Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 10-06-1980AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL October 6, 1980 - 7:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve Grimsmo Council Members: Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Phil White. Meeting to be taped. Citizens Comments - 1. Continuation of Public Hearing on Consideration of a Variance for the St. Michael and All the Angels Episcopal Church, and the Possible Adoption of Guidelines for Directional Signs. 2. Public Hearing on the Consideration of a Variance Request to Eliminate Continuous Curb Barrier on the Perimeter of a Parking Lot - United Methodist Church. 3. Report by Engineer on Storm Water Ponding Problems - West River Street. 4. Consideration of Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plat - Riverwood Estates. 5. Consideration of Allocation of Chemical Feed Equipment and Chemical Coats. 6. Consideration of the Adoption of a Resolution Calling for a Referendum on the Issuance of General Obligation Bonds to Finance the Construction of a Public Library. 7. Consideration of Approval of Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and Approval of Plano and Specifications for a Commuter Parking Lot Southwest of the I-94 Interchange. 8. Department Head Quarterly Meeting. 9. Approval of Minutes - September 22, 1980 Regular City Council Mooting. Unfinished Business - CNow Business - 10/6/80 Council AGE14DA SUPPLEMENT 1. Continuationof Public Hearinq on Consideration of a Variance for the St. Michael and All the Anqels Episcopal Church, and the Possible Adoption of Guidelines for Directional Siqns. PURPOSE: To consider a variance request by the Church to allow an off -premise directional sign somewhere in the area of Palm Street and East Broadway, and also in the area of 4th Street and Highway 25. At their last meeting, the City Council deferred any action on this item until more information could be gathered on a standard type of sign. Loren Klein, Building Inspector s Zoning Administrator, John Simola, Public Works Director, and myself, reviewed the issue of directional signs and concluded that, in our opinion, the City of Monticello should consider the allowance of directional signs on a variance basis, as we are now doing, rather than to allow them on a conditional or permitted use basis. Each variance request should be scrutinized very carefully to determine the validity, need and appropriatness of the request. There is a real question in our minds of the necessity of directional signs, except in some very limited cases, in a town the size of Monticello. When one considers the number of business establishments, churches, and other facilities that could request a variance once a precedent has been set, it would seem to destroy the intent of the current sign ordinance, which quite frankly is stringent compared to other communities. However, it should be pointed out that surrounding communities such as Big take and Buffalo (the only two surveyed) do prohibit any type of off -premise sign, whether it's an indication of direction or not. We have suggested some standards that could be followed if the City of Monticello were going to allow such signs on either a variance, conditional use or permitted use basis, and they are as follows: COULD BE ALLOWED AS: Permitted Use Variance Conditional Use POSSIBLE CONDITIONS OR STIPULATIONS: Size - Should be uniform size - 18" x 24". Height - Haight should not be greater than a "atop" sign. Color s Material - There was a difference of opinion among John Simola, Loren Klein and myself, on color. I felt tho color should be uniform no matter what it was, and made a suggestion of blue and whitot John Simola felt that the industry standards for signs should be j followed - that is, hospitals 6 churches should be blue 6 white, parka 6 recreation should be brown 6 white, and general information should be green a white. Loran Klein felt that this was one item that the Council could decide without any apocific recommendation. - 1 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 Location - Should be such as not to interfere with sight observance of any existing traffic signs, or other existing signs. Additionally, a distance factor should be considered which would allow at the most one sign every block, or one sign every 400'. Should only be allowed on County Road 075 and State Highway 025. Number of Siqns - The number of directional signs allowed should be one per establishment. Content - Directions only. TYPES OF SIGNS ALLOWED TO ADVERTISE FOR: #" -g th -/M1 Facilities ✓Governmental Facilities 1 sjChurches t i li PERMIT FEE: We would suggest the foo include the cost of the sign, which we are suggesting is to be ordered by the City of Monticello, plus $25.00 per sign. REPAIR 6 MAINTENAZICE: Applicant for sign would be responsible for keeping the sign in good repair and maintenance. Ono way to accomplish this, we would suggest, y1) is that the ownership of the sign actually be transferred to the r City with a written agreement whereby the City is the owner of the sign, and if the leaseholder does not keep the sign in good repair and maintenance, the sign shall come down after JO-dayo written notice from the City of Monticello. CHURCHES: It would seem that one possible way to resolve the possible request by various churches is to have the existing churches in Monticello gat together and replace the existing Church Directory sign, which is located on the Maurice Itoglund property on west County Road 75, with a now sign which would include the location of all churches in the Monticello area. In this way, the City of Monticello would accomplish two objectives - correct existing sign which is in need of repair, and also, possibly prevent future variance requests by churches for individual signs. - 2 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 INDUSTRIAL PARY, 6 GOLF COURSES: Although no specific request has ever been made by the Oakwood Industrial Park, you might recall that Al Joyner, with Joyner's Lanes, has requested some sort of informational or directional sign for Oakwood Industrial Park. One way to allow this would be a directional sign which would indicate "Oakwood Industrial Park" and then right on the park site itself, on one of the properties, there could be a directory of the businesses out in that area. This would necessitate a variance in both cases, and of course, could lead to requests by other industries who are not in Oakwood Industrial Park (for example, Decorative Services, Wrightco Products, Jones Manufacturing, Electro Industries, etc.). Mr. Joyner had also requested the possibility of directional signs for the two golf courses be considered. LOCATION FACTOR OF APPLICANT: One of the reasons given for variance requests in the past for directional signs has been the particular location of the applicant, which is hard to find. However, obviously this is a consideration when any piece of property is purchased - is the location in view of the major systems of transportation? - etc. Obviously, the price of land closer to major transportation networks and closer to the public view are more costly, and those out of the way are less expensive. However, public exposure is sacrificed. p SUMMARY: In summary, we think any changes to the existing Monticello Ordinance should be considered very carefully and cautiously. If the City of Monticello leaves existing Ordinance as is, that is - only takes up directional signs on a variance basis, which we aro roeommending - we think a set of standards should be applied on which such a variance would be considered. In this manner, variances of this nature are considered on a consistent basis. For the most part, as indicated at the outset, we do not believe in a town the size of Monticello that directional signs are a necessity in moot cases. Put yourself in the position of trying to find a business in the community of Elk River, for example. Obviously, to start with, you probably would have some idea of the location of the business and the moat natural thing to do if you could not find it would seem to be to inquire of someone or atop at a gas station. On the other hand, if a directional sign is meant to advertise the particular storu, Lille wuuld seem to Iw contrary to the existing sign ordinance, which prohibits billboards, and the intent of directional signs is mainly to give directions, not to advertise products or the firm. - 3 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 j it should be pointed out that the standards indicated above should be viewed as guidelines on which to base a decision for a variance. Obviously, there may be merit in a specific request that for some reason or another does not adhere strictly to the guidelines, but at least would be an indication to an applicant of what guidelines would be expected to be adhered to, and if there was a delineation from any of the guidelines, additional documentation should be given for the reason. Getting back to the initial request by the Church itself, which is to allow an off -premise sign at 4th St. 6 Highway 25 in Monticello, for which approval by the property owner has previously been given, and to allow a sign in the area of Palm Street and Broadway in Monticello. The Planning Commission had previously recommended that the sign at the intersection of 4th Street and Highway 25 be approved, and the other sign, if approval was given by the property owner, would be considered. It would appear that the Church would meet all the guidelines, except for the fact that the Council may want to con- sider only allowing them the one sign that the property owner has approved, as opposed to the opening up of the possibility to allow two signs. POSSIBLE ACTIOU: Consideration of adoption of set of guidelines under which directional signs would be considered, and the specific variance request for off -premise directional signs by St. Michael s All The Angels Episcopal Church. (Note: 4/5's vote of Council is required for approval). 