City Council Agenda Packet 08-12-1991J�
AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, August 12, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor: Ken Maus
Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen, Brad Fyle,
Clint Herbst
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held July 22, 1991.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
4. Consideration of a conditional use request to allow retail/
commercial activities as listed in Chapter 12, Section 2, B-2
(limited business district) of this ordinance in a PEM
(performance zone mixed). Applicant, 21st Century Builders.
5. Consideration of repairing, refurbishing, renting, or
demolishing the Cole house near City Hall.
6. Consideration of final payment to Dynamic Systeme, Inc., for
control system at the wastewater treatment plant; and
consideration of replacement of selected field sensors at the
wastewater treatment plant.
7. Consideration of replacement of south primary clarifier chain
and sprocket assemblies at the wastewater treatment plant.
8. Consideration of final payment to DNCON, Inc., for Sidewalk
Improvement Project 91SW-1, and consideration of setting an
assessment hearing on said improvement project.
9. Consideration of reviewing and amending the Greater Monticello
Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Guidelines.
10. Consideration of approving transfer of on -sale liquor license
--Silver Fox Hotel.
11. Consideration of adopting 1992 Monticello Heartland Express
Management Plan and adopting resolution entering into a
contract with the State of Minnesota Department of
Transportation to provide public transportation.
12. Consideration of ratifying settlement of litigation issue --
Senior Citizens Center.
13. Adjournment.
l
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, July 22, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Ken Maus, Dan
Blonigen, Clint Herbst
Members Absent: None
Approval of minutes.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded
by Dan Blonigen to approve the minutes of the regular meeting
held July 8, 1991. Voting in favor: Shirley Anderson, Brad
Fyle, Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen. Abstaining: Clint Herbst.
Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
None forthcoming.
Public hearinq and consideration to adopt a resolution
relating to modification of Housin_q and Redevelopment,
Authority in and for the City of Monticello of the
redevelopment Plan rulatlnq to Redevelopment Project No. 1,
the modification of the tax increment financing plans relating
to TIF District Nos. 1-1 through 1-12, and the establishment
of Tax Increment Financinq District No. 1-13, all located
within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and the approval and
adoption of TIF plans relatinq thereto. (Shingobee, Inc.).
Ken Maus opened the public hearing. 011ie Koropchak reviewed
the concepts behind the establishment of the TIF plan for the
Shingobee development. She noted that the proposed project
will not be constructed until a loasoe is found.
Establishment of the TIF plan and preparation of all
construction pre -planning will allow a potential project
completion time to be reduced by 60 to 90 days. The reduction
In construction time will enhance the ability of the City to
market the site to companies that are interested in renting
rather than owning an industrial facility. Koropchak also
noted that the use of tax increment financing is not designed
to benefit the developer; but instead, TIF benefit will carry
through to the leasee in the form of a rental reduction cost.
This factor also enhances the ability of the City to market
the project to a potential renter.
Ken Maus noted that the developer, Shingoboo Builders, has
tied up the necessary land for at loast one year and has
accepted the financial risk associated with City preparation
Page I
9
Council Minutes - 7/22/91
of the finance plan. Maus also noted that this marketing
technique has also been used by other communities, and he
believed it was worth a try.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fyle to table adoption of the resolution
relating to modifications for establishing TIF pians and
District No. 1-13 until such time that a qualified leasee is
found. At such time a leasee is found, then adoption of the
resolution shall be considered. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of issuing a negative declaration, Environmental
Assessment Worksheet, Cardinal Hills residential subdivision.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that in
accordance with State Statutes, an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) was prepared for the Cardinal Hills
residential subdivision. The EAW was printed in the
Environmental Quality Board Monitor on June 10, 1991, and it
was distributed to numerous local, state, and federal
agencies. In response to the EAW, the City received questions
and comments from the MPCA, the Minnesota Department of
Ndlural Reauurcea, and the City received a letter from the
State Historical Society. O'Neill went on to review the
letter submitted and the corresponding response made by the
City.
In summary, O'Neill reported that it appears that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary, as
significant environmental issues have not been raised in
response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and
seconded by Shirley Anderson to declare that the environmental
impacts of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision are
sufficiently understood based on the findings noted in the EAW
and based on the input provided by other agencies via the EAW
process. Therefore, preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement is not necessary. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Consideration of approvinq developers aqreomont governinq
City/developer installed improvements - Cardinal Hills
Phase I.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the doveloper
agreement governing City/developer installed improvements for
Cardinal Hills Phase I. O'Neill noted that the agreement is
vory similar to the previously-approvod agreement between the
Pago 2
0
Council Minutes - 7/22/91
City and Prestige Builders which governs the understanding
regarding improvement to the Briar Oakes Estate area. O'Neill
noted that the Cardinal Hills agreement requires the developer
to provide 408 of the total cost of the project in the form of
a letter of credit and to provide the City with 1-1/2 times
the value of each lot sold, with this payment made at the time
each home is developed. The surplus funds collected with the
payment of the additional assessment amount will be placed in
a fund and be allowed to accumulate until such time that
enough funds have been collected to finance the payment of the
remaining assessments.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded
by Shirley Anderson to adopt the developers agreement for
City/developer installed improvements for Cardinal Hills
Phase I. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of preliminary and final plat request entitled
Phase I, Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Aonlicant,
Value Plus Homes.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that the
Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat of Phase I
of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision and recommended that
Council approve the preliminary plat. O'Neill noted that the
preliminary plat of Phase I of Cardinal Hills includes
development of 24 lots on 10 acres of land located directly
south of the proposed elementary school site and adjacent to
Fallon Avenue. Phase I represents 108 of the total land owned
by the Value Plus developers. The remaining 908 of the
Cardinal Hills subdivision area will be platted at a later
date.
O'Neill informed Council that the Value Plus development plan
calls for marketing homes to the first-time home buyer market.
It is likely that most of the homes developed at this site
will be financed through the MPHA housing program, which
limits the price of homes to $70,000.
Brad Fylo asked if turn -grounds might be necessary at the
termination point of the roads loading to the balance of the
property. John Simola noted that it appears that the project
will move forward into phase II relatively soon; therefore, it
does not make sense to require improved turn-arounds. In
addition, City vehicles are able to turn around in the space
that Is available within the right-of-way. The developers
Informed Council that six of the lots have buyers and that it
is expected that six more buyers may be forthcoming by winter.
Page 3
9
Council Minutes - 7/22/91
Shirley Anderson noted her concern regarding the method used
for establishing street names. She suggested that the City
develop a committee to work toward establishing a standardized
street naming and numbering system.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fyle to approve the preliminary and final
plat of the Cardinal Hills Phase I residential subdivision.
In addition, development of subsequent phases of the Cardinal
Hills subdivision should be designed in a manner such that
1) "double fronting" or lots fronting two streets should be
limited. If it is not possible to completely eliminate double
fronting lots, such lots should have added depth as required
by the Planning Commission. 2) Cardinal Hills park plan
should not be impacted by the availability of nearby
school/park facilities. Future park development must comply
with the park dedication requirement of 1 acre of park land
for each 10 acres of developed land. Motion carried
unanimously.
Consideration of request to rezone 10 acres located south of
the proposed elementary school site and adjacent to Fallon
Avenue. RtequermL is to rezone from. AC (scaricultural) to R-1
(sinqle family residential). Applicant, Value Plus Homes.
Jeff O'Neill reported that in order to develop the property
associated with the preliminary plat of Cardinal Hills
residential subdivision, the land area involved needs to be
rezoned from agricultural to an R-1 designation. It is
proposed at this time to rezone only that portion of the land
area developed with phase I of Cardinal Hills Estates.
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and
seconded by Clint Herbst to rezone the north 1/2 of the south
1/2 of the south 1/2 of Section 13, Township 121, Range 25, in
the city of Monticello from A0 to R -l. Motion is based on the
finding that the proposed zoning district is consistent with
the comprehensive plan of the city, consistent with the
geographic area, and there is a need to establish an R-1 zone
In this area. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of a request to amend Section 3-2, General
Building and Performance Requirements, by adding a provision
requiring a two -car garago be constructed along with
construction of each singlo family dwollina unit.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that Planning
Commission recommended approval of the ordinance amendment
requiring all single family dwellings to be constructed to
Page 4
C
Council Minutes - 7/22/91
include a garage with a minimum floor area of 400 sq ft (two -
car garage). O'Neill noted that the proposed ordinance
amendment stems from citizens' input regarding concerns that
development of lesser valued homes with single -car garages in
established neighborhoods would result in the depreciation of
neighborhood land values. It was suggested that a two -car
garage requirement is necessary, as a one -car garage is not
sufficient area to store a vehicle and other items commonly
found in most homes such as bikes, lawn mowers, lawn chairs,
grills, etc. It was suggested that under the current
ordinance, most of these items would need to be stored
outside, which could result in depreciation of existing home
values in the neighborhood.
By amending the ordinance as proposed, there is an opportunity
to assure development of two -car garages at the outset of the
development of the Cardinal Hills development and the
Evergreens development, thus avoiding problems the City has
had in the past with other neighborhoods where sufficient
garage space was not constructed with the original dwelling.
Clint Herbst was in favor of tho proposed ordinance amendment,
as there is no record of any individual wishing to build a
home without a garage in the last five years; therefore, he
did not feel that by adopting this ordinance the City would be
somehow eliminating a potential home owner from building a
home in Monticello.
Dan Blonigen opposed the ordinance. He noted that even though
no applications have come in by home owners wishing to build
a home without a garage, this additional restriction may
someday result in such a problem. He went on to note that if
we make it mandatory that two -car garages are required, then
we should allow living space in homes to be reduced in order
to keep the overall cost of the home as reasonable as
possible.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Pyle and seconded
by Clint Herbst to approve the ordinance amendment requiring
that all single family dwellings be constructed to include a
garage with a minimum floor area of 400 aq ft. Motion is
based on the finding that a minimum requirement of garage area
of 400 aq ft is reasonable and proper given the largo
percentage of families owning two cars, and the added storago
area provided by a two -car garage provides space for storage
of household articles in an enclosed area rather than outside,
thereby improving the appearance of neighborhoods and
Page 5
9
C
Council Minutes - 7/22/91
(� 1 contributing toward maintaining property values. Motion
se carried unanimously.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NOS. 214, 211, AND 212.
10. Consideration of a request for a conditional use permit which
would allow public school use in an R-1 (single familv
residential) zone. Applicant, Monticello School District
#882.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the proposed
elementary school site plan. Ken Maus noted that on occasion
parking can be a problem at Pinewood Elementary School and at
the high school, and he requested that the City Engineer take
a close look at the number of stalls required so as to assure
the City that adequate parking will be available on site. He
went on to note that the design of Fallon Avenue is such that
it will be very difficult for vehicles to park safely on
Fallon Avenue in the event that the on-site parking is
insufficient.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the conditional use permit
which would allow school use in an R-1 zone subject to the
following conditions,
1. The site plan should be amended to show sidewalk
along the driveway that provides access to the
proposed School Boulevard. Sidewalk should be
installed at such time that residential development
neighboring this site warrants development of the
sidewalk.
2. The site plan should be amended to show sidewalk
along the driveway providing access to Fallon
Avenue.
3. The drive area leading to the service dock and
loading area should be modified to include space
for a turn -around near the loading dock area.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all final
parking lot design and grading plans mast be
approved by the City Planner and City Engineer.
The motion to approve the conditional use permit is based on
the finding that development of the school facility as
proposed is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is
compatible with the character of the existing future
neighborhoods. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 6
v
Council Minutes - 7/22/91
11. Consideration of a request to rezone 120 acres of land from AO
(agricultural )to R-1 (sinqle familv residential), which would
allow development of an elementary school facility as a
conditional use. Applicant, Monticello School District 0882.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and
seconded by Brad Fyie to approve the request to rezone 120
acres of land from AO (agricultural) to R-1 (single family
residential), which would allow development of an elementary
school facility as a conditional use. Motion is based on the
finding that the rezoning is consistent with the comprehensive
plan and is consistent with the character of the area. Motion
carried unanimously.
12. Consideration of a resolution accepting bid and orderina City
Projects 91-1, Fallon Avenue, 91-2, Briar Oakes Estate, and
91-3. Cardinal Hills Phase I.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the City
received seven bids, with the low responsible bidder being
LaTour Construction, Inc. LaTour submitted a bid security of
52 and a total bid of $513,354.47. O'Neill noted that the
engineer's estimate on the project was $594,860. O'Neill
informed Council that staff is not recommending that the
project be ordered at this time, as some of the provisions of
the developnent agreements associated with the Briar Oakes
Estate and Cardinal Hills projects have not been executed. It
was recommended that the Council take action to award the bid
subject to the complete execution of the development
agreements.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan Blonigen accepting the bid from LaTour
Construction in the amount of $513,354.47 subject to execution
of the provisions of the development agreements associated
with the Cardinal Hills development and the Briar Oakes Estate
development. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 91-24.
13. Consideration of resolution authorizing the issuance of
cenerai obii cation improvement bonds for Projects 91-1, 91-2,
and 91-3.
Rick wolfstellor informed Council that in order to obtain
funds for the anticipated construction cost payments, Council
should authorize the issuance of bonds. Funds will not be
available until late September, but this should not cause a
Pago 7
140-2
Council Minutes - 7/22191
problem with our cash flow. The bond issue amount should be
adjusted to reflect the actual bid prices and any funds
provided by the developer and school.
In summary, the cash requirements associated with this project
require an estimated total project cost of $730,000, which
would include the construction cost and legal, engineering,
administrative, and finance charges. Of this amount, a
portion will be paid up front by the school district and by
the value Plus developers, which will result in a net bond
issuance need of $515,000.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan Blonigen to authorize issuance of bonds for
$515,000 over seven years contingent upon bids being awarded
under the previous agenda item. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 91-26.
14. Consideration of outside storage of construction eauloment.
Applicant, Flovd Kruse,
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that in response to
Council's request, the Planning Commission roviowed the use of
tho Floyd Kruse property and recommended that Council take
legal action to enforce the ordinance based on the Planning
Commission's finding that outside storage of equipment and use
of the site as a staging area for the asphalt paving process
is inconsistent with the zoning ordinance and inappropriate at
the site. The Planning Commission did not sea the need to
establish an interim ordinance which would provide for short-
term use of the property in a manner inconsistent with the
present rules governing the zoning district in which this
property is located.
Brad Fylo stated that all sorts of materials such as garbage
cans and 5 -gallon pails filled with oil are still on site.
The person leasing the site from Kruse shows no interest in
cleaning it up. Floyd Kruse noted that cleaning up the
barrels is not a big deal. It could be taken care of easily.
Kan Maus also noted the renter has made no effort to maintain
tho site. If this is the intent of the renter, then the City
is probably not interested in allowing this use to continue at
the site.
Dan Blonigon suggested that many of the vehicles could bo
moved to the back of the site to tako advantage of the
screening effect provided by tho existing vogetation.
Pago 8
9
Council Minutes - 7/22191
Ken Maus informed Kruse that he should be concerned about the
potential for oil spillage on the site, as the marketability
of his property in the future could be greatly reduced if
there is any indication that an environmental problem might be
present at the site.
Clint Herbst concurred that he would like to see improvements
made to the site to improve its appearance or that action will
be taken to enforce the zoning ordinance.
