Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 06-27-1983l AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF TFL CITY COUNCIL Monday, June 27, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair , Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus, Jack Maxwell. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the June 13th, 1983 Meeting and Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission on June 21, 1983. 3. Citizens Comsents/Petitions, Requests, Complaints. Old Business. 4. Consideration of a Proposal to Restore Sidewalk Lighting to the Mississippi River Bridge. S. Ccncidcraticn cf a Crennentation by OSM to the Feasibility Study on Meadow Oak Drainage. 6. Consideration of an Appeal for a Variance by the Country Kitchen. New Business. 7. Consideration of a Proposal by Curry and Amnus to Serve as Independent Computer Search Oonsultanta. 8. Consideration of a Proposal to Alter Sewer Lines and Discharge Points for wrightco. 9. Consideration of Awarding a Contract for Sealcoating of City Streets. 10. Consideration of Subnitting a Formal Raquest to rho Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue for the Purpose of Reinstating the Officer of City Assessor_ 11. Quarterly Department Head Reports. 12. Consideration of Juno Bills. 13. Adjournmont. C Monticello City Council Monticello City Planning Conmission Joint Meeting Tuesday, June 21, 1983 - 7:07 A.M. Council Members Present: Grimsmo, Fair, Blonigen and Maus. Council Members Absent: Maxwell. Planning Comaission Members Present: Ridgeway, Carlson, Schaffer, and Dowling. Planning Commission Members Absent: Cochran. Staff Members Present: Eidem, Nolfstellor and Anderson. This was an open and informatione.l meeting hold at Perkin's with Mr. Ridgeway opening the meeting. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission Members that there has been a misunderstanding as to their role as Planning Commission members because of same reverse decisions recently made by the City Cyuncil. The C^_uncil ucmborc rCrpcafla.. With th.!. 1 to how they arrived at their decision and reversed the Planning -/ Commission's denial of certain variances. The Council and Planning Commission Members also discussed briefly, items in regard to variances and changes In thu urdindnce and zoning amendments. It was the consensus of the Cuuncil and the Planning Commission members that we go back and update our compre- hensive plan and update our zoning and ordinances accordingly. Commission members referred to the City Staff to come up with proposed changes in the conprehanaive plan and ordinances for possible discussion at the last Council Mooting in July. Thorn being no further business, members departed at 7:58 A.M Gary Anddrson, Zoning Administrator MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MON1ICELL0 CITY COUNCIL June 13, 1983 - 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsnto, Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen, Jack Maxwell and Ken Maus. Members Absent: None. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of the Minutes. A motion was made by Maxwell , seconded by Fair and unanimously carried to approve the minutus of the regular meeting held on May 24th, 1983, as presented. 4. Consideration of a Request for Reimburuement by Mr. Ed Reilly. Mr. Ed [Lally, who resides at G1' Fast River Street, was again present at the Council Meeting to request reimbursement from the City Lor cost incurred In trying to locate his sewer our - vice stub at his home. The City Water and Sewer Department petoonnol marked a location along the boulevard by his home where they thought the sewer stub should be located and Mr. Reilly's contractor, Schluender Plumbing, excavated this location but could not find the sewer pipe. The City then rechecked the sewer and water maps and found an error and restaked at a new location within 25 to 3 foot of the actual sewer lino pipe. Although tho second staking was within a few feet of the actual location, Schluendor Plumbing still was unable to find the servico and began digging a trench near the house in an effort to find the sewer pipe to deter- mine its actual location. Mr. Reilly again requested that the City reimburse him for all costa associated with digging the first holo which was an error and which also damaged two elm trees which will probably die in the near futuro. He requustcd that the City remove the existing treeo and pay for the restoration of the firut holo and also pay for the restoration of the third excavation near the house that would not have boon necooaary lied the second staking boon accurate in his opinion. Since the last meeting, which Mr. Reilly ❑handed, the City Staff has been checking with other cunurunitien and found chat meat ComnuniLiva provtdu ds much hulp aa: possibl,• in locating C the service for the proporty ownur, but do not take reoponai- bility should there be an error in the mspu or staking . I - Co, inc iJ Minutes - L/13/83 on the property. It was the opinion of the City Staff that the City should not be held liable should an error occur. Questions were also raised by the City personnel regarding how the contractor began digging to locate the line. It was noted by the Public works Director that normally a digger will start excavating across the line wi'.en trying to locate a service stub to compensate for any margin of error rather than digging parallel to the line as Mr. Reilly's contractor did. By digging parallel, if the line would be a few feet in one direction or another, it would be very difficult to find which is not the accepted practice. After considerable discussion by the Council on the claim presented by Mr. Reilly, it was suggested that although the City did not intend to assume complete liability for its help in trying to locate the services, it appeared that the first marking by City personnel was completely in error and it was the eoncensus of the Council that possibly some type of reimbursement should bu made to cover the excavation and restoration costs for the first hole dug and also for the removal of the trees that were damaged during the digging. As a result, a motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Maus _p 1^:7ro•:c a rcto m• - vA unit ly for n portion of his excavating and restoration costs as follows: 1. Reimbursement in the amount of 5300 to cover the excavating time and restoration for the first hole. 2. City crews will remove the two damaged elm trees by cutting them down and removing the brush and stumps. 3. The City will provide two replacement treor for Mr. Reilly to replant on the boulevard. Voting in favor wore Grimsmo, Maus, Fair, and Maxwoll. Opposed was Blonigen. Currently, City ordinances indicate that it is the homeowners responsibility for any repairs to both the sower and water service stubs from the utruot mains to the property lino. A motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair and unanimously carried to direct tho City Administrator to place on a future agenda a possible ordinance amendment for review and discussion that would make the City liable for all rapairo and maintenance of the cower linea from the street maina to the property lino Instead of the owner's responsibility. - 2 - Council Minutes - 6/13/83 5. Consideration and Revicw of Revised Proposal to Provide Liqhtinq on the Mississippi River Bridqe. At the previous Council Meeting, a representative from MN/DOT indicated that if the City would not participate in the cost of new lighting on Hwy 25 bridge, the project by the State would bescrapped. Since that meeting, the Public Works Director researched the lighting on the bridge further and obtained an estimate for the repair of the existing system. In researching the matter, the Public Works Direc- tor found that since 1929, the City of Monticello has had an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transporta- tion to maintain the bridge lights as necessary and to pay all power and maintenance cost. Mr. Milton Olson of Olson Electric and the Public Works Director examined the old lighting system on the bridge and felt that improvements could be made to the lighting system at a relatively low cost to get the system into operation without replacing the entire system as the State had proposed. It was estimated that the cost to completely repair the system would be less than $2,000 but the Council Members were still concerned over spending this type of funds to just repair the lighting on a bridge that may bo replaced in the next 4 to 5 years. Public Works Director, John Simola, noted that for approxi- mately $33G.00, Olson Electric felt they could do all the necessary repairs and get the system in operation. Although out of the existing seven lights, possibly only 4 or 5 would be working but after a more thorough review, a complete estimate could be presented to fix the remainder of the lights. As a result, a motion was made by Maus, seconded by Maxwell and unanimously carried to authorize the Public Works Director to expend $336 to have Olson Electric charge up tho system and do minor repairs to sea how many of the lights could be gotten to work for this amount of money. A firm estimate for the complete repair will be presented in the future. G. Consideration of a Salary Roquest for Albert Moyer in the Position of Wastewater Treatment Plant Superintendent. At the previous Council Meeting, Mr. Albert Mayor was pro- moted to the ponition of wastewater Trontment Plant Suporin- tendont to fill the position of Mr. Jim Miller who recently resigned. Mr. Moyer and the City Administrator havo aincu mat to set a salary for tho now position which has boon recommended at $22,000 annually by the City Admin.atrator. 