Sandberg could fit a house on the parcels
without the necessity of a variance, unless a rather large house is built.
At their last meeting, Planning Commission members Loren Klein and Ed
Schaffer recommended to the entire Commission that the subdivision be
approved. However, John Bondhus did oppose this. This will be brought
up to a formal motion at the July 28th meeting of the Planning Commission
and the recommendation will be brought forward to the Council.
- 9 -
Council Agenda - 7/28/80
One possibility that the Council may consider in light of the opposition
is the approval of the subdivision as presented, with the understanding
that the City Council would go on record not being in approval of
any variances. This would not prevent Nr. Sandberg from applying for
a variance down the line, but it would at least make him aware that the
Council did not look favorably upon such a request.
One other item that might be mentioned that is worth noting, is that
if this subdivision is approved, it will be necessary to assess this par-
cel, unless waived by the Council, for sewer, water and street improve-
ments. The original assessment against Sandberg Riverside Addition
included only eight parcels. According to Monticello City Ordinance, `
if a lot is subdivided and has not been previously assessed for utilities,
it is subject to assessments. v
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of subdivision request ��Q L J�
contingent upon this parcel being assessed for utilities or assessments 1'�
waived for these utilities.
REFERENCES: Certificate of survey showing the three proposed lots.
- 10 -
July 22, 1880
To the Monticello Planning Commission
We would like to make known our feelings on the proposed alterations to the
property adjacent to ours in Sandberg Riverside.
We feel that making three lots out of two existing lots is not suitable to the
"well planned" development that Riverside is supposed to be.
Much thought and consideration were put into Sandberg Riverside two years
ago when originally platted. Altering the development now would be contrary
to what we were told the development would be when we purchased two lots
in the development
We feel that only the monetary gains expected by the applicant were
considered before making this application to the Monticello Planning
Commission.
We shall be disappointed should the Monticello Planning Commission approve
this application.
—Ron and Sherrie White
Riverside Circle, Monticello
HOWARD DAHLGREN ASSOCIATES
C
CONS V LTING PLAN N ERS
ONE GROVE LAND +En •, ACC
rn�N r, LA••O L�'+, w�N NL�Gt• :,�+n]
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 20 June 1980
TO: Monticello Planning Commission
RE: Siyn Ordinance Amendments to Clarify Informational/Directional
Sign Definition, Advertising Signs of 200 Square Feet or Less,
and Time Limit for Temporary Permits
Based on the 10 June 1980 meeting and subsequent discussions with City
Staff, we have prepared amendments to the Sign Ordinance for your
consideration. One amendment clarifies that information/directional
signs are on -premise signs. The Ordinance allows information/
directional signs up to a maximum of ten (10) square feet. Informational/
directional signs are meant to allow for signs such as those directing
motorists through parking lots, identifying entrances, and similar signs.
This amendment is to the definition of infoniational/directional signs
contained in Section 10-2-2.
Another amendment deals with advurtising signs of 200 squ„re feet or
less in area. Discussion of these signs was deferred from the 10 June
meeting. The proposed amendment prohibits these signs, but allowu those
existing signs to remain. The amendment would be placed in Section
10-3-9 (B) 2 of the Ordinance immediately proceeding the recommended
revision to advertising signs in excess of 200 square feet which wall
discussed at tire last meeting.
The poauibility of phasing out these advertising signs of 200 squaro
foot or lean in a manner similar to billboards was aluo considered.
The major difficulty in applying similar removal conditions is that some
of those existing advertising signs aro located on developed property.
in liqht of the fact that there aro relatively few of these signs in
Lown, that the existing signs are not overly obtrusive, and that moat
of these signs were in place before the City had a Sign Ordinance, it
seems reasonable to grandfather them in as a non -conforming nign.
The other amendmont shown following deals with insuring temporary permits
for search lights, banners, pennants, and similar devices. The
Ordinance as prosenLly written contains no time limit for the issuance
of A temporary permit. Theoretically, under the presont Ordinance, a
temporary permit could be issued for an extended time period which could
1C)
MEMORANDUM 20 June 1980
RE: Amendments to Sign Ordinance Page Two
in fact, allow these temporary uses to become permanent signs. The
proposed amendment places a ten (10) day time limitation on such permits
with a 180 day period between consecutive issuances of permits to a
particular property owner. The proposed amendment would allow the
property owner to have these special temporary signs occassionally
during extraordinary circumstances such as a grand opening or big sale.