0N op - 4 - Council Agenda - 10/6/60 2. Public Hearinq on the Consideration of a Variance Request to Eliminate Continuous Curb Barrier on the Perimeter of a Parkin Lot - United Methodist Church. PURPOSE: To consider the request by United Methodist Church, which is located southeast of the intersection of 4th and Lynn Streets in Monti- cello, to have a parking lot completed to the south of their Church without the necessity of requiring continuous curb barrier around the perimeter of the parking lot. This ,�g�Si Ing lot is being proposed in conjunction with Wrightco Products, who/ufffte thearking lot during the week, and the United Methodist Church, who/ueclho parking lot on Sundays and for other services. it is my understanding that the obligation of Wrightco Products will be to pay for the completion of the parking lot and continued maintenance. At the time the application was filed, there was some question whether the United Methodist Church would be installing portable curb barriers, or whether they would like to delete curbing entirely. In either case, it would be necessary to obtain a variance. One of the reasons for the necessity of the elimination of the continuous curb barrier is to allow drainage from the Church and the School adjacent to the Church to flow subtly. If there was a continuous curb barrier, it would appear that the drainago would pond behind the School. At their last meeting, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the variance request based on the fact that the City previously had granted the Trinity Lutheran Church a variance not only to eliminate the curb barrier, but also the hardeurfaco requirements. POSSIBLE ACTION: Conaideration of approval or denial of variance request (variance requires 4/5 -a vote of Council for approval). REFERENCES: Site plan. - 5 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 3. Report by Enqineer on Storm Water Pondinq Problems - West River Street. PURPOSE: As you may recall, this item has been the subject on the City Council agenda of September 8, 1980, at which John Badalich reviewed a report which came as a result of a request by Ron Nygaard, who lives at 1521 west River Street, in Ritze Manor Addition, at the City Council's August 25, 1980 meeting indicating a concern for the problem with drainage in this area. As you might recall, at the September 8, 1980 meeting, John Badalich recommended that the culverts for Lots 2 6 3, Block 1, Ritze Manor be increased to 16", and Lots 4 s 5, Block 1, Ritze Manor be increased to 24", and also a 24" culvert be placed on Hilltop Drive to allow the drainage. For this project, he estimated a total cost of approximately a $4,000, but indicated that he would probably have a more definitive cost 1� figure at a future Council meeting. 64 John Badalich will have his report ready for the Council at Monday night's meeting, and as part of that report, he will indicate the benefitted area. While it should be pointed out that this meeting is not an assessment hearing, I have notified those property owners in the area, including Ron Nygaard, of the matter being placed on the agenda. In my estimation if the cost is in the neighborhood of John Badalich'a previous estimate, it might be well for the City of Monticello to pick up the entire cost rather than to assess any portion of the project. A good argument could he made for assessing a portion of the project, I believe, since it does benefit specific properties, and does improve them; however, in light of the fact that this area is quite now since their homes were built, there is a certain responsibility on the part of the City to have indicated to the people to have proper culverts in the first place. I believe this is a different situation than possibly cominq back ten or fifteen years later with larger size culverts, and then I think it would be appropriato to assess a portion of the project. If it is determined that the City Council will not assess any of the pro- ject, quotations could be received and the project completed yet this fall. If it in determined that soma portion of the project should or may be assessed, it will be necessary to hold a public hearing at our next Council Meeting, October 27, 1980 to notify those benefitted property owners prior to ordering of the project. POSSIBLE. ACTION: Consideration of ordering improvement project to install the necessary culverts in the Want River Street area, and the consideration of what portion, if any, should be assessed. REFERENCES: John Badalich to present a report at the City Council's Monday night meeting. - 6 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 4. Consideration of Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plat - Riverwood Estates. PURPOSE: To consider the proposed subdivision plat of Floyd Kruse and Kermit Lindberg. This plat consists of 13 residential lots ranging in size from 12,100 square feet to 23,000 square feet, and five commercial lots ranging in size from 12,600 square feet to 72,500 square feet. Currently, there is a proposal to have Lots 5, 6, 7 s 8, of Block 1, rezoned from B-3 to R-1 , and also to rezone Lot 1 in Block 3 from R-1 to B-3. This proposal for rezoning will be reviewed at the Planning Commission's October 14 , 1980 meeting, and their recommends tions will come forth to the City Council on October 27, 1980. In this fashion, the City Council will have the final recommendations on the zoning of the property from the Planning Commission prior to approval of the final plat. Monday night's meeting will cover consideration of the preliminary plat, and this adheres to all the requirements of the City of Monticello ordinance, including the Wild 6 Scenic River Act, with the comments noted in John Badalich's letter of September 22, 1980. One item that should be mentioned is the fact that the proposed street through the plat will be, in effect, a continuation of Mississippi Drive. This has received favorable comments from several property owners in Hoglund Addition, since they would prefer to have this street be a through street rat her than the present cul-de-sac that exists now. One of the proponents, Gary Gault, indicated he would like to see the through street completed: however, he wanted it made a matter of record that he would not be assessed for any of the improvement to change the existing cul-de-sac that exists in front of his hono to make it a through street. Normally thio coat, which has been accepted by the developers of Riverwood Estate, would be asseaeod against the project and not nos000ed againo t Gary Gault. At their last meeting, at which thio preliminary plat wan subject to a public hearing, the only comononto that were received were relative to the desire to have rho atract platted in Riverwood Estates be a continuation of Mioaisoippi Drive. II� rlQ' Park dedication for this plat in proposed in cash. bi J POSSIBLE ACTIONt Consideration of approval of preliminary plat. JO REFERENCES: Copy of enclosed preliminary plat and John Badalich'o latter V of September 22, 1980 on the plat. 1' k %) 41 - 7 - L_ Council Agenda - 10/6/80 5. Consideration of Allocation of Chemical Feed Equipment and Chemical Costs. PURPOSE: To consider the allocation of the chemical feed system costs incurred by the City of Monticello, future operation costs of the chemical feed equipment system, and an additional engineering bill. This allocation would be made towards the appropriate share that Wrightco Products should be allocated for the chemical feed system costs that was installed to meet the standards of the City of Monticello's NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Emission System) permit. This chemical feed equipment system was authorized by the City of Monticello to reduce its pollutant discharge into the Mississippi River to meet the standard, and at the time this project was authorized, it was determined that Wrightco Products should be allocated their appropriate share since they were a primary factor in the necessity of the City of Monticello having to install this equipment. My recommendation relative to the allocation of chemical feed equipment installation costs, operating costs and the additional engineering bill are as follows: A. Wrightco Products, Inc. should be billed on the composite of all tests taken prior to the City Council ordering the installation of the