Ken Maus asked that City staff examine the ordinance to
determine if the provisions regulating parking lots might be
interpreted to allow this type of use on an existing parking
lot. Staff is to also again explore the development of an
ordinance allowing interim use of land in the event that the
parking lot requirements do not clearly allow this type of
use.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle to ask for
removal of the vehicles and other debris stored on site within
90 days. Motion died for lack of a second.
A mution was then made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Dan
Blonigen to table taking legal action until staff reviews the
ordinance governing parking lots. In the interim, Kruse is
askod to remove all barrels of oil, remove all vehicles that
are not currently licensed or operable per the City's public
nuisance ordinance, remove all garbage stored on site, grade
all piles of clean fill, and park the vehicles stored on the
site in the rear of the property so as to improve the
screening of the vehicles using existing foliage. voting in
favor: Dan Blonigen, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus, Clint
Herbst. Opposed: Brad Fyle.
15. Council Update--Roview Status of Everqroons residential
subdivision.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the status of the
devolopment of the Evergreens subdivision. O'Neill noted that
the proliminary plat was approved in May of 1989; however, the
final plat was never recorded. The total area of phases I
through v proposed by the preliminary plat encompasses
approximately 90 acres and includes development of 236 lots.
The original plan called for development of the Evergreens
subdivision over five phases.
O'Neill noted that the approval period for phases II through
V has lapsed, which means that these phases must go through
the preliminary platting process again. O'Noill noted,
Page 9
NO
Council Minutes - 7/22141
however, that a development agreement was established with
phase I which links phases I to phases II through V;
therefore, according to the City Attorney, the development
agreement signed requires that the City abide by the terms,
which in effect means the City has indirectly granted final
plat approval of phases II through V. O'Neill also noted,
however, that the developer purchasing phase I property wishes
to amend the agreement which binds the City to approval of
phases II through V. Because the development agreement needs
to be modified, the City now has the opportunity to make
changes of its own to the agreement. Specifically, O'Neill
noted that the Council may be interested in taking this
opportunity to suggest changes to the park design and to the
east/west collector roadway that passes through the
development.
John Peterson of Good value Homes was present to outline his
interest in the property. He noted that it is his company's
first experience in the third ring of suburbs. He stated that
Monticello has a lot of appeal, the school system is
wonderful, and the city services are exceptional. He would
like to have his company involved in the area. He also noted
he recognizoo the dilemma that the City faces end wishes to
work cooperatively with Kjellborg and the City toward a
resolution of problems associated with the design of phases 11
through V.
With reference to the park design, Ken Maus noted that it
would be nice to move the park toward a central position on
the property; however, this option may not be totally viable.
Curt Kjellberg was in attendance. He noted that the
development agreement was initiated two years ago, and
Kjellbergs relied on it in their marketing of the project and
incurred significant cost associated with development of the
property in conjunction with the agreement.
Ken Maus noted that he would support maintaining the park in
its position as originally contemplated; however, it was his
view that the east/west collector street should be
straightened, and the lots fronting the street should be
eliminated.
Dan Blonigon noted that the developer has not completed what
he agreed to do. There was a Dig push to gat the project
through for the sake of rectifying the pollution problem at
the Kjollborg East Mobile Home Park. Blonigen did not feel
that the City is obligated to comply with any portion of the
agreement if the developer wishes to change it.
Pago 10
D
Council Minutes - 7122/41
Clint Herbst stated that he understands the park issue and
that perhaps the City could continue to allow the park to
remain in its position as proposed; however, he felt that it
was important that the roadway alignment problem be corrected.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fyle to amend the development agreement
governing the Evergreens subdivision to allow the first phase
of the Evergreens to be divided into two smaller phases (A and
B) and to require that the design of phases II through V
include realignment of the east/west collector street in a
manner that straightens the roadway and eliminates individual
lot access to the roadway. It was determined that the park
location is to remain the same. The City would consider
sharing in payment of expenses associated with changing the
design of phases II through V. Voting in favor of the motion:
Ken Maus, Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst, Shirley Anderson. Opposed:
Dan Blonigen.
16. Consideration of establishing animal impound fee schedule.
Wolfsteller reported that City staff has researched fees
charged by other communities for tho norvico of holding dogs
captured by animal control officers from other communities.
He noted that typically veterinarians will provide the service
for their clients on a limited basis primarily for kennel
service for vacations. Their charges range from $8 to $10 per
day. Therefore, it was his view that increasing the City's
charge from $7.25 per day to a higher amount is reasonable
given the amount that veterinarians charge for essentially the
same service.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan Blonigon to increase the daily charge from
$7.25 per day to $8 per day. Motion carried unanimously.
17. Consideration of Wright County State Bank request to use
strootscaue bridoo railing sections alone Hiahway 25 in their
aarkino lot.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fylo to allow the bank to install two
refurbished bridge railings along Highway 25 in conjunction
with development of their now parking lot. The bank would not
be charged for the bridge railing, as the railing was paid for
via the original streetscape project assessment roll. In
addition, the City shall sail three panels of lattice work
taken from the old river bridge. The lattice is to be
refurbished by the bank and incorporated into the parking lot
Pago 11
9
Council Minutes - 7122191
design. The cost of the lattice work is $75 per panel.
Motion carried unanimously.
19. Approval of bills.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fyle, to approve the bills as submitted.
Motion carried unanimously.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Pago 12
I&I
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
Consideration of a conditional use request to allow retail/
commercial activities as listed in Chapter 12, Section 2, B-2
(limited business district) of this ordinance in a PZM
(performance zone mixed). Applicant, 21st Century Builders.
(J.O.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Over one year ago, JKMV Properties submitted a request for a
conditional use permit which would allow development of a
strip mall on a 4 -acre site directly east of the Maus Foods
store. Planning Commission and Council reviewed the request
and granted approval of the conditional use permit with a
number of conditions. Over one year has lapsed since the
original approval; therefore, the developer must apply for a
new conditional use permit in order to proceed on the project.
In addition, the applicant has made some changes to the plan
approved previously which merit additional review. Planning
Commission reviewed the site plan and made suggestions which
have been incorporated into the site plan now presented.
The new site plan shows a slightly larger building,
as it increases from 23,530 eq ft to 26,287 sq ft.
In addition, the structure is placed in a position
slightly west of the position noted on the original
plan.
The now site plan design anticipates future
connection of the strip mall to the Maus Foods
store. This development concept was followed
despite the fact that Council denied an earlier
request to allow the strip mall to be connected to
Maus Foods. It also proposes a one-way counter
clockwise circulation pattern around the structure.
Along with the increase in building size is an
increase in the number of parking stalls created.
The original plan called for 124 parking spaces.
The now plan rovoals 131 parking spaces. It would
appear that the increase in parking spaces is
sufficient to provide additional parking associated
with the added retail space.
Following is a table which outlines tho changes in
parking in terms of numbors of stalls providod and
location.
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
Total Front Rear
Original plan 124 101 23
Revised plan 131 94 37
Ordinance requirement 119
Difference +12 over requirement
3. The original plan called for a driveway access off
of Cedar Street at a location between 6th Street
and the railroad tracks. This access point has
been removed; however, a pedestrian walkway still
remains at this location. This appears to be an
improvement to the site plan, as it reduces
vehicular access to Cedar Street and probably
enhances the safety of the pedestrian crossing by
reducing turning motions at the pedestrian
crossing.
4. The structure is pushed to the northwest, which has
provided additional land area on the southeast side
of the site to be used to manage the steep change
In elevation between the southern boundary of the
site and the building itself. Under the new plan,
retaining wall needs would be reduced. The
developer is aware that the concept needs to be
reviewed closely by our City Engineer prior to
approval.
By reducing the need for a retaining wall, the plan
provides more flexibility to complete an extension
of 6th Street through the southern boundary of this
site as was originally proposed. If you recall, at
one time the thought was to extend 6th Street along
the southern boundary of the site to link up with
Palm Street. Again, the City Council reviewed this
original deEign and docided against supporting it.
The developers are aware that approval of the
current plan does not mean that future roadway
realignments will be supported.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve the conditional use permit subject to
the following conditions (those aro the same conditions
as noted by Council on May 14, 1990, except for atom 4
which is proposed by staff):
1. Development of final landscaping and borming plan
creating effective transition between commercial
and residential properties as dotormined by a City
Planner. A bond in the amount of 100% of the
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
cost to install berming and landscaping shall be
provided to the City prior to issuance of a
building permit.
2. Development of a steep grade or combination of
steep grade and retaining walls shall be
accompanied by installation of a safety fence for
the purpose of eliminating access to the edge of
the steep grade. The fence shall be made of a
weather -resistant material and be at least 6 feet
high.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, drainage
and retaining wall construction plans shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
4. The parking requirements are based on retail use
only. No restaurant use is allowed without an
amendment to the conditional use permit.
5. Grading and landscape plan are to show a 35 -foot
sidewalk located 1 foot off of the property line
and located on City right-of-way.
The other three conditions as noted in the Council
minutes of May 14, 1990, have already been met by the
applicant. These conditions included 1) moving the
southerly most access drive onto Cedar Street in
alignment with 6th Street; 2) the northerly most exit
only access onto Cedar Street was allowed through the
varianco process; 3) the developer did remove debris
placed on the 5th Street right-of-way along the northern
boundary of the property. The removal process was
witnessed by the City Inspector.
2. Motion to deny approval of the conditional use permit
allowing rota il/commercial activity in a PZM zone.
Under this alternative, the Council could make the
finding that the proposed rotail/commercial activity is
not consistent with the nature or geography of the area.
This alternative may not be reasonable in that the site
plan and associated landscaping according to condition 01
above will be designed to buffer the impacts on the
adjoining residential areas, and the Bite is adjacent to
a busy commercial area; therefore, this alternative may
not be reasonable.
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with
the conditions as attached. The site plan is similar to the
previous plan approved in May of 1990. Changes made to the
old plan do not appear to be substantive enough to justify
denial.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of supporting data provided to the City Council on
May 14, 1990; Copy of associated meeting minutes; Copy of old
and revised site plans.
II
PJ --
a
ook
�.
Council Agenda - 5/14/90
Consideration of conditional use permit which would allow
retail commercial activity in a PZM zone. Applicant, JKMV
Partnership/21st Century Builders. (J.O.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
JKMV Partnership, along with 21st Century Builders, requests
that the Planning Commission and City Council consider
allowing retail activity to occur in a PZM zone as a
conditional use. The Planning Commission has scheduled a
special meeting and will be conducting a public hearing
regarding this matter at 5:30 p.m., May 14, 1990. City
Council will be reviewing this item immediately following the
special meeting of the Planning Commission. Staff will be
reporting on the Planning Commission's recommendation as part
of the presentation of this item to Council.
As you recall, Council previously denied consideration of a
development plan for the area which included closing of Cedar
Street and relocation of utilities. As a result of this
decision and based upon additional input from City staff, a
new site plan has been prepared for City review. The
following is a brief review of the purpose of the PZM zone
along with a review of the site plan.
PZM Zone Purpose (taken from comments made by City Planner)
The purpose and intent of the PZM district clearly calls for
development that is sensitive to the surrounding area and
environment and must produce a creative and innovative
development with aesthetic controls as a transition between
high density residential and low intensity commercial. Maus
Foods would be considered a high intensity commercial, and a
continuation of high intensity commercial activity is not the
intention of the PZM district. The district also clearly
intends to preserve open space and unique characteristics of
the surrounding land and must address all of these issues
through a complete submittal.
An important part of the PZM district is to create significant
separation between commercial activity and residential
development. As the area directly north of the proposed
shopping center is residential, including the railroad right-
of-way, a significant setback of berming and landscaping would
be anticipated. Also, woodland preservation is part of the
review, much of which has already boon removed from the site
prior to submittal.
0
Council Agenda - 5/14/90
Setback requirements within the PZM are, as a minimum, those
requirements found in the zone most similar to the development
proposed. The perimeter setbacks can be increased as needed
by the City of Monticello to properly integrate the
development into the community considering the guidelines of
the ordinance and the comprehensive plan.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
The characteristics of the new site plan for the most part are
consistent with the suggestions made by the City Planner.
Included in the new plan are greater setback distances between
adjoining properties, additional landscaping, and a reduction
in the size of the structure. In addition, the structure has
to be turned 90 degrees so that it will now face Highway 25.
This was also a suggestion made by the City Planner.
Setbacks
The proposed plan meets all building setback minimums for the
B-3 zone. No formal setback requirements are in place for the
PZM district.
As you can see on the attached site plan, the project calls
for a 10 -foot setback parking/drive area and adjoining
residential areas. Trees and other landscaping plantings will
be placed in the 10 -foot setback areas along the northern and
eastern boundaries of the properties. The final landscaping
plan is not available at this time.
Landscaping,
The landscape plan shows approximately 40 trees, which meets
the minuimum level of tree plantings had this development been
located in a B-3 zone. Since the development is located in
a PZM zone, the City at its discretion may require additional
landscaping for the purpose of creating a buffer between
commercial and residential uses. It is suggested that the
City Planner provide some input into the design of the
landscape plan and assist the City in determining to what
extent additional plantings are necessary to create the proper
separation between commercial and residential land uses. The
City/Planning Commission could approve the conditional use
permit subject to such a review.
O
Council Agenda - 5/14/90 orb
4p
Access Drives
The site plan submitted calls for development of an access
drive that is 5 feet from the 5th Street right-of-way/BN
tracks. According to City ordinance, driveways must be
located at least 40 feet from a City right-of-way; therefore,
this portion of the site plan does not comply with City
ordinance. It is suggested in one of the proposed conditions
associated with this conditional use permit that the developer
simply move the entrance 40 feet from the property line, or
the entrance could be eliminated altogether. It should be
noted that an entrance to Cedar Street at such a close
proximity to the railroad tracks might be creating a traffic
hazard. For instance, vehicles turning north onto Cedar
Street from the access might have some difficulty seeing train
traffic coming from the east. To what extent this potential
traffic hazard is a bona fide problem is difficult to say
given the infrequency of train traffic.
In addition, truck traffic servicing Maus Foods currently
utilizes Cedar Street for maneuvering space during the process
entering and exiting Maus Foods' loading berths. Using City
right-of-way for maneuvering space should be discouraged, as
a traffic hazard is created when trucks are backing and
turning on City right-of-way. The presence of the drive area
across the street might encourage the use of the drive for
additional maneuvering space, which might result in a
worsening of the existing poor traffic situation.
The site plan also calls for development of an access drive on
the south side of the parking lot which is off -set from the
6th Street right-of-way. The site plan should be improved by
realigning this drive to match 6th Street. Alignment with 6th
Street would allow vehicles entering the development from 6th
Street to simply cross Cedar rather than cross diagonally in
an unsafe manner. Moving the drive as proposed would also
require that the parking displaced by the drive be moved to
the south of the access drive.
Parkinq Spaces
The plan shows 124 stalls, which is consistent with ordinance
requirements.
Demolition Debris on 5th Street Riqht-of-way
It is my understanding that demolition debris, including tree
stumps, possibly construction material, and other unknown
materials, was buried in an area along the northern property
0q
C0AA
r�,J .
Council Agenda - 5/14/90
line and within the 5th Street right-of-way. This material
was buried without authorization after verbal notification to
the contractor (Veit Construction of Rogers, MN) by City staff
that this was not permitted. Consequently, at some time in
the future, this may need to be removed. This material will
decompose and could affect the stability of the railroad or if
5th Street is ever developed; or if a utility line such as
storm sewer is installed at the dump location, the debris may
cause settlement and would need to be excavated and replaced
with good fill material. At the present time, however, the
presence of the debris is not creating a noticeable problem.