This amendment is contained in Section 10-3-9 (C) 4.
The applicable sections of the Sign Ordinance are shown following with
the amendments underlined.
SECTION 10-2-2
INFORMATIONAL/DIRECTIONAL SIGN: Any on -promise sign giving
information to employees, visitors, or delivery vehicles but
containing no advertising. May include name of business but
must predominantly represent a directional or information
message.
SECTION 10-3-9
(B) PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS:
Prohibited Signs:
y. Advertising signs of two hundred (200) square
feat or leas in area, except that those signs
which were 1.n place on or before
may continue as a non-
conforming Lias. (The provisions dealing with
advertising algns in excess of two hundred
(200) aquaro feat could be added here or as
another provision (h) following with
subsoquont provisions rolottarcd.)
(C) GENERAL PROVISIONSc
4. The temporary use of search Iighta, hannora, pennants,
and similar devices shall require a permit. The
pormlt shall be Issued for a maximum nnriol oT_
ten (10) davo with a minimum period of one hundred
r MEMORANDUM 20 June 1980
RE: Amendments to Sign Ordinance Page Three
l
eiqhty (180) days between consecutive issuance of
such permits for any property. The permit shall be
prominently displayed during the period of validity.
Use of portable signs shall be restricted to
information only and may not exceed four (4) square
feet (no advertising).
/G
,3 f �iK--�4.� j145. _..r`— __�-•ir-i { r�, k��v+�.�f , ' ii i K u
WKERIT HOMES ARCM 3 v °
"SYSTEM FLOW BUILDING" n b
tJO. HVJY. 10, P.O. BOX'46. SAUK RAPIDS. MINN.
PHONE 1612) 2524961
July 16, 1960
IMI -SIDE 'rF.RRACE
P.U.O.
Statement iblfil.ling Vaquirements of Chapter 20, �Zming Crdi,a.•tcc
City of rlonticello
The proposal P.U.O. is to be located on lots 1 , 2 and a portion of o
3 in Block 1, Louring Hillside Terrace. The site has a total area
of. 3.02 acres. 'Phe market to be served will be determined by the
unit mix of the demlopcent. This six will consist of 29 two-
bedroan units, 6 three-bcdroem units and 1 two-bodroan handicapped
unit. Therefore , the market served will basically be young
°
fanilics with orate to, three children.
- -
A statennit from the City's Comprehensive Plan follows which skids
`
i
two relationship of the develop rant to the plan.
"The Guide Plan also suggests multiple family residen-
tial densit.,io close to the CBD and along the Interstate-
ttiglr,my 94 -tich rmy, vary from six to twenty units per
„
r
acre.- multiple fa'tily housing types can vary frac
�
moditi 1 density townhouse developments to three story
garden Apar trrents to high-rise multiple. t:'hon locating
�.
tlw, ultlplme fa illy" it iv;L7PCWtant7, to'assuio prop r�
access,. adequate off-street parking arnl location near cn'
"on a thoroughfare -so as to avoid traffic conflicts with
ningfe Uni.1y`residential neighborhoods:"
r 0
RRie P:U.-M in tc; bo designed and arranged co that'cach unit ham
its.own private entrance which eliminates children running and
o
Nlajlxn in & man hall areas. Each um11t will have homy aijacent
'•green" arca rhich will afford now outdoor pleasure for tho °
7
tenant: Sam largo "green" areas for children to play are alto
'%8a3
provided. Tot lots will be an additiomml feature.
A landscaping plan will be provided at a later date ublc. _ill o
0 0
Imlude a detailed planting list as well as terrace cicv_:x1:_, and
sodding schedule .
r -rasion control during construction will to done acccrdir.3 to
standard soil erosion control practices.
Ib
O
o
saw
HOWARD DAHLGREN ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING PLAN N E R S
ONE GPOVEL^NO TEn PACE
NiN NC�POL��,,..NNESOT• a03
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 17 July 1980
TO: Loren Klein, Building Inspector
City of Monticello
FROM: Robert Ryan, AICP
RE: Parking Requirements with respect to Hillside Terrace PUD
The Hillside Terrace PUD proposes to provide 1.5 spaces per unit instead
of the two spaces per unit required by the Monticello Zoning Ordinance.