equipment, or the first four tests listed in Table I1 of John Badalich's report of September 22, 1980 (erroneously dated September 22, 1979). Thin allocation would result in a 459 share to Wrightco Products for start up costs. B. The initial cost should include the $23,071.42 outlined on Table IV of John Badalich'a report. C. City should not allocate, nor should it pay on its own behalf, the ey additional billings submitted by OSM of $14,321.52. D. In addition to the allocation of the $23,071.42, the City should also allocate the engineering costa previously paid by the City of Monticello on this project of $12,164.44 to Wrightco Products. E. Future operation and maintenance costs, including chemicals, estimated to be a total of $20,000 annually, should be allocated to Wrightco Products, Inc. on the basis of the componit of all tests, or an allocation of 379. �F. The billing for the initial start-up costa should be allocated over j Wrightco'a next sower and water billings in the cominq 12 monthn. The billing for the operation costa should be in addition to Wrightco'a newer and water billing. This would result in a total allocation of start-up coats to Wrightco of C� 4111l$23,071 and $12,164, or $15,856)and an additional sower and water billing of approximately $7,400 per year, with the City to review after one full year of operation to determine if any adjustments should be made. ��1PN. Council Agenda - 10/6/80 Following is the reasoning leading to my recommendations: Additional Engineering Bill - since the City of Monticello previously paid $12,164 in engineering fees, I do not feel that the City of Monticello should pay any additional costs for the installation of the equipment, since: (1) Payments previously paid to OSM amounted to $12,164. (2) No billings received for the costs incurred by OSM on a timely basis. (3) There was no indication that the billing for this project would be forthcoming until relatively recently, nor that the bill was going to be nearly this high either, prior to the project nor during the project. (4) City would be hardpressed to pass on these additional billings for Wrightco'a proportionate share. B. Since the City of Monticello did not have an appropriate formula to allocate the costs incurred since the installation of the equipment, or July of 1979, 1 recommended no additional charges for the chemical costs incurred since that time, or approximately $8,939.17, for chemicals alone, not including labor, repairs and maintenance, etc. C. I based the share of the initial start-up coats based on Wrightco'a composim test prior to the ordering of the project, since it was on the basis of these tests that the City of riontieello felt that it was necessary to install the equipment in conjunction with complying with the NPDES permit in consultation with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. In summary, I think the billing to Wrightco Products is reasonable and fair in light of the fact that the City has already incurred $44,175 of cost, of which only $15,856 would be allocated to Wrightco Products. I also think it is fair to OSM in,4igh[ 4tt�4�Facr< ht,t have previously paid their firm $12,164 for oYgn of the equfpaion�� !hero are various V. ways that the coats could be allocated in greater proportion to Wrightco Products or lessor proportion. I do feel, however, to charge them with costs other than initial start-up coats since we haven't mado the billing to them and haven't had the ability to do such without the figuroa, is the same premise that I base our decision not to pay OSM for their additional engineering fees. It should be pointod out that the future operation and maintenance costs, if Wrightco Products does improve their affluent, could be, in my estimation, possibly reduced if Wrightco, at their own expense, produces additional teats to indicate that thoy havo reduced the strength of their discharge. - 9 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 IC It should be pointed out that John Badalich, John Simola and I will meet with Jim Ridgeway and his engineering representative at 4:00 P.M. on October 6, 1980, to go over the report that John has previously handed out to the Council, and I will also review with him at that time my recommendations and hopefully, an equitable allocation can be agreed upon, either similar to the above or with some revisions that could be presented to the Council for their ratification. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of: . Allocation of initial start-up costs to Wrightco. Determination of future sewer billings to Wrightco based on Chemical Feed System operation costs. Consideration of additional OSM billing of $14,321.52. REFERENCES: John Badalich report of September 22, 1980 and his September 19, 1980 letter relative to interim improvements at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. (Note: These items were handed out to you at the September 22nd meeting) -10. Council Agenda - 10/6/80 6. Consideration of the Adoption of a Resolution Callinq for a Referendum on the Issuance of General Obliqation Bands to Finance the Construction of _ a Public Library. PURPOSE: To consider a resolution which, in effect, would place the issuance of general obligation bonds on the November 4, 1980 General Election ballot. Merrill Birch, Architect on the project, will be reviewing preliminary cost estimates with the Library Project Committee prior to the City Council meeting Monday evening. The Library Project Committee will be finalizing their recosmendationa to the City Council, and basically, they are as follows: DESIGN - A copy of elevation plans are enclosed. The structure itself is proposed to be a steel frame building with stucco. COST - while more definitive figures will be available at Monday night's meeting, it is estimated that the total cost of the project, including land at $70,000 and architectural fees at approximately $42,000, will be $500,000. AMOUNT TO BE BORROWED - Again, depending upon the final figures for costs and recommendations coming from the Library Project Committee, it would appear that of the $500,000 in cost, the recommendation from the Library Project Committee will be that $250,000 be borrowed with the balance of $250,000 coming from the sale of the Oakwood Building. NUMBER OF YEARS - At this time, it appears that the issue for the General Obligation Bonds would be a ten-year payoff. SOUARF. FOOTAGE - There is approximately 6,000 square feet in the proposed plan. LOCATION - As you can sea by the plans, the location is to be on the lots granted to the City by the School District, with the proposed parking lot to be on the Dowling property, which the City has an option on that runs through November 15, 1980. PARKING - One problem that the Library Project Committee has not yet addressed but will be considering, is the number of parking spaces which aro required by the ordinance - 37 spaces - for the facility to meet the ordinance. Thera is acme fooling that the ordinance may be too stringent and that either a variance be granted or that the ordinance be amended to be more realistic. Council Agenda - 10/6/80 CI! ALTERNATIVES IF REFERENDUM IS DEFEATED - Although there are quite a few ii alternatives if the referendum gets defeated, which would include leasing, possibly the two most realistic alternatives would be either to scale down the scope of the project utilizing just reserve funds, or waiting another 180 days and resubmitting the question to the voters. In order to put the issue on the November 4, 1980 Election, the Library Project Committee would like the authorization of the City Council as soon as possible, which would include the adoption of the resolution enclosed. In this way, the Project Committee can work towards the dis- semination of the necessary public information to inform the voters of this issue. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of adoption of a Resolution placing issuance of General Obligation Bonds on the November 4, 1980 ballot, alonq with an indication of the amount to be borrowed. REFERENCES: Enclosed copy of Resolution. Site plan with floor layout and elevation plan of proposed library. - 12 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 .