City Council Minutes 05-22-1989MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, May 22, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith,
Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
2. Approval of minutes.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held May 8, 1989.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
None forthcoming.
4. Public hearing on proposed improvements to Mississippi Drive. AND
5. Consideration of resolution ordering improvement, accepting bid, and
authorizing contract - Mississippi Drive.
City Engineer, John Badalich, outlined the scope of the project, which
consists of approximately 2,000 lineal feet of street reconstruction on
Mississippi Drive. The first 100 feet of the project is being
constructed along with the County Road 39 project. The next
approximately 800 feet of street will receive minor patching, subgrade
correction, and an overlay with the possibility of 200 feet of drain
tile. Badalich mentioned that 1,140 feet on Mississippi Drive will
receive major reconstruction. They entire blacktop surface and base
materials will be removed along with some reworking of the subgrade.
Badalich informed Council that there is approximately 3,775 feet of
assessable property. According to the bids received, the total cost of
the project will be in the neighborhood of $111,000, including all
engineering, inspections, bond fees, etc. This would create a front
footage assessment of $29.41 per foot, or about $2,941 per 100 -foot lot.
Badalich then went on to outline the rationale for assessing the
benefited property owners only 35 percent of the project cost. A reduced
assessment rate is suggested because the street began to break up prior
to completion of its useful life, and the street broke up early in part
due to use of the street in conjunction with construction of the waste
water treatment plant.
At this point in the meeting the City Council heard comments from the
public. Ron Adkins noted that residents should not pay for anything, as
the project was installed incorrectly. John Badalich responded by saying
that the street was designed with the best information available at the
time. Measures were taken to control the springs in the area but were
insufficient. The street was inspected as it was being built and was
constructed in a manner consistent with the specifications. Jim Lawrence
suggested that the road was bound to fail at the outset due to
1
Council Minutes - 5/22/89
insufficient design and/or inspection. It was his view that the
residents should not be required to pick up any of the cost to
reconstruct the street. Linda Rohland noted that heavy construction
equipment is allowed on this road all the time and wondered why this is
so. John Simola responded by saying that heavy equipment is necessary
for home construction and that such equipment must be allowed to pass
over the road on occasion. Roy Chaplin pointed out that his property
will not be benefiting from the under drain system utilized towards the
lower end of the improvement area. It was his view that since his
property will not be benefiting from this under drain system, he should
not be assessed any portion of that under drain system. City
Councilmember Blonigen reminded the audience that the road was
constructed in 1976 and that the road has completed 13 years of useful
life. He further noted that an assessment of 35 percent of the project
cost is reasonable given the fact that the original street was viable for
some period and that the improvement will have a useful life of at least
15 more years, which means that over the long run, the area residents
will not be paying an inordinate amount for street improvements.
Another citizen noted that he did not think it unreasonable to be
assessed 35 percent of the project cost, as the street has been usable
for 13 years. Mayor Maus suggested that a formula be developed based on
the logic that the City should pay the portion of the project pertaining
to subgrade correction and that the area residents should pay 50 percent
of the overlay cost with the City paying the remainder. Under this
scenerio, the local contribution would equal 4.53 cents per foot, or
approximately 17 percent of the project cost. Administrator Wolfsteller
noted that in order for this project to be financed through issuance of a
bond, the City must finance at least 20 percent of the project cost.
Warren Smith asked what the City has done in the past in similar road
reconstruction situations. Administrator Wolfsteller noted that since
the major street project in 1977, there have been no similar street
reconstruction projects. Warren noted that what we do regarding this
project will set a precedent for those reconstruction projects that will
be necessary in years to come. Fran Fair noted that the time is right to
do the project now, as the bid amount is very favorable. Dan Blonigen
reaffirmed his position that he will not vote for the project unless
35 percent of the project is assessed to benefiting property owners. Ken
Maus reaffirmed his position that the City should pay a higher portion of
the assessment. It was his opinion that the residents on the higher
ground not receiving benefit from the under drain system should not be
paying a portion of the under drain cost.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Shirley
Anderson, to close the public hearing and approve a resolution ordering
the improvement, accepting bid, and authorizing contract. Motion
includes a suggested assessment rate of 20 percent of project cost.
Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus, Warren Smith.
Opposed: Dan Blonigen. SEE RESOLUTION 89-15.
2
Council Minutes - 5/22/89
6. Public hearing on proposed bituminous upgrading of Oakwood Industrial
Park roads. AND
7. Consideration of resolution ordering improvement, accepting bid, and
authorizing contract - Oakwood Industrial Park.
John Simola described the scope of the project and informed Council that
the bid amount submitted by Buffalo Bituminous is very favorable at
$99,303. Simola informed Council that the streets in the industrial park
are in the 12th year of their 20 -year design life and have shown some
wear and tear along with extensive rutting as indicated by the Braun
Engineer report. He went on to say that there may not be a better time
than now to do the proposed upgrading for the following reasons:
1. The bid amount is very attractive due to the large volume of
other work in our area this year. This could result in a
25 percent savings.
2. The cost of oil and construction are escalating each year.
3. The streets are currently in the 12th year of a 20 -year design
life. The last eight years will see a much more rapid
deterioration of the street system in the industrial park. If we
wait more than two or three years to do the improvement, the
existing street surface may not be suitable for overlay and would
have to be removed in their entirety. This alone could double
the cost of the job in later years of the life cycle of the
pavement.
4. The ability of the land owners to sell land for development is
increased if the roads are improved from the seven to ten ton
capacity.