Because of the increasingly prohibitive costs associated with owning
and operating a car, the number of vehicles per household is decreasing.
Many cities are also reducing the number of parking spaces required per
unit and it is very common for the parking requirement to be reduced
from two spaces to 1.5 spaces per unit. In some places where mass
transportation is available, further reductions are allowed. We feel
that the proposed 1.5 spaces per unit should be adequate for the proposed
develoidnent.
AL name point in the future, the City may wish to consider amending the
Zoning Ordinance to reduce the parking requirement for residential uses.
The hillside Terrace PUD could serve as a good toot Case in this
regard.
91he City may also wish to review the parkinq space size requirements. The
Ordinance currently requires all parking spaeos to be nine foot wide by
20 feat in depth. This size standard was used to accommodate a larger
vehicle than is boinq built today. Full-size vehicles are beinq down-
sized and we recommend a full size parking stall standard of 8.5 feet
by 10 feet.. In addition, more than 50 percent of the cars on the road
today are a compact or sub -compact size. The City may wish to consider
allowing some of the parking spaces to be scaled down for compact cars.
we rocommond a compact parking space standard of 7.5 feet by 15 feet. At
this time, it would be apprupriato to allow 50 percent of all parking
apace; to be compact size. In the future as the number of small cars in
use increases, it may be appropriate to increase the percentage of
compact sized spaces even further. Many cities do require that compact
larking spaces he appropriately marked, with respect to Hillside
Terrace PUD, the City may wish to consider allowing a portion of the
spaces to be sized for compact cars.
c
MEMORANDUM
RE: Parking Requirements
17 July 1980
Page Ivo
The major advantage of allowing compact sized parking spaces is that
more parking spaces can fit into the same space. If the City is hesitant
about granting the variance to the parking requirement to allow 1.5 spaces
per unit in the case of the Hillside Terrace PUD for example, another
possibility would be to allow up to 50 percent of the spaces to be the
smaller compact space of 7.5 feet by 15 feet whi.eh would provide more
spaces in the same space. Of course, the City may elect to grant the
variances to allow 1.5 parking spaces per unit and to allow 50 percent of
the spaces to be of a reduced size for compact cars. We do not forsee
any problems with these variances in this case.
J
v
13
A
C
ISS- 01:57- 035 091— 88 2. — 0 — I
E'/i- A Lam -i- ea- 3S Lave-" &A
iss-oar- oI.5roO- esL- 0-1
LpT I U- ,Ljc 3 5
11 now--
�S
L&UC Vt.o►d7t -14
JULY GENERAL FUND GENERAL
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
44.00
13117
Datapro Research - Information pamphlet
32.00
13118
Barbarossa 6 Sons - Payment on Imp. Project
15345.79
13119
MN. State Treasurer - Para payment
68.88
13120
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
45.00
13121
Wright County State Bank - Investments
338595.56
13122
James Preusse - Cleaning city hall
180.00
13123
Mont. School District #882 - Library rent
147.00
13124
Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
125.00
13125
Dan Blonigen - Council salary
100.00
13126
Fran Fair - Council salary
100.00
13127
Ken Maus - Council salary
100.00
13128
Dr. Phil White - Council salary
100.00
13129
YMCA of Mels. - Contract payment
208.33
13130
Yonak Sanitation - Contract payment
3190.50
13131
U. S. Postmaster - Box rental
10.00
13132
Brian Wieman - Summer help additional salary
37.02
13133
Michael Dick -
121.60
13134
Bob Boedigheimer -
49.60
13135
Jim King -
26.35
13136
Keith King -
79.00
13137
Wright County State Bank - FWT tax
2825.30
13138
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
54.00
13139
Gwen Bateman - Animal Imp. expense
433.06
13140
U. S. Postmaster - Postage stamps
228.00
13141
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
5.00
13142
Marvin George Builders - Const. deposit refund - Balboul Est.
798.01
13143
Mao Ward - Inf. Center salary
97.32
13144
Lucy Andrews - Inf. Center salary
109.32
13145
N. S. Power - Utilities
3065.93
13146
MN. State Treasurer - Pcra payment
1948.86
13147
Barbarossa s Sons - Construction payment
44944.75
13148
Commissioner of Revenue - Water oxcise tax
109.61
13149
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
42.00
13150
MN. wastewater Operator's Assoc. - Seminar fees
150.00
13151
Ruttger's Bay Lodge - Seminar fees - Bldg. Official Conf.