� 7. Consideration of Approval of Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and Approval of Plans and Specifications for a Commuter Parkinq Lot Southwest of the I-94 Interchanqe. PURPOSE: To approve an agreement with the State of Minnesota relative to the development of a co=uter parking lot and the approval of plans and specifications for the same. Enclosed you will find a copy of a proposed agreement from the Minnesota Department of Transportation whereby the City will be offered $6,000 to develop a 152 space commuter parking lot. This allocation is based primarily on a gravel -base commuter parking lot. This same type of commuter parking lot has been developed in Princeton, Isanti and Elk River. In meeting with officials of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, they are ready to offer us this grant, but will only offer us sufficient funds for a gravel -base parking lot which equates to $6,000 according to State Officials. They have indicated that if the City wishes to go beyond this with curb s gutter, blacktop, or enlarging the area, any additional bVto expense would be at the City'a cost. Total estimated cost of the project previously submitted by John Badalich / was $47,250 for construction costa, and if an indirect cost figure of Vl 15% was added, the total estimated cost of the project would be $54,337, of which $31,740 would be for blacktopping along for 220 spaces. It should be pointed out that this did not include curb 5 gutter. A determination should be made by the City Council relative to the following issucaf Whether the City would form the agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Whether the City would improve the parking lot beyond the 152 spaces. Whether the City would include blacktopping. J.iK,lc- ,-A I-. /J r_ f Whether the City would include curb and gutter. It should be pointed out that if the City does approve the agreement and plans and specifications, the project would probably be done yet this fall, except for any blacktopping and curb and gutter, if approved by the Council. Furthermore, if the City does delineate the curb 6 gutter and/or blacktopping, it should hold a public hearing on the matter similar to other requooto of this nature. It should be pointed out additionally, that the City of Monticello is coordinating this project, if approved, with NSP to insure that the area is proporly lighted. This will be an additional coat that will be billed to the City on a monthly basis. - 13 - Council Agenda - 10/6/80 Due to the fact that the blacktopping consists of over 58% of the cost of the project and other similar communities have put in commuter parking lots without blacktopping or curbing or gutter, I think the idea of eliminating curb and gutter and blacktopping should be considered very seriously. Certainly there is the aspect that the City of Monticello should be consistent with the ordinances it has adopted, but at the same time, there is a sense of fiscal responsibility. It is realized, however, at the same time, that to make the area attractive for the commuters and to serve the purpose it is intended, the better the parking lot the more users it will likely have, or the other alternative will be that the City of Monticello, through their protection with the Wright County Sheriff's Department, will have to enforce very closely limited parking in the downtown area, which would possibly prohibit commuters. Additionally, if the area is hardsurfaced, it will be easier to maintain, although not necessarily less costly, and it will be more attractive. POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation on commuter parking lot, and approval of plana and specifications for the development of the commuter parking lot. If this item is approved, our engineer would then proceed to prepare the necessary documents for a bid letting. REFERENCES: September 29, 1980 letter from the Minnesota Department of Transportation along with proposed agreement. C. Council Agenda - 10/6/80 T, 8. Department Head Quarterly Meeting. PURPOSE: To allow for an exchange of ideas, concerns and comments relative to the areas of assignment of each department head. Following department heads will be at Monday night's meeting: Fire Chief - Paul Klein ✓Wright County Sheriff's Rep. - Buddy Gay VS�enior Citizens Director - Karen Hanson (\�I •)YMCA Detached Worker - Mike Melstad `: r Public Works Director - John Simola 0 Building Inspector/Civil Defense Dir. - Loren Klein City Administrator - Gary Wieber It should be noted that Mark Irmiter, Liquor Store Manager, has been tentatively scheduled for October 27, 1980, which will allow the financial statements for the Third Quarter to be completed. C- - 15 - CHURCH v c ie ii /* 198-a VLR IF y 71' :3-1 TUM 'PAVING ON 4" CLASS 5 BASE REMOVE EXIST -G._ oI TREES L RELOCATE i PA NT I I ST I Pf. I ING TYP - J,J 141 J d�rfu.,r WlAFW r? �,sT• �q s�"} %e- d j 6784. Iz (ins! �i )al , r� 30 �c.o t�4°'• 2-il3q Ain i, h `� 1( 3 /r SrySo f 5� Sua C3 434o v ORR•SCHELEN•MAYERON &ASSOCIATES, INC. Division of Kidde Consultants, Inc. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors September 22, 1980 Mr. Loren D. Klein, Building Official City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Revised Preliminary Plat, Riverwood Estates Dear Loren: The revised preliminary plat of Riverwood Estates, received on September 22, 1980, has been reviewed by my staff and we offer the following comments relative to this submission. As you know, Ed Junes of my staff and Marty weber, the surveyor for this project, have consulted over the phone on numerous oc- casions regarding this plat. Our comments regarding previous re- views of this plat were forwarded to you under a letter dated August 8, 1980, and September 3, 1980. Based on our previous comments and according to the numbered paragraphs of the August 8, 1980 letter, the following information, by paragraph number needs further consideration. Paragraph 1 - Rezoning requirements (Lots 5, 6, 7, t: part of. 8, Block 1 are presently zoned D-3 and should be R-1) Paragraph 6 - A 50 foot set back line from the river should be shown. The developer intends to petition the City for the utility and street improvements. Soils information is on file in the OSM of- fice for Mississippi Drive. We were informed that a grading plan will be submitted at the time of request for utility improvements. 2021 East Honnopin Avonuo • Suito 238 -14t innoapolis, Mint,1111a 55413 6121331-8660 TELEX: 29.0948 September 22, 1980 Page -2- This concludes our comments regarding the revised submission of the preliminary plat of Riverwood Estates. A copy of the marked -up preliminary plat is being returned for your review and the other copy is being sent to M. J. Webber. Yours very truly, ORR-SCNELEN-MAYERON ASSOCIATE John P. Badalich, P.E. City Engineer J P9/kmp encl. cc: Gary Wicber, City Administrator y M. J. Weber J RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO ISSUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC LIBRARY AND PROVIDING FOR AN ELECTION THEREON BE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, as follows: 1, It is hereby determined to issue general obligation bonds for the purpose of providing money for construction of a public library. 1 ��J 3; 2. The amount proposed to be borrowed shall not exceed ,522969 3. The proposal to issue such bonds shall be submitted to the voters of the City in conjunction with the general election to be held November 4, 1480. Polling places and judges shall be the same as general election. The polls shall be opened at 7 o'clock A.M. and shall close at 8 o'clock P.N. The City clerk shall give notice of election as required by law by two weeks' published notice in the official newspaper and posting t in three public places in the City at least ten days prior to the election. The City Clerk shall cause ballots to be printed in substantially the following form: OFFICIAL BALLOT GENERAL ELECTION CITY OF MONTICELLO NOVEMBER 4, 1480 Instructions to Voters: Voters desiring to vote in favor of the following proposition shall put an (X) in the square before the word "Yea." Voters desiring to vote against the proposition shall put an (X) in rho square before the word "No." ❑ Yes Shall the City of Monticello issue its general obligation ❑ No bunds in an amount not exceeding $250,000 for the purpose of providing money for construction of a public library? MY (Back of Ballot) OFFICIAL BALLOT GENERAL ELECTION CITY OF MONTICELLO City Clerk Judges The City Council shall meet at the City hall on November b, 1980 at 7:00 o'clock P.M. to canvass the returns and declare the result of the election. Adopted by the Council this 22nd day of September, 1980. Mayor City Clerk There are certain limiting factors to the existing Historical Museum, both in terms of space and parking availability. At the City Council's June 9, ( 1980 meeting, it was determined that it would be a good idea to explore the possibility of including the Historical Museum with the Library project. it should be emphasized that the Council felt the idea should be explored, but it is not a foregone conclusion that such a facility is, in fact, needed, will be built or will be built in conjunction with the Library. SIZE This will have to be one of the issues addressed by the Committee and Architect and a determination made on the various space allocations needed for the various functions within the Library and possibly, if included, for the Historical Museum. However, it is expected that the facility will be between 4,500 to 9,000 square feet. One alternative could be the construction of a facility that allows for future expansion space, or has an immediate floor that is built but unfinished, until it becomes necessary, BUDGET Cost of the project is contingent upon the ultimate size. However, utili- zing a 6,00n Snuar? font huildinn, wti;rr r mry»?yzn -r -t- -T nal„ wnrcl, wuS. 3, uo,uuu to cullstruct 1I Ciuoll-g or'enitUturdlServiCL-S, CLC., it would appear that the budget would be somewhere in the area of $450,000. FINANCING ® There are various ways the City could finance the projccl. ,md they, inCiudl the following: A. issuance of a general obligation bond, contingent upon the approval of referendum. B. Utilization of existing reserve funds. C. Utilization of proceeds from the sale of the Oakwood Block, alo nq with existing reserve funds. LOCATION As indicated in the Background section, location selected by the Ci ty Council of Monticello was in the block south of the Oakwood School. The particular parcel of land would be that portion of Lots 9 b 10, as shown on a schematic layout done by our Planners, Howard Dahlgren Associates. This schematic layout is enclosed as "Appendix A". PARKING CONCERNS One of the concerns that will have to be addressed by the Architect and the Library project Committee will be the concern for adequate parking on a site that is limited in size - that is, one-half acre, There exists the possibility that, since the City of Monticello does own the 211 acre block to the north of the site . the City of Monticello could develop a municipal Parking lot in this adjoining block, and utilize a portion of this for overflow parking for the Library. 