It is suggested that one of the conditions require that the
property owner remove the debris material in the event it
becomes necessary to do so. This responsibility could be
formally recorded against the property. The City Council
could also require removal of the material with the
development to assure no future problems.
Summary
It appears clear that the site plan, with some modifications
as noted above, is consistent with the goal and intent of the
PZM zone. Following under alternative #1 is a list of
conditions that Council may wish to attach to the conditional
use permit.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve conditional use permit request subject
to the following conditions:
Development of final landscaping and berming plan
creating effective transition between commercial
and residential properties as determined by the
City Planner. A bond in the amount of 100% of the
cost to install berming and landscaping shall be
provided to the City prior to issuance of a
building permit.
Development of a retaining wall shall be
accompanied by installation of a safety fence for
the purpose of eliminating access to the edge of
the retaining wall. Fence shall be made of
weather resistant material and be at least 6 feet
high.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, drainage
and retaining wall construction plans shall be
approved City engineer.
Council Agenda - 5/14/90
4. Southerly most access onto Cedar Street shall be
aligned with 6th Street.
5. Northerly most access onto Cedar Street shall be
moved 40 feet to the south or eliminated.
6. A document identifying the approximate location of
demolition or unknown material on the 5th Street
right-of-way and designating the property owner as
the party responsible for removal of the debris and
restoration shall be recorded against the property.
This would require someone in the future to be
responsible when and if problems develop.
2. Motion to deny approval of the conditional use permit
request.
If the applicants are not willing or able to satisfy the
conditions noted, then the Planning Commission/Council
may elect to deny the conditional use permit process.
Condition number 5 is the only condition that would need
a variance prior to final approval. If Planning
Commission elects to eliminate condition number 5 as one
of the conditions, then the applicants would need to
obtain a variance. This process would require an
additional public hearing process.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
request subject to conditions noted in alternative it and any
other conditions that Planning Commission/Council might add.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Site plan.
0
Council Minutes - 5/14/90
Consideration of conditional use permit which would allow
retail/commercial activitv in a PZM zone. Apolicant JRMV
Partnership/21st Century Builders..
Mayor Maus relinquished the chair to Acting Mayor, Fran Fair.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the site plan and
outlined the suggested conditions associated with this permit.
He also noted that the Planning Commission had recommended
approval of the conditional use permit subject to the
applicant obtaining a variance which would allow the northerly
most access onto Cedar Street to be located within 40 feet of
the 5th Street right-of-way.
O'Neill also went on to note that during the excavation and
grading of the site placing it in the condition it is today,
material was deposited underground in an area along the
northern boundary of the property. O'Neill informed Council
that it is likely that some of this debris is located on the
City 5th Street right-of-way.
Dan Blonigen suggested that a condition be added to the permit
which would require that the developer remove all debris
material dumped on City right-of-way prior to issuance of a
building permit.
Fran Fair also noted that the debris material should be
removed from the 5th Street right-of-way as a condition of the
conditional use permit.
After discussion, motion was made by Shirley Anderson,
seconded by Dan Blonigen, to approve the conditional use
permit subject to the following conditions:
1. Development of a final landscaping and berming plan
creating effective transition between commercial and
residential properties as determined by the City Planner.
A bond in the amount of 100% of the cost to install
berming and landscaping shall be provided to the City
prior to issuance of a building permit.
2. Development of a retaining wall shall be accompanied by
installation of a safety fence for the purpose of
eliminating access to the edge of the retaining wall.
The fence shall be made of weather resistant material and
(� be at least 6 feet high.
3. Prior to issuance of building permit, drainage and
retaining wall construction plans shall be approved by
the City Engineer.
a
Council Minutes - 5/14i90
4. The southerly most access onto Cedar Street shall be
aligned with 6th Street.
5. The northerly most access onto Cedar Street shall be
moved 40 feet to the south of 5th Street, eliminated, or
a variance allowing the access to be located at this
point shall be obtained.
6. Applicant shall remove all debris previously placed an
the 5th Street right-of-way along the northern boundary
of the property. Removal process must be reviewed by
City Inspector. Debris must be removed prior to issuance
of a building permit.
Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson,
Dan Blonigen. Abstaining: Ken Maus.
AI.Urn6,ers /UiACh &10(14ionS
Residential
I
Vacant
OWN
0
-ices
SITZ
PIAN IIUDT
—1. r, We Wono
PMOBCV PAIi
I
Vacant
OWN
0
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
Consideration of repairing, refurbishinq, renting, or
demolishing the Cole house near City Hall. (J.S.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the July 8 meeting, the City Council directed staff to
prepare specifications for repairs to the Cole house and
obtain prices from local contractors. Roger Mack, Gary
Anderson, and myself, after obtaining some input from a few
local contractors, developed a set of specifications for the
necessary repairs to the home. We drafted the specifications
in such a way that the painting could be bid separately and
that individual contractors could bid on all of the work or
bits and pieces of it, as a variety of work was needed to be
done. Many copies of the specifications were distributed to
area contractors, and they were given two weeks to prepare
their quotes. For your information, staff time alone probably
totals anywhere from $1,500 to $2,000 for the various
inspections of the house, drafting specifications, and walk-
throughs with various contractors.
The proposals were received by 4:30 p.m. on August 7. A wide
variety of proposals were received. Only one proposal was for
the complete work, excluding the water line replacement. That
proposal was received from Don Swendsrud of D b C Contractors
of Monticello for an amount of $15,000. The low price for
water replacement was received from Moores Excavation of Big
Lake for $765, bringing the total cost of the project to
$15,765. D & C Contractors did not give a deduction in their
proposal for deleting the painting. Including the current
staff time, plus an additional $1,000 to $2,000 for inspection
and working with the contractor to assure a complete and
satisfactory project, you can see the refurbishment of the
house could run in the area of $18,000 to $19,000.
Various quotes were received for portions of the work. For
example, electrical work ranged from $525 to $1,635 depending
upon the extent of the remedial work. Plumbing and heating
quotes were mostly for time and materials, but we do have
enough quotes to indicate that the plumbing and heating would
probably be in the area of $1,000+. We have a proposal of
$295 for bringing the dock and rear stop to code, and a
proposal for $915 to repair the vinyl flooring in the home,
which does require some replacement. We have no individual
quotes for doing the bulk of the repair work on the inside
such as the insulation, the kitchen cabinet repairs, boxing in
the chimney, replacing the trim, installing doors and
hardware, and repairing the ceilings and the roof and the
railing, which could be significant.
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
We did receive quotes for the plastering, taping, and painting
of the inside and the painting of the exterior. Two quotes
were received for the interior, and those quotes range from
$2,050 to $2,014. Painting of the exterior ranged from $875
to $2,235 depending upon the extent of the work required and
the contractor. Based upon these figures, the City could
easily spend $5,000 to correct the code problems and water
line and still be looking at finding someone to do all of the
inside repairs, as well as $2,000 or $3,000 for painting.
At this particular time, we have not verified all the
credentials of the contractors we have quotes and proposals
from, and this will have to be done. Prior to any of these
contractors working on City property, we must verify that they
have insurance and if they have employees that they are paying
worker's compensation. Otherwise, at the end of the year, the
City pays worker's compensation for these individuals through
our own insurance company. By working with several
contractors, one may be able to keep the initial cost down;
however, there would be more inspection work required and
staff time would go up. We could look at doing the major
repairs and corrective work, which would probably run $5,000
to $8,000 Ails staff time, and have a prospective tenant do
the painting and obtain anywhere from two to six months free
rent. However, if we are going to do this, it may be better
to just pay to have the painting done in the first place. We
are, therefore, assured of the quality of the work and,
therefore, the longevity of the repairs as well. As many
repairs as are needed to this house, it's somewhat complex to
see that the work is carried through. if the City is looking
at a long-term rental program for this house, it is best that
the work be high quality and last as long as possible.
We have had some interest from people wishing to rent the
house should the City fix it up, and possibly even those
people doing some of the painting. Although that may be able
to be worked out, it still is somewhat complex in that we have
to issue a 1099 form for the value of the work performed, rent
credits have to be calculated, and it takes additional staff
time to inspect the work that they've done. Then when it's
all said and dried, tho County takes 309 of the funds that we
recover from rent.
As staff has stated before, once the City has knowledge of
repairs needed to property of ours and do not take stops to
correct them, especially those that in any way could pose a
safety problem, we become negligent, and we have much deeper
pockets than most landlords with this typo of rental housing.
We have sort of boxed ourselves in by thoroughly inspecting
the house; however, staff fools we were obligated to do so,
and given the same circumstances would probably do so again.
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to have the home
completely refurbished per our specifications at an
estimated cost, including all staff time, of $18,000 to
$19,000 and then rent the home without the garage at a
monthly rate of $450 to $500. Figuring annual
maintenance at a cheap $500 a year, we would recover our
funds in approximately 5+ years. And depending upon the
number of renters through the home at that particular
time, we may be faced with more repairs at that time.
2. The second alternative would be to have as much work as
possible done by various local contractors to get the
home at least in code compliance, probably using some
City employees for portions of the work. The estimated
cost of this would be about $5,000 to $8,000. We would
then rent the home to someone who would complete the
painting and other repairs and probably give them about
six months free rent valued at another $3,000.
3. The third alternative would be to have the house
demolished or removed at an estimated cost of $4,000 to
$5,000 and let the existing garage remain for use by the
City. This option is the least complicated and allows
the City use of the property as well as the garage for
years to come until such time it is needed for other City
functions.
4. The fourth alternative would be to resell the property.
This does not appear to be practical, as at some point in
the future, the City will have a need for expansion room,
and it could be quite costly to acquire this property In
the future should the house be repaired or a commercial
establishment built there and the value significantly
increased. In addition, we would also lose the use of
the existing garage and would have to replace the square
footage by building additional public works space or
renting space elsewhere.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator, Assistant
Administrator, Public Works Director, Building and Zoning
Administrator, and Street Superintendent that the Council opt
for option 13 and have the house demolished at an ostimatod
coat of $4,000 to $5,000.
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
SUPPORTING DATA:
Please refer to additional agenda items on this matter over
the past several meetings; Enclosed is a copy of the
specifications sent to various contractors. The individual
quotes on all portions of the work due to their length and
bulk are available at City Hall for your review.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
RENTAL HOUSE REPAIR SPECIFICATIONS
Credit
For No
Price
Painting
I. Water Service
A. Remove and replace the existing
galvanized water service from the
shut-off near the property line to
the water meter in the small basement
of the house. The new water line
shall have minimum cover of 7 feet
and shall be 1 -inch type K -copper.
All materials and labor for a complete
installation, including restoration,
shall be included. Locate and protect
all other utilities.
II. Plumbinq
A. Cut pipe 6 reconnect the black ABS
plastic pipe with a no hub fitting to
white PVC plastic pipe visible in
the first floor bathroom.
III. First Floor
A. Kitchen
1. Repair or replace the kitchen
threshold and repair or replace
the floor covering with a
suitable patch. Includes
materials and labor.
2. Finish taping of walls and install
trim and baseboard and paint
kitchen walls and finish trim.
Includes materials and labor.
3. Box in chimney, sheotrock, tape,
and paint. Include all materials
and installation.
4. Cut of countertop to 1 inch beyond
existing baso cabinet. Repair
kitchen cabinets to include closure
to the right of dishwasher area.
Use kitchen cabinets from entry
l if possible. Includes materials
and labor.
COLEHSE.REP: 7/22/91
Pago 1
Credit
For No
Price Paintinq
S. Install patio door jamb extensions.
Install and finish door trim. Install
and finish 1x4 door threshold
extension. Includes materials and
labor.
6. Cut off and cap ends of dishwasher
water and waste piping. Includes
materials and labor.
7. Cut counter top at correct angle.
Install and paint 3/4" x 3/4" cove
molding on top of back splash.
Includes materials and labor.
S. Remove kitchen sink and reinstall
after countertop completed.
B. Bathroom
1. Repair all electrical wiring,
outlets, and svitch6s shown in the
i bathroom area. Includes materials
and labor.
2. Furnish, install, and wire exhaust
fan in bathroom.
3. Furnish and install pine trim around
doorway and along base.
4. Furnish and install permanent access
ladder for basement.
S. Install 1/4" Tuan plywood floor and
cover with linoleum floor covering.
6. Paint inside of bathroom door.
7. Furnish and install bathroom door
knob.
8. Furnish and install suspended
coiling tile.
9. Fasten and wrap water pipes with
insulation.
l 14. Box in around water pipes, cover
with shootrock. Tape and paint.
COLEHSE.REP: 7/22/91 Pac:o 2
Si
Credit
For No
Price Painting
11. Sheetrock, tape, and paint bathroom
walls.
C. Living Room
1. Examine electrical wiring and
outlets and switches. Bring
electrical up to current code
standards. Includes materials
and labor.
2. Furnish and install 110 -volt smoke
detector.
3. Repair roof leak at east bow window.
Includes materials and labor.
4. Repair ceiling and repaint to match.
Includes materials and labor.
5. Finish off back of stairway with
1/4" A.P. plywood. Install b finish.
Includes materials and labor.
6. Install and finish cove molding on
top of vertical wainscoating. _
D. Bedroom/Den
1. Remove door and trim out for cased
opening, install and finish.
Includes materials and labor.
2. Install and finish closet trim.
Includes materials and labor.
3. Furnish, install, and finish wall
and base trim.
4. Repair wall, tape, and paint.
5. Sheotrock closet ceiling, tape,
and paint.
6. Install and paint three 3-5/8"
particle board shelves with 1 x 3
nailers and shelf face.
7. Install and finish 1/4" A.C.
plywood to the loft closet wall.
COLENSE.REP: 7/22/91 Page 3
Credit
For No
Price Painting
E. Entryway
1. Tape and paint walls. Includes
materials and labor.
2. Cover exterior bottom side of door
with 1/4" x 26" x 44" A.D.
plywood. Paint entire door.
Includes materials and labor.
3. Install floor covering. Includes
materials and labor.
4. Install door stop and install
weatherstripping in threshold.
Includes materials and labor.
5. Remove entry to kitchen door.
Fill holes in door jamb and refinish.
IV. Second Floor
A. Stairway
1. Trim out stairway. Includes
materials and labor.
2. Paint stairway area. Includes
materials and labor. '
B. Bathroom
1. Insulate wall to attic. Install
door stops to door jambe. Install
2" rigid insulation tight fit to
doorstops. Includes materials
and labor.
2. Re -glue linoleum.
3. Finish area behind shower by
installing wall nailers, temporary
fasten 3/8" A.D. plywood, and
paint.
4. Plumber to remove vanity sink and
reinstall when vanity base and top
are completed.
COLENSE.REP: 7/22/91 Pago 4
Credit
For No
Price Painting
5. Rework existing vanity framework to
receive to 48" vanity top. Furnish
and install 48" vanity top. Install
and finish the existing entry cabinet
doors on reworked vanity framework.
C. Northwest Bedroom
1. Furnish, install, and finish floor,
door, and wall trim.
2. Replace ceiling tile and paint
entire ceiling tile. Includes
materials and labor.
3. Install door trim and paint.
Includes materials and labor.
4. Install 90 degree sheetmetal
heat run boot in closet.