3a Council Minutes - 6/13/83 Mr. Meyer came before the Council to request that the salary be set at the same salary the former superintendent was re- ceiving, $22,860.00 annually. A motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Fair and unani- mously carried to set the Wastewater Treatment Plant Super- intendent's salary at the City Administrator's recommended base of $22,000 annually and noted that the position and the salary would be again reviewed at annual salary negotiation time within six months for a possible increase if Mr. Meyer is doing a suitable job. 7. Consideration of an Appeal for the Grantinq of a Variance - Mr. Hal Wehmann. Mr. Hal Wehmann, who has built four condominiums/apartment units on Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Block 1, Holker's Hillside Terrace, requested a variance to develop the balance of the property in that block with three additional four unit condominiums and one duplex unit. Mr. Wehmann has indicated plans to acquire a small triangular portion of the property located within the block from Mr. Roy Lauring in an effort to square off the property into one ownership. Previously, when Mr. Wehmann built the first four units on Intl 3 through 6, he had 1?cen granted variances from the minimum lot size requirements for cacti of the four buildings amounting to approximately 65e for each building. The pro- posal as submitted for the three 4 -unit condominiums and one duplex would require a total land area of 57,000 square feet and the proposed property including the triangular portion Mr. Wchmann plane to obtain totals only 54,750 square feet or approximately 4% ohort. Whon previous variances wore granted for the first four apartment buildings, the Planning Conmiscion indicated that before Mr. Welunann developed the balance of the property, lie would have to address how the situation of square footage shortages would be resolved on the remaining four lots of Block 1. Mr. Wehmann had previously indicated that his in- tontiono wore to only build a total of seven 4 -unit build- ings and should not have a problem in meeting the square footage requirements for the entire block. Setback variances wore also requested for two of tho pro- posed buildings to allow for a 20 foot setback on one build- ing instead of 30 and a setback of 10 on the duplex whore 30 foot is normally required. - 4 - Council Minutes - 6/13/83 Mr. Wohmann now feels that the entire block could be developed hetter if he could acquire the parcel of land from Mr. lauring, but the additional cost of acquiring this parcel of land to square of the block plus the inrreexd cost for the balance of the land has made it unfeasible to only build three more four unit buildings and as a result, Mr. Wehmann requested the variance to allow for an additional duplex building to be situated on the property. In reviewing the entire block development, the seven 4 -unit buildings and the one duplex would have a square footage requirement of 119,000 square feet according to the City ordinances where: s, the property only contains 109,072 square feet. This would result in a Fhortage of approximately 8ya to meet City ordinances. The basic concensus of the Planning Commission was that the development was very aesthetically pleasing and well thought out but the committee members expressed concerns over the entire development not meeting the minimum square footage requirements as originally planned. As a result, they felt they had no choice but to deny the request and this is the reason the City Council was hearing the appeal by thm develop- er. It was noted by the developer that if all of the 14 units he is proposing warm Wilt in one building, lie would have no problem meeting the City ordinances but lie preferred to stay with his existing design by building only 4 -units per building which he thought was much more pleasing to the neighborhood. Although the Council felt the Planning Commission decision to deny the request was legitimate and the Planning Comeiamion did abide by the City ordinances, a motion was made by Fair, secondud by Blonigen and unanimously carried to approve the variancu request to allow for the additional three 4 -unit buildings and one duplex l.uilding l,er the plan submitted contingent upon the developer acquiring the triangular portion of the property from Mr. laurLng and also to approve the setback variance of 20 feet on One building and 10 feet on the duplex. It was noted by the Council that the develop - or has shown that his four unit buildii.go could be located on the property without causing any problems and that the project as a whole wan much more appealing to the City rather than requiring the developer to meet the ordinance and place all of the units in one large structure. 5 Council Minutes -6/13/83 J B. Consideration of an Appeal for the Granting of a Variance -_ Applicant - Country Kitchen. This item was continued until the next meeting at the request of the applicant. 9. Consideration of the 1982 Audit Report. Mr. R-im Lillihauge,of Gruys Johnson and Associates, the City's auditing firm, was present at the Council Meeting to review with the Council the 1982 Audit Report that was recently completed. Mr. Lillihauge noted a few items that were in the management letter to the Council as follows: 1. Extra care should be taken by the Liquor Store personnel when making deposits to minimize the errors that have occurred in the past on the deposits. 2. Recommended that the finance director take at least ono week vacation per year and that someone 1 assume his responsibilities rather than letting J tho work accumulate until he returns. 3. Recommended that in preparing annual budgets, the City Staff not officially adopt budgets for all our debt service funds bU L rather call them financial projections. The renson fur this wan Lhat if they are called budgets, they must: Ic included in tho annual audit: report showing actual cotrytarisons of expenditures to budgeted amounts whorcan, if they are labeled financial projections, this would cut down approximately 15 pages from the report for 1980. After further review of the audit, a motion wan mado by Blonigun, seconded by Maun and unanimously carried to accept the audit report as presented from Gruys Johnson and Associates. 10. Consideration of the Annual Renewal of Intoxicatinq Liquor and Doer Licensoa. A motion was made by Maun and seconded by Blonigon and unani- mously carried to approve the following licensee for ronewal effective July 1, 1983 with no increase in tho fees. Council Minutes - 6/13/83 1. Intoxicating Liquor License, on-eale (Fee $1,000.00) A) Monticello Liquor, Inc. B) Silver Fox Motel. C) Wayside Inn. D) Joyner's lanes. 2. Intoxicating, On -rale - Sunday (Fee $100) A) Monticello Liquor, Inc. B) Silver Fox Motel. C) Wayside Inn. D) Joyner's Lanes. 3. Non -intoxicating Malt Liquor, On -sale (Fee $220.00) A) Monticello Rod and Gi,n Club. B) Pizza Factory. C) Monticello Country Club. D) Friend's Cafe. 4. Non -intoxicating Malt Liquor, Off -sale (Fee $33.00) A) Monticello Liquor, Inc. B) Ernie's Bait Shop. C) Wayno'a Red Owl. D) Maua Foods. E) River Terrace Trailer Park Store. F) Tom Thumb Superette. G) Wayside Inn. 11) Holiday Station. 5. Sot -up Lieonoc (Foe $220.00) A) Monticello Country Club. B) Monticello 100 and Gun Club. G. Club liquor License - (Fue C' 2u.0u) A) American Legion Club. D) VFW Club. 11. Conaideration of Dida on Oakwood Drive Ovorlay. C Bldafor overlaying Oakwood Drive (Gould Brothara Chov. Road) were rocived on Friday. Juno 30. 