3 lP `04ESOrP4 O 14 Minnesota Department of Transportation Q 2r ay� District 3 OF Tap 301 1-aU-e1 St- Eau. bl 2482 Brainerd, Ivtinnetota 56401 (2181 6284=3 September 29, 1930 Mr. Gary Wieber City Administrator City of Monticello 150 East Broadway P.O. Box 777 Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Dcar Gary Enclosed for your review and approval is a draft agreement hctween Mn/DOT and the City for construction of a park and ride lot in Monticello. I believe the terms of the agreement arc as we dis- cussed at our meeting with you on September 19, 1980, If you have any questions or comments in regard to this agreement, please give me a call. Mn/DOT hopes to finalize the agreement and receive approval from the State Attorney General's Office by October 15, 1980. if you cannot reach me, please call Bob Benke in our St. Paul Office (612-217-2009), Sincerely, mos Povich, P.C. District Preliminary Design Engineer cc: Mr. John P. Ilndalieh, P.I:. - City Dnginecr, M011ticella ill/rjn p.s. Our hydraulics Engineer has approved the drainage as shown on your site pian. An rq-1 '0 7 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Agreement No. With City of Monticello This agreement is made and entered into by the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)and the City of Monticello (City) r-lati— to the distribution of park/ride funds. 4,:5 -74� 4= o Wne eas �Nrco=.'��t'Wta`c-H`N"ranfpo'T!11ruN'684r-2h to provideLAssis- Oo,; -11~9�- I '4CI4 / tance to political subdivisions for the development of a statewide proprom of park and ride facilities; and Whereas, $200,000 was appropriated for a park/ride program; and Whereas, a statutory or home rule charter city is eligible to receive financial assistance through the park/ride grant program. and Whereas, the Commissioner has the 'authority to approve such applications: and Vlhcreas, the City of Monticello has applied for park/ride funds consistent with the provisions of this legislation; and Whereas, there is land available in tho Southwest quadrant of the inter- change of 1-94 and TH 25 which wan turned back to Wright County on %tober 31, 1975; and Whereas, such a park/ride lot had been programmed by Mn/DOT; 7 and Whereas, the City plans for the park/ride lot are more costly than J Mn/DOT's original proposal in order to comply with local ordinances for parking lots: and Whereas, the City of Monticello has been selected to receive a $6,000 grant from Mn/DOT to offset the cost of construction of a park/ride lot: Now, therefore be it mutually agreed between the parties: that, the City of Monticello shall 1 �o 1. construct a parking lot with an initial capacity of 1 spaces but with potential for expansion to a capacity of 220 total spaces. 2 /06- a parking lot o between the frontage road and ramp in the interchange of I-94 and TN 25 in Monticello, per Exhibit 1. Final design details shall be approved by the District Engineer op his designated representative. 3. pay all costs in excess of the contract amount agreed to herein. ($6000). 4. assume responsibility for maintenance and other costs associa- ted with operation of the completed lot. Services shall in- clude but not be limited Lo police patrol to ensure personnel and property security. 5. maintain such records an to permit a complete audit of ex- penditures pursuant to this agreement, and provide such in - foetation within a reasonable time on request of appropriate representatives of the State.. 6. to monitor usar.c of the parking fncility and provide data on usage to the state at the,following intervals: 1 month 6, 12 J and 21. months following completion of St?e I of parking lot construction. Required data shall include number of vehicles arriving„ departing, and parking during a typical use period,' number of vehicle occupants, and problems encountered, if any. That, Mn/DOT shall provide to the City the sum of $6,000 That, Mn/DOT shall request from the City information required for the h Department Keport to the legislatureA'uch information to include but not to be limited to: a. total cost of the lot b. figures describing the users of the lot c. problems in implementation of this service That, Mn/DOT shall approve construction plans prior to disbursement of the $6, 000. That, Mn/DOT shall have no maintenance responsibility for the park/ride lot In witness whereof, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their proper officers and representatives. Approved STATE OF MINNI"SOTA Department of Transportntion By Da t e Cornnissioner of Administration By 'Da t e As to form and execution Attorney General By Commissioner of Finance By Date By __ ___ City of Monticello CDa t e 7 QUARTERLY REPORT OF THE MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT President — Jim Maurice Vice President — Marn Flicker Secretary — Lee Trunnell Treasurer — Willard Anderson Chief — Paul Klein Joint Committeeman — Lee Trunnell Assistant Chief — Gordon Link Training Officer — Gene Jensen 1st Captain — David Kranz Ass't. Training Officer — Ted Farnum 2nd Captain — George Liefert The following is a quarterly report of the Monticello Fire Department from July 1, 1980 thru Sept. 30, 1980. There were 20 personal assists by the Chief and/or Assistant Chief. There were 11 fires which required 261 man hours. The average attendance at a fire was 18. During the past three month period there were 3 training sessions which required 123 man hours. The average attendance at these training sessions was 22. Alsu, a Bruwnie Tioitp tuuted the Ike barn on Sept. 30. Two men from the department gave the tour. Respectfully submitted by, W4.1�14 David B. Kranz Reporter bjk `�- COUNCIL UPDATE October 6, 1980 Meeting APPOINT61EPrr TO PLANNING COMMISSION Bill Burke has accepted the City Council's appointment to the Planning Commission to fill out the unexpired term to the end of the year of Dave Bauer. For your information, all Planning Commission members serve a one-year term on a calendar year basis. STATUS OF ABC DAY CARE CENTER AS IT RELATES TO THE OAXWOOD SCHOOL BUILDING On September 30, 1980, Arve and I talked to Marcella Corrow, with the ABC Day Care Center. It has become very apparent that the ABC Day Care Center may be forced to fold up their operation regardless of when the Oakwood School Building would be removed. Currently, the State Fire Marshall's office has issued an order that occupation of the Oakwood School Building cannot continue beyond March 15, 1981 without a variance, and would not look favorably on the continuation of the occupation of that building by the ABC Day Care Center. To add to their problerna, the ABC Day Care Center cannot make the financial arrangements to find another site, and so the question of whether the � City of Monticello continues the operation of the Oakwood School Building after December let, which is the date that the School District will most likely move their offices, it probably would be only a very ahort-run solution to the continuation of the ABC Day Cara Center since they will have to vacate the building in 35 months from that date anyway. I am trying to get in contact with the State Fire Parahalla office, and dotennino if the Library could continue to operate at the Oakwood School Building, even if the City wanted to, in light of the Fire Marshall'a order which becomes effective March 15, 1981. Possibly, the Fire Marshall'a office may look more favorably upon the occupation just for library purposes, as opposed to the prosent usage which includes, in addition to the library, of administrative offices for the school and the ABC Day Care Center. Obviously, even if the Fire Marshall's office did approve an extension of the building boyond March 15, 1981 for tho library, it still might not be economically feasible to occupy the building boyond that data or oven to continua operations beyond the date it is vacated by the School District. CA/no MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL. Septenber 22, 1980 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Taus, Phil White. Members Absent: None 1. Public Hearing on the Adoption of the Assessment Rolls for the 1979-1 Improvement Project. John