D. Hallway
1. Trim out scuttle hole; insulate
and finish. Install sheetrock
In scuttle cover.
2. Patch and repair ceiling as
necessary, paint ceiling as
necessary to match. Includes
materials and labor.
3. Install handrail, stain, and finish.
Includes materials and labor.
E. Southwest Bodroom
1. Trim bedroom door to fit.
2. Install and finish base and door
trim. Includes materials and labor.
3. Trim closet door to fit. Install
door knob and door stop with two
magnetic closuros. Includes
materials and labor.
4. Repaint bedroom, bedroom door, and
closet door. Includes materials
and labor.
COLEHSE.REP: 7/22/91 Pago 5
O
Credit
For No
Price Painting
F. Miscellaneous
1. Furnish and install 110 -volt smoke
detector.
V. Exterior
A. Paint house exterior entirely.
B. Paint north and east walls and bow window
area siding only.
C. Paint all exterior trim.
D. Furnish and install additional horizontal
rails on deck. Install additional step
and railing to concrete patio.
E. Construct 4' x 4' platform with railing
and step to the south from kitchen
utilizing treated lumber.
'I. Appliances
A. Remove gas stove from small white house,
install in Cole house, and check all gas
piping for leaks.
B. Remove refrigerator from small white
house and install in Cole house.
VII. Furnace
A. Heater contractor to perform service
check on furnace.
C i
COLEHSE.REP: 7/22/91 Page
Council Agenda - 6/12/91
Consideration of final payment to Dynamic Systems, Inc., for
control system at the wastewater treatment plant; and
Consideration of replacement of selected field sensors at the
wastewater treatment plant. (J.S.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Dynamic Systems has completed the control panel at the
wastewater treatment plant. The main control panel and the
backup system operation at the wastewater treatment plant have
been verified by PSG and Dean Sharp from OSM. The expediency
of the project and the quality of work from Dynamic Systems
were exceptional.
The proposed price from Dynamic Systems for the installation
of the control system was $79,500. There were no additional
costs from Dynamic Systems to the City during the construction
of the control panel; consequently, the project cost is
$79,500. We have paid Dynamic Systems a total of $74,531,
leaving a balance or final payment due of $4,969.
During the installation of the control panel, all of the field
sensors were checked out; and those that were able to be
calibrated and repaired were done. Some of the field sensors,
however, were found not to be within tolerance for
calibration, unreliable, or were cannibalized previously by
City employees to make other sensors operational due to the
unavailability of parts. Dynamic Systems has made
recommendations regarding replacement of many of the field
sensors. A copy of their recommendation is enclosed. PSG has
also evaluated the sensors and made a recommendation as to the
replacement schedule. It should be noted that some sensors
need not be replaced at this time or in the near future, as
they are not required due to the current method of operation
of the plant by PSG. Their replacement could be put off to
the future when the need arises. Please rofer to the letter
from Kolsie.
Based upon the information presented above, it appears thet
the course of action would be to purchase the two sensors or
motors for the wastewater treatment plant from Dynamic Systems
at a cost of $4,680 and budget in 1992 and subsequent years
for other sensors as needed. It is assumed that these
roplacemonts will tomo out of the sewer access fund as will
the cost from Dynamic Systems for the control panel.
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to make final payment to
Dynamic Systems for the control panel in the amount of
$4,969. Additionally, Council would authorize purchase
of the two flow meters or sensors from Dynamic Systems at
a cost of $4,680.
2. The second alternative would be to make final payment to
Dynamic Systems in the amount of $4,969 and not to
purchase the sensors at this time. This does not appear
to be appropriate, as the sensors are needed, especially
the influent meter upon which our contract cost with PSG
is based. Consequently, it is necessary to have an
accurate meter for this as well as requirements in our
permit with the Pollution Control Agency.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It Is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that
City Council authorize final payment to Dynamic Systems in the
amount of $4,969 and authorize purchase of the two sensors
from Dynamic Systems in the amount of $4,680 as outlined in
alternative #l.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of bill from Dynamic Systems; Copy of letter from PSG
regarding need for sensors.
10
August 8, 1991
Mr. John Simole
Public Works Director
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 553112-9245
Re: Electronic Control System for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Monticello. Minnesota
DSI Serial No. 145 16
Dear John:
This letter is to serve as a Notice of Completion to the city of Monticello, Minnesota,
regarding the contract to replace the wastewater treatment plant electronic control system,
Project No. WWTP90.1 .
The one year warranty for this project will take affect on August 12, 1991.
I would like to thank you for solecting Dynamic Systems. Inc.. for this project. We hope that
you fool it was as big of a success as we dol
I would also like to that nk Kolsio and crew for their assistance and patience during start-up.
Please conlact us if we can be of further assistance to the city of Monticello in the future.
Very truly yours,
DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, INC.
Craig A. M(fdinpor
com/slw
DYNAMIC
�-
SYSTEMS�i'
INC. t:
6819 Wurhrnal— Auenua Smile
Nlnnenpnll�, MN 55439.1609
1619) 941.8747
DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, INC.
6819 WASHINGTON AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55439
` (612)941-8747
r
City of Monticello 11158925
250 East Broadway
P. 0. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362-9245
L J
w—D To
ouAMnrr -- oexwwnoM
1 Retainage on final acceptance of New Supervisory
Control System for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Final Invoice
C
INVOILe
007062
"'o'Junew 27. 1991
owo1w wo.
14516 Monticello
.ouw owo. w +o.
WWTP90-1
•` CNet 30 S/P Freieht Allowed
O6
JweT7
►M,ce AMOVMf
AO
$4,969.00
U
I PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES GROUP, INC.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO J. SIMOLA
FROM K. McGUIRE
DATE AUGUST 6, 1991
RE PLANT INSTRUMENTATION REPLACEMENT REQUEST /
RECOMMENDATIONS
John,
Attached is a list of plant primary sensors and status of same.
Also attached are comments and quotes, where appropriate, from
Dynamic Systems atour request. PSG has assessed the need for
replacement of various sensors and can group them into several
categories.
REPLACEMENT NEEDED:
There are really only two sensors that fall into this category.
EO Level Sensor (LT -5);
This sensor is critical to the EO Make-up pump control
logic. At a depth of two feet or less EQ make-up pumps
ere"locked out". If the level is such that pumping is required
and the sensor is falsely reading low, pumps will not operate and
our capacity to deal with potential shock loads is diminished.
When the opposite is true, the EQ tank will be pumped empty and
the pumps will run dry, thus causing undue wear on the pumps.
Cost: $2,340 Milltronics MultiRanger Plus
Influent Flow Meter (FT -2);,
Proper operation of the influent flow meter is critical to
everything we do. This instrument is required as a condition of
our NPDES permit for continuous plant flow monitoring. Influent
flow monitoring is also the basis for determining user fees as
well as in determination of treated plant loads under the
Monticello/PSG O&M contract.
Cost: $2,340 Milltronics MultiRanger Plus
RLQVESTED FUTUREIPLANNED UPGRAD
Aeration Dissolved Oxvqen Metara. North and South (AT -13 6 14)y
Presently only one of these two units is operational.
Problems with the existing unite are; an inability to temperature
calibrate them, need for frequent calibration and cleaning of the
Monticollo Wattowator Treatmont Plant
1401 Hart Blvd.. Ainntieelln, hlinncxna 55362 Ph. (612) 295.2225 V
probe, frequent probe failure, and the high cost of probe
replacement (approx. $700 ea). Blowers are cycled on and off
based on the readings by these sensors. we are presently working
with the manufacturer to optimize the life and function of these
units. Further evaluation of the existing units, and the many
other available D.O. sensors on the market is necessary to
determine which will offer the most reliable and cost effective
performance. Only one unit is required under the present mode of
operation.
Cost: $2,000 - $8,000 ea
NO ACTION AT THIS TIME:
All other non -operational sensors, AT -7, LT -49, AT -21, AT -22,
AT -59, AT -80, AT -45, FT -50, FT -51, and FT -54, fall into this
category for now either because there is no known reliable sensor
for the application or due to a lack of need under the present
mode of operation.
Thank you.
cc L. Breimhurst
0
Monticello wastewater Treatment Facility
Field
Probe and Sensor Status List
AT -1
Influent pH Meter
OK.
AT -6
EO pH Meter
Repaired by manufacturer, yet to be reinstalled.
AT -13
Aeration D.O. Meter (S)
D.O. reads OK, temp won't calibrate.
AT -14
Aeration D.O. Meter (N)
D.O. reads OK, temp won't calibrate.
AT -48
Digester pH
OK.
FT -2
Influent Flow Meter
Won't hold calibration, unreliable.
FT -14
Aeration. Air Flow (S)
OK.
FT -20
Aeration Air Flow (N)
OK.
FT -8
EO Air Flow
OK.
FT -4
Primary Clarifier Influent Flow
OK.
FT -23
Final Effluent Flow
OK.
LT -5
EO Level Sensor
Unreliable, unusable, when outside the stilling tube
even slight ripples cause loss of lovel. Echoes inside
the stilling well cause false readings. A reliable
unit here is needed, proper EO Transfer Pump control
depends on it.
FT -11
Aeration Influent Flow (S)
OK.
FT -12
Aeration Influent Flow (N)
OK.
PT -55
Primary Digester Gas Pressure
OK.
PT -56
Secondary Digester Gas Pressure
OK.
/_
PT -57 Storage Tank Gas Pressure
OK.
PT -25 Plant Compressed Air Pressure
OK.
LT -3 Raw Sewage wet well Level
OK.
AT -7 EQ D.O. Meter
No Probe, probes are expensive and require frequent
cleaning, PSG feels this unit is unnecessary to present
mode of operation.
FT -9 EQ Make-up Flow
OK.
LT -10 Intermediate wet well
OK.
AT -22 Awr'atiurr Suspanded ootids plater (r.)
AT -21 Aeration Suspended Solids Meter (S)
One set of bulbs and lenses on order from Germany to
evaluate these meters. It has been suggested that
these meters will require frequent cleaning and will be
unreliable. Solids are determined in the lab daily for
process control.
AT -59 Return Activated Sludge Suspended Solids Meter (S)
AT -80 Return Activated Sludge Suspended Solids Meter (N)
One set of bulbs and lenses on order from Germany to
evaluate these meters. It has been suggested that
these meters will require frequent cleaning and will be
unreliable. Solids are determined in the lab daily for
process control.
Total coat of parts ordered for evaluation of SS meters
is approximately $120 plus freight.
FT -30 Return Activated Sludge Flow (S)
OK.
FT -31 Return Activated Sludge Flow (N)
OK.
LT -49 Primary Digester Level Sensor
Cannibalized 1984, reason unknown, PSG feel this unit
is unnecessary under the present mode Of operation.
The Secondary Digester and Mottling Tank where there are
no sensors should be consideree for addition of liquid
level sensors at Some point in the future.
AT -45 Thickener Blanket Level/Density Meter
Cannibalized, date unknown, pre 1987.
FT -50 Secondary Digester Inflow (Supernatant)
Mapco ultrasonic, cannibalized to repair E0 Make-up
flow meter 5/91, these in-line ultrasonics will not
function reliably reading sludges high in solids. $575
to repair boards removed.
FT -51 Storage Tank Inflow
Cannibalized to repair NAB Inflow 5/91, these in-line
ultrasonics will not function reliably reading sludges
high in solids. $575 to repair boards removed.
PT -58 EO Blower Air Flow
OK.
FT -54 Sludge Disposal Flow (Doppler Flow Meter)
In operative, manual on order, unnecessary to measure
flow to the loading stand this way, volume hauled is
calculated by change in volume remaining in the holding
tank roughly 1.5 weeks twice per year. CDuID De
removed and applied to the supernatant flow.
FT -32 WAS Flow
OK.
LT -43 Thickener Level
Cannibalized pre 1987, not needed.
0
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
7. Consideration of replacement of south primary clarifier chain
and sprocket assemblies at the wastewater treatment plant.
(J.S.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
During the 1991 budget process, it was noted that the south
primary clarifier chains and sprockets at the wastewater
treatment plant were in need of repair and/or replacement. It
was determined at that time to get through the winter by doing
periodic repairs or small segment replacements to the chain,
so the actual replacement could be done with the 1991
operating budget. It is now time to replace the entire
assembly, as it is more cost effective to do so. In addition,
it appears that at least one manufacturer has dropped this
size of chain, which limits our access to replacement parts.
Consequently, it appears,more prudent to do the replacement at
this time.
Since we are concerned only with parts here and PSG performs
all of the installation labor, the cost is not significant;
however, it is above the $2,000 single item limit for PSG and
needs Council authorization. The cost of the chain assemblies
Is $2,716. The cost of the sprocket assemblies is $1,555.
The total estimated cost is $4,271. It is possible that some
additional small parts will be needed upon retrofitting the
system. These parts should not be significant, and we would
expect the entire project cost to be under $5,000.
Since these are actually repairs to the existing wastewater
treatment plant, the funds should come from the repair and
maintenance budget at the wastewater treatment plant. Because
this item is significant in nature, as it exceeds the $2,000
non -approval limit for PSG and could result in exceeding the
repair and maintenance budget for 1991 of $0,000 at the
wastewater treatment plant, it requires Council approval.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is to authorize replacement of the
LE
clarifier
chains and
sprockets in the south primary
V
1✓
clarifier
$5,000.
as outlined
above at an estimated cost of
2.
The second
alternativo
is to continuo replacing bits and
pieces as
This appears
because of
needed in the clarifier chains and sprockets.
to be the most costly in the long run; and
the limited manufacturers of this chain, it
may become
more difficult in the future.
LE
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It Is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the
City Council authorize replacement of the south primary
clarifier chains and sprockets as outlined in alternative 41
for an estimated cost of $5,000-
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of letter from PSG; Copy of quotes from Lenan, Inc.
12
I PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES GROUP, INC.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO J. SIMOLA
FROM : K. McGUIRE
DATE AUGUST 5, 1991
RE SOUTH PRIMARY CLARIFIER CHAIN AND SPROCKET REPLACEMENT
John,
Attached are quotes for parts to replace the carrier chain and
sprockets in the South Primary Clarifier. We will replace only
sprockets in a condition such that premature wear to the new
chain may be caused, thus limiting the cost of the project.
There will be some additional expense for steel to widen the
riders as was done when we rehab'ed the North Clarifier in the
spring of 1988, as well as some miscellaneous hardware. These
r items can be purchased under the R&M budget. We have been
replacing portions of the chain in this unit annually on an as
needed "to get through the winter" basis. We have discussed
rebuild of this clarifier periodically over the last couple
years. we have evaluated retrofit with plastic chain and have
found this option to be considerably more difficult and costly
than anticipated.
l
Recent developments in the clarifier chain manufacturing industry
are limiting supply and have in some instances driven prices for
similar parts up as much as 45% according to our supplier. We
recommend bringing this issue to council as soon as possible to
protect ourselves from such an increase.
Thank you.,
%%/;/ L
cc L. Breimhurst
Montieollo Wastowator Troatment Plant O
1401 Han Blvd.. Monticello. A lnneeota 55362 Ph. (612) 295.2225 �%
LENAN. INC.