1983 at 2,00 P.M. As part H - 7 - Council Minutes - 6/13/83 of the bids, an alternate was requested for 000 feet of a fabric overlay on a section of the road that could be used as a test area. The following are the tabulations of the bids received. Omann Const. Buffalo Bitum. Nero Asphalt Base Bid $11,332.50 $11,182.00 $12,142.00 Alternate (600 feet of fabric overlay) S 2,925.00 S 2,325.00 S 3,900.00 Public Works Director, John Simola, had recommended that the Council consider having two areas along Oakwood Drive to service test areas for this new fabric overlay, one near the entrance to the Commuter Parking lot and another area after the parking lot to better determine how the fabric would work in stopping cracks from developing. Because the cost for the fabric overlay is quite high in comparison to the total project cost, a motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen and unanimously carried to accept the low bid from Buffalo Bituminous for the blacktop- ing in the amount of $11,182.00 and to alto accept the bid in the amount of $2,325.00 for the 600 feet of fabric overlay only. 12. Concideration of a Proposal to Extend the Wastewater Treat- rrent Plant Grant Budqct Period. The grant budget period for the wastewater Treatment Plant project expires July 31, 1983 which means that any monies allowed for by the EPA/PCA relating to the plant cannot bus used after that date. Because n contract claim and oulr Sequent law suits have teen filed against the City by tho contractor which have not yet been nettled, it was the recommendation of the City Engineer and the Public works Direetor,that the City request that the grant budget period N extended for another 12 months to July 31, 1984. In addition to the law suit, the City is attempting to final out the project and are having some problems with lions againrt the project from suppliers of electrical equipment who have not yet been paid by one of the subcontractors. If the City withholds monies from thu general contractor, Paul A. laurencu Company, for those lions beyond July 3lat, 1983, the City would have to make full paymont themselves if the grant budget period is not extonded by the EPA/PCA. As a result, a motion was made by Blonigen, soconded by Fair and unanimously carried to approve a request for a Stop III grant amendment that would extend the grant budget period for an additional to July 31st, 1984. Council Minutes - 6/13/83 13. Eye Safety Program. As part of an ongoing safety program for the City of Monticello employees, it was recommended by the Public Wcrks Director that the simplest, most economical and most effective form of eye safety would be to require mandatory wearing of industrial strength safety glasses and frames in all areas where hazards to the eye are known or thought to exist. The cost of implementing such a program for approximately 20 employees in the Public Works Department would be about 1232 initially. To provide eye glasses that would meet the rigid safety standards, would cost $8.90 fcr non-prescription glasses including side shields and $16.90 for prescription glasses including side shields. The Public works Director recommended that the City provide these safety glasses for the employees with actual prescriptions being provided by the employee, if necessary. After discussing the merits of the program, a motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair to approve the purchase of safety eye glasses for city employees at a cost of $8.90 for non- prescription glasses and $16.90 for prescription glasses provided the Public works 'Dopartment makes it mandatory for each employee to wear such glasses. Voting in favor were Fair, Grimomo, Maus and Maxwell. opposed was Blonigon. 14. Consideration of Awarding Final Payment on the Construction of the 4th Street Warming Douse. Currently, the City of Monticello is withholding $200 from Jay Millor Construction on the 4th Street Warming llouae addition. The work has recently been conp2.otod satisfac- torily to the City and it was recummorded that final payment be processed. A motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus and unanimously carried to approve final payment to Jay Millor Conutruetion in Lila amount of $200 on the 4th Street Warming House project. 15. Consideration of Sealcoatino Project for 1983. As part of the comprehensive streot maintenance prcyram, the City has budgeted $27,800 for seal coating al.ruetn in 1983. The Public Works Director lequeutal apploVal to prepare plane and specifications and to advertino fur bide to W futurned June 27th, 1983. Council Minutes - 6/13/03 A motion was made by Maus, seconded by Maxwell and unanimously carried to authorize the Public Works Director to prepare plans and specifications and to advertise for bids for seal coating project for 1983. 16. Consideration of Resolution Regulating Lobbying by Cable Communications Company. Recently, the SherburneAright County Cable Communication's Commission, of which Monticello isavember, has recoamended that all of the ccAT=nities involved in the commission adopt a resolution requiring any cable T.V. companies who are interested in providing service,to meet and discuss their proposals only with the cable commission members at a meeting rather than lobbying individually with individual members or Cities. It was felt that if all communities adhered to this policy, problems would not arise in the future with individual companies trying to persuade individual members or com- munities on their aspects of their company. A motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution setting a policy on cable television lobbying with the Sherburne/Wright County Cable Communication Commission only. (see Resolution 41993 072). 17. Consideration of Protective Covenants - Oakwood Block. A list of protective covenants has been prepared and agreed to by Security Federal Savings S Loan and the City of Monti - collo regarding Security Federal's purch000 of the Oakwood Block from the City. The purpose of tho covenants is to regulate the type of development that may occur on the Oakwood Block and outlines some of the concerns and requirements presented by the City on futuro developments. Basically, the protective covenanto are as follows 1. No vehicular ingroau or egress shall be developed or allowed on Block 32 that abuto Pine Street or Walnut Street. - 10 - O l Council Minutes - 0/13/83 2. All proposed development shall be reviewed by a 3 memher architectural review board consisting of one menber selected by the developer, one member selected by the City of Monticello, and a third member selected by the other two members. This board shall review the proposed development plans in regard to design, traffic flow, intensity of use, and landscaping, etc. 3. No sale or subdivision of a lot may occur until a development is committed to. 4. The covenants shall run with the land for a period of 20 years. A motion was made by Slonigen, seconded by Maxwell and unani- mously carried to adopt a resolution authorizing the proposed restrictive covenants to be attached to the documents and re- corded to the Wright County Recorder's office as part of the sale of the Oakwood Block to Security Federal Savings and Iran. (See Resolution 1983 0733. 18. presentation of Faaoibility Report on Meadow Oak. Storm Water Drainage. Mr. Chuck Icpak of OSM, City's Consulting lhgincering Firm, presented to the Council a feasibility report they were aut.horized to prepare regarding Lite Meadow Oak storm dtainage problem. As part of the Meadow Oak Sulilivi;ion, it was initially planned to provide for excess otorm water drainago from the project to flow into what is known as county Ditch 433. It was recently brought to the City's attention that the area known an Meadow Oak Sublivtuion was not oti.ginally assessed for the County Ditch Project and is not allowed to drain its storm water run off into the County Ditch without prior County approval. The feasibility report presented pussible solutions to the drainage problem which included throe basic alternatives. 1. Direct discharge to the river which would require construction of a storm sewer pipe that wan esti- mated at 5217,000.00. 2. Overflow discharge into County Ditch 033, which is presently how the project was designed. O Council Minutes - 6/13/83 3. A controlled discharge into County Ditch 433 which would require the installation of a gate that would be closed normally preventing any discharge into the County Ditch until the waters would reach a certain level, which should only occur during an abnormally high 100 year rainstorm. It was recommended by the City Frigineer that the controlled discharge was seen as the most beneficial approach cc the problem for the City and the County Ditch authority. The Council will be discussing this item at the next Council meeting. Meeting Adjourned. /1 Rick wolfste^lor Assistant Administrator - 12 - 0 J Council Agenda - 6/27/83 4. Bridqe Liqhtinq- (J.S.). As directed by the Council on June 13, I contacted Olson and Son's to perform a detailed inspection and miscellaneous repairs of the bridge wiring. That investigation revealed the bridge wiring to be intact. This wiring needs only minor repairs and one box cover. one problem that was found is a broken wire between the bridge and the control center service pole some 95 feet away. In addition there are 4 fixtures needed on the walkway. The total cost of the work needed to repair the wiring and replace 4 fixtures is $1,864.80. This would then light the 6 walkway lights. If one of the two remaining fixtures that are believed to be okay are found faulty after being lit, it would cost an additional $316 to replace one fixture. The cost of checking out the system was $210.00. If we add tho $210.00 for repairs and 4 fixtures, the total cost is $2,074.80. The MN/uur will allow the City to salvaga the liq hL iix Lulus and standards to they could be utilized in our nearby parks. They could be sandblasted and painted and I believo they could be an asset to our parks. As I otated in earlier meetings, NSP would provide minor maintenanco on the lights until they aro removed from service. This maintenance is provided for in our standard lighting con- tract. Mn addition, I have enclosed a letter from MN/DOT portaining Ito lighting the now bridge. RaM, NCF.S: Letter from MN. Department of Transportation. - 1 - C +PNNESO., fit Minnesota Department of Transportation `yr District 3 OF