Badalieh, City Engineer, reviewed with the Council the proposed assess- ment rolls for the 1979-1 Improvement Project, which consisted of storm sewer, sanitary sewer and permanent streets in the Oakwood Industrial Park area; and also, street improvements and sanitary sewer to the bauring Hillside Addition. The total cont of the improvement nrojcct was $981,995.13, of which, $819,819.34 was proposed to be assessed. Mr. John Lundsten, owner of property to be assessed near Oakwood Industrial Park, asked the Council if the entire project costs were all lumped together and then equally divided by footage, or whether areas Lhat did not receive blacktop streets were given any type of credit. In auldition, Mr. Lundsten asked about the 570.00 -per -acre area assessment. It was explained to Mr. Lundsten that all of the sewer and water improve- mente south of I-94 in the Oakwood Industrial Park area wan equally divided based on front footage, but street improvementn for bituminous surfacing was aaaessed reparately, and those property owners rocuivin9 only Class 5 streets were asseoned accordingly. It was also explaim'd that the 576.00 - per -acre area naceaement was for the interceptor sewer line that was constructed in Oakwood Industrial I`ark for future development. The osnonumento an proposed for the 1979-1 project would be spread over a ten-year period of time with homestead proparty exinting at the time of the project to receive a 20 -year payoff period. The interest rate on the proposed nasessmenta was to be 79, hiucd on equal principal payments. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Iran Fair and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution certifying the assessment rolls fur the 1979-1 Improvement Project, as presented, with the indication that the homestead property would be aosesscd over a 20 -year period of time, and the remaining property to lr: anoussed over 10 -years un :u: oven principal L.tr.is at 7% annual interact. (See Resolution 1980 824). 2, Public 11carinq on Proposed Anneasmento for Delinquent Accounts. Minnesota Statutes 429.101 allows for special ansasement.s to be collected for various types of current servicuo that aro past due. Motion wan made by Ken Mauo, socondod by Dan Blonigen an(] unanimously carried to certify the following delinquent newer and water bills to tho County Auditor for collection in 1981 at 0% interest: I_ C Council Minutes - 9/22/80 PROPERTY OWNER AMOUNT DUE TYPE OF BILL Lori Strchler liawkins S 48.13 Delinquent Sewer 6 Water Bill Tom McCauley 72.G3 Michael Fenton 31.00 " ]ane Carter 56.00 " Chris Maas 36.00 Gordon Stokes 53.30 • Garry Lange 33.00 Daryl Tindle IG7.80 Sewer F. 11ater Hookup Charge 3. Public Hearing on the Rezoning and Conditional Use for a Proposed Medical Clinic East of the Monticello-Biq lake Community Ilospital. Monticello -Big lake Community Hospital requested rezoning of Lots 1 L 13, and the West 33' of Lot 2, Block 22, Lower Monticello, and the East lialf of Oak Street lying between Blocks 22 6 23, Lower Monticello, from R-1 to R -B. in addition to the rezoning request, the Hospital has also made an application for a conditional use for a proposed medical clinic. It was noted that previously the City of Monticello has received eorran- pond ence from neighbors in the Ellison Park area expressing concerns with the possible extension of River Street to accommodate a parking lot to the rear of the proposed medical clinic. Presently, the rezoning request and the conditional use request for the Clinic does not propose to use River Street extended to meet their parking lot, but rather to have parking lot traffic enter and exit onto Hart Boulevard. The developer of the- Clinic heClinic has indicated -,flat if, for some roason, Ilurt Boulevard cannot be used for entering Lila parking lot, they may, in the future, approach the City for possiblo oxtansion of River Street to the rear of their parking lot. Mr. John Bondhus, area resident near the Ilospital, expressed concern shout the water drainage problem that now exists in the area that presently drains through his property, causing largo flown through his exisLing trout ponds. Mr. Bondhus was concerned that if the drainngo through his pruhorty in increased because of future development within the City, futuro storm sewer outlets would hovu to be providud to allow for Lilo increased runoff and ouggested that Lha City consider keeping a rmall area along the vacated Oak Stroot for a drainage/utility purposes. Mr. Bondhus noted that, although Lila Clinic requeuLud the :aacmullLu ba climinatud to allow for Lila development of the Clinic, he suggested that a small area on the cast side of the property bo retained for possible future utilities. - 2 - Council Minutes - 9/22/80 Consulting Engineer, John Badalich, indicated that if drainage became a problem, holding ponds could be constructed between Bart Blvd, and County Road 75, which would help alleviate any excessive flows at one time, and also, if storm sewer outlets are needed to the River, the t area at the sewer plant could be used for the underground storm sewer rather than through Oak Street. In regards to the conditional use permit, the Planning Commission, at their last meeting, recommended approval of both the rezoning and the conditional use permit for the Clinic provided the developers provide access to the proposed parking lot from Hart Blvd., rather than opening up and extending River Street. Motion wau made by Dan Blonigun, seconded by Phil 4thitc and unanimously f' carried to rezone Lots 1 & 13 and the west 33' of Lot 2, Block 22, lower Monticello, and the East half of Oak Street lying between Blocks 22 and 23, from R-1 to R -B, and also, approve the issuance of a conditional use permit for the proposed medical clinic contingent upon the proposed parking �• lot using Bart Boulevard as an access and exit point. (See Zoning Ordinance Amendment 9/22/80 086). q. Public Hearinq - Consideration of a Variance Request for the Cummins Auction Company. The Cummins Auction Company of Omaha, Nebraska, requested a variance to allow them to hold an auction at the American Legion Hall in Monticello on Tuesday, November 11, 1980, in order that they might have a m•w tool auction. The variance wau rpqueoted because auction salou are not allowed in an R -B zone unless it were the property ewnera themielvcr; who were hulding an auction. Mr. Jim Kruger, of National Bushing a Parti Cu., expressed ohirosition to this varianro requeut, in that his busineim and other local l;unines:;ps roll similar types of tools and if any of the -,e items need servicing or warranty work later, they usually end up doing the work. Mr. Kruger felt that the:;e auction facilities u.ually Icavo town the next day, leaving CUitomers to have service work done locally. mution wai made by Phil White, seconded by han Blonigo❑ and unanimously carried to deny the variance requeat of Culrmint: Auction t •11 ally. M 21 Council Minutes - 9/22/80 S. Public Hearing - Consideration of a Variance Itegoest for Caen Bateman Gwen Bateman requested a variance to build a 24' x 34' rambler on Lot 23, Block 2, Ritze Manor, which would be less than the 1,000 sq.fi. minimum required by City ordinances. Ms. Bateman's request is based on the fart that she has applied for a loan through Farmers Home Administration, in Buffalo, which has regula- tions that would not allow a family of one, as in her case, to build a house larger than 816 square feet. Several property owners in the area have indicated opposition to the variance request, requesting the City to maintain its 1,000 sq.ft. minimum requirement. Although some Council members felt the City should consider allowing some type of option that would allow for smaller homes within the City, a motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair to deny this variance request: voting in Favor: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Phil White. Opposed: Ken Maus, pan Blonigen. notion carried to deny this variance. 5. Public Hearinq - Consideration of a variance Request for John Prauqht. Mr. John Praught, who lives at Lot 29, Block 2, Ritze Manor, requested a variance to allow more than one garage on his property. City Ordinances currently do not ellow a second garage to he built without a variance. Mr. Praught indicated that the second garage would he of conventional construction and appearance, similar to his existing house, and would not require any other sethack variances. it was noted by the Council that one abutting property owner recommended approval of the second garage, while another abutting property owner recommended the variance be denied. In addition, the Council noted that lir. Prauqht should discontinue using his second driveway npproach off of County Road 75, as thio would have to he approved by loth the City Council and the Wright County Highway Impartment. Motion wan made by Ken Maus, seconded by Phil white and unanimously carried to approve the variance request for the second gnrage to Mr. Praught public Hearinq - Consideration of a variance Requoat for Wnyno Mayor. Mr. Wayne Mayer, who livrs at 110 Marvin r1wood Itoad in Andorn-Wilholm Estates, requeoted a varianco to build a garage within 26' of the front property lino, rather than 30' as required by City Ordinances. - 4 - Council Minutes 9/22/80 is Mr. Mayer's request was based on his desire to build a garage which is a little bit deeper than the depth of his house, rather than asking for a sideyard variance to allow the garage. wa It was noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval at their last meeting, and that no property owners in the area were in opposition. Motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Ken Maus and unanimously carried to approve the 4' variance for the garage for Wayne Mayer. 