City Council Minutes 10-10-1989MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, October 10, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Fran Fair, Warren Sinith, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson,
Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
2. Approval of minutes.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting held September 25, 1989. Voting in
favor: Ken Maus, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen.
Abstaining: Fran Fair, due to her absence at the last meeting.
4. Public hearing on the proposed assessment roll for 89-02 and 89-03
improvement projects (Mississippi Drive and Oakwood Industrial Park).AND
6. Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for certification to County
Auditor.
City Administrator Wolfsteller indicated that the Mississippi Drive
reconstruction project and the Oakwood Industrial Park overlay project
were both recently completed under budget. Both projects were between
16% and 20% under original estimates, and he noted that the assessment
rolls were prepared based on previous Council direction of approximately
20o assessable to property owners along Mississippi Drive and 500 of the
project cost assessable to the Oakwood Industrial property owners. It
was also noted that the Oakwood Industrial Park overlay project was
initiated by concerns of the Industrial Development Coimnittee to bring
the roads up to 10 ton standards in an effort to help promote industrial
usage within the park. Over the past few years, the industrial park
roads have been posted at 7 ton limits, which necessitated the need for
upgrading of the roads.
The public hearing was then opened, and Dale Lungwitz, representing the
Oakwood Industrial Partnership, questioned why the property owners should
again pay for street improvements that they thought were originally
designed to 9 tons. He noted that the partnership is still paying for
assessments for the original improvement project and disagreed with the
idea that the roads were purposely designed to 7 tons in order to not
over burden the property owners previously and to allow for future
development to occur before increasing the tonage to its proper road
design. It was noted that the original feasibility study indicated a
9 -ton design was proposed and could not understand how a change was made
to a lesser design without the partnership's knowledge. As a result, he
felt a 50o assessment was inappropriate, and the Council should consider
a lesser amount.
1
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
Pat Townsend, property owner along Thomas Park Drive, felt the road
condition was adequate for his needs and did not feel he received a
benefit, as his road was already designed to 9 tons and is now only a
10 -ton design.
Jay Morrell, owner of M & P Transport, noted that the City's engineering
test of the roads indicated that some areas were still 8 tons or better
in design and failed to see how the road could increase in tonage if it
was only designed at 7 tons previously. It was his opinion that the
roads had to have been designed to a greater tonage originally; and as a
result, did not feel that 50% was an appropriate assessment. He also
requested that the industrial park be treated the same as the downtown
retail district in that it is just as vital to the coimnunity in creating
jobs and tax base and should also be treated the saine at a 20% assessment
level similar to the downtown Streetscape Project assessment.
Councilmember Blonigen indicated that it was his recollection that the
industrial park was originally designed to only a 7 -ton road system with
the idea of increasing the tonage later. As a result, he felt the 500
assessment was reasonable and should possibly have been even higher than
that being proposed. He also requested additional information from the
City Engineer on the design specifications to verify his recollection.
In reviewing the plans available, Public Works Director, John Simola,
noted that a smaller quantity of bituminous was planned for the Oakwood
Industrial Park when compared to Lauring Lane and that Lauring Lane was
designed for 7 tons. As a result, it seems to indicate that the Oakwood
Industrial Park probably wasn't designed to more than 7 tons originally.
The Council then discussed whether the assessment policies concerning
overlay projects should be reviewed in the future, as it may be
appropriate to treat all classes of property equal. The Council
questioned the City Administrator as to what effect a change in the
assessment roll to a 200 level would have on the City finances, and they
were informed that the reduction in the assessment roll would have to be
made up through additional tax levies.
After further review and discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith,
seconded by Fran Fair, to adopt a resolution applying a 20% assessment
factor for both the 89-02 and 89-03 improvement projects. Voting in
favor: Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus, Warren Smith. Opposed:
Dan Blonigen. SEE RESOLUTION 89-28.
5. Public hearing on proposed assessment roll for delinquent charges. AND
7. Consideration of adopting an assessment roll for certification with the
County Auditor covering delinquent charges.
Annually, the City Council reviews the accounts receivable which are
delinquent over 60 days and considers these charges at a public hearing
for adoption as an assessment roll to be collected on the following
year's taxes. Minnesota Statutes allow cities to collect delinquent
charges by placing special assessments against property owners who
receive the benefits.
P)
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
The public hearing was opened, and the Council heard convents froin Dick
and Cathy Hoheisel who questioned why a $28.32 delinquent sewer and water
bill should be their responsibility when the bill was incurred by a
previous owner. It was explained that utility charges are the
responsibility of the property owner and that the City has the choice of
placing a special assessment against the property owner even though the
present owner did not verify or check for existence of previous
outstanding bills.