Environrrmntai Control Equipment Sates and Service
8001 Aahcroft Avenue
Edina. MN 55424-1725
(812)920-0809
July 30, 1991
Mr. Pete Klingenberg
Maintenance Manager
Wastewater Treatment Plant
1401 Hart Blvd.
Monticello. MN 55362
SUBJECT: Chain Replacement
South unit (Upper Level) Primary Collector
Lenan Proposal #P-73091-1
Dear Mr. Klingenberg:
This letter will confirm our verbal quotation to you this afternoon.
We based our proposal on previous proposals and orders. Please review it for
any corrections.
The original specifications say 70' of #488 metal chain is required per side.
We previously measured this and felt it more prudent to quote 80' per side. Our
quote as follows using F-2 attachments to accommodate your 2" x 4" wooden flights.
(80'/side)(2 sides) • 160' #488 metal chain with F-2 attachments
approximately every 10'.
Price----------------------------------------------------- $2.576
Freight FOB Factory prepaid and added ------- Estimate ---- S 1140
ALTERNATE
If you only wish to order 70' per side • 140' total.
Deduct---------------------------------------------------- S 300
Tax must be included if applicable unless paid directly by purchaser to the
state. Please add if necessary.
Delivery estimated 6-8 weeks.
Payment terms are 15 days after receipt of material or 30 days from the date of
the invoice, whichever is less.
0
Page 2
Mr. Pete Klingenberg
July 30, 1991
All material warrantees standard by manufacturer. No labor or other material to
be provided.
Thank you for your business. Please contact us if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
LENAN, INC.
Lee E. Gleason
LEG/ng
P.S. I cautioned you about happenings in the industry. One manufacturer no
longer makes this size chain. Another major manufacturer was bought out
and now the two companies' prices have gone up and access is limited.
Supplier I'm quoting petitioned this morning for Chapter 11 (per infor-
mation I received). They are still accepting and filling orders. If they
get sold, we can reasonably expect the buyout to result in even higher
prices and more limited access. Our advice is to get this chain in stock
now, and you should be O.K. until the market stabilizes.
Lee
0
LENAN. INC.
Environmental Control Equipment Solea and Service
9001 Ashcroft Avenue
Edina. MN 55424-1725
[912)920-0809
/c/ o
�tt,,.TiaG�•J At
f✓/' �/ifi�lT �D�i�f ��+E�rr
_711 "I
NiTz`,' w�r�•T�' � GST T�Y/1 /�' r-�"E
„f,yL //�� .!f /,fir•►��c ,sem ��y/ /%'.�c`�E r�—
f,,,r,� ak,sv�)- ''fI' TyBiJr ,s',r .r�-•�►'<Rs
V-70 �yGE i.r
T/t/1
AorB��sT Di9� S
TM�6%.eFs wF J/�0 �FB�sE �t1 1T�'ro.M /!�t
Tom/ TJr®� va•/T . ���ifYE moo''(- ,arc T/�F 1Y`o � �'
1it`ilfli �o fQ'if ac�Pil y.
,¢`L Jay, n / ` a� • ,�« 1 J/ -P1. -f f- �K99-/ar--was%
v« iir �x 7ho�
u//iG B� f/�'. k[v. y diOPJI µ OPEii�j(lil �+i//•✓c)f J,S l%!• y I�•
Jif-,C�B��) of oTJ1'Cr't lP•4.1x •.✓:c /�"� 13.
LENAN. INC.
r Environmental Control Equipment Sales and Service
8001 Ashcroft Avenue
Edina. MN 55424-1725
(812) 920.0809
#A ' uy'r-t /f/�
IN
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
Consideration of final payment to DNCON, Inc., for Sidewalk
Improvement Project 91SW-1, and consideration of settinq an
assessment hearinq on said improvement project. (J.S.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
DNCON, Inc., of Lakeville, Minnesota, completed the sidewalk
installation on July 20. The restoration work was recently
completed and final payment quantities determined. The
original bid on the project, based upon the estimated
quantities, was $30,077.05. This included not only the
installation of new sidewalk but repairs to the existing
sidewalk system. The final quantities extend to a total
project cost of $32,526.82. This is $2,449.77 above the
estimated cost. Primary reasons for the overrun were due to
additional curb and sod over the estimated quantities and the
replacement of additional sidewalk in front of the Lindquist
Funeral Home at the request of the property owner. This
additional cost of $1,250.64 plus inspection costs will be
assessed 1008 to the property owner. The particular sidewalk
was on the grid and based upon our criteria did not need
replacement. The property owner requested the replacement for
appearance sake only and, therefore, will be assessed 100% of
the cost of that portion.
DNCON, Inc., has boon paid $27,832.48, leaving a balance due
of $4,694.34.
Final costs are currently being determined for the removals by
the City and the Inspection costs. We expect to have these
the week of the 12th. Consequently, we request that the City
Council sot an assessment hearing for the proposed sidewalk
improvement to be hold September 9, 1991. This gives
sufficient time to determine the final costs and send out
notices, as wall as published notice as required.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve final payment
I to DNCON in the amount of $4,694.34 for sidewalk
improvement project 91SW-1 and to sot a data of
September 9, 1991, to hold the assessment hearing for the
project.
2. The second alternative would be to authorize final
payment to DNCON as previously outlined but not to sot
the assessment hearing for September 9 and sot it at a
later data.
13
C
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the
City Council authorize final payment to DNCON, Inc., for
$4,694.34 as outlined in alternative Al and to further order
an assessment hearing for September 9, 1991, on said
Improvement project.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of final payment request.
14
DNCON
TEL No. 612 435 6419 Aug 07.91 8:13 P.01
DNCON, INC.
'vet OWr.fO auswsss
9870 • IOISi STREET WEST • LAKEVILLE. MN 55044
(9+2)7133UY4a 435-6419
Pate :.:'{august 8, 1991
City of Monticello
250 east Broadway
Monticello, MN
Re: Project No. 91SW-1
Conc. Sidewalk a Appurt. Work
Estimate M
Base Bid "A"
..wal uLco"S.«vc .on
UO.,, To .6.1
�y,OG6 7S SF
4" Conc.
walk
@
S���_%Sr'
766.nD SF
6" Conc.
Drwy/Sidowalk
@
S- 1-Rp`/SF
178.5 LF
Reinstall
86-18
@
6�_70 /LF =
170,0 Cy
Compact A
6118.-10 Fill
@
$ 5 nn /CY •
972.0 SY
Sod w/black
dirt
@
$ t_10 /SY
77.0 SF
Keystone
bl. A Ret. Wall@
$ 16.00 /SF =
Total Base Bid
Alternate Bid "P"
1202.5 SF 4" Sidewalk
86.25 SF 6" Sidewalk/drwy
10.00 LF B6-24 Curb a Gutter
��- SF Concrete Atep
Mobi1izaLion
Lena Retainage
Loos Previously Paid
S 17 sae c�
1 17A An
L_gas _or
R S Q..ILB�
1.717 njL_
$ 25,778.51
@ $ 7.6n-. /SF "
VO an
@ 4_0c /SF -
iso 11
@ 15.00 /LF
i %n—nn
@ ij0_nn /3F
inn nn
Total Base Bid
$ y 17A -11
@ 1620.00 LS
5 1620.00
Total Amount Due
$_)L526.82 _
n
Amount Due
77 A77,jA
9 4,694.34
I
DNCON
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN
TEL No. 612 435 6419 Fug 07.91 8:13 P.02
Re: Project No. 91Sw-1
Conc. Sidewalk a Appurt. work
Estimate 93 Final
Total Amount Due $ 32,526.82
Less Retainage 0
Less Previously Paid 27,832.48
Amount Due This Estimate $ 4,694.34
Approvelei
Signed:
onetruction Oserver
1141
Signed
��ntracto
Signed
C
City or Monticello
Date: ®/A/9/
D a to: �1 l /!,
i
Date i
LVI
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
Consideration of reviewing and amendinq the Greater Monticello
Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Guidelines. (O.K.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Last March, City Attorney Paul Weingarden received copies of
the GMEF Guidelines and the Economic Development Authority
(EDA) Bylaws for review and suggestions. Enclosed you will
find a copy of the letter received from Mr. Weingarden stating
his suggestions. At the EDA's July 23 meeting, the members
passed a motion to accept Mr. Weingarden's suggestions. The
suggested amendment to the GMEF Guidelines, Definition of
Public Purpose, Paragraph 3, is as follows:
To assist new or existing industrial or commercial
businesses to improve or expand their operations.
Considerations for loans shall take into account factors
including, but not limited to, the nature and extent of
the business, the product or service involved, the
present availability of the product or service within the
city of Monticello, the compatibility of the proposed
business as it relates to the comprehensive plan and
existinq zoninq policies, and the potential for adverse
environmental effects of the business, if any.
Mr. Weingarden's concern of the current Definition of Public
Purpose, Paragraph 3, was that the paragraph appeared to be
anti-competitive in nature. It is his belief that as a
governmental agency, you should not be attempting to
manipulate the marketplace in this respect. The current
definition reads:
3. To assist new or existing industrial or non-competitive
commercial businesses to improve or expand their
operations. Loans will not be provided for businesses in
direct competition with existing businesses within the
city of Monticello.
The EUA has coma to recognize that the GMEF is but a small
portion of a project's total funding. They recognize that
Mr. Woingardon's suggestion reduces the likelihood of
potential insinuation by the public regarding competitive
discrimination by the EDA or the GMEF Guidelines. They also
recognize that the suggestion may increase the number of
preliminary GMEF applications for review and agreed that the
potential increase is within a manageable range. Therefore,
the EDA passed a motion in support of Attorney Weingardon's
suggestion, as this would place an attorney is a better
position to defend the EDA or GMEF Guidelines if need be.
15
C
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
As stated in the GMEF Guidelines, no changes to the GMEF
Guidelines shall be instituted without prior approval by the
City Council. Therefore, the EDA requests your consideration
to review and amend the GMEF Guidelines as suggested by
Attorney Paul Wei.ngardcn and amended by the EDA.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to amend the GMEF Guidelines, Definition of Public
Purpose, Paragraph 3, as suggested by Attorney Paul
Weingarden and amended by the EDA.
2. Motion to deny amending the GMEF Guidelines.
3. Motion to table the agenda item for further research or
suggest another alternative to the EDA.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation is alternative action #1 in support of the
suggestion made by Attorney Weingarden and the EDA.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Mr. Weingarden's letter; Copy of page 1 of the current
GMEF Guidelines, Definition of Public Purpose, Paragraph 3.
16
I
012-325-5879 OLSO1v1JSSET P. P. 137 PQ. JLIL 23 '91 14:00
OLSON, USSET, AGAN & WEINGARDEN
9VITO 900
FALL A. WEINGAPOEN• 4000 FRANCE AVENUE OOVTh
BUI.•LO OIFICt
C NARLES T. ALAN N:NN96 OLIO. MN 33635
OAVIO J. V SSE T
T{LEFwOI.0 1612) aE2-30O7
THOMAS D. OLSON TELEFNONE 18121025-30—
pOClIOKO OFFICE
O ENNIS E. OALENTELEFM
MAROV9RITE A, OATELLE F•F 14121029-9070
On( IS 121 .TT -3010
DEL A. OLOCNGR
LOCAL •t tltT•w,ti
FEOOTJ.AGAN
OLE BILE NO.
9MIRL0E J. ALLEN
7975(6) July 22, 1991
oARGOAOAKKe
r9v •..ORO LAND
KIN COPTIN
TpVDT 9VN0
4ONNtE TRONN09
011ie Koropchak
0IEZCGAN
Economic Development Director
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund Guidelines
Dear 011ie:
You haves rsquested tat 11 ;:a lew your GMEF guidelines and
provide any comments. We have previously discussed the necessity
for holding meetings open to the public with adequate notice
provisions in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. I am
specifically concerned that applicants do not present their case
and are then asked to leave the room during discussions. As open
meetings, all applicants have a right to be present.
My other concern is your definition of public purpose,
specifically paragraph 3 which appears to be anti-competitivo in
nature. while I can understand your desire to avoid hurting
existing businesses in the City of Monticello, it is my belief that
as a governmental agency you should not be attempting to manipulato
the marketplace in this respect. Accordingly, I would suggest you
re -write paragraph 3 as follows:
"To assist new or existing industrial or commercial
businOosAs to improve or expand their operations.
Considerations for loans shall take into account
factors including, but not limited to, the nature
and extent of the business, the product or cervico
involved, the present availability of the product
or service within the City of Monticello, the
compatibility of the proposed business as it
relates to the comprehensive plan and existing
zoning policies, and the potential for adverse
environmental effects of the business, if any.,,
612-925-5879 OLSONWUSSE7 P. A. 137 PO4 JUL 23 '91 14:011
011ie Koropchak -2- July 22, 1991
S would suggest that you amend in this fashion. should
you care to discuss the matter in any detail, please advise at your
convenience.
Very truly yours,
PaFAW gar
PAW: lld
cc: Rick Wolfsteller
U
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND GUIDELINES
CITY OF MONTICELLO
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 55362
(612) 295-2711
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) is to
encourage economic development by supplementing conventional
financing sources available to existing and new businesses.
Through this program administered by the Economic Development
Authority and participating lending institution(s), loans are made
to businesses to help them meet a portion of their financing needs.
All loans must serve a public purpose by complying with four or
more of the criteria noted in the next section. In all cases, it
is mandatory that criteria 01 be satisfied, which requires the
creation of now jobs. It is the responsibility of the EDA to
assure that loans meet the public purpose standard and comply with
all other GMEF policies as defined in this document. Along with
establishing the definition of public purpose, this document is
designed to outline the process involved in obtaining GMEF
financing.
DEFINITION OF PUBLIC PURPOSE
1. To provide loans for credit worthy businesses that create new
jobs.
(a) One job is equivalent to a total of 37.5 hours por week.
2. To provide loans for credit worthy businesses that would
increase the community tax baso.
3. To assist new or existing industrial or non-competitive
commercial businesses to improve or expand their operations.
Loans will not be provided for businesses in direct
competition with existing businesses within the city of
Monticello.
4. To provide loans to be used as a secondary source of financing
that is intended to supplement conventional financing (bank
financing).
5. To provide loans in situations in which a funding gap exists.
6. To provide funds for economic development that could be usod
to assist in obtaining other funds such as Small Business
Administration loans, federal and state grants, etc.
GMEF GUIDELINES: 05/13/91 Page 1 / 7 J
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
:u. Consideration of approvinq transfer of on -sale liquor
license --Silver Fox Motel. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Rodney Dragsten, owner of the Silver Fox Motel, has been
issued an on -sale liquor license for the period July 1, 1991,
through June 30, 1992. Mr. Dragsten is in the process of
transferring ownership of the motel to Lydia Wang. The
corporation's new name will be Chin Yuen Silver Fox Inc. and
will be operated by Ms. Wang, her daughter, and son-in-law.
Ms. Wang has applied for transfer of the liquor license, which
is a requirement of our City ordinance. In addition, the
Liquor Control Division also has to approve the transfer. The
Wright County Sheriff's Department is doing a background check
on the new owners, but we are not aware of any information
that would adversely affect the license transfer. The new
owner of the Silver Fox Motel has operated for approximately
five years the Chin Yuen Restaurant on Highway 10 in Elk
River.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Approve the liquor license transfer from Mr. Rodney
Dragsten to Lydia Wang contingent upon Liquor Control
Division approval.
2. Do not approve the transfer --At this point, we have no
reason not to approve the transfer. The license fee has
been paid for the entire year, and the Silver Fox Motel
is being sold under the assumption the license foe is
adequate until July 1, 1992.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of license application.