TR 301 Laurel St.. Rn. %X 978 Rrainerd. Minnesota 56,101 (2 18) 828.2460 June 20, 1983 Mr. John Simola Public Worktl Director 2SO East Broadway Monticello, MN S5362 In reply refer to: S.P. 7104-4390 (TH 2S) Bridge over the Mississippi River Future Bridge - Lighting Dear Mr. Simla: As per our telephone conversation last reek, the following are examples of bridges on the state highway system in which cities are paying the electric bill and saintaining the lights: 1) Division Street Bridge in St. Cloud. TH 23 2) Broadway Bridge in Little Palls, TH 27 3) Sauk Rapids Bridge in Sauk Rapids. TH 1S 4) Bridge in Sauk Centre, TH 71 S) Washington Street Bridge in Brainerd. TH 210 6) Will Avenue Bridge in Brainerd. TH 2S 7) Bridge in Princeton. TH 9S There is also a bridge at Paynesville on Trunk Highway 55 (unlit) that the City has installed lights up to each and (short bridge) and Paynesville pays the electric bill and maintains the lights. If you have any questions give me a call. Wn/DOT would like to know soon if the City of Monticello is willing to pay the electric bill and maintain the lights on the new bridge. Thank you. Sincerely. Jams Weingartt, P.E. District Preliminary Design Engineer JW/rjn An Evo.r npprvhuv W E -U -1m1•1 400-® Council Agenda - 6/27/83 5. Consideration of a Presentation by OSM Relatinq to the Feasibility Study on Meadow Oak Drainage. (T.E.) As you are surely aware, if you have seen the Monticello Times, John Badalich attended the Wright County Commissioner's meeting or. Tuesday, June 21st, to discuss Meadow Oak drainage. My undeI- standing from the information given to me by John and from the newspaper is that public outcry was certainly intense at that meeting. John indicated to me in a phone call that all he really did before the County Commission was to present the feasibility report much like Charles Lepack reported it to us. He did in- dicate that the controlled drainage appeared to be the most feasible both financially and in terms of drainage control. He apparently also indicated to the County Commission that the feasibility was to be discussed by the City Council on June 27, and that hopefully, one of the drainage alternatives would be selected and authorization would be given to OSM to pursue a permanent application. With that simple background, Monday evening Charles Lepack will again be representing OSM at our Council Meeting. He will be prepared to answer your questions on the feasibility study and is hoping that upon completion of the discussion, the Council will select a preferred alternative and authuiize thu appliCntiur, for permit. Once the permit application is submitted to the County Board, the County must call for a public hearing, after which they will make their decision. At this point, we on Staff do not have a formal position as to any of the alternatives. we do, however, think that the controlled discharge type of outlet would be a reasonable solution. Charles lepack can address this at greater length on Monday. with respect to this particular problem, 1 wish to address one Jesus that, at least so far as I am aware, has not yet been addressed. Apparently, the contention of those along the Ditch is that the Ditch cannot handle the added flow. IL is nine apparent that the condition of the Ditch is substantially substandard. If, in fact, the maintenance of the Ditch has boon neglected, such that the Dilch can no longer handle the designed volume, than it would not be the full obligation of the City or Meadow Oak to be responsible for its repair or a now outlet. 9ho proper procedure is for the City to make application into a natural drainage outlet. If the hydro- logical study shown that the water generated by the now area will not exceed the design limitation of the Ditch, we should be permitted to dump Chore. That the design limita- tiono cannot be mot duo to nogligont maintenance is neithor our fault or responsibility. As I noted, this issue may have boon addressed, I simply have soon no reference to a dia- cuaoion of this sort. I think that if thia position has boon overlooked an of this point, we had boot address it at the time of our application. - 2 - Council Agenda - 6/27./83 G Consideration of an Apneal for the Granting of a variance Applicant - Country Kitchen. Attached below are the planning Commisr.ion agenda and the Planning rorrmission Minutes for the variance request for country Kitchen. Planning Commi»csion Agenda - 5/17/83 AGENDA SUPPL.EMENr Public Beatinq - Variance Request for Separate Pylon Sign to Advertise Daily Specials - Country Kitchen. The Country Kitchen Restaurant in the Monticello Mall re- cently decided to move their pylon sign from the north side of the building to the south side to gain better exposure from 1-94. The pylon sign also was raised to 32 feet above the roadway (Hwy 25) in compliance with City Ordinances. An part of the pylon aign, the Country Kitchen has always had a small reader board attached to the sign which allowed them to change the wording daily to advertise thoir specials. In addition, this reader boors ro also used for messages not 11 neccasarily related to the Counr.ry Kitchen, but for such things as advertising civic events, etc. ttecause the sign was raised in height when it was moved to its now location, the reader board is currently difficult to reach easily to enable the employee's to change mosoagoo. As a result, the Country Kitchen has applied for a variance to place this advertising sign back in itu former location on the north end of the building new the front entrance. City ordinances only allow for one pylon sign per establiahment and as a result, o variance would be needed to allow Country Kitchen to have this separate sign. Although this sign would be on a permanent Iacation, it would appear that this reader board moseago sign would be aimilar to other requests recently received by McDonald's for a portahlo sign to advertise opociala. Although the Country Kitchen has indicated t.ho sign is not always used tot just advertising food items available and is used for other purposes, there appears to bo little difference* botwoon thia type of request versus a portable sign request. POSSIBLE. ACTIONt Consideration of recommending approval or denial of variance request for a aoparato mucoage board sign. - 3 - Council Agenda - 6/27/83 71 i MINUTES OF THE PLA::NING Cl:, ITSS10': N.I.ETII.. May 17, 1183 3. Public Hoarinq - variance Request for a Separate Pylon Sion - Country Kitchen. The Country Kitchen Restaurant in thu Monticello Mall r*- contly decided to move their pylon sign from the north aide of the building to the south side to gain better exposure from 1-94. The pylon sign also was raised to 32 feet above the roadway (Hwy 25) in compliance with City ordinances. As part of the pylon sign, the country Kitchen has always had a small reader board attached to the sign which allowed them to change the wording daily to advertise their specials. in addition, this reador board is also used for messages not necessarily related to the Country Kitchen, but for such things as advertising civic events, etc. Mr. Bryan Tachida, Manager of the Country K1tChsh, noted that when the sign was raised in height and mov*J to its ~ now location, the reader board has become very difficult to roach easily to enable the employees to change messages. Mr. Tschida requested that they be allowed to place the reader board portion of the sign back in its former location at the north and of the building near the front. entrance. Ile noted that Country Kitchen has always had this sign since 1974 and ho would not be asking for any additional signs, but only to allow it to be grandfathered in in its old location. It was noted by the planning Commission that the grand- fathered clause would no longer apply once the sign was roved to a now location and it wau the coi,sonsus of the committee that similar requests have been mado by other restaurants to allow for additional advertising signs which have been denied in the pact. Comments from Qufldlnq Official, Gary Anderson ragardinq Country Kitchen Variance Requost. Tho Planninq Commission noted that the grandfather Clause would n(, longer apply once the sign was Braved to a now location, The Committe*'s consensus that similar requests hava been surd* by other restaurants McDonald's) for additional advertising signs which have been denied i , the a,%t. - 4 - Council Agenda - 6/27/83 7. Consideration of a Proposal by Curry and Associates to Serve as Independent Computer Search Consultants. (T.E.) As early as last fall, Rick and I began discussions on the cost of using a computer service bureau for our financial reports. we began looking into the possibility of purchas- ing our own system that would be able to handle all of our billings, assessments, payroll and budgeting and financial reporting. Both last year and this year, we are paying approximately $5,000 plus or minus for the services rendered by Gruys, Johnson, which is little more than our monthly finance statements and our general ledger and journals. Lynnea still performs all of the sewer and water billings in long hand and on a calculator. Assessment rolls also are generally done by our engineering firm or our finance consultants