After further discussion, motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded
by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt the assessment roll as
presented with the City Administrator checking with the City Attorney on
the legalities of the delinquent bill questioned by the Hoheisels. SEE
RESOLUTION 89-29.
8. Consideration of a simple subdivision request to allow two R-2 (single
and two-family residential) lots to be resubdivided into two residential
lots. A conditional use request to allow a 4-plex in an R-2 (single and
two family residential) zone. A variance request to allow a resubdivided
lot to have less than the minimum lot square footage to allow the
existing residential structure to be converted into a 4-plex. Applicant,
Brad and Cindy Fyle.
Brad and Cindy Fyle requested permission to resubdivide two existing
platted lots into two new lots with the same square footage as originally
platted but with one of the lots having its frontage on Maple Street
instead of Third Street. The two original lots had 10,890 square feet,
and the new lots would also equal this square footage and required a
variance from the City's requirement of newly platted lots having
12,000 square feet. The City staff and Planning Commission recoimnended
that if the subdivision is approved, three conditions be attached that
would require the plat to be recorded within 30 days, drainage and
utility easements would have to be required on a separate recordable
document, and that a separate document indicate that the newly created
parcel along Maple Street does not have sewer and water and that the City
would not be responsible for its installation.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, and
unanimously carried to approve the resubdivision contingent upon the
three conditions being met as outlined above.
The Council then reviewed the second part of the request concerning the
conditional use permit to allow the existing home on one of the newly
created parcels to be converted into a 4-plex dwelling. Current R-2
zoning regulations only allow for a duplex unless a conditional use
perinit is granted. The existing structure would require between
16,000 square feet and 19,000 square feet of land area to allow for a
4-plex; and it was noted that the lot in question had only 10,890 square
feet. As a result, a variance of between 6,000 square feet to
9,000 square feet would be necessary.
3
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
Brad Fyle indicated that he would like to request a tri-plex instead of a
4-plex, which would still require a variance of 4,000 square feet to
6,000 square feet on land area. In addition, the parking requirements
would require six off-street parking spaces; and the proposal submitted
by Mr. Fyle indicated that this could be met if the cars could back onto
Third Street and be allowed to use a portion of the boulevard for parking
requirements.
The Council was also presented with a petition from neighborhood
residents opposed to any variances being granted for a structure of more
than two units, as they felt the land area was not sufficient and would
cause traffic problems in a primarily single family neighborhood.
Because of the large variances in square footage requirements that were
necessary, motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Warren Smith,
and unanimously carried to deny the request for a tri-plex and instructed
the applicant to ineet the current zoning regulations for utilizing this
structure.
9. Consideration of a variance request to allow an attached garage to be
constructed within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant,
Lawrence and Lynn Gantner.
The applicant had originally appealed the denial of this variance from
the Planning Commission level to the City Council but prior to the
meeting requested that his variance appeal be withdrawn.
10. Consideration of a petition from residents of Meadow Oak for improvements
in maintenance of Meadow Oak Park.
In September, the Council was presented with a petition from residents of
Meadow Oak Subdivision requesting City support of establishing a skating
rink on the pond within the Meadow Oaks Subdivision. In addition, the
petition requested the City Council to install a flood light on the
skating rink and to also consider removing snow from the pathways within
the park system during the winter.
Public Works Director, John Simola, informed the Council that he had
obtained quotes from Olson Electric for the installation of park lights
along the trail system and to light the proposed skating area on the pond
at a cost of approximately $6,500. He noted that this cost could be
reduced by approximately $600 if some volunteer help could be obtained
from the residents regarding the trenching of electrical cables for the
lighting system. Mr. Simola also noted that the electrical cost for the
proposed lighting system would be less than $200 per year if the City
paid for the initial installation cost versus almost $1,100 per year if
the system was installed by NSP.
The staff noted that in checking with its liability insurance carrier,
the City would be exposing itself to more liability by authorizing a
skating rink on a natural pond and that the City should take extra
precautions by possibly providing a rink attendant and/or proper signing
4
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
to warn citizens of the dangers. It was also recoimnended that the City
could clean the trail system within the park leading to the rink but
recoimnended that the City should not get involved in cleaning all of the
trails within the park system. From a strictly liability standpoint, it
was recoimnended by the staff that the Council may want to consider a
skating rink within an area of the park not associated with the pond.