15.00
13152
Brian Wieman - Salary supplement
60.75
13153
Michael Dick - Salary supplement
101.60
13154
Keith King - Salary supplement
55.28
13155
Bob Boedigheimer - Salary supplement
35.65
13156
Wright County State Bank - Investmente
225000.00
13157
Wright County State Bank - FWT tax
749.80
13158
Wright County State Dank - Investments
160000.00
13159
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT tax
1520.90
13160
VOID
--
13161
State Treasurer - Social Security Fund - 2nd Qtr. - 1980
8137.53
13162
MN. State Treasurer - PEM payment
1027.84
13163
Amoco 011 - Treo-56.17; park -7.27, atreet-30.80; sower -12.32
137.17.
13164
fire -30.61
Monticello Fj ro Dept. - Payroll h pagor repairs
1809.57
13165
Olson's Electric - Lift station repairs h parts for gas pump
295.43
13166
John Simola - Mileage
55.39
13167
Food Rita Controls - Chlorinators mist. chemicals
1961.38
13168
Earl 11. Anderson - Ono 8' bench
118.54
13169
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone - 51.52 to be roim, by OSM
649.98
13170
Stat. Trpasuror - Division of waters - Vrrmit for WWTP
25.00
13171
Zahl Equipment Co. - Bushing 6 keys for gas pump
5.4n
13172
/8
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK N0.
B 6 J's Discount - Dog food
22.86
13173
Howard Dahlgren - Meeting attend., sign ord. amendments
524.10
13174
Centra Soto - 6 pair gloves
4.20
13175
MacQueen Equip. - Street sweeper parts
185.88
13176
Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins.
1763.62
13177
Buffalo Bituminous - Thomas Park Drive 6 at. repairs
9812.06
1317B
Mae Ward - Inf. Center salary
104.00
13179
Lucy Andrews - Inf. Center salary
92.00
13180
Poirier Drug - Film 6 salt tablets
9.77
13183-
3181Mobil
mobilOil - Gas and oil 6 tire repair
240.03
13182
N. W. Bell Telephone - Fire phone
22.32
13183
Wright County Sheriff - Police contract
6378.66
13184
RogerMack - Mileage
21.20
13185
Moon Motors - John Deer tractor repairs
18.49
13186
Monticello Office Products - Mise. office supplies
166.52
13187
Don Fern - Reward for reporting vandalism
5.00
13188
Bruce Bray -
5.00
13189
Conway Publications - Issues of Ind. Dev.
7.00
13190
North Central Public Service - Gas
76.92
13193-
3191Phillips
PhillipsPetro. Corp. - Gas and oil
525.70
13192
Gruys, Johnson s Assoc. - 1979 audit report fees
6000.00
13193
Lindberg s Sons - Paint for parks
59.89
13194
Monti. -Big Lake Pet Hospital - Animal Imp. expense
65.00
13195
Fidelity Bank s Trust - 71 Water Rev. s G. O. bonds - interest
3684.65
13196
N. W. Nat. Bank of Mpls. - 76,77,78,79 G. O. bonds - interest
177909.45
13197
1st Nat. Bank of St. Paul - 78 G. 0. bond - interest
39273.00
13198
Harry's Auto Supply - Misc. repair parts a supplies
175.68
13199
Water Products Co. - one saddle
38.26
13200
Audio Communications - Radio repair, installation, antenna
131.95
13201
Fair's Garden Center - Fertilizer for city hall shrubs
22.04
13202
Albinson - Balance due on previous check issued
.60
13203
Gary Wicber - General mileage - June thru July 21
31.60
13204
lot Nat. Bank of Mpls. - 75 Mtee. Bldg. s G. O. bonds - intorest
23332.45
13205
Monticello Fire Dept. - Adv. for open house reimbursement
32.55
13206
PIN. Growth Exchange - Employee AeeL. & referral service
225.00
13207
Central I.M. Communications - Pager repair
55.50
1320*3
Gould Bros. - Repairs to Chov. tanker s mini pumper - Fire Dspt..
