Loading...
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