After further review, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren
Smith, to authorize the installation of the lighting system as proposed
and to authorize the skating rink to be constructed on the pond and
directed the staff to clean the pathway leading to the pond when
necessary or whenever the residents were unable to remove the snow
themselves. Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus, Dan
Blonigen. Opposed: Shirley Anderson, due to the concerns over
liability.
Staff was also instructed to obtain additional quotes and to negotiate
the best price possible for this installation.
11. Consideration of modification to street lighting policy to include
lighting cul-de-sacs and/or dead-end streets.
Recently, the City received a petition from residents along a cul-de-sac
requesting the installation of street lights at the end of cul-de-sacs.
The City's current policy allows for the installation of street lights at
intersections and at distances of approximately 700 feet apart.
In reviewing all of the cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets in Monticello,
the Public Works Director noted that an additional 32 street lights would
be necessary if all of these locations were lit. The annual cost of
operating all of these lights would amount to approximately $160 per
year. If the City only installed lights on the 23 cul-de-sacs, the
annual cost would be $4,112.40. Mr. Simola noted that the present policy
of lighting intersections, inid-block points, and other areas for safety
was established a number of years ago before the City had many
cul-de-sacs. He suggested that a survey of cul-de-sac residents be done
to see if there is a lot of interest in these areas receiving street
lights. The Mayor agreed the survey would be appropriate, and it was the
Council consensus that some cul-de-sacs may be long enough to require the
policy to be changed. The Public Works Director also recomended that if
the policy were to be amended, it could be done allowing for the
installation of street lights within cul-de-sacs by petition only at this
time.
In light of the minimal cost that would be involved, motion was made by
Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, authorizing the installation of
street lights within cul-de-sacs petitioned by 51% of the property owners
along a particular area in question. Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Warren
Smith, Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan Blonigen and Shirley Anderson.
5
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
12. Consideration of approval of Transportation Management Plan and budget.
o0
13. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing contract with State
of Minnesota to provide public transportation service.
The City staff in conjunction with the Monticello Transportation Advisory
Coymnittee has prepared a management plan document that will be submitted
to the State of Minnesota which outlines the Transportation Management
Plan and annual budget for the operation of the bus system for
Monticello. With State approval of the Transportation Management Plan,
the City would be able to proceed with establishing a transportation
system that would operate from 9:00 a.m, to 6:00 p.m. five days per week,
excluding holidays, for Monticello residents. In addition, the service
would provide one daily trip to the Nutrition Center in Big Lake and
would also be available for service to the local airport.
It was noted that the management plan annual budget would total $55,577
with approximately $12,000 to $14,000 being required from the City to
support the system. The balance of the operating costs would be covered
through State grants and revenues from the riders. The plan also
includes a fare system that would be $1 per one-way trip when purchased
individually and would allow for blocks of tickets to be sold at 10 for
$7.50 or 50 for $.50 each.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, to adopt a
resolution entering into a contract with the State of Minnesota to
provide a public transportation service in the Monticello area. Voting
in favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson.
Opposed: Dan Blonigen. SEE RESOLUTION 89-30.
14. Consideration of a contract with Hoglund Transportation for provision of
public transportation service.
With the approval of developing a transportation system for the
Monticello area, Council reviewed a contract proposal with Hoglund
Transportation which outlined the terins and conditions for having Hoglund
Transportation provide the vehicle and drivers associated with the bus
transportation system. The State of Minnesota has reviewed the contract
proposal and did not have a problem with the City contracting for the
transportation system equipment and personnel rather than the City
acquiring its own bus system and employing its own drivers.
As a result, a motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith,
authorizing a contract between the City of Monticello and Hoglund
Transportation for the provision of operating the bus transportation
system for one year for the City of Monticello. Voting in favor: Fran
Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson. Opposed: Dan Blonigen.
0
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
15. Consideration of adopting an agreement authorizing a contract with
Township of Monticello outlining annexation process.
The City Council reviewed a proposed joint resolution which outlined the
understandings and agreements pertaining to land suitable for annexation
and the criteria that would have to be met before future annexation
occurred. It was noted that the joint agreement had been created through
the cooperation of the OAA Board, City staff, and Tom Salkowski, the
County Planner. The Township of Monticello has previously reviewed the
document and adopted it in its present form.
Some minor changes had been recoimnended by the City staff; and although
it does not appear the Township opposes the changes, no formal action has
been taken on the changes at this point.
Mayor Maus, the City's OAA representative, explained that the intention
of this joint agreement was to establish guidelines and criteria that
would be necessary for land owners to meet before requesting annexation
into the corporate city limits. With the recently adopted land use plan
being approved by both jurisdictions, it was felt that a
guideline/working document should be prepared to inform all parties of
the requirements before annexation procedures could be initiated.