154.63
13209
Autocon Industries - Repair to reservoir control panel
217.00
13210
Int. Conf. of Bldg. Officials - Review manual, s duos
73.10
13211
Pyles*a Backhoo - Ind. Park, Walnut St., latrine rental, fuel
2739.00
13212
Lank installation, rOLary drain cleaning at dog pound
Monticello Rotary Club - Duos for Gary Wieher
118.00
13213
Our Own Hardware - Misc. supplies - fuol tank parts -231.48
471.00
13214
Monticello Times - Misc. printing 6 publishing
392.35
13215
Wallace Frnnnon - Building shelves in basement at city hall
56.00
13216
Hoolihan, Nails c Boland - Atty. fees on Ruff casement case
3636.60
13217
Wright County Auditor - S police fines for June
1215.50
132118
American Linen Supply - 2 cases of toilet tissue - parks s ctr.
67.00
13219
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Jean Brouillard - Diesel fuel and gear lube
309.86
13220
Marco Business Products - Paper for copy machine
98.50
13221
Carlson Welding - Welding, steel storage cabinet, I" rod
111.45
13222
VOID
--
13223
Buffalo Rendering Service - Animal Imp. expense
20.00
13224
Persian's Office Products - Repairs to dictaphone
93.45
13225
St. Cloud Fire Equip. - Hoses, handles, fire ext., recharge
55.40
13226
Ruff Auto PartS - Thermo housing for pick up
5.00
13227
Maus Foods - Coffee
23.31
13228
Monticello Ready Mix - Cement
243.50
13229
Gordie Link - 2000 gal. gas based on 9 of use in 1979
2128.00
13230
Annandale Sod Service - 45 rolls of sod
40.50
13231
Hoglund Bus Co. - 2 used truck tires, switch, tail pipes 6 clam;>s
219.32
13232
Central McGowan - Cyl. rental and oxygen
18.34
13233
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage
46.70
13234
Gross Ind. Services - Laundry
138.60
13235
Davis Electronic Service - Pager repairs
88.41
13236
Trueman -Welters - Parts for Int. tractor
48.77
13237
Marcus ZumBrunnen - Routing & lettering park benches
8.00
13238
Coast to Coast - Misc. supplies
162.84
13239
Ruttger's Bay Lake Lodge - Civil Def. Conf. in Sept. dep.
84.89
13240
Ind. Lumber Co.- Lumbar for picnic tables - 168.00 & mist.
258.03
13241
Int. Harvester Co. - Solenoid for Hough loader
50.18
13242
Flicker's T -V - Battery
2.59
13243
National Bushing - Filters, welding rods, tools, etc.
61.90
13244
O. K. Hardware - Water jug, hedge trimmer, key, nozzle
49.00
13245
State Treasurer - Surplus Property - Various tools
55.70
13246
Curtis Noll - Various nuts, bolts, washers, etc.
223.51
13247
Stokes Marine - Gasket, oil for chain saws, file
18.20
13248
Wilcnsky Auto Parts - 1 axel shaft for M37
58.60
13249
Flexible Pipe Tool Co. - Root saws for sewer rodding machine
189.70
13250
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. foes
44.00
13251
MN. Park Supervisors Assoc. - Reg. Fee - Park Supr.- Roger Mack
29.50
13252
Payroll for June
15007.06
TOTAL DIS13URSEMENTS FOR JULY
$1,115,435.14
�g
9-
.i
L
DAVIS AUCTION SERVICE
BOX 332
MONTICELLO, IVIN 55362
295-2032
TOI.Dhone 295.2711
250 East Broadway
MONTICELLO. MN 55362
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council (Members
FROM: Gary Wieber _r J
DATE: July 28, 1980
SUBJECT: Proposed Joint Meetinq with the Library Project Committee -
Tuesday Eveninq, July 29. 1980 - 7:30 P.M.
Met- Lina 3335739
Purpose of this meeting requested by the Library Project Committee is to
review with the Council the progress made thus far by the Library Committee.
Of specific concern to the Library Project Committee is whether the current
site under consideration for a library is adequate to accommodate a library
of 6,000 square feet, along with the parking required by Monticello City
Ordinance, or 37 spaces.