8. Public Hearin - Consideration of a Variance for the St, Michael & All the Angels Episcopal Church. St. Michael's Church requested a variance to allow an off -premise direc- tional sign somewhere in the area of Palm street and East Broadway, and also in the area of 4th St. and Highway 25. These new signs would be approximately 18" x 24" and would give directions to the Church. Mr. Clifford Olson, who owns the lot on the SE corner of the intersection of 4th St. and Highway 25, has indicated to the City that he would have no objections to the sign being located on his pro- perty, provided, however, that the sign does not block any driveway entrance. T Council discussed the possibility of having these directional type signsbeinga standard type whereby possibly they would all be of similar size and color. Public Works Director, John Simola, noted that sign companies do make a standard type sign that could be used by Churches, etc., as directional signs. Motion was made by Ken Mau n, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to table action on thin request; until more information can he gathered on n standard type sign, and to qoe if Lila individual church or churches would be agreeable. 9. Public Ifearinc.1 - Consideration of a Variance Request for Setback and Lot width - Richard Lembko. Mr. Richard Wmbke, who owns Tots 2, 3 & part of Lot 4, Block 7, Lowor monticallo, requested a variance for a newly created lot of less than 80, and also a varinnro of less than 10' on a nidayard nethtick. Mr. Lembko proposed to divide. Wt 3 into two parcels and attach Lila easterly 35.34' of Lot 3 to Wt 2 to create one lot of 101,34' in width. The remaining 30.GG* of Lot 3 would be attached to Lho 44.34' of Wt 4 to create a now 75' wide lot. This nowly created 75' lot would only bo 71 from the existing hams, thus requiring a 3' variance on Lila aidayard. Y' Council Minutes - 9%22/80 �• '' In addition, it was pointed out by the City Engineer that any lot abutting the River, as in this case, which was less than 15,000 :;quare feet, or t 80' in width, must be approved by the OUR according to the recently adopted City ordinances. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Dan Bloningen and unanimously carried to approve the variance request for the 3' sideyard setback and the subdivision of a 75' lot, contingent upon the OUR approval. The certificate of survey would have to be presented along with proof of recording of same. 10. Consideration of the Adoption of a Resolution Calling for a Referendum on the Issuance of General Obligation Bonds to Finance the Construction of a public Library. The purpose of this item was to consider a resolution placing the issuance of general obligation bonds on the upcoming November 4, 1980 ballot, with an indication of how much money would be borrowed for a now library. Merrill Birch, Architect for the library project, was not able to have definite cost figures available for Monday night's meeting, and as a result, it was the consensus of the Council to table this item until the October 6, 1900 Council meeting. It was noted chat the October t,,th Council meeting is a change from the regularly scheduled 0:tober 15th meeting, which will be eliminated. 11. Public Hearing on the Prorosed 1981 Budqet, Includino Aviirupriation of Federal Revenue Shnrino Funds. The City Council roviowad the lrornnnsed budget for 1901, which proposes a mill levy eoliectiblo in 1981 of 51,047,353. This mill levy would amount to 26.194 mills for the City of Monticello, compared to 22.327 mills in 1980. AS part of the 19131 budget, Fedco,l Revenue Sharing low requires that the City hold a public hearing on Lite possible appropriation of federal Revenue Sharing funds anticipated in 1981. it was proponed by the Council to appropriate the expected Revenue Sharing Funds of $112,929 expected in 1981 towards the Ciry's phare of Cita cants for upgrading the waste- water Treatment Plant. Motion wan made by Phil white, oecorvied by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to adopt the 1981 budget for tire City of Monticello, as pro- sont0d, resulting in a $1,047,353 levy with the approprintJon of Federal Revenue Sharinq Funds received in 1981 being nllocatod towards tho City's share of thu Wautowater Treatment Plant. Council Minutes - 9/22/80 12. Consideration of Approval of Downtown Parkinq for the Proposed Addition to the Monticello Theatre. Mr. dike Muller, owner of the Monti Theatre in Downtown Monticello, proposed to build an addition to the existing Theatre, which would add 149 seats and requested approval Lo utilize the downtown parking lots for his addi- tional parking requirements. The Downtown Parking Committee has reviewed this item with Mr. Muller, and recommended that of the additional 37 spaces required by the new addition, a portion of these could be assessed under the downtown parking lot assessment procedures, provided half of his required additional 37 spaces are shared with the Wright County State Bank parking lot. For the most part, the Theatre's hours would be different than those in the downtown retail establishments, and as a result, some of the Theatre parking could be utilized at the Wright County State Bank parking lot, provided a written agreement is obtained from the Wright County SLate Bank allowing the theatre to utilize their parking lot. In addition, Mr. Muller indicated that approximately G to 9 additional parking spaces would be provided behind their facility. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seco;tded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve the proposed addition to the Monti TheaLG•a, contingent upon a written agreement being provided the City of Monticello regarding joint use of the Wright County State Bank's parking lot.. 13. Consideration of Approval of Drainage Plon for The mondows Sui,division. Mr. Mel Wolters, developer of The Meadows sulr3iviuiun, requested Lhe City npprovn his 1x nding aron and grading plan in nrder that: hr, may be permitted certificates of occupancy for Lhose lots abutting Prairie Road. A preliminary review of the grading and ponding area lion been done by the City's Public Works Director and Building Inspector, with the following items noted to be completed yet: A. The initial grading plan for The Meadows calls for it 24" culvert under Prairie Rood; however, the exisLing 18" culvert appears to Lu muru Lhuu adCquaLu to 1laudlu Lhu uvurfiow from Lhu pond on the north side to the pond on tho south aide of Balboul Gsto Les. B. There were several open cuts on Prairie Road for sower and water services, and it was noted Lhat those should be blacktopped and brought back up to grado prior to the issuance of any additional certificates of occupancy. - 7 - Council Minutes - 9/22/80 C. It was the opinion of the City Engineer and Public Works Director that the first three driveways on the cast side of the plat abutting Prairie Road could eliminate culverts if ehe driveways were dipped; however, it was noted that if storm sewer is ever needed in this area, the filling of this area would probably be assessed back to the property owners at that time. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve the grading plan for The t,eadows Subdivision, contin- gent upon the above items being corrected, as indicated, and subject to a final inspection by the City Engineer and Public Works department. 14. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request - Decorativ. Services. Mr. Hill Shackor, of Decorative Services, requ,.:sted a simple subdivision of the easterly half of hot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park. The proposed subdivision would create an 88,650 square foot lot abutting Chelsea Road, and a 110,250 square foot lot that would have a 36' access to Chelsea Road. It was noted that although the newly created lot would only have a 36' wide frontage on Chelsea Road, this would appear to be adequate for a roadway and utility purposes to the lack lot created. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Phil White and unanimously carried to approve the simple subdivision of the Easterly Ralf of I,ot 1, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, contingent upon submission of Certificate of Survey for the two newly created Iota, and recording of casement. 