and we pay a service charge for that privilege. Last fall, because of the budget format change, we had some discussions with Gruys, Johnson about adapting their programs to suit the new budget. Gruys, Johnson indicated to us that it would take some modification lut they did not see any major stumbling blocks. They indicated to me that their software could not accommodate the numbering system that I had used for the budget, and asked if I had any trouble with a II new chart of accounts that would fit their soitware. I told l� them that even though I liked my numbering system and was familiar with it and preferred to use, if it simply could not be worked in then I would have to adjust to a new system. we then proceeded on the assumption that the new account numbers would be drafted and that our service would go on uninterrupted. In February, we discovered that our finance reports were not forthcoming and that they wore not as yet ready to service our account. Rick reported to me that he even hoard an off-the-cuff comment saying that our account was not of major importance since they warn getting into the heart of the tax season and those were the important clients. Prompted by that comment and the need for our financial statements, I contacted a computer service bureau with whom I had worked previously who are located in Mankato. They submitted to us a formal proposal to provide us with approxi- mately equivalent services of those provided by Gruys, Johnson. I chocked with tho City Attorney about the legality of just dropping Gruys, Johnson since I had verbally committed to their performance and as such they had expended funds of their own to prepare a now program. Pringle said they probably would have the right to come back to us if they wore not given a proper opportunity to cocuro the job. In a discussion in March with a ropresontativo of Gruys, Johnson, he presented his projected charge to the City which showed an increase of about $200 a month. I asked him at that time 1f ho was aware - 5 - Council Agenda - 6/'27/87 that we were talking with another service bureau and would be securing price quotes from them. He was stunned at that time and was not aware that he didn't have a complete lock on our account. We requested from him a formal bid for rendering the service. Upon receiving the formal quotes from each firm, Rick and I spent many, many hours comparing the two proposals. This was a very difficult task since we had not drafted formal bid specs and the comparisons were not always equal. One obvious note was that when the notion of competition was projected into the quote, Gruys, Johnson's bid price fell by the $200 per month they had earlier increased us. Ultimately, based upon all the comparisons we could do and the comments by Pringle in terms of financial obligations incurred based on a verbal agreement, we simply went to Gruys, Johnson and said if you will do the entire computer service for the cost of $80 a month, the job is yours. They conceded and $480 a month is the cost which is the same cost it was in 1982. That provides just a little background on why I think it is wise to discontinue our service with Gruya, Johnson and/or any service bureau and investigate the acquisition of our own system. All of which leads us to the item on this agenda. In the beginning, and even now, neither Rick nor I nor other staff members can accurately consider ourselves experts or even substantially knowlcdgablo in the realm of computers. In assembling all of the data that I could possibly find about data processing, I came across the firm of Curry and Asmun, who are independent computer consultants. They disclaim any and all allegiance with any computer firm, but rather much like our engineers, would do or perform an intense study of the needs and requirements of the City and then help in the selection of the proper hardware and software that would meet these needs. I have discussed at length with them, the role that everyone would play in developing tho oyotem. Based upon our limited knowlodgo of the field, I think tho concept of independent consultants is a worthy one. A sort time ago Mr. Dave McCauley of the firm prosonted me with the proposal to do our consulting work. The cost for their offorts in that proposal was $9,800. I told them that I would not ovan take that proposal to the Council, that that sum I found to be unworkable. An soon on I said that, he indicated that they had already boon working on a separate proposal at a oubotantiolly lower rate and ho would got that proposal to me. no roquestod at that timo that they bo - 6 - t Council Agenda - 6/27/83 allowed to come before the City Council to make the presenta- tion for their services. I indicated that he should get the revised proposal to me so that I could review it and would then determine whether or not to place it on the agenda. McCauley called me on Wednesday, the 22nd, indicating that he would hand deliver the revised proposal on Friday morning, the 24th, and that they hoped they would be scheduled for the Monday, the 27th meeting. I said that I would put them on the agenda but that I would have to have the report by early Friday for preliminary review. If the proposal does not come in at what I consider a reasonable price, I will be deleting them from the agenda. If the price is considered by me to be marginal, I will allow them to make their pitch and let the Council make the determination. While I do, in fact, think the concept of independent con- sulting for computer selection is a worthy one, I cannot justify substantial expense for that consulting service. Enough other cities have gone through the selection process either with consultants or on their own and are willing to share both what they learned and what they discovered in their research. 1 think there is alno considerable knowledge to be gained from the vendors so long as one keeps in mind �i• that the information being provided is, in fact, tainted by that vendor in hopes of making his sale. REFERENCES. A copy of the proposal by Curry and Asmus. - 7 - 14 (�k'!}av1,14 /.Aj aAP_ Council Agenda - 6,27/83 B. Consideration of a Proposal to Alter Sewer Lines and Discharge Points for Wrightco. W.S.). For the past several months, the City of Monticello has been working with Wrightco in an attempt to help them or assist them in making a single point discharge to the City sewer. This is in connection with the City's enactment of the pre- treatment ordinance. Wrightco currently has thiee discharges, one from their egg grading plant, one from their main plant and one from their creamery, the building in which the quiches are made for Land -O -Ickes. The egg grading and main plant discharges come together in a manhole behind Maus Foods and this pipe, in turn, runs gravity north to Broadway, then east to Pine, then north to Pine into the lift station in the park. All of the flow from Wrighteo's main plant and egg grading plant,which is in the neighborhood of 50,000 to 70,000 gallons per day, gets pumped through the lift station along River Street to Cedar Street. From there it discharges into the gravity main flowing down River Street to the plant. The discharge from the creamery building which is upwards of 7,000 gallons a day flows to Walnut Street and goes down Walnut Street to Third Street, and then down Third Street to New Street and from there down to River Street and goes gravity all the way to the Treatment Plant. In an attempt to hook all these lines together to a single monitoring source, the City in working with Wrightco started again looking into all aspects of Wrightco's discharge. It was at that time that I researched some of our older as-builts as far as pipe sizes. Our large sanitary sower maps and our 77-3 as built maps showed incorrect pipe sizes for those lines located on Walnut Street and Third Street. Those larger mope and the newer maps indicated that pipe to be 8 inches. These pipes would not have sufficient size for Wrightco's discharge. In researching our 1960 au-builts, I found the pipes to be larger on those ao-builts. Further investigation proved that the as-builto were correct and the newer maps wore incorrect. when I found these errors, I immediately realized that there may be ample capacity in the gravity line going down Walnut Street, Third Street and how Street to allow Wrightco to discharge into thio pipe without having to go through the downtown area and the lift otation in the park. The benefits of such a change arc oignificant. The benefits to the City, of course, aro first; that we could take approxi- matoly 50,000 to 60,000 gallons a day of flow off the lift otation in the park. We would save money in electrical Cchargos because we would not have to pump that 80,000 gallons. - 8 - Council Agenda - 6/27/03 We would save money in wear and tear on the pumps because we would not have as many cycle times. It would give us additional time during certain periods of the day if an emergency should occur in that lift station. It would give us more time to react to a problem. Those people in the downtown business area will not have the sanitary sewer odor which they have become so accustomed to over the past few years. Wrightco's discharge will go into a pipe which will have a gravity flow which will mean a smooth and steady flow coming frau Wrightca and the Treatment Plant will not see the surges from the lift station that it does on Wrightco's flow. As a first step toward the wrightco sewer change, I made a study of the pipe sizes and grades and had our sewer department check out the as-builts thoroughly. From this information, we determined the actual flow capacities or the anticipated flow capacities for the entire system. Based upon this information, it was determined that the sewer capacities ranged from a low of .77 cubic feet per second (346 gallons per minute) to a high of 2.1 cu. ft. per second (942 gallons per minute). I then asked Wrightca to research all of their available data and determine a maximum discharge that they would give the City at any one time. They indicated that ,... barye.. ld >c ubic feet cr cecond _ (150 gallons per minute).