L Following are some of the alternatives that the Library Project Comnittee
would like to pursue with the Council:
1. Acquire additional land from either Mr. Bob Dowling or Independent School
District #882 - (it should be pointed out that the land owned by the School
District does have a covenant on it which indicates that this area shall
only be used for school or playground purposes, but there is a possibility
of this matter being pursued further).
2. Reduce the size of the building.
3. Amend the parking ordinance requirement for libraries.
4. Grant the City a variance from the provision of requiring 37 spaces
(it looks like a 6,000 square foot building could be accommodated with approxi-
mately 26 spaces).
5. Build the library elsewhere including the Oakwood block (the City would
lose the rights to the existing site since the School District conveyed
it with the covenant that the City develop a library on it.)
6. Develop overflow parking onto the Oakwood Block.
{ GW/ns
Wo(como to //1onlicallo b/[o rnouniain '—+` • �I •
Telephone 2852711
Cllt y oI Trl..t Af.
250 East Broadway
MONTICELLO. MN 55362
MEMORANDUM
TO: City CouncilCI,embers
FROM: Gary Wiebei
DATE: July 28, 19800///
SUBJECT: Aqenda Item 6 - Park Dedication for Macariund Plaza
M—. L— 3335739
After reviewing the proposed park dedication for Macarlund Plaza, 1 would
recommend that the City of Monticello consider park dedication fee in cash
rather than land, which would amount to $3,368.
I have met with the developers of Macarlund Plaza, and they were willing to
dedicate Lot 13 and 14. Block 3, Hoglund Addition, for the park dedication
requirement for Macarlund Plaza, which amounted to $3,368, plus the
park dedication fee for Thomas Park, of $2,600. For your information,
Thomas Park has been purchased by the developers of Macarlund Plaza al so,
and the plat for Thomas Park has not been officially signed by the City
until the Park Dedication requirement has been paid.
Although their proposal was on a preliminary basis, the developers of
Macarlund Plaza indicated that Lots 13 6 14, Block 3, Hoglund Addition.
would be worth at least 54,000-5,000/ea. plus assessments, and since,
in effect, they are giving up $8,000 to $10,000 of land for $5,968 of
park dedication fee equivalent, they propose that possibly a credit could
be granted to them for this difference.
After reviewing the Lots in question, Loren Klein. our Building Inspector,
indicates that before he would be able to grant a building permit on Lots 13
and 14, Block 3, Hoglund Addition, he would need a soil survey and there
could be some question of whether these lots would be buildable. Additionally,
there is about $4,000 left of assessments on each lot.
Reviewing Park Dedication, i recommend that the City of Monticello take the
fee in cash equivalent, or $3,368, due to the following factors:
1. Question of the buildability of Lots 13 and 14.
2. Expense City would incur on sod and seed in the development of these
parks.
3. Assessments of $8,000 still pending would be picked up by the City, in
effect, if the Lots were taken over by the City.
W.11o„>,o ro Iffloafi«ofZo ... kille onounra;n -=
Memo to City Council
July 28, 1980
Page N2
4. City now has quite a few park dedication from plats, and I would think it
would be best to develop these parks at this time rather than take on
additional parks.
To look at the other side for a moment, I think there is some merit in taking
park dedication in this area since there is no parklands in the eastern portion
of the City. If the Council feels that park dedication of land is worth
pursuing, it might accept the land in lieu of the park dedication requirement
plus any credit adjustment that the Council may want to make, along with the
fact that this park dedication would be accepted contingent upon developers, at
their own expense, taking a soil survey and determining the buildability of
these lots.
GW/ns
COUNCIL UPDATE
July 28, 1980 Meetinq
Library Committee
Next meeting of the Library Committee is Thursday evening at 7:15 P.M. on
July 24, 1980. In addition to Ken Maus, all other members of the Council
are obviously invited to the Committee meetings.
Thus far, the Committee has reviewed the libraries in Elk River, Cokato,
Howard Lake and Buffalo. Purpose of the meeting on Thursday evening would
be to give the architect some ideas in terms of square footage, room size
requirements, etc.
Computer
A quotation has been received from Gruys, Johnson, our auditing firm, to offer
the City of Monticello computer services for handling the general ledger,
cash disbursements, cash receipts jounai on a computer, in addition to the
liquor store transactions, for $385 per month. i am working with another
firm in considering an alternative proposal, however, in both cases the
requirement would not be that the City of Monticello purchase its own
mini -computer, but have the input work done by the City of Monticello staff
and have the computer processing done by an outside firm.