17
!AJ4. wlaN91,IT
i
CITY OF 110NIICELLO
LICBI1SE. APPLICATION
This application in being subtnitLed for Lite following llcense(s)I
_ Set-up license off -sale, non-lutuxicaLlny liquor
_1— u, -sale, iutuxical.iny liquor u, -sale, wine
u, -sale, nun-intuxicaliny liquor chi -sale, wine/3.2 beer
/Lf -19-7-9
Applicant Namc:_'.\� w, I.kl-k Y, _nye: y:.?z. ba�^Lle: f-'I� ICII
Applicant Addicnn:�h(7li C. ' ". !r' .. o Phone:
pl�rnu(11�
nano of Businesns`C.�i,L�ll�! L/\ Jl,yl( Jvv
Address of BuslucsnI III'') G- (11 A`
Business Phu„s:
Benuribe natulo of buninenn operation, Ilrel�' �lTiltllll(lfll
if Curpuu,lauu: ori ice,n:� �_y�ll.�. �ti.S!lL, 1.5x�')c
_
__1 �,lLIiAJ.Ii vakli,�yf(UL^'IU1n1
I. I re CLO I a :
I►,, you or ,loan your cuIporal. jolt, pnrtuarahip, enc., uurronLly hold filly license
nILowlny Lbe gnlo of wino, inluxicatiny liyuur., nurintoxicating llquur, or
neC-ups7 ✓ Yes no
If yen, Nmmn of IE -1\ (�1":iliUl�[1t1�
Add,nnn
Phone, A_' I;jct—
1
Types of Licnnnn,_Lij l 1_(�f: V08113 held,
l
Fee Cerencos:
Name Address Telephone Ilumber
1
DLoA ('a. Vim_
f)&nj� Gir
Credit References (list at least one bank you do business with):
Name Address Telephone Number
_�y- F�7c1;u►��t� - c_l.K Vii
11
Munu,1: of invent mrn L, excludi uylnnd:_•�L ? I6 K__Jrj�iO-•
(0I11y applicalMs Cur "m-sal,e, LuLuxlcaLJng 1 quor must provide Lhls lulormaL•lon)
Have you ever been cuuvicLed of n felony, or of violaLing Lite National
ProhlbJtictu Act or any State law or urdivance relating to msuufacLuLe or
Lransportallon of Jntuxicatiug llquura:
Oct
L doclore that Lite nhuve Informntinu Is true and correct, to Lhe boot of
my knowledge.
)n• r
ly, yla:pu�tftgftio�ire
For city uno only
Gurol.y MAIII Liquor I.InblllLy CorLlflcnLe of
luaurnnco
Application Foe Llcenso Feo
Sheriff, Wright Comity
Imtn Mayor. City of Monticello
City AdMintaLrator
l
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
11. Consideration of adoptinq 1992 Monticello Heartland Express
Management Plan and adoptinq resolution entering into a
contract with the State of Minnesota Department of
Transportation to provide public transportation. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Monticello Transportation Advisory Committee has reviewed
the proposed budget and Management Plan and recommends that
Council adopt the plan and associated resolution. The plan
proposes no changes to the existing level of service, and the
budget proposes a total operating expense of $72,182, which is
$600 less than the 1991 budget total. Please review the
budget narrative within the management plan for detail
regarding budget items and for statistics outlining system
usage.
Increased ridership combined with the slight increase in the
bus fare has caused the fare portion of the local share to
increase relative to the City tax portion. For instance, the
1991 budget called for a fare share of $9,308 with a tax share
of $19,788. It is projected that actual fare revenue in 1991
will come in around $12,438, with the tax share requirement at
about $17,146. The 1992 budget projects the fare revenue
share at $11,184. The remaining $17,689 is to come from tax
revenue. In summary, the 1991.—budget needed $19,788 tax
dollars; the 1992 budget needs $17,146�tax dollars, which is
a decrease of $2,653 or 138.
According to project supervisor, Tom Gottfried of MN/DOT has
reviewed the management plan and notes that the Monticello
system shows good growth patterns, and the cost per ride is
well below MN/DOT guidelines. It is his recommendation that
no changes be made to the present level of service.
Hoglund Coach Lines continues to provide excellent service and
is in compliance with the terms of the two-year contract which
expires in December of 1992.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to adopt or modify and adopt the 1992 Monticello
Heartland Express Management Plan and adopt the
resolution entering into a contract with the State of
Minnesota Department of Transportation to provide public
transportation.
to
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
Under this alternative, Council accepts the management
plan and continues to support the operation of the
Monticello Heartland Express. This alternative commits
the City to financing 40% of the project costa via fare
and tax revenue.
Any modifications to the plan desired by Council could be
incorporated into the motion adopting the management
plan.
2. Motion to deny adoption of the 1992 Monticello Heartland
Express Management Plan and do not adopt the resolution
entering into a contract with the State of Minnesota
Department of Transportation to provide public
transportation.
If Council is not satisfied with system operation or is
not willing t o commit the City to funding the local
share, then this alternative should be adopted.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The system continues to meet the transportation needs of many
elderly and handicapped citizens. In addition, children (and
their parents) in significant numbers are taking advantage of
this transportation resource. System performance in terms of
ridership and cost efficiency meets or exceeds MN/DOT
expectations. For the reasons noted above, staff recommends
that Council select alternative 11.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Budget worksheet; Copy of management plan which includes
resolution authorizing City participation in providing
transportation in partnership with the State of Minnesota.
19
SYSTEM
PONT ICELLO HEARTLAND EXPRESS CONTRACT a
67638
MONTH(N
6 YEAR(i.e.91
91
Y -T -D
Budget Projected
As I..ing
TOTAL
1991
1991
1992
Operating
Expenses
G�M0.11.1
Personnel Services
1010
Admin, Mgmt, 6 Supervisor Salaries
13.945.71
$7.639.00
37.091.42
15,409.00
-
1020
Operators' Wages
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
1030
Maintenance and Repair Wages
$0.00
13.727.00
$0.00
$0.00
1035
General Office Support Wages
$474.41
$0.00
1918.93
$650.00
1045
Operations Support Wages
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
1055
Fringe Benefits
11,012.37
--------------
$1,589.00
--------------------------------
12,024.74
11,397.00
1060
TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES
$5,432.55
112,955.00
110,865.09
17,445.00
Adminstrative
Charges
----------------
----
1085
Management Fees
$0.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1088
Tarriffs and Traffic Expense
$0.00
$1,211.00
$1,200.00
$1,248.00
1090
Advertising, Marketing, 6 Promotional
$IOO.DD
$2.000.00
11.200.00
11,248.00
1100
Legal, Auditing 6 Professional Fees
10.00
$0.00
10.00
$300.00
1105
Security Costs
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
10.00
1110
Office Supplies
$0.00
$52.00
$0.00
$0.00
1120
Leases/Rentals (Admin. Facil.) SPECIFY
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
10.00
1130
Utilities
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$O.OD
1135
Other Direct Admin. Charges SPECIFY
$0.00
10.00
10.00
$200.00
1140
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES
--•--------------------------------------------
$100.00
-----------------------------------------------
13.299.00
$2,400.00
$2,996.00
CSicle Charges
00
Fuel and Lubricants
12,224.19
10.00
$4,485.35
14,295.36
1180
Maintenance and Repair Material (Vehicle)
10.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
1185
Contract Service Maintenance Labor
$0.00
10.00
10.00
MOD
1190
Tires
$0.00
$0.00
10.00
10.00
1195
Other Vehicle Charges SPECIFY
$0.00
$0.00
10.00
10.00
1200
TOTAL VEHICLE CHARGES
--•--------------------------------------------
12,221.19
10.00
14.486.36
14,295.35
.... ...a.
Operations Charges
�•••°'..............
�llaul5 �1.4•^s(.c
1230
Purchase of Service
$25,698.91
$41,135.00
15� 1,397.82152,250.00
1238
Depreciation
10.00
10.00
10.00
$0.00S
1240
Mileage Reimbursement( for Pgnr Service)
12.360.46
$9,750.00
$6.010.00
15.195.34.b
1243
Repair and Maintenance of Other Property
$0.00
$0.00
10.00
$0.00
1246
Leases/Rental(Garages, Vah.,ate) SPECIFY
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1248
Other Operations Charges SPECIFY
10.00
10.00
10.00
$0.00
1250
TOTAL OPERATIONS CHARGES
--............................................
126,059.37
...............................................
$55.A95,00
$56,207.90
151,445.35
Insurance Charges
1280
Public Liability 6 Prop. Damage on Veh.
10.00
- 10.00
10.00
10.OD
1310
Public Liability 6 Prop. Damage - Other
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1320
TOTAL INSURANCE CHARGES
-----------------------------------------------
10.00
...............................................
10.00
10.00
10.00
'•xes
A
and Fees
Vehicle Registration 6 Permit Fees
10.00
10.00
10.00
$0.00
1360
Federal Fuel 6 Lubricant Taxes
10.00
10.00
$0.00
10.00
1370
State Fuel 6 Lubricant Taxes
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1380
Other laxe6 6 Fees SPECIFY
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1390
1016L TAXES AND FEES
-----------------------------------------------
10.00 10.00 10.00
...............................................
10.00
SYSTEM MONTICELLO HEARTLAND EXPRESS CONTRACT s 67638
MONIHIN 6 YEAR(i.e.91 91
1426 Total Operating Expense (Input)
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE (Calculated)
Operating Revenue
1140 Passenger Fares
102 Contract Revenues
1478 Revenues - Other SPECIFY
1490 Other Financia) Assistance SPECIFY
1492 Federal Operating Grants SPECIFY
1505 1014L OPERATING REVENUE (Calculated)
REVENUE SOURCES
MNOOT SHARE
FARE REVENUE
CITY TAX REVENUE
Capital Expenses
tcnn Vehicle E•rs-!P.
i 1602 Lift, Ramp E.pens¢s, sic.
X1604 Radio Equipment E=pensee
1606 Fare Bo. Expenses
1610 Other Capital Expenses SPECIFY
1585 TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES (Calculated)
Capital Revenue
1617 Federal Capital Grants SPECIFY
1619 Other Financial Assistance SPECIFY
1630 TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUE (Calculated)
Marketing Expense
1700 Heartland Express
Operating Statistics
1830 Total Number of Passengers(Bus/Van)
7835 Total number of Adult Passengers
1850 Total Number of Elderly Passengers
1860 Total Number of Handicapped Passengers
1065 Total Number of Student Passengers
1870 Total Number of Children Passengers
1080 Total Number of Free Ride passengers
1890 Total Number of Dial A Ride Passengers
y 1810 Total No, of Volunteer Driver Passengers
(` 1955 late,, Vehicle Hours (Ous/Ven Service)
1956 Total Volunteer Driver Hours
1995 Total Vehicle Miles (Bus/Van Service)
1996 Total Volunteer Driver Mites
1970 Number of Dial -a -Rids Vehicle Trips
1940 Number of Times Lift of Ramp was Used
Number of Gallons of Gas
Y -T -D Budget Projected Asking
TOTAL 1991 1991 1992
$0.00 10.00 $0.00 $0.00
Lai! o.rt
$35,816.11 512,739.00 513,959.35 $72.182.72 b .d3�t k,.a to
, If$cr....G
Y -T -D Budget Projected ASWI; b1 a J4rJ B,16msw^t
107AL 1991 1991 1992 x JJ4.4 C•4 { offer •
15,445.11 56,308.00 $10,890.22 110,890.22 b game ar •' t
51.106.00 53,000.00 11,548.00 $296.00
50.00 10.00 $0.00 $0.00 foie! Rr+r«�°
50.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
$0.00 10.00 10.00 $0.00
-------- --------------------------------------
16,551.11 $9,308.00 $12.435.22 111,184.22
113,643 144,376 143,310
59,308 112,438 111,184
519,788 117,115 117,689
10.00
$0.00
10.00
$0.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
WOO
10.00
$O.00
10.00
10.00
50.00
10.00
50.00
50.00
10.00
$D.00
10.00
10.00
---^-----^-----^-------------------------------
10.00
...........................
$0.00
$0.00
=.I .........
$0.00
�..e.a.e
10.00
10.00
10.00
50.00
10.00
80.00
10.00
10.00
...................
80.00
...........................
^...........................
$0.60
50.00
....................
50.00
10.00
...............................................
10.00
10.00
10.00
9161
16225
18928
16928
2329
1197
3958
3958
3969
$681
1939
7930
460
670
920
920
0
0
0
0
2053
5947
$126
4126
641
1130
1285
1286
9464
16725
11921
18926
0
0
0
0
1301
2500
7511
2560
0
0
0
0
15211
26998
10063
78163
0
0
0
0
9168
16225
19696
19696
115
202
230
230
1901
0
3816
3611
If
250 East Broadway
P. 0. Box 1147
Monticello, MN
55362-9245
Phone: (612) 295.2711
Metro: (612) 333.5739
Fax: (612) 295.4404
Mr. Randy Halvorson
Director
Office of Transit
Minnesota Department of Transportation
815 Transportation Building
St. Paul, MN 55155
Dear Mr. Halvorson:
On behalf of the City of Monticello and the Monticello Heartland Express,
I am pieased to submit the enclosed application for 1992 state operating
assistance.
In less than 18 months of operation, the Monticello Heartland Express has
become a valued institution in the community. System ridership among
children and elderly has shown consistent growth throughout the first
months of operation. Ridership has increased even during late spring and
early aummor whon ridership typically falls off. Ridership figures
clearly illustrate that Monticello Heartland Express is meeting
transportation needs of a cross section of the community.
The City thanks you and the state of Minnesota for continued support of
the Monticello Honrtland Express.
Yours truly,
CITY OyFF�I�MIOON'TIICELLO
J 'Neill
Ass stent Administrator
JOJkd
cc: File
0
MANAGEMENT PLAN
MONTICELLO HEARTLAND EXPRESS 1991-1992
ORGANIZATION
The Heartland Express is organized and monitored by the City
of Monticello under a contractual arrangement with Hoglund
Transportation of Monticello. The 1992 management plan,
contract bid specifications, and budget are based on the
service demand and delivery experience gathered during 1-1/2
years of service. Selection of the service provider for
budget year 1992 results from a formal bidding process
conducted in 1991.
At present, Hoglund Transportation operates the Monticello
Heartland Express and is respc,nsible for the day to day
operation of the transit program. Gordy Hoglund, owner of
Hoglund Transportation, is responsible for the day to day
management and operation of the transit system.
The owner/operator of Hoglund Transportation is responsible
for hiring, establishing wages, and terminating all employees
working on conjunction with the Heartland Express.
The City of Monticello's Assistant Administrator, Jeff
O'Neill, will represent the applicant in negotiating an
assistance contract with the state. The Assistant
Administrator, with the assistance of the Senior Center
Director, will be responsible for monitoring the' ongoing
operation of the system and will assist the Monticello
Transportation Advisory Committee and the City Council in
development of the Monticello transportation system operation
policy. In addition, the Monticello Transportation Advisory
Committee will provide marketing and operations support for
the program in the form of in-kind contributions of time.
Hoglund Transportation, as the present transportation service
provider, currently provides bus service to the Monticello
School District and to other organizations. The
transportation company staff consists of 75 drivers and 1
dispatcher. Two employees in addition to existing staff have
been employed to service the contract with the City of
Monticello. Of the additional staff required, one is a full-
time driver and one works part-time. Each part-time driver
works approximately ten hours po r week.