^ This would be from the egg grading, the main plant and the quiche building. They also indicated that there could be times when they could dump one of their holding tanks at an additional rate of 150 gallons per minute, but that that discharge could be regulated and would not need to be discharged during peak periods. So for all practical purposes, a 150 to 200 gallon per minute maximum from Wr ightco would be applicable. The next step in checking out this system was to dotormino the actual flown already in the lino. This was done by determining the flows in the system at Now Street and Broadway. we did this by installing a monitoring device in the manhole, than reading the water motor at the nearby laundormat. itocordings over several days showed a maximum flow of log gallons par minute or .24 cubic foot par second. In this area, the line capacity is approximately 1.45 cubic foot per second or 651 gallons par minute. As you can neo, the system is definitely capable of handling the additional flow frac, Wright.co oven if we allow for increases of 20 to 30% an those involved. - 9 u Council Agenda - 6/27/83 The next thing we looked at was the possible additional flow that could come into this system. All of the sewer located on Lauring Lane and all of the new development up there would flow into our interceptor sewer so this would not be attributable to this system. Most of the area lying between the railroad tracks and Hwy 75 or Broadway and east of Hwy 25 and west of Washington Street is pretty much developed. We do not see any additional development in that area that could occur that would substantially increase the flows. We do have the Oakwood Block that will contribute to this area, however, it is doubtful that the flows from any development that would occur there would be such that they could overload this system. The next step was to actually clean the sanitary sewer pipes and inspect them withclosed circuit T.V. to locate any possitle obstructions or defects that may reduce the capacity of the line. This inspection was performed during the second week of June. From this inspection it was determined that there is only one spot or location throughout the whole system that could influence or cause a doterent to the flow. There is an offset joint or a dropped pipe which has dropped approximately two inches in the area of New Street and Broadway. The location is approximately on the north curb line of Broadway in the center of New Street. It is possible that this pipe could allow infiltration of dirt �:► into the line as well as a possible obstruction. It should be repaired irrogardlese of a sewer change from Wrightco. After completion of the inspection, I worked with Greg Paumen of Wrightco in determining the feasibility of a single point discharge from Wrightco, Inc. to leading this gravity sewer system entering at the manhole behind the Coast to Coast building at 4th Street. Originally, Wrightco had planned to locate their monitoring manhole near Locust and 4th Street and connect the lino from tho egg grading process near or into this monitoring manhole. It would be a very short connection of possibly 20 to 30 fact of additional pipe. They then indicated that they would either connoct the creamery into their manhole in the plant and insulate tho line or install a pumping station to pump the line from the creamery over to that manhole or install additional monitoring equipment to monitor the creamery building by itself. After obtaining field measurements and data, it was dotorminod that there would be a coat increase to change from the discharge at Locust and 4th to the gravity discharge behind the Coast to Coast. A map of the proposed change and material list is included for a reference. Some of tlio most obvious additional costs are involved in excavating 4th Street / - 10 - Council Agenda - 6/27/83 to connect to the manhole and to reroute the egg grading plant on the west end of Wrightco over to the new line going out to 4th Street behind the Coast to Coast. In addition, a manhole would be needed in this area to bring all of the pipes together. Basically, the materials involved, the laying of approximately 430 feet of pipe more than the previous single point discharge plant. In addition to these piping changes, it was found that 4 elm trees located along 4th Street were in the way of the new sewer system and more than likely could not be saved. One of the 4 trees would have to be removed for Wrightco to place their monitoring manhole in their originally planned position. This left three trees, however, that could have remained if Wright would have gone ahead with their first plan. We therefore felt this was an additional cost. After several discussions with Greg Paumen and Jim Ridgeway, Wrightco Inc. did agree to allow those trees to be removed. On the condition that replacement trees would be planted, possibly some that would not grow as tall and become a hazard to the overhead wiles. The 4th tree would be the responsibility of Wrightco. In addition, some sidewalk would have to be torn up to place the monitoring man- hole. This sidewalk would have had to been torn up in the original location so the sidewalk repair was deemed to part of the orioinal O1 n. The enclosed material list basically shows which part of the project would be City responsibility and which part would be Wrightco's responsibility. We do not,aa of this time,have accurate cost data on the job. We can only guess that the City's share will be some, place between $7,500 and $10,000 and the Wrightco share of the project will be in the neighborhood of $6,000. We will have actual quotes from blacktopping, excavation, and pipe companion by Monday night's meeting. There has been no funds budgeted for thio project. 11owever, I wholeheartedly support this sower change and believe that it will save the City money in the future, as wall as take care of some of the problems we have in tho downtown business area. If Wrightco wore to install their single point discharge as planned, and at some time in the future we decided to hook Wrightco up to the interceptor newer which is planned for the south side of tha Burlington Northern Railroad, those costo would for exceed this project. I beliovo that this sower change would delay the actual time that wo would have to hook Wrightco into such an interceptor. In addition, if that ware to occur, a connection would only have to be made from the manhole at walnut and 4th Street to the in- torceptor on the south side of the railroad tracks. Thio, of couroo, would reduce our costo greatly as it would be quite difficult to hook Wrightco to the interceptor if thay wore discharging down Locunt Street. Council Agenda - 6/27/83 As I mentioned earlier, there are some cost savings involved. As far as the lift station down at Bridge Park, the cost savings would he minimal. Wrightco's flow to the lift station accounts for about 210 of the total flow. The billing for the year is approximately $643.50, 21% of that billing would be $135.13 per year. If we take the $12,000 that it costs to install the latest rennovation at the lift station, prorate it for 12 years, we come up with about $1,000 per year. A 21% savings in flow could increase a life expectancy of the station by approximately 1.68 years. That would account for $1,680 in savings. There are some other savings, of course, because of wear and .tear on the switch gear for cycling and again the benefits of a reduction in flow to the lift station itself. Wrightco's sewer billing for the first quarter of 1983 was $18,059.50. This was extremely high due to several reasons. Wrightco's useage in their main plant is up 62% over the first quarter of 1982. Useage in the mid -America building or the quiche building is up 377% over the first quarter of 1983. In addition, Wrightco has stopped their pretreatment system and are using it only for buffering for P.H. All of these factors have lead to the large sewer billing. My original estimate in December of 1982, based on old figures and Wrightco'= ^_ontinucd ,rcercar.