Although I am studying further the feasibility of such a project, it would
appear now that the City could eliminate the necessity of adding staff for
bookkeeping purposes within the next two to three foreseeable years if
computer capdbilities were available. Additionally, computer processing would
allow for timelier reports, better management analysis, etc. There is further-
more the possibility that the City's utility billing could go on a computer
basis.
Jet Machine for the Sewer system
Currently, John Simola has been fortunate enough to secure a jet machine from
one of the firms he used to work with and is experimenting on some of the
sanitary sewer lines in Monticello.
Possibly some of the Council members may have viewed jet cleaning machine, and
John will probably be bringing this up on 1981 budget.
Council Update Continued
1979-1 Improvement Project
Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., general contractor on the 1979-1 Improvement Project
which extended sewer and water along with road improvements to the south half
of Oakwood Industrial Park, J. R. Culp Property, and Commercial Plaza 25,
is about to be completed. Plans are now being made to have our engineer
prepare estimated assessments on this project and to hold a hearing in the
next two months.
-2-
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
July 14, 1980 - 7:30 P. M.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, ren Maus.
Members Absent: Phil White.
1. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Request - Cy Reinert.
This item was postponed until the July 28, 1980 Meeting.
2. Consideration of Approval of Joint Powers Aqreement between the City
of Monticello and Independent School District #882 for a Joint
Summer Recreational Program.
At the last City Council meeting, it was the consensus of the City
Council to enter into an agreement with the School District of
Monticello for a Joint Powers Agreement to provide a joint summer
recreational program, but not necessarily to include recreation throughout
the year or other programs thdt are part of the Community Education curri-
culum. In addition, it was the consensus at that time that the City
would consider funding half of the summer joint recreational program
cost with the School District, but would want to be able to review this
percentage on an annual basis.
Since that previous meeting, a joint powers agreement has been reviewed
by the City Attorney, Gary Pringle, and a few minor comments have been
incorporated into the agreement by the attorney. Once approved by the
City Council, the Joint Agreement would be presented to the School
District for their approval.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Ken Maus and unanimously
carried to approve of a joint powers agreement between the City of
Monticello and School District 882 for Summer Recreational Programs.
(See Exhibit 7/14/80 #1).
A motion was also made by Ken Maus, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously
carried to approve an expenditure amount of $5,730 for 1980 as the City's
share (50%) of the Summer Recreational Program for 1980 calendar year.
In regards to the Joint Powers Agreement, motion was made by yen Maus,
seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to appoint Council-
woman Fran Fair as the City's representative on the Community Education
Board replacing Loren Klein.
Council Minutes - 7/14/80
3. Approval of Contract for Architectural Services for the Library with
McEnary, Krafft, Birch & Kilgore, Inc.
At the City Council's special meeting held on July 7, 1980, approval was
given by the City Council to enter into negotiations to form a contract
with McEnary, Krafft, Birch & Kilgore, Inc., for architectural services
for the proposed new library.
It was understood from the architects that all basic services for pre-
paration of plans and construction management for a new library would
be included in the basic total fee, not to exceed a certain dollar
amount, but some questions were raised concerning the language of the
proposed contract. City Attorney, Gary Pringle, will be reviewing the
contract, but it was the consensus of the Council to get all the
remaining questions and particulars worked out in the proposed contract
before actual approval. Therefore, a motion was made by Ken Maus,
seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to table any action on
a contract with an architect until a final draft can be completed.
4. Consideration of Acceptinq 1979 Audit Report.
At the City Council's June 23, 1980 meeting, Rick Borden, with Gruys,
Johnson & Associates, reviewed with the Council the 1979 Audit Report.
At that time, it was decided that the Council would review the 1979
Audit Report for two weeks before considering formal acceptance of the
1979 Audit Report.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Ken Maus and unanimously carried
to formally accept the 1979 audit report prepared by Gruys, Johnson &
Associates as presented.
5. Consideration of Purchase of Additional Dump Tank for the Fire Department.
Purpose of this item was to consider acquisition of an additional 1,800
gallon dump tank for the City of Monticello's fire department.