The transportation service provider is responsible for filing
required reports to the Transportation Regulation Board.
MCNTPLAN: 9/8/91 Pago 1
N
B. PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
GOALS: The main goal for 1992 is to maintain a client base
through delivery of an efficient and effective
transportation service.
1. Cost Efficiency
Establish a service level designed to encourage ridership
while maintaining reasonable operating costs through
efficient use of employees and a single 25 passenger
vehicle.
1992 Projected Estimated miles: 28,863
1992 Projected Cost per mile: $2.40
1992 Projected Hours per employee: 1,250
2. Service Effectiveness
Target elderly and handicapped markets with a variety of
marketing campaigns to attract initial ridership.
Establish user oriented system featuring a minimal call
ahead requirement of one hour.
Achieve a ratio of .63 passengers per mile.
3. Cost Effectiveness
Make efficient use of transit dollars by establishing
cost per passenger at $3.81.
Establish revenue to cost ratio of .16.
C. LEVELS OF SERVICE
1. Service Area and Population
The Monticello Heartland Express is intended to service
the population residing within the city of Monticello,
the areas immediately adjacent to the city known as the
Orderly Annexation Area, and a portion of Big Lako and
Bocker Townships, which are populated areas lying
adjacent to Monticello across the Mississippi River and
within the Monticello School District boundaries. The
population of the city of Monticello is estimated at
5,014. The Orderly Annexation Area and township area
population is estimated to be 4,000. Those areas are
outlined on Exhibit A.
MGNTPLAN: 8/8/91
Pago 2
0
Transportation to the Big Lake Nutrition Center from
points in Monticello will be provided once a day during
the noon hours. Transportation to and from Kjellbergs
West Mobile Home Park, which is outside the city limits,
is now being offered. Also, transportation to churches
and businesses located in the township but directly
adjacent to the city is provided at no added charge. The
cost per ride to Kjellbergs West is $2.00. No other
transportation outside the areas mentioned is
anticipated.
Of primary importance is maintenance of a transportation
service level that will attract citizen of Monticello
ridership, as the City of Monticello is the primary
source of local revenue for this program. Therefore,
except for service to the Nutrition Center and airport,
extension of transportation service to areas outside the
Monticello city limits will be phased in as the service
demand and concurrent impact on service delivery becomes
better understood. Extension of service level beyond
city limits will be considered by the City Council when
it can be demonstrated that service expansion will not
diminish capability of the system to offer a desirable
service level to Monticello citizens. In addition, it
must be demonstrated that the City portion of the cost to
deliver service to the outlying areas can be rocovored
through a combination of user fees and through added cost
efficiency created by new ridership. At such time that
the bus service is expanded into outlying areas, the City
Council of Monticello will establish bus fares that
reflect the added cost of servicing outlying areas that
do not contribute to the local share revenue generated by
taxation.
Typo of Service to be Operated
The City will administer through contract a "dial a ride"
eervice which will feature a minimum one hour call ahead
requiroment. The program marketing effort will stress
the importance of calling ahead sooner than one hour
before the ride is needed.
Days of Operation
Tho City will be providing 2,500 hours of service between
January 1, 1991, and Docembe: 31, 1991, which is equal to
1O -hour a day service, five days per week, not inciuding
holidays. The projected hours (2,560) include 60 hours
of Sunday morning sorvico. Sunday service will be
provided during the months of January, February, March,
November, and December. Service is to be provided
MGNT PLAN : 13/8/91
Page 3
between the hours of 8:15 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. Any hours
above 2,500 will be funded entirely by the group or
organization requesting the service. On the average,
10 -hour -a -day weekly service is planned for Monday
through Friday. During winter months, the bus will run
11 hours daily; and during summer months, the bus will
run 8.5 hours daily.
In addition, if additional revenue becomes available,
such funds could be used to expard transportation hours.
The cost to operate the bus beyond the basic 10 -hour day
would be financed entirely by the local share. Source of
such funds might include donations from the Lions Club,
M.S. Society, City of Monticello, or others.
4. Hours of Operation
Service will be provided between the hours of 8:45 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. during the summer months, which is equal to
a 9.25 hour day. The "extra" or unused 45 minutes of
service will be shifted to the winter months when the
system will be in operation between the hours of
7:45 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Also, unused hours may be used
in conjunction with providing extra transportation during
a community event.
D. FARES
The proposed fare structure calls for a base fare of $1.00 per
one-way ride. This fare will apply to all city of Monticello
riders, including elderly, children over the age of 6, and
able-bodied adults. Children under 6 years of age may ride
free with a parent or guardian. Reduced fares will be
available to all potential users of the system through the
purchase of ticket books. Reduced fares can be obtained when
tickets are purchased in bulk through ticket books per the
following table:
Base rate: $ 1.00
10 -ride ticket book i 7.50 ($.75 ride)
40-rido ticket book $25.00 ($.62 ride)
Bus drivers will Boll ticket books on the bus but will not
make change for individuals paying the base fare.
C MGNTPLAN: 8/8/91 Pago 4
Ticket books will be sold at a variety of local
establishments, including local retail stores, City Hall, the
Senior Center, the School District, etc. The Senior Center
Director will be responsible for coordinating ticket printing,
distributing ticket books, and collecting ticket book revenue.
Fare structure for outlying areas shall be established by the
Citv Council at such time that it is determined that it is
feasible to serve outlying areas.
MARKETING
1. A major thrust of the marketing effort will be focused on
the primary users of the system, which are the elderly
and handicapped. Approximately 750 citizens over 60
years of age reside within the city of Monticello, of
which a significant portion participate in programs
offered by the local Senior Citizen Center. This center
will be a major trip destination point and will also be
the primary distribution point for marketing information
regarding the program. Successful development of the
senior market will occur if the Senior Center resources
are properly used in promoting the program. In 1991,
approximately 479 of the users included elderly and
handicapped.
The remainder of the transit market includes mostly
children. In 1991 it was found that many children
utilized the system in conjunction with after school and
summer recreation activities. In 1991, approximately 229
of the ridership consisted of children. Continued
marketing efforts will be made to communicate the service
to this segment of the population through cooperative
effort with the school district.
Twenty percent of the local households are considered to
be "low income" as defined by the State of Minnesota
Department of Trade and Economic Development. This
represents approximately 340 households within the city
of Monticello. A portion of these households utilize the
bus transportation program for economic reasons. An
additional focus of the marketing effort will include
communicating the program to this group through standard
moans and through organizations that have frequent
contact with this segment of the ,population. Local
social services such as the food shelf, tho "WIC"
program, Wright County Social Services, and local
churches will be utilized as the medium by which the
program can be marketed to this special group.
MGNTPLAN: 8/8/91
Page 5
9
R
Much of the work force that resides within Monticello
commutes to points well outside the city limits.
Marketinq Concept
Standard methods for promoting the transportation system
will be utilized. The City of Monticello will strive
toward devc'_opmcr.t cf an efficient marketing program by
utilizing many of the techniques now in place in other
communities. Such techniques may include but not be
limited to the following:
• Of primary importance in development of an
advertising campaign is the proper utilization of
the local newspaper. A series of advertisements
will be developed to promote the system.
• Continued development and refinement of information
brochures describing the transportation service.
Brochures will be distributed to various
organizations for further distribution.
• Development of an attractive image by maintaining a
clean and attractive bus. Service image will focus
on providing "coach" service rather than bus
service.
• Clean and efficient operation of the transportation
service will be goals which will allow the system
to market itself through word of mouth advertising.
• Demonstration rides and tours will be given in
conjunction with a moving "open house." It is
expected that presentations will be given to
numerous organizations for the purpose of
describing the program and allowing people to get a
"hands on" feel for the system and its potential.
It is hoped that charitable organizations and the
business community will be impressed with the
program to the extent that they will purchase
blocks of tickets for later distribution to the
eldorly and the needy.
• Local schools and the local library will be asked
to participate in marketing availability of service
to youngsters.
MGNTPLAN: 8/8/91
Pago 6
011
Marketinq Plan Cost/Benefit
The proposed marketing plan is relatively inexpensive in
terms of cost of advertising and supplies; however, it
does require considerable effort in terms of man-hours.
Much of the marketing effort requires personal contact
and one-to-one advocacy which is likely to reap
significant rewards in terms of ridership. Fcrtunately,
volunteers and man-hours are available to sufficiently
market the service to groups and service organizations.
COORDINATION WITH EXISTING TRANSIT OPERATIONS
The degree in which this program is coordinated with the
Annandale Heartland Express and the Sherburne County Heartland
Express is limited. On occasion a Monticello rider will be
transferred to a Sherburne County system vehicle for transport
to points in Sherburne County. This type of occurrence is
rather rare. Likewise, on occasion a Sherburne County rider
Is transported to a drop-off point in the Monticello transit
area, with the Monticello system then transporting the
individual to a specific point in the city. In sum, system
integration and coordination is not emphasized. Discussions
botween the three transportation providers in this area are
now underway with the goal of improving system integration and
r efficiency.
The Monticello Heartland Express will be coordinated with an
existing volunteer driver transportation program originating
from Wright County. Coordination of transportation service
will allow volunteer resources to be used for other longer
distance driving duties such as transporting individuals to
metro locations and back.
EXPENSE CONTRACT
(See attached copy of expense contract with service provider.)
REVENUE CONTRACTS
From time to time, requests are made by various organizations
for Monticello Heartland Express service outside the standard
hours of service. Financing of the hourly cost and mileage of
added service is provided by the organization requesting the
service. Such service is provided to all residents and not
for the exclusive use by the organization requesting service.
MGNTPLAN: 8/8/91
Page 7
G)
I. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
None planned for 1992.
J. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the
transportation r.ica oxpar.ca contract, which inciudas a
vehicle maintenance program requirement that is consistent
with state requirements. Please see the transportation
service expense contract for details.
R. DRIVER SELECTION
The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the
transportation service expense contract, which includes a
driver selection process that is consistent with state
requirements. Please see the transportation service expense
contract for details.
L. INSURANCE
The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the
transportation service expense contract, which includes an
insurance requirement that is consistent with state
requiremonto. Plcase see tho transportation service expense
contract for details.
M. TIME DISTRIBUTION RECORD
The City shall monitor and enforce the terms of the
transportation service expense contract, which includes
maintenance of time distribution records in a manner that is
consistent with state requirements. Please see the
transportation service expense contract for details.
C MGNTPLAN: 8/8/91 Page 8
MONTICELLO HEARTLAND EXPRESS BUDGET SYSTEM NARRATIVE
Personal Services
The Monticello Heartland Express budget calls for administrative,
management, and supervisory services in the amount of $5,409. This
amounts to 51 of the projected salary of the Assistant City
Administrator, 88 of the projected salary of the Senior Citizens
Center Director, and 58 of the projected salary of one member of
the Monticello support staff.
Fringe benefits in the personal services category amount to $1,387.
Total personal services expense is projected at $7,446.
Administrative Charqes
Under tariffs and traffic expenses, it is projected that the City
will spend $1,248 on tickets to be used in conjunction with the
transportation program. A nominal amount of $52 is included in the
office supply category and $1,248 for advertising. The budget
Includes $300 for legal expenses associated with contract review
and $200 for miscellaneous travel expenses, which results in a
total of $2,996 budgeted for administrative charges.
Vehicle Chdrgos
Gasoline and oil purchases made by the transportation service
provider is covered under vehicle charges. Based on a projected
total mileage of 28,863, it is expected that gasoline costs will
amount to $4,295.36. This amount includes the $.20 per gallon gas
tax credit.
Operations Charges
The City has alroady entered into a contract with Hoglund Coach
Lines for services to be delivered in 1992. The contract called
for 2,500 hours of transportation service. The 1992 budget for
transportation sorvico, including maintenance, amounts to $57,445.
A mileage/maintenance expense of $.18 per mile is included in the
operations charge, which is estimated at $5,195. The remaining sum
of $52,250 covers basic transportation service.
Insurance Charqos
Hoglund Coach Lines, as transportation provider, is required to
provide insurance coverage in the amounts of at least $1,000,000
per claim and at least $100,000 per occurrence. The operator also
provides comprehensive coverage for each vehicle and collision
coverage to provide replacement funds in the event of substantial
loss. MN/DOT and tho City of Monticello aro included as additional
BUDGT92.NAR: 8/8/91 Pago 1
01
named insured on the operator's insurance. All insurance charges
are thus paid by the contractor and are part of the purchase of
service fee.
Taxes and Fees
No funds have been budgeted for taxes and fees, as no such expenses
are eripectz-- gl:a: the deaign of tho ..cnticcllo Foartland Ewpress.
Total Ooeratina Expenses
Total operating expenses for the Monticello Heartland Express
program during the 12 -month period from January 1, 1992, to
December 31, 1992, equals $72,182.
Overatina Revenues
It is expected that passenger fares, including revenue contracts,
will amount to $11,184.22 based on a projected ridership of 18,928
and a paid ridership of 17,642.
Capital Expenses
No capital equipment purchases are planned for 1992.
cudgat 6uaaiary
For the 12 -month period from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 1992,
it is expected that capital expenses will amount to $0.
Operational expenses will amount to $72,182. Fare revenue will
amount to $11,184, which creates a total operating deficit of
$60,998.