^ePt wars $,I' ,4,411 Per veer. Currently, if things continue as they are, Wrightco'a projected sewer bill could be as high as $72,238 or an increase of 116% over the projected cost. The single point dischatgo in itself will help Wrightco reduce its costs. More accurate teats can be taken in the actual flows to our sewer system rather than water meters being used in computing the bills. I do believe, however, that Wrightco may find it to their advantage to again start operating their pretreatment system. If indeed, now testing after completion of the single point discharge indicate significantly high loadings again. I have given you about all the information 1 have on the subject. The plan, which was developed through the cooperation of the City of Monticello and Wrightco Staff, has been submitted to Wrightco's engineer and to various contractors for prices. I would ask that John Badalich review the enclosed information and make possible comments at the meeting Monday night. I have discussed some of the phases of this plan with Charles [repack of OSM. I believe Wrightco will have a representative at the meeting to offer any additional information that may be requested. REFERENCES1 Enclosed map of plan, and motorial list and rostorn- tion list. C - 12 - WRIGHTCO SFWER CHANCE MATERIAL LIST Citys 315' - 4" Sol. Weld PVC 20' - 4- Sol. Weld PVC 2 - 4- PVC Tee's 2 - 4' PVC Cape 1 - 4- PVC 1/9 Bond 1 - 4' PVC 1/16 Band 78' - 81 Sol weld PVC TOTAL COST TO CITY IS: 2' - 0- weld PVC 1 - 0' "1. Meld PVC $1,504.96 1 - 0. 9e elbow 37' - 10' Sol. Meld PVC 1' - 4' pis. MH 10.5' deep with rings Ano casting 2 quarts PWC Primer 2 quarts PVC Cement 2 Begs speed Crete 4 Bags dement Wrightcot 235' - 6' "1. Weld PWC 18' - 6- Sol. Meld PVC 2 - 6- PVC Too - s 2 - F- VW. rvt 2 - 6' PVC 1/6 Bond 1 - 4' Dia. r.H 5.5' Deep with Ring:: and casting 1 - 6' Dia. MH 11' Deep with caul inq dnd cover 1 - Bag Speed Crete 2 - Bags Cement 1 - Yard Concrete (Set 11=0 RF,STORATION LIST City) 65 Tons Blacktop Repair 70 Cu. yds. Class v (in place yards) 480 Sq. yds. Black dirt and Good 1 Replacement Trees WrigAtco: 65 Tfas Blacktop Repair 64 Cu, y de. Class v (in Plato YOGI 100 Sq. Vt. Concrete Slab 135 Sq. Yds. Black dirt and bead 25 Pt. 4 It. wide sidewalk I Feplacamont Trs' C SEWER CAPACITIES STREET SIZE, TYPE MAX MAX IACATION LENGTH GRADE CPS GPM 4th Street Locust - Walnut S" VCP 230' 0.40% .77 346 Walnut Street 4th - 3rd St. 10" VCP 410' 0.90% 2.10 942 3rd Street Walnut - Pine 10" VCP 412' 0.30% 1.20 539 3rd Street Pine - Cedar 10" VCP 412' 0.30% 1.20 539 3rd Street Cedar - Palm 10" VCP 410' 0.30% 1.20 539 3rd Street Plan - % New 10" VCP 279' 0.28% i.15 516 3rd Street 12 New - Now 10" VCP 280' C. 28% 1.15 516 New Street 3rd St. - Broad 12" VCP 396' 0.22% 1.55 696 New Street Broad - River 12" VCP 444' 0.16% 1.45 651 Total feet 3,273 19 R/VER �\` • � _ - .. w •w � •o. .:�a l0 3��•,•ao a� -• to a� Ii 71�x :4o' aqi-.�jf .mow _ ... - �..y.�Mo - � + 2► JS'� •..�..,yn - ''` L,� .�ii; � I �r int" t . } �,i �� jji�1 ■±'1 S�+S * w a'1 1 i M ij'4ll �� �tI �1�I � 7 ,i' �S'1 W. .1 .11.i .�+"t• f fffi i.iyW$$r�J,i+ :1.��'��.1�. I� �t �.1. 1 �. �3'.} Lli�y tttr. 7-. �� pjllr 1 1 ., 1 • 1 � 1 �' i 1j �l as :t� • :� i• �i 1.! ' i t• tli .i � i•!"' t s<y sw .a1 t t' s• � ` t- � ` • «) •a !I 1 1` -,,,j {' I`! t j ,, �, i; - i Y -i i M Y �- �• 1 •i � 1. � �•w 1 I �., 1 ! w . P'Y • i � . I 1. �• . l w I- LEA �.`i P 20 p IDS ec. • ~ _ a� a � �'7 � � � !, o � i"� Oti► `""� �rry,; �� ��-•t.y '`•� tot Broadway - New Street M.H. Flow Monitoring May 1983 10.00 AM to 10.00 AM Date Total Gall -one Ave.GPM 14t 14W 5/20-21 66,780 46.4 69 28 5/21-22 58,980 40.9 63 24 5/22.23 72,780 50.54 98 27 5/23-24 67,920 47.17 79 23 5/24-25 57,360 39.83 72 17 TOTALS 373,820 44.97 Av(!. 76.2 Ave. 23.8 Ave. 64,764 GPD AVE. 14 hour Ave. g -)m Meter usenge at B -Clean Laundry 05/23 5759.6 cal`ons 6.9 gom 05/24 9125.6 golions 10.9 Gom J "Flow data obtained by utilizing a Stevens lyoe f level. recorder with e 90 degree V -notch Wier for manhole monitoring. The water readings were used for the Laundry readings on 05/23 h 24/83. Flo j?p rN M .t. a}t�� may} bit% got L A p5 K�� r4L-, S N{} f V}CtshniT�JZ `a7 1-0 to y�S �1.��: (�4a cib? 9" 2275— g 'F! I/4 Ti C : TL1 6.J21 b mi Co, , 14.4 29o3Y /q: 4275, 75' L Council Agenda - 6/27/83 9. Consideration of Awarding a Contract for Sealcoating of City Streets. O.S. ) Bids for the 1983 - 2 Seal Coating Project will be re- ceived at 2:00 P.M. on Monday, June 27, 1983. As of this writing, there has only been one act of specs and plans sent out. We hope to have our tabulations and recoumndation for you at Monday night's meeting. A copy of plans and specs are available at City Hall for your review. - 13 - Council Agenda - 6/27/83 a discussion of this sort. I think that if this position has been overlooked as of this point, we had best address it at the time of our application. t L C BID TABULATION Seal Coating Project SC83-2 city of Monticello, Minnesota June 27, 1983 ITEM 11 ITEM N2 Lithout S+eepino) (With Sweeping) Allied Blacktopping, Inc. .479 per sq. ft. .424 per sq. ft. $35,720.47 $31,618.95 Batzer Construction .45 per sq. ft. .38 per sq. ft. $33,557.85 $28,337.74 Buffalo Bituminous .409 per sq. ft. .359 per sq. ft. $30,500.36 $26,771.70 Council Agenda - 6/27/83 L 10. Consideration of Submittinq a Formal Request to the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue for the purpose of Reinstatina the Office of City Assessor. At the time we hired Gary Anderson as building official, one of the major considerations was that he already was certified to assume the role of City Assessor when and if approval came from the State of Minnnesota. The provisions of Minnesota Statute 270.494 require that the City submit a formal letter to the Commissioner of Revenue requesting that he reinstate the office of City Assessor. Being that we are between assessing duties at this time of the year, it is a good time to submit such a request. While it is generally agreed that we would be taking this course of action, the Council has not formally requested that the position be reinstated. Thus, you must adopt a resolution calling for the request to be made to the Commissioner of Revenue for the reinstatement to occur. REFERENCES: A copy of a proposed resolution requesting said reinstatement: copy of my letter to the Commissioner of Revenue making such a request. Ca - 14 - C RESOLUTION 1983 #74 RESOLUTION REQUESTING REINSTATMENT OF THE OFFICE OF CITY ASSESSOR WHEREAS, the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota, has engaged as a full time regular employee of the City, Mr. Gary Anderson, a certified Minnesota Assessor; and, WHEREAS, the Council finds it desirable and financially prudent to utilize said individual to perform the duties of City Assessor; and, WHEREAS, M.S. 270.494 provides a mechanism by which the City may request reinstatement of the office of City Assessor. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA that the Commissioner of Revenue for the State of Minnesota be requested to reinstate the office of City Assessor for the City of Monticello, Minnesota. Adopted this 27th day of June, 1983. ATTEST: Thomas A. Eiden City Administrator C Arvo A. Grimsmo, Mayor m C, LIQUOR FUND LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE - 1983 AMGUKT CHECK NO. MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H 230.60 10753 VOID -- 10754 Twin City Wine Co. - Liquor 1,763.33 10755 Griggs, Cooper b Co. - Liquor 2,254.94 10756 Ed Phillips b Sons - Liquor 3,459.84 10757 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. - Mark 1. 20.00 10758 MN. State Treasurer - Pera W/H 233.24 10759 Twin City Wine - Liquor 376.39 10760 Ed Phillips b Sons - Liquor 5,577.90 10761 Griggs, Cooper b Co. - Liquor 4,427.06 10762 Old Peoria - Liquor 538.51 10763 Wright County State Bank - FWT - May 463.20 10764 State Treasurer - FICA - May 532.58 10765 Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - May 239.00 10766 Wright County State Bank - From checking to money market acct. 35,000.00 10767 JEMCO - Adv. in motel guides 50.00 10768 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. - Mark 1. 20.00 10769 Twin City Wine Co. - Liquor 1,439.63 10770 Ed Phillips b Sons - Liquor 7,532.96 10771 MN. State Treasurer - Pera W/H 232.31 10772 Commissioner of Revenue - Sales tax - May b of June - 83 b, 844. 92 10773 Ed Phillipa b Sons - Liquor 3,301.74 10774 Griggs, Cooper b Co. - Liquor 2,429.69 10775 Monticello Times - Adv. 222.95 10776 North Central Public Service - Utilities 126.47 10777 Yonak Sanitation - Carbage contract 82.50 10778 Maus Foods - Supplies 24.22 10779 Northern States Power - Utilities 455.28 10780 Liefert Trucking - Freight 355.27 10781 Internal Revenue Service Center - Fed. liquor retail license 54.00 10782 MN. State Treasurer - Dept. of Agr. - Food handlers license 25.25 10783 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 54. 25 10784 .rim's Lock b Key - Lock changes at Liquor Store 61.00 10785 Gruys, Johnson b Assoc. - Audit fee - 1982 1,385.00 10786 L. vegren Ice - Ice purchases 67. 50 10787 7 Up Bottling Co. - Misc. mdse. 245.15 10788 Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Mise. mdse. 648.40 10789 Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse. 752.90 10790 Old butch Foods, Inc. - Misc. mdse. 157.53 10791 Dohlhefiner Dist. Co. - Beer, etc. 17,484.09 10792 Dick Beverage Co. - Beer, etc. 4,076.85 10793 Day Dist. Cu. - Beer 392.40 10794 Grossloin Beverage Co.