Currently, the Monticello Fire Department does have an 1,800 gallon dump
tank that was purchased in April 1977 for the purpose of allowing the
tanker truck to dump its supply of water at a fire site and return to
get a new load of water. This dump tank is, however, in need of repairs
and Paul Klein, the Fire Chief, requested that the City consider pur-
chasing an additional dump tank at this time since the City would he
without the present dump tank while it i,s being repaired.
Because the Fire Department has, for 1980, already exceeded its initial
budget for capital outlay items, it was the consensus of the City
Council that any requests for new items should be presented and requested
for the 1981 budget year,
W
- 2 -
Council Minutes - 7/14/80
6. Consideration of Establishinq Hours for Monticello Parks.
Purpose of this item was to consider the establishment of certain park
hours within the City of Monticello. Buddy Gay, of the Wright County
Sheriff's Department, has asked the City Staff that the City Council
consider establishing park hours to allow the Sheriff's Department to
use these hours as a tool in removing some of the juveniles and other
undesirables from the park after hours in the evening and early morning
hours .
It was noted that problems have existed in some of the City's parks,
especially Ellison Park, and complaints have been expressed by some
of the area residents that school kids are congregating in the park
prior to the regular school day. It was felt by the Sheriff's Depart-
ment that establishment of hours such as 8:30 in the morning until
10:00 P.M. would eliminate some of the use of the park by kids at odd
hours. Unless regular hours are established by the City Council, the
Sheriff's Department did not have a tool to use in removing or asking
the youths to leave a park.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Ken Maus and unanimously carried
to adopt an ordinance amendment setting park hours of 8:30 A.M. until
10:00 P.M. only in all City parks. (See Ordinance Amendment 7/14/80 081).
7. Consideration of an Ordinance to Requlate Travelinq Shows.
Purpose of this item was to consider adopting an ordinance that would
regulate carnivals, circuses and menageries in the City of Monticello.
The City of Monticello previously had an ordinance that regulated
amusement carnivals, etc., but when the new ordinances were adopted in
1975, this portion was eliminated. The Wright County Sheriff's
Department has indicated that numerous incidences have occurred when
carnivals are in town that may warrant regulation by the City of such
amusement shows.
Some of the main aspects of the proposed ordinance would be approval
required by the City Council of Monticello, and a license fee along
with proof of insurance by the carnival and submission of a surety bond
payable to the City of Monticello.
Motion was made by Ken haus, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously
carried to approve the adoption of an ordinance relative to regulating
traveling shows and carnivals within the City of Monticello.
(See Ordinance Amendment 7/14/80 082).
-3-
�9
Council Minutes - 7/14/80
8. Ouarterly Meetinq - Department Heads.
The City Council held informal discussions with the following department
heads:
J
Mike Melstad - Local YMCA Detached Worker
Buddy Gay 8 Don Hozempa - Representing Wright County Sheriff's Dept.
Karen Hanson - Senior Citizens Center Director
John Simola - Public Works Director
Karen Hanson, Senior Citizens Center Director, reviewed with the Council
her experiences on her recent trip to The National Council on Aging in
Washington, D.C. In addition, she reviewed with the Council the
possible need for additional electrical wiring at the Senior Citizens
Center, which may have to be updated.
Public Works Director, John Simola, informed the Council that the proposed
boat ramp in Ellison Park may not be started until Spring of 1981. He
also noted that the State Highway Department is doing a traffic study
along Highway 25 near 1-94 to determine if any additional traffic
devices are necessary in that area. He also noted that the State
is still requesting that the City install a right -turn lane leading
off of Highway 25 into Sandberg South Addition.
Council also discussed the present condition of Chestnut Street between
Broadway and West River. It was noted that this street was not improved as
part of the 1977-3 Street Project because future storm sewer outlet to
the River was planned for this street in the next few years. The City
Engineer now indicated that because of the ditch being constructed through
the Country Club property, the storm sewer planned for down Chestnut
Street may not be needed for.five to ten years, therefore, the Public
Works Director was instructed to get costs for a possible 2" overlay
for Chestnut Street.
9. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular Council Meeting of
June 23, 1980 and the special Council Meeting of July 7, 1980, as
presented.
Meeting adjourned.
Rick Wolfste ler
Assistant Administrator
RW/ns
4
J