BUDGfi92.NAR: 8/8/91
Page 2
OFFRATNQ EXPENSES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
1010
Administrative, Management &
Management Fees
Supervisory Services
1020
Operator's Wages
1030
Maintenance & Repair Wages
1040
General Office Support Wages
1050
Operations Support Wages
1060
Fringe Benefits
1000 TOTAL
ANTICIPATED STATISTICS
FOR NEW COMRAcr PERIOD
5,409.00
650.00
1,387.00
7,446.00
ADMINISTRNT1VE CHARGES
1110
Management Fees
1120
Tariffs & Traffic Expenses
1,248.00
1130
Advertising, Marketing & Promotional Charges
1.248.00
1140
Legal Auditing & Other Professional Fees
300.00
1150
Security Costs
1160
Office Supplies
1170
Leases & Rentals (Admin. Facilities) (specify)
1180
Utilities
1190
Other Direct Administrative Charges (specify)
200.00
1100
TOTAL
2,996.00
VEHICLE CHARGES
1210
Fuel & Lubricants
4,295.00
1220
Maintenance & Repair Material (Vehicles)
1230
Convact Service Maintenance Labor
1240
Tires
1150
Other Vehicle Charges (specify)
1200
TOTAL
4,295.00
OPERATIONS CHARGES
1310
Purchase of Service
52,250.00
1320
Depreciation
1330
Mileage Reimbursement for Passenger Service
5,195.00
1340
Repair & Maintenance of Other Property
1350
Leases & Rentals (garages, vehicles, etc.) (specify)
1360
Other Operations Charges (specify)
1300
TOTAL,
57,445.00
I
Off'€_ RATIYC�,STATIST1Cc
The purpose of this form is to describe the anticipated operational characteristics of the
participating transit system.
t
D
ANTICIPATED STATLvncs
PASS N •F S
Fog NEW CONTRACT PEROD
2504
TOTAL NUMBER OF PASSENGERS
18,928
Of this total, how many passengers will be:
2510 Disabled
920
2511 Elderly (55+)
7,938
2512 Adults (18-54)
4,558
2513 Youth (6-17)
4,126
2514 Children (0.5)
686
Note: Total of 2510-2514 mart equal Line 2500
Of line 2500, how many will be:
2515 Demand Response
18,928
2516 Fixed Route
2517 Volunteer Driver Passengers
i
t HOim
2134
TOTAL SERVICE HOURS
Of this total, how many hours win be:
2,500
Regular Route
Demand Responsive (Dial•A-Ride)
2,500
Route Deviation (Flex Fixed)
Subscription
Contract
Shared Ride Taxi
2531
Volunteer Drivers
Ma"
2540
TOTAL VEHicu Man
28.863
Of this total, how canny miles win be:
Regular Route
Demand Responsive
28,863
Route Deviation
Subscription
contract
Shared Ride Taxi
2541
Volunteer Drivers
D
INSURANCE CHARGES
1410 Public Liability & Property Damage
on Vehicles
1420 Public Liability & Property Damage
Other than on Vehicles
1400 TOTAL
TAXES AND FEES
1510 Vehicle Registration & Permit Fees
1520 Federal Fuel & Lubricant Taxes
1530 State Fuel & Lubricant Taxes
F'-P"APT
1540 Other Taxes & Fees
1500 TOTAL
1600 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
72.162
OPERATING REVENUES
2010 Farebox Revenue
to,eeo
2020 System Revenues
294
2000 TOTAL REVENUES
11,184
2110 Federal Operating Grant (Section 9 only)
°
2120 Federal Capital Grant
°
CAPITAL EXPENSES
1710 Vehicle
°
1720 Lift, Ramp, Etc.
°
1730 Radio Equipment
°
1740 Farebox
°
1750 Other Capital Expenses
°
1700 TOTAL CAMAL EXPENSE TOTAL
°
CID
1. CAPITAL EXPENSE
TOTAL (From Line 1700)
11. OPERATIONAL EXPENSE AND DEFICIT
A. Operational Expense (Line Number 1600)
from Operating Expense Sheet 72, 182
B. Less Anticipated Revenue (Line Number 2000) 11,184
from Operating Revenue Sheet
TOTAL OPERATING DEFICrr 60,998
(to be complexed by Mn/D07)
111. FUNDING PROVIDED BY APPLICANT
A. % of Capital (must be in cash)
B. % of Total Operating Costs (cash)
TOTAL
IV. FUNDING PROM FEDERAL GRAM
A. % of Capital
B. % of Operational Deficit
(Section 18)
C. up to 50% of Operating Deficit
(Section 9)
V. FUNDING FROM MN/DOT
A. % of Capital
B. Total Operating Cost Less
Fixed local Share and
Federal Operating Amount
C. % of Operating
D. % of Marketing
TOTAL
TOTAL
2010 FAREBOX REVENUES (Sum of 1 & 2 below) TOTAL 10.890
1. Cash Fares
2. Coupons. Passes, and Tokens
2020 SYSTEM REVENUE (Sum of 1.6 below) TOTAT 294
1. Special Route Guarantees
l 2. Contract Revenues 294
3. Advertising and Concession Revenues
4. Package Delivery Revenues
5. Vehicle/Facility Leasing Revenues
6. Other Revenues
2000 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
(Sum of Lines 2010 and 2020) TOTAL t tea
• Total or both t and 2 is accurate. Actual percentage cash tares
versus coupons, passes, token is estimated.
I
I
OPERA71NG RDENM (LINE 2000) TOT.41 11,184
LOCAL APPROPRIATIONS TOTA1
1. City contribution 17,688
2
3.
4.
CON77t1RU ONS TOTA1
1.
2
3.
4.
LOCAL SHARE TOTAI 28.872
Resolved that the City of Monticello enter into Contract
(recipient organization)
Number with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation,
to provide public transportation service in Monticello
(service area)
Further resolved that the city of Monticello agreesto provide
(recipient organization)
41.4% percent of the total operating cost from local funds. Further resolved that
authorization to execute the aforementioned Contract and any amendments thereto is
hereby given to the Aset. City admin. or the City Administrator
(tine) (title)
Further resolved that the Asst. City Admin. or the City Administrator
(d,4) (title) 1
is hereby authorized to execute requests for reimbursement from the Minnesota Department
of Transportation.
CERTMCATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is awe and correct copy of the resolution
presented to and adopted by the city of Monticello ataduly
authorized meeting thereof held on the day of '19—
as
19_as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession.
Rick faolretoller
(narne)
City Administrator
(rule)
0
Contract Number
t►l 01"_3M 1O►s • :_ t't_Z1 wwall WO: ►:
STATE OF MLV(NFSOTA
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
On this day of , 19 92 , before me appeared
Jeff O'Neill and Rick Wolfsteller
(name) (nems)
to me personally Know, who being by me duly sworn, did say they are respectively
Assistant City Administrator and City Administrator
(title) (title)
of city of Monticello
(recipient oganiration)
AUTNOR=D SIGNAWM:
Signatures appearing below tire those of the
persons listed above by title.
City of Monticello
Keciprem oganttanon
By
Assistant City Administrator
By
Tltlo. City Administrator
NOTARY
Council Agenda - 8/12/91
12. Consideration of ratifyinct settlement of liti4ation issue --
Senior Citizens Center. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Through our attorney, Chris Harriethal of Larkin, Hoffman,
Daly, the City has reached a tentative agreement on settling
the litigation issue between Karen Hanson and the City of
Monticello. A final draft of the settlement proposal agreed
to by the Plaintiff is currently being drafted by
Mr. Harristhal and will be available for Council review Monday
night. The City Council has to officially ratify the
settlement proposal in that previous proposals were approved
in a closed session of the Council. Since the final
settlement will be public information, the ratification by the
Council can be done at a regular Council meeting.
Additional information, if necessary, will be provided Monday
night.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None. f'/
20
CITY OF MOHTICELLO
Monthly Building Department Report
Month of Ju IY
19 91
PERMITS MID USES
Leat'Thl,
Sem.
Month Leet
Year 'Thl.
Yee.
PERMITS ISSUED
Month June
Month July Iaet Yee[I To Data
To
Date
RESIDENTIAL
Nmeb.r
18
26
10
75
84
Veluetlon
$147,200.00
S 485,900.00 5
!21,900.00 5 1,501,500.00
51,)90,500.00
P%
1,266.01
7,847.514,158.15
12.291.2)
10,776.65
S-In,rgee
70.60
240.10
259.85
740.70
684.15
COMM RC I AL
t+umbo[
2
6
3
16
14
Valuetlon
36,500.00
73,700.00
81,800.00 2,642,500.00
186,700.00
Fee.
538.05
!95.40
679.10
14.931.81
1,883.45
Surcharge.
18.00
36.10
40.90
1,770.50
91.85
IIIWSTRIAL
Number
1
3
1
4
4
Valuetlon
22,000.00
93,s0o.0o
80,200.00
178.800.00
115,100.00
Fae.
225.00
1,179.77
908.00
1,999.47
1,764.77
Surcharge.
11.00
46.75
40.10
89.40
57.75
PLUMBING
Numbor
2
66
26
71
Fee.
46.00
139.00
188 .00
67].00
504.00
Surcharge.
1.00
3.00
3.00
1].00
10.50
OTIIERB
Nu.b.r
1
5
1
Va luetlon
0.00
95,000.00
00.00
rase
10.00
1,090.80
10.00
6urcharye.
•50
49.00
.50
TOTAL 110. PFAMITS
23
42
20
126
124
TOTAL VALUATION
205,700.00
653,100.00
683,9D0.00 4,417,600.00
1.692,700.00
TOTAL FF.F.S
_ 2,075.06
5,731.68
5,933.41
30.966.31
14.538.87
TOTAL SURCIIARGED
100.60
)28.4!
147..1
7.712.60
044.75
cuAlI.NT MONTII
FEF
Numbs Lo
Data
I-M.IT IIATURR
Number
PERMIT SURCHARGE
Vefile 1.1 on
Th le ye nl Ia.t year
Oingle Family
6
6
2,620.96 5 197.35
5 384,700.00
17
I8
Du PI.e
1
0
Null! -f em11Y
0
1
Co+em. rclAl
0
6
Indu.tr lel
I
740.27 28.00
56,000.00
1
2
Be.. Ga -9..
I
90.00 7.50
1,000.00
1
3
61g.e
0
0
Public Building•
0
1
ALTERATION OII RePAIA
In, 111n0e
14
746.15 35.7!
71,200.00
42
41
Cu®el clel
B
59!.40 36.10
73,700.00
l4
10
Indunlrinl
7
701.50 18.75
37,500.00
3
7
PI.IIM.ING
All Type.
6
179.00 3.00
.00
21
26
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
O ,Imelny Pool.
1
162.00 7.10
11,000.00
1
1
Oecke
4
60.00 7.00
6,000.00
20
12
TrAPWARY PERMIT
0
0
DF3IOLITION
1
10.00 .50
.00
1
3
TOTALS
42
5,771.60 326.45
657.100.00
124
126
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT
Montt of July , 19 91
PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
TYPE
NAME/LDCATION
VALUATION
rEE
PERMIT
SURCHARGE
PLUMOING SURCHARGE
91-;690
Root eIinglas removal c roplacamen
AC
Arva Gr1memo/530 Y. Rroadvay
!1,500.00
615.00
5.50
97-1691
l.t!. remodel
AC
Morn G Merle PllCka[/71J Pins 8t.
1,500.00
15.00
.70
91-1697
Btore9a Wllding
AD
Richard c Jennall• Harulu/202 Kevin
Longley Dr.
1,700.00
15.00
.50
91-1693
Deck
AD
Ronald Du bay/7860 Rod Oak C1re1a
1,500.00
19.OD
.!0
9t-1690
Resn ingla nous. c 9.1.9.
All
Ir an Auringer/505 91. St.
1,!00.00
15.00
5.0
.50
'4
9t-1695
House enc garage
8r
Value Plus Xoems/109 Crit• Circle
56,900.00
28.45
$23.00 5.50
91-1696
H.uaa G para'. soffit L fascia
AD
Petrick i DObbla Twnsand/440 Y. Or- way
1.5DO.00
15.00
.50
91-1697
Inaarl or ram.del
AD
Derv1n G t3h lrl.y Bit. v/601 C. R1ver et.
1,500.00
19.00
.50
91-1698
Daae.ent finish
AD
Michael L Beaky Batk/780 Acorn Circle
3,000.00
30.00
1.50
91-1699
Church residing, ..fill G fascia
AC
et. Michaela G Angola Church/301 E. 40 St,
4.000 00
40.00
2.00
91-1700
House i ga raga addltl.n
AD
AtG Bus1a Y.3CMOtuk1/1111 Club Vlev Or,
2!,200.00
753.30
12.50
91-1701
Huse and garsga
SP
BLH Buildare/260! M.edo. Oak Lane
69,100.00
.50..0
3..55
24.00 .50
91-;707
Deck
AD
Craig c Joy Rua/109 CTeatnut .1.
1,500.00
19.00
.50
91-1703
Intortor remodel
AC
Pauls H.L. No lk.r/111 L. Broadway. Ste 7
5,000.00
50.00
1.50
91-1704
House L garage rarcor
Ad
L.
nsrry G Evalyn Beh.ffer/710 Kept Bt.
1,700.00
15.00
.50
91-1705
Howe L garage
BP
Lamar. Custom 110me•/106 Kenneth
74,900.00
473.89
37..5
23.00 .50
91-1706
Carsge sOdltlon
M
Jams i Joyce Oaund.rs/7;B Crocus La
7,000.00
20.00
1.00
91.1707
No eddit Ion
AD
Guyc Amy Bleg/506 Y. 6th 8t.
3,000.00
30.00
1,50
91-1708
Cold storage building
I
Olmonson Lumber of Monticello. Inc./
100 Chalsaa Road
56,000.00
153.50
25.00
91.1709
Demolish old storage building
D
Simonson Lumber of M.nti-110. Ino./
100 Chalau Rbad
0.00
10.00
.50
9;-1710
DeC1
AD
Nancy Setthi t/151 Il.dman Wna
1,100.00
15.00
.50
91-1711
In -ground pool
AD
Merk G Joann H-1Chler/104 Manner Clr
15,000.00
162.00
7.50
9t -t 117
Underground tank removal L replace.
AI
Dah1h.l.or DI•tri b. Inm./107 Co. Rd. 116
16,000.00
171.00
8.00
91-1713
Detached ga rag•
RD
Gerald L site Clamant/117 E. 4th 8t.
5,000.00
50.00
7.70
91-1714
Roof removal L replacement
AC
Monticello School Dlat. IBB 7/
307 Yash ington Bt.
60,700.00
460.10
30.10
Bt -1715
rront house L gareg• reelding
AD
Paul L Janice Damara/1500 Y. R1ver Bl.
1,500.00
19.00
.50
91-1716
Root taorl. over ..let •tandI ng
seem roof
At
Electro Indust r les/2150 Y. R1v.r et.
21,500.00
720.50
10.75
91-3717
Hou.* c garage
By
*1
Value P1 u. Home a/107 Crocus Circle
51,700.00
392.08
77.35
23.00 .50
9t-17 tB
House 4 garage
B►
L..... Cusaom /4L. 3rd Bt.
77,300.00
463.36
36.15
23.00 .50
91-17 t9
Housa L garage
er
Valu. Plus Homos/312 Mervin Elwood Rd.
56,800.00
400.58
28.40
73.00 .50
91-1720
Garage addition
AD
Robs rt D.Iduo i Bwsrly John.on/
;m0o Meed.Y Oat n.
1.500.00
15.00
.50
PERMIT DESCRIPTION TYPE
NUMBER
91-1721 Deck
91-1722 Houea reelding
61-1723 Huusa eJJltlw�
91-1724 Intortor ramodal
91-1725 House i garage r•.tding
PIAN REVIEW
91-1695 Hours G 9e re 9s
91-1701 House i pa rep•
91-1705 Hour. i perap.
91-1700 Cold ■to -go building
91-1717 1lmuae i pe raga
91-1710 Nouse G ga rape
91-1719 Hour. i 9.[aga
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT
Monte of July , 19-21
NAME/LOCATION
AD Brune G July T-dt/111 K.Mste lane
AD Cee[yl Bt.1nmatt/913 E. Broedwey
AD Michael i Cheryl ooWdy/107 Crelp Lana
AC Bnydsr Drug/120 -.at 3rd et.
AD Jaffrey G Sus en Lundy/2762 Oakylew Lane
TOTALS
BP velus Plur Noma•/109 Crocus Clrcla
BP OLH Out ./2605 Mssdow Oak Ian.
BP La arm Custom Home•/106 :am.
Ions
I ELmon.on L-13.1on
ar of Nticl lo, Ino./
100 Chelsea Road
ar value Plus Homa•/t07 Crocus Circle
OP LMar. Cu.tom homer/413 C,"
OL.
Sr Value Plus Hom../312 m-,. Elwood Rd
TOTAL PIAN REVIEW
VALUATION -PEEP
PERMIT OURCMAAO!
PLUMBING SURCHARGE
61,500.00 615.00 6.50
2,000.00 20.00 1.00
27,500.00 2bb. 25 13.75
1,500.00 15.00 .50
2.000.00 20. DO 1.00
6653,100.00 $5,050.26 6323.45 6139.00 63.00
640.10
34.55
47.39
294.77
39.21
40.34
40.06
6543.42
TOTAL rEVEWUE 66,057.73