- Beer 15,731.35 10795 Thorpe Dist. Co. - Beer 3,330.20 10796 A. J. Ogle Co. - Beer 72.80 10797 [tanker 'a Life Ina. - Group Ina. 276.58 10798 Ileating 6 Air Cond. Service - Air conditioner repair 252.00 10799 Payroll for May 3,558.49 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR JUNE - 1983 6126,860.27 lBiNI;ItAI, PIIyH_ JUNE _ AMl111N'I' 1 l:IIECK N0, MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H I 1,474.57 17338 State of MN. - Documents Div. - 82 MN. Uniform Fire Code 33.30 17339 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 299.00 173• Brideewater Telephone - Reimb. for over-charge 5,346.98 1734 Corrow, Sanitation - Contract payment 3,761.50 17342 Buffalo Lock b Key - 6 keys made 16.50 17343 League of MN. Cities - Conference fees 170.00 17344 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 355.00 17345 Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services at Library 125.00 17346 VOID -- 17347 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll W/H 179.04 17348 James Preusse - Cleaning city hall 250.00 17349 YMCA of Mpla. - Monthly contract payment 284.16 17350 Mr. Arve Crimsmo - Mayor salary 175.00 17351 Mr. Dan Blonigen - Council salary 125.00 17352 Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary 125.00 17353 Mr. Jack Maxwell - Council salary 125.00 17354 Mr. Ken Maus - Council salary 125.00 17355 Ernest Pribyl, Treasurer - Taxes for k year on Lindberg house 288.75 17356 Berry's Tree Service - Removal of 2 trees 720.00 17357 MN. Park Supervisors Assoc. - Reg. fee for Roger Mack 7.00 17358 Sherburne/Wright County Cable TV Comm, - Cable TV cont. (reimb.) 9,031.00 17359 MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/II 1,633.81 17360 Wright County Sheriff - April contract payment 9,041.98 17361 Wright County State Bank - FWT - May 3,497.30 17362 State Treasurer - FICA - May 3,943.72 17363 Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - May 2,004,00 17364 MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 116.00 173( Wright County State. Bank - Interest on Lots 13,14615, Block 51 2,430.00 1736, (Option Agreement) Gwen Bateman - Animal Imp. expense - May 246.67 17367 Internal Revenue Service - Levy proceeds 96.08 17368 State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees 202.00 17369 Wright County State Bank - Investments 420,000.00 17370 Wright County State Bank - Investments 414,908.33 17371 Paul A. Laurence Co. - Payment 023 - WWTI, 54,322.59 17372 Richard Knutson, Inc. - Payment 02 - 82-2 Improvement 18U,8U5.14 17373 VOID -- 17374 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll W/11 179.04 17375 Could Bros. Choy. - 83 Choy. van - trade in price 8,67U.00 17376 Jerry Hermes - Cleaning Library 125.00 17377 MN. State Treasurer - Pep. Reg. fees 166.00 17378 Ilolidoy Inn Airport 02 - Roam for A. Grimsmo - League Conv. 49.46 17379 League of MN. Cities - LMC Mini conference 45.00 17380 Wright County State Bank - Investments 220,000.00 17381 Monticello Fire Dept. - Payroll 875.00 17382 Monticello Dep. Reg. 02 - Transfer 6 license fee - 83 Van 10.75 17383 Mrs. Ed Schaffer - Inf. Center salary 132.75 17384 Mrs. Lucy Andrews - Inf. Center salary 150.75 17385 MN. State Treasurer - Pero W/H 1,635.65 17386 Howard Dahlgren Assoc. - Planning for May 100.00 11387 VWR Scientific, Inc. - Lab, supplies 192.10 17388 Lv of Bros. - Uniform rental 124,00 1738^ J M Oil - Trans. fluid 26.58 l 1731. Cary Anderson - Mileage around town 88.70 17391 Radio Shack Accts.- Software fo, dWTP 199.00 17392 Phillipe Petro. - Ilyd. fluid - TP 41.92 17393 Auto Con Industries - Repair 'eservoir - control panell©I 328.67 17394 GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. Minnesota Bearing Co. - Coupling inserts - clarifier - WWTP I 23.92 17395 Central Contractors Supply - Tools for WWTP 57.64 17396 Banker's Life Ins. - Croup Ins. 2,338.81 17397 Monticello Fire Dept. - Reimb. for Fire Dept. expenses 645.68 17398 let Bank Mpls. - Public fund activity charge 4.00 17399 Foster Franzen Agency - 2 way radios ins. 26.00 17400 Patco Co. - 12 traffic cones 92.86 17401 Duerr Masonry - Concrete slab at Library for bike rack 700.00 17402 Northwestern Bell - Fire phone 36.43 17403 Figs It Shop - Power rake rental and mist. supplies 68.96 17404 Mobil Oil - Cas for Fire Dept. 160.96 17405 League of MN. Cities - Annual payment for League bldg. plan 138.00 17406 Bryan Equipment - Mower repairs - Mott mover 141.95 17407 R 6 C Assoc. - Cas additives 12.17 17408 Int. Conf. of Building Officials - Membership dues - C. Anderson 60.00 17409 Production Specialities - St. repairs 5.00 17410 MN. Planning Assoc. - Croup membership dues - Ridgeway 6 Eidem 50.00 17411 Lindberg Paint - Paint for parka 97.67 17412 SMA Construction - Sever pipe b prints 84.15 17413 Monticello Rotary Club - Dues for T. Eidem 141.00 17414 Maus Foods - Supplies for all Depts. 215.79 17415 North Star Waterworks - 26 valve box extensions 101.12 17416 DeChene Farms Nursery - Replacement tree expense 17.99 17417 CompressAir d Equipment - Compressor pump for Mtce. Bldg. 173.17 17418 Flexible Pipe Tool - Sewer supplies- water pressure gauge 311.14 17419 Century Laboratories - Crease, deod., etc. - St. Dept. 104.94 17420 Earl Andersen 6 Assoc. - Playground Equip. 6 20 gal. Toluene 3,735.00 17421 Water Products - I" water meter 131.98 17422 Fyle'e Backhou - Digging water shut offs 6 latrines @ NSP park 265.00 17423 Buffalo Bituminous - Blacktop for streets 284.34 17424 Wright County Sheriff - May contract payment 9,041.98 17425 Smith -Pringle b Mayes - Legal 5/l/ - 6/14 915.00 17426 North Central Public Service - Utilities 1,608.56 17427 Northern States Power - Utilities 6,707.16 17428 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone (117.46 Ans. service for Lib. 1,075.39 17429 National Bushing - Misc, street supplies 40.42 17430 E'arl's Welding Supply - Cyl. oxygen 16.50 17431 Feed Rita Controls - Testing, Feed rite 15 6 2 poly tanks 1,060.50 17432 Coast to Coast - Supplies for all De pts. 124.12 17433 Walt Mack - Mileage with own truck 26.25 17434 Monticello Printing - Envl., business card, bldY, supplies, etc! 197.70 17435 Campbell Abstract - Judgment searches for Oakwood Blocki 27.00 17436 Sh,rburn.• County Equipment - Park supplies 128.78 17437 Central MLUowan - Rental 6 5 yr. lease on 2 cylinder* 251.25 17438 National Lire Ina. Co. - T. Eidee's pension plan i 85.00 17439 Marco Iluwiness Products - Admin, supplies 112.03 17440 Lull Concrete Products - 12 concrete rings 58.80 17441 Cruys, Johnson 6 Assoc. - Audit fee for 1982 audit 8,950.00 17442 Olson 6 Sons - Pump at reservoir repair, lices at city hall 1,396.94 17443 Monticello Times - Publishing 479.58 17444 7,ep Mig. Cv. - Zep TNT, dispenser, 55 gal. pump 331.00 17445 Muudy's Investor Service - Bond rating feu 1,000.00 17446 Ih:r Own Hardware' - Mise. supplies for all dept. 551.42 17447 _ Could Bros Chev. - Shop somal 15.00 17448 The Plumbery - Bal. on 4th St. warning house, shower drain, etc 656.70 17449 Equitable Lift, Ins. Co. - ins. W/11. 40.00 17450 Davis Electronics - 10 auto battoriva - pagers - Fire Dept. 51.50 17451 GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage 6 LMC expense I 162.34 17�s2( Tom Eidem - Mileage 6 mist. expenses I 269.72 �: l John Simola - Misc. expense12.83 17L54 Maus Tire Service - Tires for new van, repair, 78 Int. truck tires 489.23 17455 Voss Electric - Bulbs for city hall 199.7.01 17456 Neenah Foundry - Storm sewer grate 63.09 17457 Wright County Auditor - k police fines - May 992.U0 17458 Kirkham, Michael 6 Assoc. - Computer software - WWTI' 1,200.00 17459 Electronic Tool Supply - Temp. probe - WWTP 121.79 17460 Willard Farnick - Mileage to meeting in St. Michael 16.50 17461 Monticello Office Products - Binders, computer papers, etc. 123.89 17462 MN. Valley Testing - Testing - Sewer Dept. 134.24 17463 Local 049 - Union dues 114.00 17464 Protect Sealcoating Co. - Sealcoat city hall parking lot 536.00 17465 Waltera Cabinet Shop - Cabinet hardware for city hall 27.00 17466 State Treasurer - Surplus Property Fund - 6 pairs fire pants 93.67 17467 Harry's Auto Supply - St., Water, Sewer Depts. 239.38 17468 Adams Pest Control - Library peat control expense 36.75 17469 OSM - Misc. eng expense - 82-2 Project - Step III - WWTP 97,815.08 17470 Payroll for May 20.695.09 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR JUNE $1,517,920.84 Holmes 6 Graven - Legal - Tax Incr. Fin. proposal expense 135.00 1002 LIRA Account — — a .-I - .-qmeb PC, 1OV TQ C! Fife S Ip. T-t4jal PA 4- vc 4*5, 14— . PUG . P—, E --Sr. C, Rg 7 4 VC!L— E -.T EL Ci,*(.t- ;,Jk Chu Mile ILL • 69 PC, 1OV TQ C! Fife S Ip. INJaRr Alf, eP o° o . Q) Q - &A a I • \oP of NYO tt ri/• y 3� L :o M • ' MAINYl� G1iJ ,0 It qe5`-- zop ASS (p,O •40� Po 'Qeli CelOSYI . a = � ��-•----•----L ;% ��y,..,a;►�+� o f.'t 2 30 ' g"�cP ,J YowF ey. - - 6• J ow M L J _ leci.�E Cw:r.:•4 oc c God y..lK ,- jo/ r, arc SCAT—K)!J i ya TrJ fK l �' ! ' E.L.9VI P 1 - at' i o �S L � N J . -'�• 920a t I� •F:ec� ee.:S b�--•- �p . lffROr, Loc. (o•PVGQ. tso� \ A. %ftko i. �CJ�GGrt. 15'oc C0,4.'UAb S �r d� Pot New Ht4 ! P1nE �AA,F F,NAL ►J(cCWi��G� � PQ�QAQ'wr ��fJ Tti t MOV, r,C— No A.vi> W k\UNkT C o SNC. . PEOF. N•c l 2'vJc Q /R T