George Phillips of Oakwood Industrial Park Partnership noted that he
understands the necessity of upgrading the existing roads but noted that
the property owners should not be required to pay 100 percent of the
overlay cost. Jay Morrell concurred with Mr. Phillips and noted that the
users of the industrial park are paying a large amount of property taxes,
and this should be considered when establishing the assessment amount.
John Badalich reminded Council that in 1977 the streets were installed
and designed to be upgraded as the park developed. The present proposal
to upgrade the street is consistent with those plans, and the upgrade
will extend the useful life of the existing roadway at a bargain price.
George Phillips suggested that a split in the assessments is in order
because Chelsea is now a through street which is used by the general
public and not just an industrial road. Therefore, the City should be
paying a portion of the assessment. Ken Maus agreed with the logic that
the City should share the improvement cost associated with a collector
road. Shirley Anderson was concerned that the property has not been
moving in recent years and that it might not be wise to continue
investing in the roadways if major portions of the area are going to
continue to be vacant. Ken Maus suggested that the City should maintain
3
8.
9.
Council Minutes - 5/22/89
its industrial areas and thus protect the potential for industrial
development. Maus reiterated the need for industrial development, as the
tax base that such development provides will provide necessary revenue to
operate City/School/County services. Maus went on to indicate his
support of a 50/50 split of the street overlay costs. Dan Blonigen noted
that he would support an 80/20 split of cost with the City paying
20 percent of the project cost.
Motion was then made by Fran Fair to approve the project with a suggested
assessment ratio of 60 percent of project cost to be paid by property
owners and 40 percent by the City. Motion by Fran Fair died for lack of
a second.
Motion was then made by Shirley Anderson to approve the project with the
property owners paying 65 percent of project cost and the City paying 35
percent. Motion died for lack of a second.
Motion was made by Warren Smith to establish a suggested assessment ratio
of 50 percent City and 50 percent local property owners. Motion seconded
by Fran Fair. During discussion, Warren Smith noted that this street
improvement is highly necessary to preserve the industrial development
potential of the community. The City should consider this expenditure as
an investment in the future financial security of the community, as the
industries that eventually locate in the area will help supplant the loss
of revenue when the power plant is decommissioned. Voting in favor of
the motion: Ken Maus, Warren Smith, Fran Fair. Opposed: Shirley
Anderson, Dan Blonigen.
Motion approving resolution made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Fran
Fair, ordering improvement and accepting bid and authorizing contract
with Buffalo Bituminous in the amount of $87,409.65. Voting in favor of
the motion: Shirley Anderson, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus.
Opposed: Dan Blonigen. SEE RESOLUTION 89-16.
Consideration of final plat approval - Country Club Court. Applicant,
Floyd Markling.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the final plat submitted
contains necessary utility easements and now meets all City requirements
previously noted.
After discusson, motion by Warren Smith and seconded by Fran Fair to
approve the final plat of "Country Club Court". Motion passed
unanimously.
Consideration of allowing Monticello Jaycees to use West Bridge Park for
teen dance July 1, 1989.
After discussion, motion by Fran Fair and seconded by Warren Smith to
allow Monticello Jaycees to use West Bridge Park for teen dance July 1,
1989. Motion passed unanimously.
2
Council Minutes - 5/22/89
10. Consideration of developer agreement - Phase I - Meadows Second Addition.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the developer agreement noting
that it is very similar to the recently adopted Evergreens developer
agreement. O'Neill went on to note that due to the small size of the
Meadows project, it is suggested that the guarantee amount be established
at 100% of project cost rather than 125% of project cost as was required
with the Evergreens agreement.
After O'Neill's presentation, Dan Frie noted his concern regarding
engineering fees. He wondered why both the City Engineer and his
engineer must inspect the project. He also asked if he could have any
assurances that the City inspection fees would not be excessive. Mayor
Maus noted that projects completed by private developers and eventually
maintained by the City must be inspected by the City so as to insure the
City that the work meets specifications. This does not mean, however,
that the City Engineering Inspector must be on the site at all times.
City Engineer, John Badalich, agreed that inspection fees can be kept at
a minimum if the contractor follows a schedule and provides adequate
notice of project activity. John Simola noted that the City is willing
to provide "shadow" inspection if the developer's private engineer
utilizes an inspector with respected credentials and experience.
Simola noted that minor modifications need to be made to sections of the
agreement pertaining to street sign and street lighting installation.
After discussion, motion by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen
to approve the developer agreement as presented with amendments to the
sections of the developer agreement pertaining to street sign and light
installation. Motion passed unanimously.
11. Consideration of request to prepare plans and specifications for restroom
in West Bridge Park.
After discussion, motion by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen
to table item pending preparation of additional information. Motion
passed unanimously.
12. Consideration of Purchasing FAX Machine from Reliance Data Corporation in
the Amount of $1,756.
Administrator Wolfsteller recommended the purchase of a FAX machine, as
it will improve the ability of the City to exchange and process
information in a timely manner. Transmission of information by FAX
machine when necessary will benefit the City by saving time on the
progression of current projects, etc.
After discussion, motion by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Fran Fair,
to approve purchase of a FAX machine in the amount of $1,756. Motion
passed unanimously.
Council Minutes - 5/22/89
13. Consideration of bills for the month of May.
After discussion, motion by Dan Blonigen and seconded by Warren Smith to
approve bills for the month of May. Motion passed unanimously.
OTHER MATTERS
Mayor Maus suggested that Council consider rescheduling regular meetings to
start at 7:00 p.m. rather that 7:30 p.m. due to the length of meetings and
agendas.
After discussion, motion by Smith and seconded by Anderson to reschedule
regular Council meetings to 7:00 p.m. from 7:30 p.m.. Motion passed
unanimously.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
0