15. Consideration of Extension of Variance for the Elimination of Curb Barrier on Parkinq Lot - .Tamen Sundberq. Mr. James Sund berg, owner of the former D 6 It Storage Wilding in Oakwood Industrial Park, requested an extension of a variance for the elimination of: a curl) barrier on the ssuth Dido of the property. In 1978, the. City Council approved a variance request for up to two years for the previous owners for tho installation of it curb Karrier around their parking lut. Since that time, Mr. Sandberg has purchased the mini -storage building, and line indicated the possibility of future development occurinq in the near future and also rurlurnted the variance on the curl) b)rrior he extended for an additional one year. This request, if granted, would allow hlr. Sundbeig adaquate time to eithor complete the additional building Plano, or if not, would allow him ade- quate tints to complete the curbing as required. Motion was made by Phil White, aecondod by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to approve a one-year extension until 9/18/81 for the variance to eliminate the curb barrier around the perimeter of Mr. Sundberg'a parking lot. - 8 - council Minutes - 9/22/80 lb. Consideration of Approval of Sanitary Sewer Cleaning on River Street from New Street to the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed with the Council his recom- mendation to have the sewer line located on River Street from New St. easterly to the Wastewater Treatment Plant cleaned and televised. nr. Simola indicated that the City has experienced some problems along River Street with sewage backup and indicated that a thorough cleaning of this segment of sanitary sewer would hopefully increase the capacity of the line. In addition to the cleaning of the sewer line, it was recommended that closed circuit TV be used to search out for defects in the line which may have to be repaired to increase its capacity. Two quotes were received by the Public works Director `-or this project, as follows: A. Viking Pipe Service - bid $85.00 per hour for cleaning and $75.00 per hour for telovising of sewer line, with a maximum cost not to exceed 55,223.23. B. Solidification, Inc. - bid $45.00 per hour for cleaning and $99.00 per hour for televising of sewer lines with a maximum cost not to exceed $5,400.00. In addition to the River Street sewer, Mr. Simola reco,nmended that a small section of Broadway sewer line from highway 25 easterly be televised to dutormine the condition of the newer and locate service stubs, and also recommended that a small seyment of walnut Street he televised to iocat.i a possible stotmt suwer/sanitary sewer cross connection. This possibio crows connection is allowing storm water runoff to flow into the Wastewater Treatment I•iant, thus increasing the plant's treatment capacity utu�ecunsarily. Motion was made by Phil white, acconded by Ken Maus and unanimously carried to approve the cleaning of Sanitary sewer from Clew St.reet to the Waste- water Treatment Plant along River Street And also a portion of Broadway Street and Walnut Street and awarding the service to Viking Pipe Service rompnny, not: to uxcced '5.000. 17. Consideration of Approval of Excavation Regulations. In accordance with City ordinanceo, Public Works Director, John Simola, prepared a set of exravat.ion regulations which were reviewed with the City Council. These excavation regulation] follow tho provisions of the iontieollo City Ordinances, and the main purpose of the regulations were to aaauro that contractors who were digging in the City'a public rictht-of-way ropince the proporty 1>nck in its original condition. t4otion was mado by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen and unanimously carried to adopt the excavation regulations as presented by the Public works Director. (Soa Exhibit 9/22/80 uil - 9 - council minutes - 9/22/80 18. Appointment of Additional Election Judges for General Election - November 4, 1980. in order to meet the requirements of Minnesota Statutes requiring election judges to be in party balance, a motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Can Blonigen and unanimously carried to appoint Lana Wolfateller and Arlene Wallin as additional election judges to serve on the tlovember 4, 1980 election. 19. Proclamation of School Bus Safety Week. Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Dan Plon igen and unanimously carried to proclaim the week of October 5 - 11, 1980 as School Bus Safety Week. (See exhibit 9/22/8D a2). 20, Consideration of Appointment to Planning Commission . Due to the recent resignation of Planning Commission member, nave Hauer, the Council reviewed possible candidates to fill out the unexpired term until December 31, Igx0. it was the consensus of the Council to appoint Mr, William Burke to tho Planning Commission to fill out the unexpired tem. of Dave Bauer until December 3), 1980. 2f Mr. Burke did not accept thu position, it was the consensus of the Council to then offer the pouition to Dr. Kasper. 21. Consideration of Beinq a Partv of the Matter of The Petition of Burlington Northern, Inc, to Terminate MAP Agency cervico At Monticello, Minnesota. The Minnesota State Department of Transportation has notified the City that a public hearing will be hold on the proposal by Burlington northern Rnilroad, Inc. to terminate its bane agency service in Monticello. This public hearing is achuduled for September 30, 1980 at thu Monticello City Ball and would, as proposed, terminate a fulitimedepot agent in Monticello. Tile request by Burlington northern is to merely become more efficient and effective by reducing manpower in Monticello And havo Lhin area'a depot agent being located in 09"e,, Minnesota. i4otion wan made by Fran fair, ueconded by Phil White and ur,nnimaualy carried to adupt it resolution whoreby the City of Monticello would not be in opposition to Lho present termination of bane agency service, but: would go on record no deuirous of having nueh uervice being continued should the need ariso in the future. (Soo Bonclut.ion 1980 025). 10 - f� 7 4� Council Minute. - 9/22/80 I' 6 - 22. Cnnsideration of Approval of ilinutes And Bills for September, 1980. c ' Motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Fran Fair and unanimously carried to approve the regular Council Minutes of September. 8, 1980, I and the bills for the month of September, as presented. (See Exhibit 9/22/80 V3)ti j ,g 23. Consideration of Improvements to Fourth Street Warming Mouse and Park. C At the previous Council Meeting, the City Council authorized the i Public works Director to obtain firm costs of installing handrails at the Fourth Street warming house for safety reasons, and costs 4'1 on installing additional lighting to the general skating ar,:a. GI Public Works Director, John Simola, informed the Council that the installation of the handrails would cost a maximum of $150, assuming { approximately $5U.00 in City labor was used. In addition, his recommendation was to install a 400 watt lighting fixture on an existing ole at the easterly p y portion of the perk at a cost of 5102.12 per year. t! Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Ken Maus and unanimously - carried to approve the installation of the handrail, not to exceed $150, 1� and the installation of a 400 -watt light fixture at a cost of $102.12 per year. !i '4. Consideration of Change Order - 1980-1 and 1980-2 Improvement Project. Consulting Engineer, John Ilndalich, recommended that a change order consisting of installation of perforated atone sewer pipe instead of solid storm sewor pipe along Mississippi Drive as part of the improve- ment 1980-1 and the installation of insulation for three sanitary sewer services on Prairie Road am part of improvement 1980-2 be approved with the contractor, Ilayes, Inc. The change order, as recommended, would acid $770 to the Coat of the 1980-1 improvement project for mzcnrlund Plaoia, and would also add 5600 to the cost of improvement 1900-2 along Prairie Road. i motion was made by Yen Rous, seconded by Fran Pair and unanimously carried to approve the change order 01 in the amount of $1,370 to Mayen Contractors, Inc., for the 1980-1 s 2 Improvement Projects. r 25, consideration of. Approvinq rAorlments for Interceptor Sewer Lino. As part of tho Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrading, an interceprt.or sower line is propeued to bu constructed from the Wastewater Treatment Plant y - southerly across County highway 75 and then proceed westerly through r the School District property connecting to the existing newer on Wash- ington Street, Council Minutes - 9/22/80 The proposed interceptor sewer would cross property owned by John Eondhus and also School District #882. Motion was made by Ken Maus, seconded by Phil white and unanimously carried to approve obtaining an easement from John Dondhus for the interceptor sewer line in the amount of $1.00, and also approve the appraisal amount for the easement crossing the School District property in the amount of $16,000. The City of Monticello had received an appraisal for the casement crossing the School District property which was estimated at $15,000, and the School District also received an appraisal estimating the easement value at $16,000. It was agreed by the Council to accept the School District's appraisal for the casement in the amount of $16,000 as noted above. Meeting adjourned. QD Rick WolfsLo4aur, Assistant Administrator IU/ns - 12 -