Councilmember Fair indicated she was not ready to make a decision on a
joint resolution without further study.
As a result, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Fran
Fair, and unanimously carried to table any action on the joint resolution
regarding the annexation process to allow for further review of the
document.
16. Consideration of adopting a resolution setting a public hearing date for
the adoption of the development program for Development District #1 and
for the adoption of the TIF Plan for TIF District #1-1.
On September 29, 1989, the finance plan was submitted to the County and
School District for their review concerning the proposed tax increment
financing proposal associated with the 7th Street realignment cost for
the proposed K -Mart addition to the mall. A formal public hearing is
required for the development program and finance plan after a 30 -day
notification to the other taxing jurisdictions.
As a result, a motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley
Anderson, and unanimously carried to set the public hearing date for
October 30 at 5:00 p.m. for the consideration of adopting the development
program and tax increment finance plan for District #1-1.
SEE RESOLUTION 89-31.
7
17.
18.
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
Consideration of replacing underground heat pipes at the City's waste
water treatment plant.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed with the Council the
continuing problem the City is experiencing with leaks in the heat supply
pipes running from the hot water boiler to various buildings at the waste
water treatment plant. Previously, the City has made repairs to a
portion of the heating system piping at a cost of approximately $10,000
and continual leaking is occurring to the point where the entire heat
supply systems may have to be replaced. In 1988, the problems became so
severe that some repairs had to be made with some heat being lost to the
aeration complex. Because it appeared that testing of the copper
couplings indicated that they may have been assembled without being
soldered, the City Engineer has agreed to work with the City staff in
completely redesigning the replacement of the heating pipes at no charge
for design.
Based on a recently completed design for a complete new system, the
estimate for replacement totaled over $55,000, much higher than
originally anticipated. In light of the recent cost estimate, it was
recoimnended by the Public Works Director that the City wait at this time
in regards to replacing the system and utilize temporary heating where
necessary. It was noted that this additional time will be used for
evaluating alternatives in an effort to get this cost lower. It was also
noted by the Public Works Director that the prime contractor for the
original construction project could not be held responsible for the
faulty workmanship in that the one-year warranty date has elapsed; and it
would be difficult for the City to recover any cost associated with this
repair.
It was the consensus of the Council to table any action on the heat pipe
replacement until next year when more information is available.
Consideration
and/or hazards
Monticello for
of establishin
us waste dispo
a period of one year.
moratorium on development of infectious
1 or incineration plants within the city of
In recent weeks, the City staff has received two separate contacts from
developers investigating the possibility of developing an infectious
waste incinerator facility in the city of Monticello. The City staff was
concerned that the City may not be prepared to properly address the land
use issues involved with such a development and indicated that the
present City Ordinances may be insufficient to properly zone or regulate
the location of such a facility.
Presently, incineration facilities are allowed as a conditional use in
the I-2 zoning district, which could possibly pave the way for
development of an infectious waste incineration plant anywhere within an
I-2 zone. Because the staff has not had an opportunity to receive any
public input on the development of such a facility or to examine the
special impact such a facility may create on properties zoned heavy
industrial, it was recoimnended that the Council establish a moratorium on
Council Minutes - 10/10/89
development of an infectious and/or hazardous waste disposal or
incinerator plant for one year to allow staff time to review with its
planning and engineering consultants conditions that may be applicable
for this type of operation. This would allow sufficient time for the
staff to present a recommendation on proper land use controls that may be
considered by the Council to protect the health, safety, and welfare of
the citizens of Monticello.
Motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and
unanimously carried to adopt a moratorium on the development of hazardous
and/or infectious waste incineration and/or disposal sites for a period
of one year to allow for proper land use controls to be developed.
19. Consideration of feasibility report on sewer extension along Chelsea
Road.
At a previous Council meeting, a property owner along County Road 117
between Chelsea Road and Dundas Road requested a cost estimate for
connecting to the city sanitary sewer system. Public Works Director,
John Simola, prepared an estimate of providing sanitary sewer to the
parcel and estimated the cost of the project at $31,953.60. In reviewing
the extension, it was noted that there may be a benefit of this sewer
extension to more than one parcel along County Road 117; and it was
suggested that a public hearing be held by the Council with all property
owners potentially being assessed being notified of the improvement.
Motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and
unanimously carried to adopt a resolution receiving the feasibility
report and ordering a public hearing on the proposed sewer extension
along County Road 117 between Chelsea Road and Dundas Road.
SEE RESOLUTION 89-32.
Rick Wolfsteyler
City Administrator